Saturday, November 25, 2006
Thursday, November 23, 2006
1 Nephi 17 begins with Nephi recounting eight years of travel in the wilderness,
1 And it came to pass that we did again take our journey in the wilderness; and we did travel nearly eastward from that time forth. And we did travel and awade through much affliction in the wilderness; and our bwomen did bear children in the wilderness.
3 And thus we see that the commandments of God must be fulfilled. And if it so be that the children of men keep the commandments of God he doth nourish them, and astrengthen them, and provide means whereby they can accomplish the thing which he has commanded them; wherefore, he did bprovide means for us while we did sojourn in the wilderness.
Nephi looked at his family's hardships and saw blessings. He saw the hand of the Lord in his people's ability to survive and prosper under those conditions.
His brother Laman, on the other hand, saw nothing but hardship,
20 And thou art like unto our father, led away by the foolish aimaginations of his heart; yea, he hath led us out of the land of Jerusalem, and we have wandered in the wilderness for these many years; and our women have toiled, being big with child; and they have borne children in the wilderness and suffered all things, save it were death; and it would have been better that they had died before they came out of Jerusalem than to have suffered these afflictions.
21 Behold, these many years we have suffered in the wilderness, which time we might have enjoyed our possessions and the land of our inheritance; yea, and we might have been happy.
Two men, both living with the same hardships, having the same experiences, with so very different perspectives. The major difference between them was a sense of gratitude.
Luke 17:12-19 tells the story of the ten lepers healed by the Savior, yet only one returned to give thanks. What of the other nine? While healed of their physical malady, they missed an opportunity for greater happiness and increased personal growth.
Perhaps gratitude has much to do with perspective. This year marks the 150th anniversary of the Willie and Martin handcart companies. We have heard their stories, and learned of their tragedies. The inspiration derived from their story comes not only of their perseverance and faith in pressing forward, or of those sent to rescue them, but also, and perhaps most importantly, how they remembered the experience,
“A teacher, conducting a class, said it was unwise ever to attempt, even to permit them [the Martin handcart company] to come across the plains under such conditions.
“[According to a class member,] some sharp criticism of the Church and its leaders was being indulged in for permitting any company of converts to venture across the plains with no more supplies or protection than a handcart caravan afforded.
“An old man in the corner … sat silent and listened as long as he could stand it, then he arose and said things that no person who heard him will ever forget. His face was white with emotion, yet he spoke calmly, deliberately, but with great earnestness and sincerity.
“In substance [he] said, ‘I ask you to stop this criticism. You are discussing a matter you know nothing about. Cold historic facts mean nothing here, for they give no proper interpretation of the questions involved. Mistake to send the Handcart Company out so late in the season? Yes. But I was in that company and my wife was in it and Sister Nellie Unthank whom you have cited was there, too. We suffered beyond anything you can imagine and many died of exposure and starvation, but did you ever hear a survivor of that company utter a word of criticism? Not one of that company ever apostatized or left the Church, because everyone of us came through with the absolute knowledge that God lives for we became acquainted with him in our extremities.
“ ‘I have pulled my handcart when I was so weak and weary from illness and lack of food that I could hardly put one foot ahead of the other. I have looked ahead and seen a patch of sand or a hill slope and I have said, I can go only that far and there I must give up, for I cannot pull the load through it.’ ” He continues: “ ‘I have gone on to that sand and when I reached it, the cart began pushing me. I have looked back many times to see who was pushing my cart, but my eyes saw no one. I knew then that the angels of God were there.
President Hinckley has said, "May we live worthy of the glorious endowment of light and understanding and eternal truth which has come to us through all the perils of the past. Somehow, among all who have walked the earth, we have been brought forth in this unique and remarkable season. Be grateful, and above all be faithful."
I echo his sentiments. Let us all be grateful.
Thursday, November 09, 2006
According to Associated Press writer Mark Sherman, the justices had very pointed and graphic questions to ask of the two sides arguing the case. One such question, asked by Justice John Paul Stevens, is the title of this post.
The lines between the two sides have been clearly drawn. Those arguing for the law, including Solicitor General Paul Clement, say that this form of abortion simply goes too far. According to the AP story, 1.25 million abortions are performed each year, of which a few thousand are procedures doctors call "dilation and extraction" or "intact dilation and evacuation". Opponents call these abortions "partial birth" abortions because they are performed during the middle third of pregnancy and involve "partially extracting an intact fetus from the uterus, then cutting or crushing its skull."
Eve Gartner of Planned Parenthood is arguing against the law banning these abortions. Her side argues that this method is sometimes the safest for women. She is quoted by the AP as saying, "What Congress has done here is take away from women the option of what may be the safest procedure for her. This court has never recognized a state interest was sufficient to trump the women's interest in her health."
It seems to me that the sides boil down to the same basic abortion debate: the interest of the fetus versus the interest of the mother. The difference here, though, is the especially graphic nature of this method of abortion.
Wednesday, November 08, 2006
D-Jerry Brady 44%
R-Butch Otter 53%
US Representative Dist 2:
D-Jim Hansen 34%
R-Mike Simpson 62%
D-Larry LaRocco 39%
R-Jim Risch 58%
R-Donna Jones 59%
D-Jacki Groves Twilegar 41%
R-Ron Crane 64%
D-Howard Faux 36%
R-Lawrence Wasden 62%
D-Bob Wallace 38%
Superindendant of Public Instruction:
R-Tom Luna 51%
D-Jana Jones 49%
Tuesday, November 07, 2006
Here is how the sentencing is being reported:
The NY Times also has an interesting editorial by Anne Applebaum about the validity of the trial. As you read through the previously linked articles you'll notice that they are awash in criticism. I think this editorial explains quite well the purpose and success of Saddam Hussein's trial.