Yes, you matter.

I'd like to ask the members of our community symphony how many of them have ever played a perfect concert. I'd bet few to none have. I play with a community orchestra and we're not nearly as good as the Utah Symphony, but we still put on an enjoyable concert. We love to make beautiful music.

If you came to hear one of our concerts, you would most likely be able to pick out a few mistakes. We value all our members. I've been with them for about four years and haven't seen or heard of anyone getting kicked out. Some leave on their own. Some new people join us every year. We're grateful for all their individual contributions. We all have our own talents and gifts, and it makes a beautiful harmony when we play our best. Even when we all try our best, we make mistakes. None of us would dare to purposefully make a bad noise during a concert, so there's no point in getting upset when it happens. We just keep on playing. Sometimes strings or bows break. Other musicians step in where they can, to help.

I'm a cello player. They probably wouldn't miss me much if I didn't show up. They could easily carry on without me. There are several cello players that are better than me. There are several that are not as good as me. We even value the worst cello player because that person is learning and growing in the art. Eventually, with enough practice, our worst cello player will become a good cello player.

As you go to church, imagine you're a member of a community symphony. Every one has their own talents and gifts. Each person's effort contributes to the harmony of the congregation. Even when trying our best, sometimes somebody makes a bad noise. The symphony will go on with or without you, but you'll sound better, and the symphony will sound better with your unique gifts as you practice with us.

What does "all men are created equal" mean?

What does it mean that all men are created equal?

Lately, it seems that there has been much confusion over the meaning of the word “equal”. Some have implied that the meaning of “equal” means “same”. This is not true. “Same” is one special case of equal, like a square is one special case of rectangles. I think someone in my past told me that equal meant “the same”. This has led to some confusion for me.

Equal is a way to compare the value of a property of something. So when you say two or more things are equal, the question is “in what aspect?” Take height, for example. You can find two people who have the same height. They are equal in height. That does not mean that the two different people are equal. It just means that the value of their height is the same.

In mathematics, the equals sign is useful in determining the numerical value of an expression. The equation 7=7 is not useful, because we already know that 7 is the same as 7. The expression a=7 is much more useful. This equates the numerical value of the variable “a” with the known value of the number 7.

In the Declaration of Independence, it states that “. . . all men are created equal, endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights . . .” The word equal is in reference to the value of each individual’s rights, in comparison to the value of another person’s rights. Your rights are no more valuable than my rights. The rights of an important or popular person are no more important than an unknown person. Age does not make that person’s rights any more or less important than any other person’s. Wealth does not increase rights. Since all people share the same value in rights, there is no privileged class recognized in the United States of America. The word equal did not mean that every person was created with the same potential, characteristics, or that every person’s outcome would be equal either.

The phrase “all men are created the same” is very different from the phrase “all men are created equal”. We obviously know that everyone is different. No two people are the same. When we look at the phrase “all men are created equal”, it begs the question, “what aspect are we comparing?” We are comparing the value of each individual’s rights. One person’s rights cannot override another person’s rights.

Joel Skousen defines fundamental rights as “those rights to act, or to be, which all persons can do or possess simultaneously without compelling any other person to provide a service or tangible asset.”

When the founding fathers created the Declaration of Independence, they did not place any qualifiers on the phrase “all men”. This includes all races, religions, and both sexes. This leads us to the question of slavery. Slavery places the rights of the slave-owner above the rights of the slave, thus creating inequality. This is contrary to all men being created equal, and contrary to the Constitution and Declaration of Independence.

Should there be inequality in rights? If one person achieves more wealth, learning, or power, does that entitle him to infringe on other’s rights? The answer is no. The reason is that all mankind are spiritually children of God, and God is not a respecter of persons. This means that even God does not value one person above another. Without this belief, people in power are tempted to, or actually become tyrannical.

The phrase “all men are created equal” means that everyone is entitled to enjoy the same fundamental rights.

Originally posted August 29, 2013

Why Did God Allow ______ to Happen?

Where was God when this happened?
Why did God allow that to happen?

Those who attempt to deny the existence of God because a gross evil has been allowed to happen misunderstand some very basic principles. Everything has its opposite. If there is evil, then there must also be good. If you were stranded on a desert island with only horseradish and onions to eat, would you deny that sweet fruit exists? Would you refuse to be rescued from that island because you were so bitterly disappointed that you refuse to believe that sweet food exists elsewhere?

To understand why evil happens, first you have to know the rules.

1. Man has agency, meaning he is allowed to choose good or evil.
2. Actions have consequences. This is a corollary to agency. We learn from consequences. If we were constantly propped up every time we were about to fall, we wouldn't learn how to walk. If there are consequences for good actions, there must also be consequences for evil actions.
3. We are here to learn through personal experience the difference between good and evil, and that everything has its opposite - good and evil, life and death, pleasure and pain, sweet and bitter, etc. Imagine living in God's kingdom before you came to earth. If you never experienced anything bad, how would you truly appreciate living with God?

If God prevented us from doing evil to others, how would we learn that what we did was bad?

We experience evil to learn through our own experiences to cherish the good. Sometimes we experience hardship to remind us to turn to God. When nobody can make it better, and only God can, hopefully we turn to Him.

How to avoid being a victim of evil

1. You need to learn how to recognize the voice of God. Reading the word of God is an excellent way to learn that. Pray and listen.
2. Obey the word of God. If you knew someone that never took your advice even when they asked for it, would you keep advising them? Or would you just say "You seem to be determined to follow your own advice. Why don't you just figure this one out on your own." God knows what is best for us. That is why He gave us commandments. God wants us to be happy like He is. Satan wants us to be miserable like himself. The master you choose to follow is the one you become more like every day.
3. Trust in God. Sometimes we don't understand why bad things happen to good people. God's ways are higher than our ways. He is wiser than us. The scriptures counsel us to be patient in our afflictions. Shadrach, Mesach, and Abednego didn't give up hope when they were cast into the fiery furnace. They trusted in God even to death, but they were spared. There are others like Abinadi that weren't saved from physical death at the hands of their enemies, but what really counts is they were saved in the kingdom of God.
4. After you have learned how to recognize the voice of God, that still, small voice that speaks to our hearts, learn to understand and act upon those promptings. We still have the agency to choose whether or not we will do what God tells us to.

Overcoming Trials

Finally, Nobody in this life is exempt from pain. The more we try to avoid our problems, the longer they take to overcome. Pain and suffering are part of life. Deal with it. That's the opposite of "avoid it". Work through it and you will grow in character. You are what you make yourself to be.

Originally posted December 19, 2012

Common Sense Reasons to Obey the Law of Chastity

Without resorting to "because God says so", I wanted to list some common-sense reasons to keep the law of chastity. But I'm not keeping God out of this conversation. 

Most of God's commandments are common sense. For example, "thou shalt not steal", and "thou shalt not kill" are pretty obvious and self-evident. Most of us understand why we don't steal or kill. They follow the golden rule: "do unto others as you would have them do unto you". 

Some commandments are not as obvious. "Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain" is one that you kind of have to think about. This one has a lot to do with respect. 

Sometimes we have to take commandments on faith because we may not understand them. If we have a testimony of most of the commandments because they make sense and ring true to us, then the remainder we can take on faith if we believe they are from God. 

But if we can explain the commandments in common-sense terms, it helps us to realize the importance of keeping them. 

The law of chastity is that we are not to have sexual relations with anyone that we are not legally and lawfully married to. 

When we get married, it is because we have strong, tender feelings toward our soon-to-be spouse. We want these loving feelings and trust to stay strong. Keeping the law of chastity is necessary to maintain this relationship. 

If extra-marital sex happens, trust is destroyed. What was once rare and priceless diminishes in value. That which is common is not valued as highly. Extra-marital sex diminishes the value of sexual relations within marriage. Also, extra-marital sex will divert loyalties, commitments, time, and energy away from the spouse. We can see how obeying the law of chastity strengthens marriage. 

Sex is how babies are made. Every baby deserves a mother and a father. The family unit is the foundation of character. Keeping sex restricted to only within the bounds of marriage ensures that, barring death or divorce, babies have both a mother and a father. Obeying the law of chastity strengthens the family. 

Many people mistakenly believe that the pursuit of pleasure leads to happiness and fulfillment. One person defined happiness as the pursuit of worthwhile goals. We can see that in the case of junk food, continual indulgence in the pleasure of junk foods leads to poor health and suffering. But proper healthy foods deliver satisfaction, health, and a certain amount of pleasure too. Over-indulging in junk foods reduces the ability to enjoy them. One reason is because they are bad for the health. Properly prepared, there are many healthy foods that are both nutritious and delicious. Doing the right thing may be more difficult, but it brings true happiness. 

The laws of God are consistent, with very few exceptions. The law of chastity is a law of God. It is based on eternally true principles. Even if you don't believe in God, believe in doing what is right.  

Originally posted November 19, 2012

My Thoughts on Healthy Eating

Healthy Eating for Living in the Modern World:
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1_P9MqumeMDZGinfWWmIfwlMG7TqqoTII1jVvLZNrBF4/edit#slide=id.i0

Surprise Ingredients in Fast Food
http://www.naturalnews.com/022194.html

Why a Microwave Oven is Bad for Your Health
http://www.naturalnews.com/022015.html

Can a Scientist be Religious?

I saw a Bill Maher video clip where he was ridiculing religious people as crazy and un-thinking. I think that people who believe there is no God are the ones that are not thinking correctly. If there are varying degrees of intelligence, then the greatest of all is God. To think that the human is the most intelligent being is awfully conceited and ignorant of the possibility of life elsewhere in the universe. Those who believe only in what they can see are not critical thinkers. Those who put their full faith in science fail to realize that humans are fallible, or they fail to make the connection that imperfect humans create imperfect science. Science has been wrong many times in the past. How can anyone think that science is entirely correct now?
Point of view

If you’re a lab rat in a box, and all you knew from the day you were born was that box, then that box is your world. You don’t know anything beyond what you can see in the box. Denying that there is anything outside that box is like the “thinker” who denies that God exists because he can’t see God. We have been blessed with the five senses of sight, sound, smell, touch, and taste. These interact with matter in their own way. Why do we think that if we can’t sense it, it doesn’t exist? What exists that we cannot sense? We simply do not know. Is there another kind of matter than we cannot sense?
Life after death

If you haven’t decided whether or not you believe in life after death, now is the time to plan ahead, because the way you live your life now should take into account what happens in the next life. If indeed God exists, then you better live your life as God commanded us so that you will be happy, not only in this life, but in the next as well.
When I was wrestling with the question of life after death, I asked myself why do I not experience any visits from those beyond the grave, if indeed there is life after death. I came up with several explanations. There are many plausible explanations we can come up with, but here are some I thought of. 1. Once you die, you can’t show yourself, or influence physical matter. 2. You’re not allowed to. 3. You don’t care. 4. It’s a practical joke. 5. Life is like an amusement park ride. 6. All I was taught in the LDS faith growing up was true.
Happiness

Happiness has been defined as the pursuit of worthwhile goals. Some say “eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we die.” This attitude is selfish, and does not produce happiness. It is the pursuit of pleasure, which does not bring happiness. The gospel of Jesus Christ brings true happiness, not only in this life, but in the next life as well. Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord. We see that nations that fall into moral decay also fall into economic poverty. Your personal moral code is your religion. I fear those who claim they are atheist or have no religion. How can you trust someone who has no moral code of ethics, or feels free to change them at their convenience?
Defining Reality

Our five senses, as wonderful as they are, are very limited in comparison to the reality around us. For one example, we know that matter has a gravitational field, but we can't sense the image of the gravity from an object. We know some objects have magnetic fields, but we can't see, taste, smell, or hear magnetic fields. We can only see electromagnetic wavelengths in the range from 0.4 to 0.7 micrometers. We can't see sound. We can't hear light. We can't see radio waves. We can't smell anything that doesn't enter our noses. We can't sense neutrinos. Before humans developed the technology to detect these, we didn't know about them. We had to convert their effects to one of our five senses. We explain the physical world in terms of our five senses because we know no other way. If we assume that reality is limited to empirical data, we would be ignorant and conceited.
A Sixth Sense?

We have a sixth sense. This one is difficult to interpret because of the conflicting signals we receive. We receive messages from two sources. From one direction, we are lied to and tempted by Satan. From the other direction, we receive truth and inspiration from the Holy Ghost. We don't all experience the same messages at the same time. If we did, it could be as easy to verify as asking "did you hear that?" Then it would be regarded as reliable as hearing. It would be universally accepted as reality. But such is not the case, and one of our challenges in life is to learn to decipher where the messages come from, then choose the right if we want to be happy. When deciding where these messages come from, keep in mind that anything good comes from God. Peace, love, and truth come from God.

Originally posted May 31, 2012

The Worst Defense of Global Warming?

Here's one of the worst defenses of global warming I've seen.  Their logic is "proclaim it and it's true".

 http://lasp.colorado.edu/education/climate_myths/no-consensus-on-climate-change.html

I'll call this link Colorado.edu from here on.

Colorado.edu says:

"As with all science, there is some uncertainty associated with the science of climate change. Often this is taken to mean that no scientific consensus on climate change exists and that the science is not solid yet. In fact, there is scientific consensus on many aspects of climate change, including the statement that most of the increase in global average temperature since the mid 20th century is very likely (>90% probability) caused by anthropogenic emission of greenhouse gases (IPCC 2007)."

I say:

So the thousands of scientists who disagree with you don't count in your consensus? 

31,487 scientists disagree here: http://www.petitionproject.org/

700 scientists disagree here: http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=2674e64f-802a-23ad-490b-bd9faf4dcdb7

a few disagree here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming

and 800 peer reviewed papers that disagree are linked here: http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer-reviewed-papers-supporting.html

Colorado.edu says:

A scientific theory must be testable; others must be able to test the theory and be able to prove whether it is false. It only takes one contradictory observation to necessitate a change in a theory. Good science is an unbiased and unprejudiced inquiry into some phenomenon—it does not have a political or economic agenda.

I say:

Exactly.  So how do we test global warming caused by CO2?  Where's our control planet?  Why do they ignore all the contradictory observations?  Have we seen an area of science that has more bias, prejudice, political influence, and scandal than global warming supporters?  Ok, pharmaceuticals. 

Colorado.edu says:

If people simply say that they do not believe the evidence pointing toward climate change, that is not good science; they must produce factual evidence that corroborates that belief.

I say:

Changing data to support a theory is not science.

http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/climate-reports/7479-us-government-in-massive-new-global-warming-scandal-noaa-disgraced 

And ignoring factual evidence that disputes their manmade CO2 global warming theory isn't science either.

Colorado.edu says:

In addition, any alternative hypothesis must be testable, so that it can be proven whether it is false.

I say:

Is the theory that the sun's varying output resulting in global temperature changes not testable?  Or haven't these guys heard of it?  Can't we measure both sides and compare trends between the two theories?  We don't have to change the output of the sun.  We only have to record data and compare to determine if a causal relationship exists. 

Colorado.edu says:

Thus far, scientists have produced only one testable theory for why global average surface temperatures have been rising in the last half century: human-induced climate change. No significant evidence-based challenge to the theory has been developed. Because the evidence, as judged by peer-reviewed scientific publications, builds up—rather than pokes holes in—the theory, it currently stands as scientific consensus. No scientific body of national or international standing maintains a dissenting opinion on climate change.

I say:

So they are defending their complete ignorance?

Colorado.edu says:

For more information on consensus around climate change, please visit the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

I say:

And for opposing viewpoints, you're on your own.  Their self-proclaimed consensus is pretty one sided.  They don't offer any links to opposing theories.  They didn't mention one opposing theory or any evidence to discount such theories.   

Originally posted January 3, 2011