A BLATANT EXAMPLE OF LIBERAL MEDIA BIAS THAT EVEN I CAN SEE©

I was not trained as a journalist, but I do know how to read and I have a fair handle on comprehension of what I read, especially if it is at the level of most news put out by the major media. We have all heard of the alleged liberal media bias of the three major news networks: CBS, ABC, and NBC.  Today I want to expose a blatant example of this by two of those networks.  Even I can see it.

On Wednesday (today) news broke that someone hacked into Colin Powell’s email account.  In private emails he blasted Trump and said that he had warned the Clinton campaign several times not to use him as a scapegoat for Hillary’s choice to use a private email server. He didn't have nice things to say about Hilary either.  Well, how do you suppose ABC and NBC handled it?

In a short article of 11 paragraphs, the lead article on NBC’s website this morning titled “Colin Powell Calls Trump a 'National Disgrace' in Hacked Emails ” devoted only one of the 11 to the Clinton scandal. Here it is: “Powell expressed frustration about his name being linked to Clinton's email issues, writing in another leaked email: "I have told Hilleary's [sic] minions repeatedly that they are making a mistake trying to drag me in, yet they still try," Powell wrote.” See the article here: 

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/colin-powell-calls-trump-national-disgrace-hacked-emails-n648011

ABC, however, in another brief article does NOT EVEN MENTION Powell’s comments about the Clinton email scandal. See the artilce, “Trump a 'National Disgrace,' Colin Powell Wrote in Hacked Emails,” here:  

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-national-disgrace-colin-powell-wrote-hacked-emails/story?id=42073252

I am continually appalled at the hubris of the mainstream liberal media to pretend to journalistic objectivity and that they believe they can dupe the American people by withholding information from their readers. They are proving themselves almost worthless in their role as watchdogs on behalf of the American people.

Let’s think together gain, soon. 

The Benefits to Children of Regular Family Mealtimes©

Continuing to Reap Success* 1 September 2016

“The Benefits to Children of Regular Family Mealtimes”

I have been interested over the years when authorities of the Church encourage the practice of eating meals together as a family.  As I grew up our family had many of our meals together. Lunch was a major exception, and as we grew older and schedules differed we had fewer and fewer breakfasts together.  It seems to me that we always had dinner as a family. Virtually the same pattern existed as we raised our family. Because of the above mentioned counsel we insisted that our children be home together for dinner and we ate breakfast together nearly every morning while they were in grade and middle school and even much of high school.

This should interest young parents for many reasons. My wife and I have observed what we think is a disturbing and dangerous trend away from eating together as a family. These observations include: 1) With both parents working in many cases, schedules are more difficult to arrange to have meals together than when I was a boy–though both of my parents worked.  2) In today’s liberation society it seems that fewer and fewer mothers like to cook (and perhaps don’t know how to cook) and want to escape that task. 3)These factors lead to often leaving family members to fix their own meals. 4) They also lend themselves to another phenomenon which we have observed–more and more families eating out at restaurants at all times of the day and any day of the week. When we raised our family the budget was so tight for so many years that eating out for us was a luxury and a special event where we took pains to teach our children proper public manners and etiquette.  

I was amazed to read the following report about the infrequency of family meals in the UK.

Surveys have shown that a fifth of British children do not eat a meal more than once a week with another member of their household, and many homes do not have a dining table. Needless to say, this pattern is concentrated in the lower reaches of society, where so elementary but fundamental a means of socialization is now unknown.(1)

I wondered how that matches up with things in the United States so I did a Google search and to my surprise learned that a Gallup poll done in 2013 reported that 53% of adults with children younger than 18 say their family eats dinner together at home six or seven nights a week, and 35-38 % of those said they ate together all seven nights of the week! This trend has remained largely unchanged from 2001. While this is greater than I expected, it does leave 47% that do not have meals together at this frequency. Twenty-eight percent had dinner together 4-5 nights a week and 21% 0 to 3 nights a week.   Interestingly, even the self-described more liberal segment of society dined with their families about as frequently as moderates and conservatives. And listen to this good news, “As younger parents are even a little more likely than older ones to regularly eat dinner as a family, this seemingly traditional aspect of American life will likely continue for the foreseeable future.”(2)

This runs counter to our personal perceptions, but I hope we have been wrong about them. I remain just a tad dubious about how far the Gallup poll may be generalized, because one study shows that “Meal preparation time dropped from three hours per day in 1960 to twenty minutes in 1998.”(3) Also, one can find online a brief summarizing research on the question “Do Family Meals Really Make a Difference?” put together by two women at Cornell University. They discuss the difficulties of researching the subject and evaluating the data, nevertheless, many studies come up with positive results which I will mention below, which leads the authors to this interesting recommendation:  

Set a goal to have regular family meals at least three times per week, if possible. Most research notes some type of improvement in child outcomes when a family participated in at least three family meals together each week. Of course this is not possible for all families. If not, try to substitute family dinners with shared breakfasts, evening snacks or any similar activity that will allow your family to gather more regularly.(4)

Three times a week seems to me like a very low minimum. It is unclear whether this recommendation is made because other data suggest that families are not eating together as frequently as Gallup suggests, or if the research shows this as a minimum threshold to produce positive benefits.

Regardless, it is important to stress that there are important reasons to value and practice family mealtime together as often as possible. In April of 2005, Shirley Klein an associate professor of family life at BYU spoke in the weekly devotional.  Her subject was “Protect Our Homes, Increase Our Power.”  She talked about the spiritual warfare families faced in America and recommended the “numerous beneficial effects” of family mealtime as one antidote. Education, socialization, better nutrition and improved health were among those benefits. She touted family mealtime as one of many “everyday events” which if parents take seriously can provide parents the time and environment where children can learn important social, moral, and ethical principles.(4) The Cornell brief lists a number of benefits resulting from regular family mealtimes. Research suggests that children who participate in family meals are “less likely to be overweight,” “eat more healthy foods,” “have less delinquency,” have “greater academic achievement,” “improved psychological well-being,” and “positive family interactions.”(5) This report also lists a score of references to professional studies on the topic. I recommend that you check out both the brief and these references.

Other studies relate a host of benefits to regular family mealtimes.  One study found, “Participation in dinner table conversations offers children opportunities to acquire vocabulary, practice producing and understanding stories and explanations, acquire general knowledge, and learn how to talk in culturally appropriate ways.”(6) An article by Anne Fishel, co-founder of “The Family Dinner Project,” and professor at Harvard Medical School” discusses things such as participation in mealtime as a predictor of high achievement scores on high school tests. It has a greater relationship than time spent in school or doing homework! Adolescents who eat with their families five to seven times a week are twice as likely to get As in school than those who eat with their families twice a week. She discusses several nutritional benefits and the negative effects of eating in front of the TV. High-risk teenage behaviors such as smoking, binge drinking, marijuana use, violence, school problems, sexual activity, and eating disorders are lower among those adolescents regularly eating with their families. Dealing with depression, suicidal thoughts and recovering from cyberbulling are also subjects studied and reporting positive correlations with regular family mealtimes.Likewise, positive moods and views of the future in youth are apparently influenced by socialization which occurs at mealtime. (7) And on the studies go.

A vivid memory stands out from my own childhood. I wasn’t yet twelve when one evening I had dinner with a friend at his home. I still remember his father beginning a discussion about some topic and engaging the entire family in that subject. They talked and talked about it. My friend asked his father a question about something and his dad assigned him to do a little research in their family Encyclopedia and report back the next evening at dinner. I asked him if they did that often and he said, "every night." I went away wishing we did such things at our family dinners, and because it was deeply ingrained in my mind and heart I later resolved to do something about it when I had a family. We weren’t perfect, and I never felt as successful as that skillful father I saw as a young boy, but we did try to use family mealtime to help teach our children, learn from them, help them develop morals and manners as well as to interact with each other appropriately and to participate meaningfully in family discussions. I have no doubt that you, with some thought and planning could approach the ideal more closely than we did.

There is a spiritual war being waged over the definition and value of family in America. Given the frequent counsel of our leaders to regularly eat together and make the most of that time, I urge young parents to take this counsel seriously and to do some personal study about both the benefits of doing so and to think deeply about how to make mealtime the most beneficial. It should be a point of regular discussion between the parents and plans should be made regularly to maximize the use of that time together as a family.

If you have fond memories of great mealtimes or thoughts about this blog please share your stories with us in the comment section.

Let’s think together again, soon.

Notes: 

* Some years ago I promised returned missionaries from the CRM, that I would occasionally write some editions of our mission publication “Continuing to Reap Success.”  Here is a new installment. 

1.  Anthony Daniels, “The Worldview that Makes the Underclass,” Imprimis 43, Nos. 5/6 (May/June 2014): 2.

2.  Lydia Saad, “Most U.S. Families Still Routinely Dine Together at Home,” Well-Being, (26 December 2013).  Available online at:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/166628/families-routinely-dine-together-home.aspx

3.  Information reported by Jean Zimmerman in Made from Scratch: Reclaiming the Pleasures of the American Hearth (New York: Free Press, 2003), 157, cited in  Shirley R. Klein, “Protect Our Homes, Renew Our Powers,” in Brigham Young University Speeches 2004-2005, (Provo, UT: Brigham Young University, 2005), 409.

4.  Eliza Cook and Rachel Dunifon, “Do Family Meals Really Make a Difference?” See Parenting in Context, Cornell University College of Human Ecology, Department of Policy Analysis and Management, bold emphasis in original, available online at:

https://www.human.cornell.edu/pam/outreach/upload/Family-Mealtimes-2.pdf

5.  Shirley R. Klein, “Protect Our Homes, Renew Our Powers,” in Brigham Young University Speeches 2004-2005, (Provo, UT: Brigham Young University, 2005), 409-10.

6. Abstract of Catherine E. Snow and Diane E. Beals, “Mealtime Talk that Supports Literacy Development,” Direction for Child and Adolescent Development 2006, no. 111 (Spring 2006): 51-6.

7. Anne Fishel, “The Most Important Thing You can Do with Your Kids?  Eat Dinner with Them,” The Washington Post, 12 January 2015, available online at:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/01/12/the-most-important-thing-you-can-do-with-your-kids-eat-dinner-with-them/?utm_term=.1fa6704454fb
    A nineteen-page September 2007 report by The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University (CASA), entitled “The Importance of Family Dinners IV,” discusses many of these same issues related to abuse of various substances. 
    This article has many cyber links to studies which it mentions or reviews.

An Ancient and Inspired but Unknown Guide to Parents for Educating Children©

Continuing to Reap Success* 11 August 2016
"An Ancient and Inspired but Unknown Guide to Parents for Education Children"


Introduction:  

We all learn “line upon line and precept upon precept.” Some of the brighter among us learn paragraph upon paragraph and the really keen like Joseph Smith learn page upon page and chapter upon chapter.  The Savior I imagine, learned book upon book. The less keen may learn word by word. I seem to fall into this category all too often.  Today’s blog is an example.  

In my morning reading I came across what I consider an amazing set of ideas, the knowing of which some fifty years ago, would I believe, have made a significant difference in my activities as a father. Today, I learned that the Biblical book of Proverbs is something of a handbook to guide parents in training children!(1) Ho, ho, ho, wouldn’t that have helped if had I known and understood that as a young parent? Unfortunately I am learning it too late to benefit my own children and I’m also learning it too late to help them help many of their children–some of whom are now in middle adolescence and early adulthood.

So I am sharing this for my younger friends, most probably those who served in the California Roseville Mission when I presided there. They are in their early and mid-thirties and in the thick of raising young families.  I hope this may be of some benefit to those who are wise enough to give this information the consideration it merits. And, if there are a few others out there–parents and grandparents who can pass it along to young people who may take their advice seriously, so much the better. There may even be some young people whom I do not know that are frequenting this blog.  Maybe it will help them as well.

I am reading an article about “Marriage and Family in Ancient Israel,” and the following excerpts are from a section about the status of children in the Israelite home. The author Daniel I. Block, begins the discussion by pointing out that the book of Proverbs is a handbook for parents. He next turns to a discussion of the disposition of the book of Proverbs toward youth by an analysis of the terms the book uses to describe them.This section may make some readers uncomfortable because it portrays youth in fairly negative terms.This seems like a contradiction to our notion that youth do not reach accountability until age eight, and that they are basically good. But, if the reader will not over react, I think he/she will see that the descriptions fit many of the situations parents encounter in raising children.  In other words, the book of Proverbs is taking a realistic and practical view of the condition of children rather than perhaps a theological view of them. Here is the first assessment:

How Proverbs Characterizes Children

Cast as a manual for the instruction of a young man, the book of Proverbs offers a clear window into the ancient Israelite disposition toward youth. It is especially instructive to note the specific words used to refer to and characterize the person addressed. (1) Ben is an expression capable of a wide range of meanings, one of which was equivalent to “student,” under the tutelage of a “teacher,” referred to as his ab, “father.” In Proverbs the word denotes a young man dependent on and accountable to mother and father. (2) Na’ar is a late adolescent in need of training as he prepares for adulthood. (3) Peti (plural petauim / peta yim), is from a root pata, “to be simple, open (minded),” hence a simpleton, a gullible person, one easily seduced or taken in by ideas of any kind, whose mind is untrained to discern truth from falsehood, hence in need of guidance. (4) lis/les is a fundamentally flawed scoffer, mocker, who arrogantly displays his corruption by holding wisdom and instruction in derision and is in need of humbling. (5) Kesil is a shameless, stupid and insolent person, disinterested in wisdom and incorrigible in his ways. (6) Haser leb is a mindless and heartless person, one who lacks sense and needs discipline. (7) Ewil is an idiot, a morally stupid and thick-brained person, virtually indistinguishable from the kesil.  Both are characterized by ‘iwellet, “moral corruption, folly,” and both respond to discipline and correction with contempt. (8) Siklut/sakal means stupidity/ and obtuse and stupid person, without any necessary moral connotations.(2)

The solution: Effective Parents

Importantly, though Proverbs sees the flaws in youth, it provides for a solution through learning–education. Notice the number of Hebrew words that are found in Proverbs related to teaching children. The emphasis is on parents teaching and training children, preparing them for a life as a responsible adult and even for roles of leadership. Many would agree I’m sure, that this is not happening as well as it should in our schools.  Proverbs emphasizes teaching youth wisdom, self-discipline, understanding, prudence, discretion, perception, insight, and listening.

This vocabulary and the manner in which the words are used demonstrate that from an intellectual, moral and spiritual standpoint, Israelites believed persons in their youth were fundamentally flawed. According to the opening thesis statement of Proverbs (1:2-7), the answer to this problem is reflected in a rich vocabulary of learning: hokma, “wisdom”; musar, “discipline, training”; bina (cognate to tebuna found elsewhere), “understanding”; da at, “knowledge”; orma, “cleverness, smarts:’ mezimma, “discretion, prudence”; leqah, “perception, insight:’ and tahbulot, “fundamentally “the art of steering a boat” but idiomatic for “leadership skill.” Elsewhere one encounters the noun sekel, “insight, prudence,” and a series of verbs for learning sama’, “to listen,” especially to fathers and instructors, and hitteth ‘ozni, “to incline the ear” to teachers (Prov 5:13); lamad, “to learn” (Prov 30:3); hanak, “to initiate,” that is, “bestow the status and responsibilities of adulthood.”(3)

The Goal: Preparation for life

Block tells us that the goal of Proverbs is not just to produce intelligent adults, but to “prepare the young person for life.” This is to be done by parents teaching a wide range of “practical and pragmatic subjects.”  I suggest wise parents may pause here and consider the suggestion that it would be a good project for them to read Proverbs and make a list of these practical and pragmatic subjects it teaches parents to teach their children. Many things may be added to Block’s list found below.  With the list in hand, parents could then begin to plan ways to teach, emphasize, and reinforce lessons on those subjects. When children are old enough to understand it would also be good to sit down with them and begin reading Proverbs together to highlight and extract these important issues. Done properly, parents could read this book together with their children several times during their formative years. This would not only give parents multiple opportunities to teach, but would also acquaint the children with this great book and its value in their lives and for their use as parents in the future.

From the preamble and the book as a whole, it is evident that the goal of learning is not merely to produce an informed and intelligent adult but to prepare the young person for life. The dimensions of this learning are encompassed by the single word hokma, which at base means skill in a craft (Ex 35:30-35) but by extension refers to intellectual acumen (1 Kings 4:9-14 [Eng. 29-34]), shrewdness (Ex 1:10), literary appreciation (Prov 1:6), ethical and moral integrity (Prov 1:3), and an understanding of the mysteries of life (Prov 30:11-33). Accordingly, the book of Proverbs covers a wide range of practical and pragmatic subjects, including personal etiquette, discipline and self-control in the face of inevitable sexual temptation, the importance of hard work, the importance of right speech, and other social skills, needed not only to get along with the rest of the household (Prov 6:16-19) but also to accept the responsibilities of adulthood in the broader community. To achieve these goals, stubborn wills needed to be broken, gullible minds needed to be given a framework for evaluating ideas, hard hearts needed to be softened, and self-centeredness needed to be replaced by a sense of membership in and obligation to the community. But underneath it all is a profound theological conviction that “The fear of Yahweh is the first principle of wisdom.” [Prov. 1:7; 9:10; 15:33; Job 28:28; Ps 111:10; Eccles 12:13]. If a young person does not learn this, he or she remains a fool, and a society of fools cannot stand, let alone prosper. Accordingly, the task of training children and preparing them for mature adulthood fell not only to the child’s parents but was deemed to be the responsibility of the community as a whole.(4)

Parents will need to study Proverbs carefully and be sure they understand how its teachings coincide with those of the Gospel as Latter-day Saints understand it. Doing that, I believe they will find many things that will help guide them in teaching and preparing their children for life.

I conclude by repeating Block’s very important observation, “If a young person does not learn this, he or she remains a fool, and a society of fools cannot stand, let alone prosper.” That is the Biblical view. In fulfilling their responsibilities correctly, parents are also fulfilling an important duty to society. A nation of fools cannot stand or prosper. With the current condition of so many of our children being raised in single-parent households and that single parent is often a poor, uneducated or poorly educated woman, and the seminal father is nowhere to be found. He is very likely in bed with someone else carelessly perpetuating the spiraling cycle. The result? America and many other nations around the world are rapidly becoming nations of fools.

Let’s think together again, soon.

Notes:

*Some years ago I promised returned missionaries from the CRM, that I would occasionally write some editions of our mission publication “Continuing to Reap Success.”  Here is a new installment. 

1,  Daniel I. Block, “Marriage and Family in Ancient Israel,” in Marriage and Family in the Biblical World, edited by Ken M. Campbell.  (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2003), 33-102.

2.  Ibid., 89-90, emphasis in original.

3.  Ibid., 90-91, emphasis in original.

4.  Ibid., 91-92.

Recent Studies Suggest Health Benefits of Reading©

This morning while listening to my favorite “classical music” radio station out of London the DJ mentioned a recent study that suggested that the elderly (50 and over), who read books tend to live longer. As a reader this caught my attention and I searched for the study.  Apparently there are several studies pointing to health benefits of reading. I found two that interested me and which I thought may interest readers of this blog.

The first was done in 2013. It looked at the effects of novel reading on the short- and long-term effects on brain connectivity and found evidence in brain scans for both.(1) The second study, and the focus of this blog was done in 2015 by three researchers at Yale University. They were interested in the possible effects of reading on the length of life compared to the non-reader. The study involved a large population which make the results somewhat more impressive. It included 3,635 men and women, age 50 and over, for 12 years. Two statements from the abstract of the article convey the essence of the findings: “Book reading contributed to a survival advantage that was significantly greater than that observed for reading newspapers or magazines” and “These findings suggest that the benefits of reading books include a longer life in which to read them.”(2)

Just how much of an advantage did reading give the reader vs. the non-reader? Well, compared with adults who did not read books, those who read books for up to 3 ½ hours each week were 17 percent less likely to die over the 12-year follow-up, while those who read for more than 3 ½ hours weekly were 23 percent less likely to die.  

This study found that those who read books for an average of 30 min per day say, a chapter a day showed a survival advantage, compared to those who did not read books. The robustness of our findings suggest that reading books may not only introduce some interesting ideas and characters, it may also give more years of reading.(3)

Incidentally, as mentioned above reading books was better than reading newspapers and magazine articles.  The authors had some reasons why.

Reading books tends to involve two cognitive processes that could create a survival advantage. First, it promotes “deep reading,” which is a slow, immersive process; this cognitive engagement occurs as the reader draws connections to other parts of the material, finds applications to the outside world, and asks questions about the content presented. Cognitive engagement may explain why vocabulary, reasoning, concentration, and critical thinking skills are improved by exposure to books.Second, books can promote empathy, social perception, and emotional intelligence, which are cognitive processes that can lead to greater survival. Better health behaviors and reduced stress may explain this process.(4)

The results of this study led the authors to make some suggestions for older readers.

Individuals over age 65 spend an average of 4.4 hours per day watching television (Bureau of Labor Statistics (2014)). Efforts to redirect leisure time into reading books could prove to be beneficial in terms of survival for this population. Also, participants in the study spent considerably more time reading periodicals than reading books; since the survival advantage is significantly stronger for book reading, switching from reading periodicals to books, or adding book reading to daily activities, might be worthwhile.(5)

There is one other bit of good news for book lovers and readers which I encountered in this search. That is, that the number of published hard-copy books sold has risen from about 559 million in 2014 to  571 million sold in 2015.  This compared to the rather static market for e-books.(6)

So, all around good news for older readers.  

Let’s think together again, soon.

Notes:  

1.  Gregory S.Berns, Kristina Blaine, Michael J. Prietula, and Brandon E. Pye.  “Short- and Long-Term Effects of a Novel on Connectivity in the Brain,” Brain Connectivity 3, no. 6 (2013): 590-600.

Available online at:  http://online.liebertpub.com/doi/pdf/10.1089/brain.2013.0166

2.  Avni Bavishi, Martin D. Slade, and Becca R. Levy, “A Chapter a Day: Association of Book Reading with Longevity,” Social Science & Medicine 164, (September 2016): 44-48, emphasis added.  I do not know if this article is available for free online.  I accessed it through a paid online service.

3.  Avni Bavishi, et al., 47, emphasis added.

4.  Avni Bavishi, et al., 44, internal references omitted.

5.  Avni Bavishi, et al., 47, emphasis added.

6.  Hillel Italie, “From Coloring Books to Harper Lee, a Good Year For Paper,” AP The Big Story, 16 December 2015.  Online at:  

http://www.bigstory.ap.org/article/fc55b5d90284497684ac0793f8bccc84/coloring-books-harper-lee-good-year-paper

Our Great Hope Lies in American Ideals©

Introduction:

Most of my life I have been dismayed at the liberal propensity to loath America because of her failings.  This began for me back in the 1960s as I was arriving at adulthood. The late 1960s were a very difficult time for America, largely because of the opposition to the Viet Nam War.  Liberal ideals were in the ascendancy it seemed to me then, and they were epitomized by the famous trial of the “Chicago Seven,” led by arch-Liberal Abbie Hoffman who advocated “revolution.” Since then there has been a continual parade of liberal American self-loathing.

In writing this, I am not blind to America’s faults. But I believe America to be the greatest nation in the history of the world and it is largely due to her ideals. Sure, she falls short of her ideals, but what person, what city, state, or nation does not? Generally only those who do not profess ideals at all. 

Many young people today, nurtured on three generations of this self-hate and woefully ignorant of American’s great history and legacy, seem ready to throw over American ideals which they neither know or understand. Thus the popularity of the “Bernie” socialistic philosophy. He however, is at the far left of a far left liberal political movement and many if not most liberals promote many different forms of socialism which are inimical to the original American ideals which are so endangered.

Clarence Thomas on American Ideals

So, I now turn the microphone over to a black American man of some character, wisdom, judgment, and good common sense, to speak in behalf of American ideals for a moment or two. Read carefully, there are several really important gems in what he says below.

“Throughout my youth, even as the contradiction of segregation persisted, we revered the ideals of our great nation. We knew, of course, that our country was flawed, as are all human institutions. But we also knew that our best hope lay in the ideal of liberty. ...

I often wondered why my grandparents remained such model citizens, even when our country’s failures were so obvious. In the arrogance of my early adult life, I challenged my grandfather and doubted America’s ideals. He bluntly asked: “So, where else would you live?” Though not a lettered man, he knew that our constitutional ideals remained our best hope, and that we should work to achieve them rather than undermine them. “Son,” he said, “don’t throw the baby out with the bath water.” That is, don’t discard what is precious along with what is tainted.

Today, when it seems that grievance rather than responsibility is the main means of elevation, my grandfather’s beliefs may sound odd or discordant. But he and others like him at the time resolved to conduct themselves in a way consistent with America’s ideals. They were law-abiding, hardworking, and disciplined. They discharged their responsibilities to their families and neighbors as best they could. They taught us that despite unfair treatment, we were to be good citizens and good people. If we were to have a functioning neighborhood, we first had to be good neighbors. If we were to have a good city, state, and country, we first had to be good citizens. The same went for our school and our church. We were to keep in mind the corporal works of mercy and the great commandment: “Love thy neighbor as thyself.” Being wronged by others did not justify reciprocal conduct. Right was right, and two wrongs did not make a right. What we wanted to do did not define what was right–nor, I might add, did our capacious litany of wants define liberty.   ...

America, was founded on the idea that liberty is an antecedent of government, not benefit from government.”(1)

Where would you rather live?  Where is there a higher ideal of government, ensconced in a constitution?  I'm with Clarence, we should "work to achieve" those ideals "rather than undermine them."

Let's think together again, soon.

Notes: 

1.  Clarence Thomas, “Freedom and Obligation–2016 Commencement Address,” 14 May 2016 at Hillsdale College, in Imprimis 45, nos. 5/6 (June 2016): 4, 5, emphasis in original.

In Fact, Mrs. Clinton Did Lie to the American People©

Introduction: The debate about Hillary Clinton’s email scandal brought forth from her numerous categorical denials. Her opponents have claimed that she lied in many of these instances while her supporters, among them a friend of mine, maintain she has been honest throughout the ordeal.  This morning FBI director James Comey issued a report on their investigation and flatly contradicted Mr. Clinton and showed her to in fact be lying to America about six issues which I have listed below.

1.  She said: she never received any email that was marked classified.

Comey said: “From the group of 30,000 emails returned to the State Department in 2014, 110 emails in 52 email chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was top secret at the time they were sent; 36 of those chains contained secret information at the time; and eight contained confidential information at the time. That's the lowest level of classification.”

2.  She said: she turned over all work-related emails to the State

Comey said: “ The FBI also discovered several thousand work-related e-mails that were not among the group of 30,000 e-mails returned by Secretary Clinton to State in 2014.”

3.  She said: she never knowingly sent or received classified information on her server.

Comey said: “...there is evidence that they [Clinton and staff] were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.

For example, seven e-mail chains concerned matters that were classified at the top secret special access program at the time they were sent and received. Those chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails about those same matters.

There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position or in the position of those with whom she was corresponding about the matters should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation.

In addition to this highly sensitive information, we also found information that was properly classified as secret by the U.S. intelligence community at the time it was discussed on e-mail. That is excluding any later up-classified e-mails.

None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system.”

4.  She said: she only used one device and had one server

Comey said: “It turns out to have been more complicated than that. Secretary Clinton used several different servers and administrators of those servers during her four years at the State Department, and she also used numerous mobile devices to send and to read e-mail on that personal domain.”


5.  She said:  her personal server(s) were secure

Comey said: "We also assess that Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal domain was both known by a large number of people and readily apparent.

She also used her personal e-mail extensively while outside of the United States, including sending and receiving work-related e-mails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries. Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail account."

6.  She said: she did not violate Federal law

Comey said: “ there is evidence of potential violation of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information”

Let’s think together again, soon.

Note:  You may read Comey’s complete statement here:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/07/05/inside-james-comeys-shockingly-scathing-comments-about-hillary-clintons-email-setup/?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_comey-trascript-144pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory

The Doctrines of Marriage and Family and Our Role and Responsibility as Husband and Father©

[Introduction:  This afternoon I gave a 12 minute talk in our stake priesthood meeting.  Here is a copy, complete with footnotes which are about as long as the talk itself.  As always, your comments are welcome.]

Brethren, I have been asked to address the vitally important topic of the doctrines of marriage and family and our role and responsibility as a husband and father. I will do my best to keep myself out of this and cite scripture and the teachings of the brethren, and concentrate on several fundamental principles. When I read this to my wife she agreed it was a “no nonsense” talk and suggested I warn you. So, fair warning.

The Apostle Paul spoke of marriage as “this great mystery.”(1) He was not speaking in anything like the jocular manner one might encounter today. He was speaking of it as one of the mysteries of God, indeed, it is one of the mysteries of godliness. Joseph Smith and numerous passages in modern revelation encourage us to be diligent students of these mysteries.(2) 

Christ’s Church and Gospel promulgate the highest ideal and sacredness of marriage and family of any philosophy to be found on earth.(3) William Clayton said that he learned from Joseph Smith that “the doctrine of ... celestial marriage is the most holy and important doctrine ever revealed to man on the earth, and that without obedience to that principle no man can ever attain to the fulness of exaltation in celestial glory.”(4) 

There are only two theories of the origin of marriage. The first, the evolutionary theory accepted by the world, is that marriage is a man-made institution which evolved as civilization developed. The second one is the view given to us in the restoration. D&C 49: 15 reads, “whoso forbiddeth to marry is not ordained of God, for marriage is ordained of God unto man.” This is the only statement in all four Standard Works which plainly states marriage is ordained of God, though the Jewish and Christian world deduced this idea from some statements in the Bible, while others found in those same stories justification to denigrate marriage and elevate celibacy and the aesthetic life.(5) Therefore, in today’s confused world in which we plainly see that marriage and family really are mysteries to the world, we know the Gospel teachings are the only way to truly know what a family is, along with its purposes and destiny.(6)  

Everything in the Plan of Salvation is for the family, beginning with the creation. 1 Nephi 17:37 states, “Behold, the Lord hath created the earth that it should be inhabited; and he hath created his children that they should possess it.” D&C 49: 16-17 add: “Wherefore, it is lawful that [man] should have one wife, and they twain shall be one flesh, and all this that the earth might [fulfil] the [purpose] of its creation; 17) And that [the earth] might be filled with the [number] of man, according to his creation before the world was.” As we all know, the Fall made it possible for Adam and Eve and all their posterity to have families.  In bearing children and rearing families we are co-participants with God in carrying on his work which is to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man.(7) The Atonement made it possible for God’s children who have obeyed all of the required and necessary ordinances to, be forgiven of sin, which is one of the first steps toward the larger goal of returning permanently to the presence of God as exalted beings and families.(8)

Thus, the third Article of Faith declares, “We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel.” Five ordinances are required for men to be exalted: 1) baptism, 2) confirmation, 3) ordination to the Melchizedek Priesthood, 4) endowment, and 5) sealing to wife and children. A sixth one is required for we who are living–the sacrament–in which we formally renew all of the covenants which we have made to this point in life.(9)

Ordinances are channels through which God gives us blessings(10) of power, authority, the full blessings of the Atonement, and sacred knowledge which we will need in order to pass to our exaltation in the Celestial Kingdom.(11) Joseph Smith explained, “The question is frequently asked, ‘Can we not be saved without going through with all those ordinances?’ I would answer, No, not the fulness of salvation.”(12)These required ordinances are different from the other, non-required ordinances in one respect. Each one involves entering into a sacred covenant with God. The ordinances are the mechanism by which these covenants are made. Most importantly, by doing so we receive by covenant a multitude of blessings and promises from God. In Section 104:33 the Lord said, “And, inasmuch as they are faithful, I will multiply blessings upon them and their seed after them, even a multiplicity of blessings.” In one instance he said “I will multiply a multiplicity of blessings....”(13) We unlock or activate all those promises by obedience to those covenants.(14) So when we have received all of the ordinances we have been promised the fulness of the blessings of the fulness of the Atonement.(15)

Baptism and marriage are two gateway ordinances. Baptism, is the gate through which we must pass to get on to the straight an narrow path which leads to eternal life.(16) Marriage is the gate through which we pass into the highest degree of the Celestial Kingdom.(17) All of the individuals in all of the other degrees of glory will “remain separately and singly, without exaltation, in their saved condition, to all eternity; and from henceforth are not gods, but are angels of God forever and ever.”(18)

It behooves us therefore, brethren, to make every effort to know precisely what we promised God and to be diligent in keeping those promises because the Lord has said, “I the Lord am bound when ye do what I say, but when ye do not what I say, ye have no promise.”(19) We cannot be casual about either learning what we promised or observing and keeping those promises. God will not be mocked. Serious consequences attend neglect or violation of those covenants.(20) They should be the highest priorities in our religious life. Bishop Robert L. Simpson, taught, “It is expedient, however that we place first things first, an agreement that we make with the Lord through his Holy Priesthood takes precedence over all else, regardless of its source or its apparent value.”(21)  

A key covenant which is not well understood is the law of chastity. Most adults arrive at marriage physically mature enough to have the power to procreate, but marriage is required to have the authority to procreate. Authority to procreate? Elder Charles W. Penrose, a member of the First Presidency, taught: “In its correct form [marriage] is under the divine direction. The Father of the race has the right to a voice in the sexual unions of his children. Those relations are fraught with so much consequence, relating to time and eternity, that the Supreme Ruler should regulate them(22) for the benefit of the parties, the welfare of society,(23) and the good of posterity in this world, as well as for eternal results in the life to come.”(24)  There is not time here to discuss the sweeping implications of this marvelous statement. Just let me reiterate that proper regulation of the use of our procreative powers is for the benefit of the couple, society in general, and their posterity in this world. I testify this is true.

Therefore, brethren, as apostle Matthias Cowley said, “We must remember that we have taken upon us the most solemn obligations that were ever assumed by men and women upon the face of the earth.”(25) It is only because of the importance and weight of the promised outcome that such heavy obligations are placed upon us. This is as it should be. D&C 78: 17-18 teaches:  17) Verily, verily, I say unto you, ye are little children, and ye have not as yet understood how great blessing the Father hath in his own hands and prepared for you; 18) And ye cannot bear all things now; nevertheless, be of good cheer, for I will lead you along. The kingdom is yours and the blessing thereof are yours, and the riches of eternity are yours.” 

This of course, makes our wives and children our greatest blessing and our greatest responsibility.  President Ezra Taft Benson taught us:

First and foremost, nothing except God Himself takes priority over your wife in your life—not work, not recreation, not hobbies.Your wife is your precious, eternal helpmate—your companion. 

What does it mean to love someone with all your heart? It means to love with all your emotional feelings and with all your devotion. Surely when you love your wife with all your heart, you cannot demean her, criticize her, find fault with her, or abuse her by words, sullen behavior, or actions. 

What does it mean to ‘cleave unto her’?It means to stay close to her, to be loyal and faithful to her, to communicate with her, and to express your love for her”(26)

President Russell M. Nelson similarity taught:“So brethren your foremost priesthood duty is to nurture your marriage–to care for, respect, honor, and love your wife. Be a blessing to her and your children.”(27) His predecessor, President Boyd K. Packer said it this way: “What my son and his wife are doing with their little children transcends anything they could do in the Church or out. No service could be more important to the Lord than the devotion they give to one another and to their little children.”(28)

I hope and pray brethren, that we hear and believe and act upon these doctrines and principles.The basic spiritual component of our responsibilities, obligations, duties, and privileges is highlighted and taught in the Temple ordinances. Of these things I bear sacred witness and testimony in the name of Jesus Christ, Amen.

Let's think together again, soon.

Notes:

1. Eph. 5:32.

2 Joseph Smith said, “I advise all to go on to perfection, and search deeper and deeper into the mysteries of Godliness.” [Joseph Fielding Smith, comp., Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1967), 364, 2 May 1844.] Scriptural statements regarding our responsibility to study them and promises that they will be revealed include: Mk. 13:11; 1 Ne. 10:19; Mosiah 2:19; D&C 42:61; 63:22-31; 76:5-10.

There are two types of mysteries: those no one knows because they have not been revealed, and those which some know and others do not because of their ignorance of that which has been revealed.  Baptism and marriage fall into this latter category.

3. President David O. McKay said: “A careful study of [scripture] leaves little doubt that Jesus set forth the lofty ideal that marriage is of divine origin and that the marriage bond should be held sacred.” He also said, “...we should substitute the present tendency toward a low view of marriage by the lofty view which Jesus Christ gives it.”  David O. McKay, Treasures of Life (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1970), 65.

4. Joseph Smith, cited by William Clayton, in George D. Smith, ed., An Intimate Chronicle: The Journals of William Clayton (Salt Lake City: Signature Books,1991), 559; also in Andrew Jenson, “Plural Marriage,” The Historical Record, 6 (July 1887): 226, my emphasis.  John Taylor’s view was, “Our marriage system is one of the greatest principles that God ever developed to the human family, whether men believe it or not.”  John Taylor, JD 20:352, discourse of 30 November 1879.  He said this in context of remarks about plural marriage.

5.  Mary Catherine Thomas, “The Influence of Asceticism on the Rise of Christian Text, Doctrine, and Practice in the First Two Centuries,” PhD. diss., Brigham Young University, 1989, 36-106.

6. John H. Groberg, “Family: The Eternal Perspective,” address at the BYU Center for Family History, 27 February 2004, Internet edition, 2; David A. Bednar, “Marriage Is Essential to His Eternal Plan,” Worldwide Leadership Training Meeting: Supporting the Family (Salt Lake City: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 2006), 4; Parley P. Pratt, The Autobiography of Parley Parker Pratt (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1938), 297-98. 

In 1994 President Howard W. Hunter made the following, profound statement about the authority of this Church regarding the family:  “The Church has the responsibility--and the authority--to preserve and protect the family as the foundation of society.”  Howard W. Hunter, Conference Report, October 1994, 8. 

7. D&C 132:63   “...they are given unto him to multiply and replenish the earth according to my commandment, and to fulfil the promise which was given by my Father before the foundation of the world, and for their exaltation in the eternal worlds, that they may bear the souls of men: for herein is the work of my Father continued, that he may be glorified.”

8. See, Russell M. Nelson,  “Celestial Marriage,” Ensign (November 2008): 93.  This highest purpose of the Atonement is crucial to understand especially in terms of the necessity of the higher ordinances of the Melchizedek Priesthood, and is increasingly the subject of discourse in the Church.  It is one of the main subjects in the Hafen’s book: Bruce C., and Marie K. Hafen, The Contrite Spirit: How the Temple Helps Us Apply Christ’s Atonement (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2015).  See for example explicit statements on pp. 8-9, 11, 19, 27, 28.  The stress can also be seen in the titles of several chapters such as 2: “The Purpose of Christ’s Atonement: Providing for Our Growth;” 4: “His Atonement: Strengthening Blessings;” and 5: “His Atonement: Perfecting Blessings.”

9. There are a growing number of statements which state that we renew all covenants we have made when we partake of the sacrament.  The following is a list of references to these statements in some semblance of chronological sequence: Delbert L. Stapley, Conference Report October 1965, 14; Marion D. Hanks, “Preparation for Prayer,” in Prayer (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1977), 28;  Clyde J. Williams, ed., The Teachings of Harold B. Lee (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1996), 574; Spencer W. Kimball, Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, edited by Edward L. Kimball, (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1982),  112, 220;  Mackay, John E.  “I Have a Question.” [What covenants do we renew when we partake of the sacrament?]  Ensign 25 (March 1995): 66-67; Gordon B. Hinckley, Teachings of Gordon B. Hinckley (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1997),  561; L. Tom Perry, “As Now We Take the Sacrament,” Ensign (May 2006): 41; Carol Frogley Ellertson,  “The Sanctifying Power of True Ritual Worship,” in D. Kelly Ogden, et al, eds., The Gospel of Jesus Christ in the Old Testament, The 38th Annual Brigham Young University Sidney B. Sperry Symposium, (Provo: Religious Studies Center, BYU/ Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 2009), 92-94; M. Russell Ballard, Yesterday, Today, and Forever: Timeless Gospel Messages with Insights from His Grandfathers Melvin J. Ballard and Hyrum Mack Smith (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2015), 16.    In this last one, Elder Ballard plainly declared: “As you know, the sacrament is a renewal and a reminder of all our covenants with the Lord, not just those made at baptism.”

10. Joseph Smith used the word “channel” in reference to the priesthood, [Joseph Fielding Smith, comp., Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1967), 166-67], and both ordinances and the temple in the following: HC 3:379; Andrew F. Ehat and Lyndon W. Cook, The Words of Joseph Smith (Religious Studies Center, BYU, Provo, Utah: 1980), 3; and HC 4:59.

11. First Presidency, 12 February 1971, letter to church leaders regarding their responsibility to prepare members for temple ordinances.  The statement is found in an attached document entitled, “So You Are Going To The Temple.”  Copy in possession of DWB.

12. Joseph Fielding Smith, comp., Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1967), 331, 20 January 1844.  He said similar things on several occasions.  See: TPJS, 12, 167, 308-309, 331, 362-63, 366; Joseph Smith, in Andrew F. Ehat and Lyndon W. Cook, The Words of Joseph Smith (Provo, Utah: Religious Studies Center, BYU, 1980), p. 233, 363; Scott Kenney, Wilford Woodruff’s Journal, 20 March 1842, 21 January 1844, and HC 6:319, 8 April 1844.

13. D&C 104:38.  Some of the late Book of Mormon peoples apparently had some form of eternal marriage.4 Ne. 1:11 reads: "And they were married, and given in marriage, and were blessed according to the multitude of the promises which the Lord had made unto them."  For those familiar with the ordinance of eternal marriage the phrase "multitude of promises" is accurate, and so far as I know is unique in doing so. Promises are not generally given in civil marriages, even those performed by properly authorized Mormon priesthood holders.  They may pray for blessings to come to the couple, but they do not confer any by the authority of the priesthood.

14. Merrill J. Bateman, “Ordinances and Covenants: The Ties that Bind,” address to the BYU Family History Conference, 29 July 2008, Internet edition; see also Dennis B. Neuenschwander,“Ordinances and Covenants,” BYU Family History Fireside, 29 October 2000, Internet edition.

15. Harold B. Lee, in Clyde J. Williams, ed., The Teachings of Harold B. Lee (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1996), 570; Gordon B. Hinckley, “A Century of Family History Service,” Ensign (March 1995): 61; David E. Sorensen, “The Doctrine of Temple Work,” Ensign (October 2003): 56-63; Dennis B. Neuenschwander, “Ordinances and Covenants,” address to the BYU Family History Fireside, 29 October 2000, Internet edition, 6; “Holy Place, Sacred Space,” conference address May 2003, Internet Edition; Merrill J. Bateman  “The Fulness of the Priesthood,” address to the BYU Family Life Conference, 28 March 2008, Internet edition; Tad R. Callister, The Infinite Atonement (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2000), 296-97, citing Dallin H. Oaks, cited by  Elder John Madsen at a Los Angeles Temple Devotional on 13 Dec. 1998;  Richard G. Scott, 21 Principles: Divine Truths to Help You Live by the Spirit (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2013), 73.

16. 2 Nephi 31: 16-18.

17. D&C 131:1-4.

18. D&C 132:17.

19. D&C 82:10.

20. See for example: Ezek. 17:12-19; D&C 5:27.   See also: Russell T. Osguthorpe, “The Power of Inspired Invitations.” In The Things Which My Father Saw: Approaches to Lehi’s Dream and Nephi’s Vision, edited by Daniel L. Belnap, Gaye Strathearn, and Stanley A. Johnson.  (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 2011), p. 8; Robert L. Millet, “Honoring His Holy Name,” Ensign 24 (March 1994): 9-10; Samuel W. Richards, “Covenants–A Word of Counsel,” Millennial Star 15 (13 August 1853): 536-37.

21. Robert L. Simpson, Conference Report, April 1967, 68.

22. Parley P. Pratt said on this subject: “It is, in short, a principle so high, so holy, and so pure that it can never be secured short of a compliance with the commandments of God, not only by a virtuous source of life, but by a strict observance of his commandments in regard to tithing, building the Temple, and the orders of endowment.”  Parley P. Pratt, The Prophet 1 (24 May 1845), emphasis added.

23. Parley P. Pratt said it this way: “It is calculated to exalt society to the highest degree of happiness, union, purity, fidelity, virtue, confidence, and love, in this world and in that which is to come.”  Parley P. Pratt, The Prophet 1 (24 May 1845).

24. Charles W. Penrose, “Leaves from the Tree of Life,” Eleventh Leaf, The Contributor, 2 (August 1881): 337.

25. Matthias F. Cowley, Conference Report, October 1899, 63.

26. Ezra Taft Benson, “To the Fathers in Israel,” Ensign (November 1987): 50.

27. Russell M. Nelson, “Nurturing Marriage,” Ensign (May 2006): 37.

28. Boyd K. Packer, “The Weak and the Simple of the Church,” Ensign (November 2007): 8-9.