Political Independence

It's been a while since I've blogged. Probably because I am in the process of having an affair with John Adams. It's been going on for a while now, and last night I even dreamt in revolutionary times. It's that serious. And Daniel doesn't know about it. I'm hoping it won't go over badly.

A few things about John Adams that I love are that he is well read, was passionate about American independence and was proud of his "independent" thought. Independent in ways that he had to reach out and consider ways of government that he had never considered before. He often brought up the importance of independent thought.

I generally stay away from politics, not that I don't have political opinions, but because people are often staunch in their views that I'm asking for a fight and judgement if I do, which usually I am not prepared to take on. This would be opposed to Johnny, so I am stepping out and standing up for my political view in his honor.

Let's start with some kindling.

I read a comment on Facebook from someone who said she did not like President Reagan. This surprised me because she wasn't even alive when Reagan was president. Obviously, her father is very liberal. He has passed that political thought onto his daughter. On either side, this is sad and wrong. Not because it was against Reagan (who few people really disliked, on either side) but because there seems to have been no encouragement of independent thought and the father, being so staunch in his political ways, seemed to be open to no other way. This has really bothered me.

On the other side:

My sister-in-law's sister took her children to a political convention and was praised by a passer-by for "raising a good republican." To this, she immediately and passionately responded that she was "raising a good American". Teaching her children to be politically aware while not ensuring that they follow her political views was her goal. This is wise, though not easy.

In the last week I read that:

Barbara Bush Jr (W's daughter) was in favor of the heath care bill being passed.

Laura Bush is in favor of gay marriage.

Isn't that amazing? These are people who are from hugely political families. Here they are, independent in their thinking and not suaded by party or family or conservative talk radio. That's fabulous. I am not saying that I am for these things, but that I absolutely respect that their family allowed for reaching outside their political box. I have a new respect for President Bush (which I never lost, but it has been renewed). This president who was so hated by many non-republicans, and said to go down in history as the worst president ever, has members of his own family who have opinions on both sides of the political isle--unlike his haters (who I am convinced cannot see both sides). I applaud him. And his family.

As a parent, our job is not to teach our children to be like us, but to teach them principles, integrity, and independent thought. To look at things on both sides of the isle as legitimate even if we favor one over the other. There are few black and whites in the political world. (Truly few black and whites anywhere). To be able to understand that both sides have good and bad is valuable (and uncommon) in raising a good American.

I think John Adams would agree. I'll ask him in bed tonight. It's possible this could be a big debate. And he is very persuasive so I'll get back to you.

For my next political/spiritual post: I heard David Mccullough (author of John Adams) give a speech on American independence not being achieved because that's how God planned for it, but because of a series of choices--which could have gone many ways. I think what he's saying is he doesn't believe in fate since God does not control us and the future lies in collaborative independent agency. While I agree with this, the forefounders themselves said on many occasions that God was behind them, and I feel (in obvious hindsight) that is true. My next post (a long time in the thinking) will explore how much God is a part of our lives and how much of what happens is simply nature and consequences. What ideas do you have on this topic?

Kindness Revisited

My point was this: if you are suppose to be working, work, don't "flirt". I don't go to the social security office to talk about the weather, or my family. I want to be in and out of there as quick as possible and I want the "worker" to be efficient. Not cute. Not funny. And I don't care if she is nice. I just want the work done. Back to Mother Theresa (who I actually do think is really nice). When she saw something that needed to get done, she didn't beat around the bush with kindness in order to get it done. She knew what needed to happen and made sure that it did. Even if that meant that when she worked with people to organize, she wasn't all blossoms and butterflies. She got to it. I guess my last post was written in a little bit of frustration. Sorry if I seemed un-kind.

Things I learned at the Social Security Office

It's hard to be mean to a really nice person. I think this may be an evolutionary advancement: if I am really nice you won't be as mad when you realize how incompetent I am. Think about it. And don't apply it to me, because I already know I'm super nice (thank you), and mildly (?) incompetent. I am in fact a good example of this theory. To the point that I am starting to realize that I can/should be not so nice, even a bit aggressive when I want something done a certain way.

Let's go further with this theory: Who is super competent AND really nice? Not Martha Stewart. Not Obama. (Okay, regarding my audience, I guess competent is subjective). Not even Mother Theresa. (Yes I did. Which is the answer to your question: You didn't just say that did you?). Because when you know how to do something and you can do it well, sometimes others feelings are not the priority. (This may go against a lot of my other posts, but give me room to grow will ya).

My point is, next time I go to the social security office and the lady starts small talking and being really friendly, I may well ask if she is being nice because she is so incompenent. And I'll hope (firmly) that that goes over well.

Bottom Line

I have neighbors who are selling the product Isogenix, which is a weight loss meal replacement/ de-tox system. They are totally into it. I can't see them without their talking to me about nutrition and how well this system has worked for them and many others. How they really believe in it and that it will absolutely improve my life. I get samples, lectures, pamplets and invites to learn more. And since they are both at the bus stop with their kids twice daily, and the kids play together often, this is a frequent occurance. And I don't mind, they are good people. It has often occurred to me that it would drive them crazy and they would be really offended and would consider it inappropriate if I talked to them about the church and how it could improve their lives. Why is that? Why do they feel like it's their place to "change my life" whereas if I made suggestions of a spiritual parallel, I have crossed the line. What gets me more is that in process of their "improving my life" their pocket also gets bigger. Whereas my offensive "improving their lives" does not affect my bottom line in the least. I'm mulling over the idea of bringing this up the next time I talk to them.

Moments

There was a young man in our ward who committed suicide last week. It was shocking and bitterly sad. I wanted to write down two of the tender moments that touched me deeply regarding this whole situation.

The first was at the funeral. I didn't love the funeral, in fact I struggled with a lot of it, but the bishop spoke so well. One thing he said was that this family told him they were concerned that not many people would come to the funeral since the boy was a bit of a loner and the family not very social. He then said with tears in his eyes that the family should stand up and look back as the chapel was filled to capacity and beyond. I wanted to cheer but I was weeping. I'm so grateful for good people who came together to support this family. I think that really is the essence of our purpose in this life.

The other was at church the following Sunday. I wasn't in relief society but heard this through Gigi Dody. She said that in the high priests meeting they addressed the issue of suicide by talking about doctrine and quoting different prophets. In contrast, the women sang A Childs' Prayer for the mother of this boy and at the end only the piano was playing as no one could get through the song. I am grateful to be a woman for many reasons, and this is one of them.

One last thing that I'll try to tie in--in sacrament meeting at Christmas time Brother Williams spoke of the affect of the gospel. He quoted what we've all heard, that the gospel makes bad men good and good men better. And then he said that it goes beyond people and affects situations too, that it makes bad things good and good things better. I really like this idea. In the midst of something awful, there are moments of rare goodness and beauty that are in line with the gospel. And I am grateful to have witnessed a few of these moments.

I Love Making Goals

Even though I know they don't all pan out. This year I am going to make fun do-able goals. Wanna hear them? I thought so.

1. Passionately kiss Daniel every day.
2. Read the Lord of the Rings series
3. Cook more seafood (we're stuck on Salmon, and I want to branch out)
4. Say yes to my kids more, even add "that sounds like a great idea!"
5. Spend less time on the computer (maybe by 1/2) and more time outside.

What goals do you have this year?

Record Snowfall in DC

I just read about the snow storm in DC and it brought up a memory that I am going to share. Ready?

1996

That's a long time ago. I was pregnant with Lindsey and Daniel was interviewing at USUHS and Georgetown medical schools. I flew out to meet him and check out the area (and although obviously with hindsight--I remember thinking then that that's where we would go to school. That's my Grandma Groberg in me).

Anyway, back to the story.

There was a huge storm in DC. It shut down almost everything (including Daniel's interview at Georgetown). Stores were practically empty because people were preparing to be holed up for weeks apparently. Somehow my flight still landed. I proceeded to get myself from the airport, through the metro system to the right station in a city I'd never been in. I was 21. That's no small cookie. And it was night time. Then. My sweet husband gave me directions to walk to the hotel from the metro (I don't remember how faw away it was, but I think it took me 30 minutes with the snow). We didn't have cell phones (were they invented yet?) I had a suitcase that had rollers and did I mention I was pregnant? The side walks were impassable because that's where the snow plows had put the snow so I had to walk in the street. And climb over lots of snow mounds. With my "rolling" suitcase. And it was freezing. FREEZING! What confidence Daniel had in me. And I didn't let him down. I found it without much problem and was so grateful that his confidence worked (because I lacked it a bit). And I was so grateful to be with him again. In a nice warm place.

The next day we walked to White Flint mall (which is an upscale mall that was eye opening to me to walk through) and it was almost empty. We walked through the parking lot and my memory is of huge trees that were covered in snow and with what seemed like thousands of crows. The contrast was amazing to me, to watch them fly--they would fill the sky and then come back to the white tree. We would try to excite them just to watch the show over and over again. I loved it, which is kind of silly cause crows are a nuisance, but that memory was remarkable to me. The whole experience there: the two of us, out on our own, very young, in our nation's capital, breaking off from what we have known, establishing our own family, trudging through a difficult storm, but finding moments of enjoyment and new found confidence amidst the storm. And I learned a solid character trait of Daniels: that it's always a good time for ice cream, even in sub-freezing, government halting weather. I'm sure the ice cream shop appreciated us too--we must have been the only customers in weeks.

It's fun to have memories come up to the surface.

(I'm still remembering. . . what does it say about my marriage that Daniel wasn't there for both typhoons in Guam. And come to think of it, both times I was pregnant. Something about my needing storms to recognize my capability and/or give Daniel reason to have confidence in me? I probably shouldn't go any deeper on this one.)

Bag of Challenges

At least a few times these last few months I have heard in conversation or in lesson the idea that if we were to put our "bag of troubles" and trade with someone who we think has less troubles than we, that we would quickly take our own bag back. Isn't that a sweet idea. It kind of makes you feel better about yourself and that other people who seem to be really put together must be hiding some really hardcore problems. But guess what? (You'll never guess) I disagree with this idea. I don't think that troubles and trials are created equally. And, I think I have a pretty easy life, aside from a self-condemning voice that I need to shut up, a few natural disasters and some little things here and there, my life has been pretty coosh. I will go ahead and keep my bag (and knock on wood constantly). Life is not fair. Hardships are not evenly divied out. The grass really might be greener in the other bag.

What do you think?

And, one more thing about my passion post (Greg--I really did mean passion, not just extremism). I found a scripture that I think goes a long with it perfectly. D&C 12:8
And no one can assist in this work except he shall be humble and full of love, having faith, hope, and charity, being temperate in all things, whatsoever shall be entrusted to his care.

Humility Begets Truth

Cliff's Notes Version for those of you like me who want to skim through and get the main idea: if you are extreme and passionate in your views and can see no wrong, YOU are wrong. Sorry.

I catch myself saying "The truth is . . ." then telling an opinion that I have, which I think is pretty funny. My thoughts or opinions in my mind are categorized as True. There you go, just come and ask me. So, I've been thinking about truth, and after reading some of 1776, Fire in the Bones, The Chosen and considering my own religion, how bothered I am that good people (even really good people) can be on the wrong or un-true side. And how the "wrong" side often isn't recognized for a long time, if ever.

Then I should take the next step and question if and when I am/have been on the wrong side (which won't be included in this post), instead I'll hypothetically ask:

• Would I have been converted to the cause of liberty in 1776, seen the vision of America which was a far cry from what it was, or would I have wanted to stay passionately loyal to the king?


• Would I have promoted the bible being translated into English, and hidden or been killed for this belief or would I have agreed with the passionate majority that English was a vulgar language and not fit for scripture.


• Would I have accepted Joseph Smith as a prophet if I were alive in his time and been mocked and scorned or would I have done the popular thing and been a part of the passionate anti-Mormon mob?


• Would I have accepted Jesus Christ as a son of God and a personal savior if it meant that my life were at risk or would I have rejected him and asked with the passionate crowd that Barabas be freed.

I am absolutely converted to each of these causes, but in it's time, when many many people were passionately opposed, sometimes with seemingly strong cause, would I have recognized and fought for what was right? Would I have recognized that

Passion is often wrong.

I had to decide whether to put that sentence in. I wrote it and had an internal debate because it sounds so harsh--but I really think it's true. Anyone who is so passionate about something often
(from here on out, when I use the word often I really mean always, but I just can't bring myself to making that extreme of a point) often doesn't have the bearings to recognize other truths. Anyone who is so emotionally connected is not intellectually open to being wrong. And passion is often selfish, and selfish is often wrong. This may not be appreciated by a teenager in love. Or by any extreme political advocates. (Are those two of the same?) You have to be able to question yourself. Often. Sincerely. Being open to being wrong. Moroni 10:3-5 says to ask if something is not true. I love that it says to ask if it's not true rather than if it's true. I need to ask myself often if the path I am on is wrong. We need to recognize when we are not right by questioning it--by being open to being wrong.

(Viki, plug your ears for bit). I don't like talk radio. Almost every time I listen to a right wing republican (I am a republican) I want to become a democrat. Anytime I hear someone say anything so entirely negative about "the other side" I quickly discredit them because.

There is no straw man.

If you cannot recognize good in the other side then you are too emotionally connected and can not have a strong argument. If you are so passionatly one-sided that the other side is always wrong, you, my friend, are sadly wrong.

I remember reading a book by Andy Rooney, and one chapter (the only one I remember) was about religion. Very negatively about religion. His point (and it really tested my faith) was that so many awful, destructive, horrible things have happened in the name of religion or of God. These people (the leaders of the horror) were passionate about their God-driven-cause. Passionate--not open to being wrong. Because of that passion, they were very wrong and very destructive. I'mputting in a thought that my sister Lisa left in a comment, I think it goes perfectly: Our understanding is seldom complete, so we must humbly move forward to learn and understand more and more. It is extreme commitment without open mindedness and self questioning that is so dangerous.

Often I think that those most passionate, most extreme are almost always the most wrong. But I recognize movements (American independence, Mormon Church, Bible translation) that need(ed) passion to move forward and was (in my ever so true opinion) directed of God. As much as I like to stand in the middle and nod at both sides, there are times when extreme action and sacrafice are required, but it is always (always, not often--I'm daring to be bold) the humble, the sincerely questioning, the meek, the selfless (both Joseph Smith and William Tyndale sacrificed themselves for their work. Oh yea, and so did Jesus Christ) that truly see God's work forward. How can we know if we are in the right side? Paraphrasing Moroni 10, we must receive (and all that that implies) ponder and ask sincerely if it is not true. I like that as a definition of humility. And we have to keep doing this. We can look at previous answers with sweetness, but we have to continually, humbly look to God for truth and for what is wrong in us.

(Hm, could humility be an antonym to passion? Can you be humbly passionate? Am I digressing too far . . . . should I press Publish Post. I'm questioning that . . .)

9/11

My niece Kaila blogged about what she was doing when the 9/11 attacks occurred. I am going to copy her.

Daniel was in flight medicine training school for 6 weeks and the girls and I were staying in the basement of my parents home. We would be leaving for Guam in a month. I remember waking up and hearing the radio on upstairs and being annoyed that it was so loud. When I got up and found out what had happened I absolutely broke down. This changed my life in a selfish way because I knew that this meant war and I knew that Daniel would be a part of it. That horrified me. Whenever someone called (like my mother-in-law) I could barely talk between sobbing. When my sister-in-law Traci walked in I completely broke down. I remember Lindsey asking if she could have a turn watching a show because we had watched the airplane show all day long, which I actually think is sweet--her security had not internally changed. I would love for Daniel to tell his story, I know he was told that likely assignments would change and they even prepared for the possibility of flying to NY to assist with medical needs.

I was broken hearted for the families that were torn apart. I watched as people went to ground zero with pictures of loved ones hoping that someone had seen them and that they were safe. I remember watching a particular man with a picture of his wife and him breaking down after showing it to the camera and pleading for any information about where she was.

I was so touched by the fire fighters who (some of them I heard) took the last communion on their way into the building. I was inspired by the "Let's roll" (is that what it was?) of the passengers in the Pennsylvania flight. And the desire that everyone felt to help. The patriotism and unity that was shown was remarkable. It is still something that can move me to tears.