Return to Modesty

I so appreciated David Brook's most recent column that astutely pointed out how a return to civility can only come through a return to modesty. Modesty is unpopular. It's not flashy or quick or attention-getting--the seeming virtues of the day. However, I completely agree that modesty could very well be a step in the right direction for ourselves personally, as communities, and as a nation.

I thought about the people I know who are fine examples of modesty and a few faces immediately came to mind. I so admire them.

I think women, in particular, could use a dose of modesty. The notion that women should be humble, meek and mild has long since been thought out-dated. Women are supposed to be strong, resolute, determined, courageous, and educated, they say. And yes. Undeniably yes. Women are to be all of these things. But they are also to be tempered by modesty, softened by gentility,  and sweetened by civility. My own mother is this way and I respect her so much for that. She is an example to me of simultaneous strength and soft-heartedness, tenacity and tenderness, fierceness and faith, power and purity.

Oh that we were all more like our mothers! I think of my female fore bearers with increasing frequency these days as I prepare to join their ranks as a mother. I am grateful that I have so many to look to as examples of might and modesty.

Incentives for Family

While it may seem strange to speak of external economic incentives to get married and have children in the context of today's philosophical emphasis of intrinsic desires and self-fulfillment, such incentives used to play somewhat of a role, at least as scaffolding, in supporting traditional family values. How might this happen? Where could such incentives originate?

Well, as you grow up you might one day ask yourself, "Who will take care of me if something were to happen to me? What if I were to get sick? Who will take care of me when I get old? Will I be alone?"

The obvious and traditional answers to the these questions are based in the family. If you are sick, a spouse might nurse you back to health while older children take on a temporary burden of providing for the material needs of the family (perhaps alongside your siblings, parents, and cousins). When you and your spouse grew old, the children you lovingly raised would see to it that your needs were met.

What happened to these incentives? Do any of them still exist and play a role? The short answer is no. Thanks to legislation such as Medicare, Social Security, the Prescription Drug Acts, and the age discriminating clause in the Employment Act, there is little reason to be worried about having your needs met when you are old.

After the legislation above was enacted, any remaining economic incentive for families was likely evaporated in the passing of the 2010 health care bill. This bill, which President Obama will sign today, mandates health care coverage. Now there is no need to be worried about who will take care of you when you get sick--the government will. The government will make sure the system works for you. Furthermore, because the government "closed the doughnut hole" for elderly care and lowered the Medicare age to 55, it is feasible that you could go through life without ever worrying about having a son or daughter or spouse to take care of you.

If you think that these economic incentives for families are inconsequential, try finding a welfare state that has a fertility rate reaching the 2.1 replacement rate. There is not one. By creating government safety nets for the sick and elderly, we have removed the economic pressures that lead to creating families.

Not only does this not bode well for the institution of the family but it also leads to dilemmas involving labor shortages (to take care of the lopsided demographic pattern) which, in turn, leads to immigration dilemmas. Heavy amounts of immigration can lead to fractures in cultural cohesion as the immigrants have less and less incentive to assimilate. This, over time, can lead to violence, even war.

So, when we try to create a society with fewer consequences--or even less harsh consequences--the consequences will usually pop up in unexpected and unintended places.

Comment

A great article by one of our favorites, David Brooks, came out on the 2nd. The article talks about the strange culture that is coming of our technologically saturated era, especially in the areas of love and dating.

Mikey made a comment on the article and his comment got published. (Comments are moderated by the New York Times and he has commented several times before without getting his comment published).

He said, quoting a passage from the article,

"'Today there are fewer norms that guide in that way.'

There are more than you might realize. Consider the following quote:

Moral uncertainty always leads ot behavioral absurdity. Prescriptions which are value-free always prove to be so costly. Unprincipled pragmatism is like advising someone who is hopelessly mire in quicksand not to struggle--so that he will merely sink more slowly!"
-Neal Maxwell."

What a smarty pants. (Both of them).

Repercussions

I had never thought there would be so many repercussions. It seems like I can't really get away from it; the talk, all the news, all the circular never-ending conversations, all the emotion, all the intolerance, all the hypocrisy, all the ripples in the pond. Will it ever subside?

I was at work today when a professor came in to discuss the future of this program at the University. Being a field heavily dominated by the gay community, BYU's affiliation with the Church is not a good thing for students wishing to break into this field. There has been talk of suspending or discontinuing the program because the doors of opportunity are rapidly closing and funding, placement, networking and communication lines are all down. Students are being advised to take BYU off their resumes and keep affiliation with the church private. It makes me sad.

I've been reading here for the last few nights and many of the verses have struck me. It's incredible how closely much of it mirrors today and how the spiritual leaders were no doubtedly involved in secular affairs. The prophets counseled with the kings and rulers. It was eye opening.

But there haven't been exclusively negative repercussions. As soon as I expressed concern about the issue there was an outpouring of support and love, encouragement and understanding that was shown towards me. Words seemed to come at me from places I had never expected. My Old Testament Professor, a distant friend, a magazine cover, an overheard conversation of people walking by. I got a forward a while back that really brought the last month into clarity:

"... an article quotes a University of Utah student who thinks the Church's involvement in the issue is inappropriate: "I can't believe they're supporting Prop. 8. The church is supposed to be neutral. That's changed now. They can't support a candidate but they can support a proposition. They've warped their stance. I've had to separate myself from the church because of the way they're handling the 'problem' of homosexuality. It's so against what
the church teaches. It's unchristian."

As soon as I read that I immediately thought of a statement from Elder Boyd K. Packer: "In the Church we are not neutral. We are one-sided. There is a war going on, and we are engaged in it. It is the war between good and evil, and we are belligerents defending the good. We are therefore obliged to give preference to and protect all that is represented in the gospel of Jesus Christ, and we have made covenants to do it" (Address to Religious Educators at Brigham Young University, August 22, 1981). And Elder Dallin H. Oaks just explained why the Church is involved with the current issue in an interview with the Church's Public Affairs staff: "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints must take a stand on doctrine and principle. This is more than a social issue – ultimately it may be a test of our most basic religious freedoms to teach what we know our Father in Heaven wants us to teach."

I bore my testimony to my students today. Those who claim that "prophets ought to keep their noses out of politics" have never read the Old Testament! Think about Moses, and Elijah, and Isaiah, and Amos, and others; they went directly to their respective political leaders and told them what the Lord wanted them to do, what course to pursue. (Can we limit what God can say about anything?) I testified that the First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve Apostles is the wisest group of leaders on earth, and not just from their cumulative intellectual prowess (world-class heart surgeon, nuclear physicist, judge and legal mind, etc., etc.) but because of their direct connection with Heaven, and living by the Spirit every day . . . The truth is restored to stay."

Reactions

My reaction to the election is no surprise. I'm excited and anxious to watch the next four years unfold. But I was interested in these stories that made me realize that this may be bigger than we realize.

As I watched the results Tuesday night I felt small, and like something far beyond my control was impending. But I wasn't scared.

Ballot

I've seldom felt more sprightly before the sun came up, but I couldn't help being excited to cast my vote among the nearly 117 million nationwide. I hit the line at 6:55 am and the anticipatory wait only made me more enthusiastic. No one should be that lively while waiting in the line. It's obnoxious.

I sanctimoniously signed my name on the blue paper, right above the bar code. With that they gave me a blue card with an American seal and a small, square, gold computer chip in the corner. I held it tight for the last few minutes before I slowly inserted it into the electronic ballot box.

The first question irked me, but it was refreshing to feel like I was taking some sort of test, but there wasn't a wrong answer. That's one of the best parts of America. No one has a corner on good ideas, and no one's are necessarily right or wrong. They just are. And with those ideas we move forward as a society and learn to knit our ideas together in an attempt to eventually lift ourselves and others upwards.

It was absolutely thrilling. I couldn't stop smiling after for two reasons: a) because I was exercising a right that was fought for, one that means I am an American and that my voice matters and b) that my voice really doesn't matter in Utah, and I just found that to be paradoxically hilarious.

Gobama

I can't wait to see how it all unfolds. Be still my beating political heart.

Waves

I feel pummeled. It seems like there has been so much turbulence to withstand lately. But less like wind and more like water. Like a constant set of waves, one after the next they pound and crash, and as soon as they recede enough for me to get air back in my lungs and have a moment of peace, the next set rolls in and smashes me back into the abrasive sand. My skin has never been so smooth. And my soul has never felt more bruised.

All the talk of this has really gotten to me. News delivered yesterday was like salt in my already stinging wound and it all culminated during the intermission and resulted in a night of hot tears.

I'm like a well of conflicting feelings. I feel for people and I believe in people and equality and the freedoms that America guarantees. I know that God is Love, that perfect love casteth out fear. I believe in a loving, merciful God who loves all of his children. But I don't think that's the issue. The problem is I feel like standing in opposition to this proposition is like breaking a commandment or holding hands with the devil. And that's the last thing I want to do.

I want to be able to get a phone call from my uncle and just be able to espouse pure, unreserved, unquestioned excitement and happiness. The bottom line is that I am happy and at peace when he is happy and at peace. Aren't the painful things sometimes the most beautiful?

This surprised me, and this was interesting. I understand this (although I still have problems with parts of this). And I think everyone should read this.

Most of all I want my insides to quiet and reconcile themselves. I spend so much time finding common ground with others it seems like I've neglected trying to find common ground between my heart and my head. I have spent so long abiding by principles of pure charity, and now I feel confronted, like I'm putting my love to the test. But what I can't quite pin down is what love asks of me. And I hope I can figure it out before I drown in the next onset of waves.

Poli-Ticks

There are several people who ask me why I am such an Obama supporter. Sometimes it feels like lifting up your sleeve and revealing a swastika tattooed in black ink when people ask me who I align myself with.

But it doesn't have to be that way.

The questions I always ask people is how much of their own research they have done, and what issues matter most to them. I, for one, have always been a proponent of women's rights. I think equal pay is a no-brainer, and discrimination of any sort is intolerable. In this light, I would like to draw your attention to voting records of a certain Republican Presidential Candidate who seems like a man that would uphold the rights of women (he did, after all, choose one as his VP pick) but these two NAYs (among other things) have lead me to believe that women in particular should wonder about casting their vote in his direction.

And I'm not alone. One of my professors is an avid Obama supporter. He sent me several links about things he's written and other online sources laying out policies and setting records straight.

Here are a few:
Obama in 30 Seconds
Obama Speaks for Himself
Energy Independence and the Safety of Our Planet
The War in Iraq
The Great Need of Our Hour

The final word, Obama doesn't eat babies or harbor white child slaves. He's not a terrorist or a socialist or any other "ist." I believe he is honest, hard working and smart. Most of all, I believe that he is crossing boundary lines that have never been challenged. Colin Powell said it right in this endorsement video.

Gobama .

Debate

I want it to be a good one this year. Substantive. We'll see come Friday.

Politics

I've always been bothered by the Blue Scare that has seemed to hold my blood-red state in a vice grip since FDR.

I wish a lot of things for the world. I wish we would all recycle. I wish everyone would burst into song and feel pure and piercing joy as music left them in elation. I wish we hard tougher skins and softer hearts. I wish waste wasn't common place. . . the list could go on for days.

But one thing I really wish, is that people would just take the time to read. Reading spawns thought and not only that, it shows that you, as a human, are interested in something other than yourself. You're interested what others think about the same things that consume your thoughts day in and day out. (Unless they don't, in which case you're detached from yourself and should jumpstart your brain with a good book). An incredible and entirely unhuman thought. To think, thinking about someone else's thinkings?! Unheard of. I wish we read what other humans thought about our country, or read about what those proposing to preside over it really have to say. I wish we would read about current events and learn about things out of arms reach. I wish we would read about not only issues and problems, but possible solutions and progress.

But above all, I wish for more time to read.