when my phone successfully set this 5 40 alarm from my voice command, i realized that it really gets me.
i will also just add to the previous post how long and sprawled the restoration of the gospel was. many people were inspired to translate the bible. many gave their lives to make it available. the printing press had to be invented. the churches needed to be reformed so that people were allowed to read and participate. people had to become literate. the written word had to become popular. many people had to be instilled with the fire of conviction to think upon and write great things. people had to be brave enough to pass those sometimes illegal pamphlets to strangers, family, and friends. revolution needed to happen in people's minds. revolutions needed to happen on french soil, american soil, and soil across the world. more great people circulated more great ideas. the new american states became a place for people to come from financial persecution. people also found religious freedom here. many sects found footing and battled for souls. one of those souls was joseph smith, who saw the battle, had the miracle of the written bible, and knelt down to pray.
i am trying to remember how much bloodshed, sadness, and unappreciated bravery went in to this restoration. i don't believe in american exceptionalism and i don't even believe the united states is a christian nation. but i do believe god's plans are slow and steady and that educating ourselves, having open minds, and having compassion--along with keeping the eternal view people love to talk about in sunday school--should be the top priority for any member anywhere.
anyone who says 'we have no need for brave agitators' is ungrateful and misinformed.
i am trying to remember how much bloodshed, sadness, and unappreciated bravery went in to this restoration. i don't believe in american exceptionalism and i don't even believe the united states is a christian nation. but i do believe god's plans are slow and steady and that educating ourselves, having open minds, and having compassion--along with keeping the eternal view people love to talk about in sunday school--should be the top priority for any member anywhere.
anyone who says 'we have no need for brave agitators' is ungrateful and misinformed.
"no man or woman can change god's laws, only god can so they're stupid."
obviously kate kelly believes that, otherwise she wouldn't have been petitioning directly to the Lord's servants. but also guess what, the only thing that limits god is US. maybe WE'RE the ones that need our hearts softened and our minds opened so we can receive new revelation. god would never give us revelation we weren't ready for. a lot of members are always saying how the church's laws will never change from "social pressure" or "protesting," and they are right, but what they're missing is accountability--our accountability to search, ponder, and pray and instead of being settled, be ready for glorious change, be teachable, and look for good, and seek for all the possible good we could bring in to the world.
1885: LDS church publicly condemns and releases Bishop John Sharp for renouncing polygamy
1890: LDS church renounces polygamy
1942: LDS church excommunicates Helmuth Huebner, who was arrested for opposing Hilter and was waiting execution
1946: Huebner is posthumously reinstated with note "excommunicated by mistake"
1977: LDS Church excommunicates Byron Marchant and Douglas A Wallace for opposing LDS ban on Blacks receiving the priesthood
1978 LDS church discontinues ban on Blacks receiving the priesthood
obviously kate kelly believes that, otherwise she wouldn't have been petitioning directly to the Lord's servants. but also guess what, the only thing that limits god is US. maybe WE'RE the ones that need our hearts softened and our minds opened so we can receive new revelation. god would never give us revelation we weren't ready for. a lot of members are always saying how the church's laws will never change from "social pressure" or "protesting," and they are right, but what they're missing is accountability--our accountability to search, ponder, and pray and instead of being settled, be ready for glorious change, be teachable, and look for good, and seek for all the possible good we could bring in to the world.
1885: LDS church publicly condemns and releases Bishop John Sharp for renouncing polygamy
1890: LDS church renounces polygamy
1942: LDS church excommunicates Helmuth Huebner, who was arrested for opposing Hilter and was waiting execution
1946: Huebner is posthumously reinstated with note "excommunicated by mistake"
1977: LDS Church excommunicates Byron Marchant and Douglas A Wallace for opposing LDS ban on Blacks receiving the priesthood
1978 LDS church discontinues ban on Blacks receiving the priesthood
friday was one of the worst days i have ever had at my current or any other job.
the day started with my supervisor telling me to change one of the policies i have for my students. i completely disagreed with him and told him why. we had a long discussion about it (that was extremely awkward because he would stop talking and smile whenever someone walked by, and also made me move locations several times so no one would overhear us talking--too bad i don't have an actual workspace or that wouldn't be a problem). the problem was one i had long been dealing with and had brought up to him several times over the last few years only to have him completely dismiss my concerns. without his acknowledgement or help, i developed my own solution. still, he told me he was "confident and settled" with his decision (which he didn't ask me about even though it effects every minute of every shift for everyone on my team, and also my eight hour work day) and that when i talked to my employees i could blame it all on him and he was fine with that (because that will really help me retain the good, open, appropriate relationship with them them that i have worked and sorrowed for years to build). after it was all done, he said, "i just want you to know i'm not mad at you."
i was stunned and replied with a matter of fact "i'm not mad at you either" even though he had already walked away from me; he didn't look back and said nothing. it was so condescending and i couldn't BELIEVE he thought that the most important last thought to leave me with, that the final word of a frank but completely unemotional professional conversation should be him assuring me that he wasn't mad at me.
fast forward a few hours: my other direct supervisor, who i barely even see, had asked me at the very last minute to order lunch for him and some others because they would be in meetings all morning. never mind that i myself was in meetings literally all morning. when i finally got there and found out the food had never showed up, i took care of it immediately and then took the food in as soon as it got there. "i'm sorry," i said when i took it in, "i haven't been here all morning so i wasn't able to take care of this sooner." my supervisor said, as if to a child, "oh don't worry, don't feel bad about it. it all worked out." not only did i not give a shit about their sandwiches that they asked me to order while i was literally walking out the door that morning not getting there on time, but it's not like i was shaken up or overly apologetic or anything. it was a courteous, professional apology for a mistake that wasn't mine.
why do these men who are my supervisors feel that they need to not only invent but coddle emotions for me? sometimes i second guess myself: are people really being sexist or am i being sensitive? but in two years i haven't heard either of them make a statement like that to my male co-workers, even after heated (even yelling) conversations on work-related topics. the first supervisor steam rolls people ALL the time, and the second one is flakier to everyone than most i've worked with, but the difference with me is that they think my emotions are not only part of but the defining aspect of our professional relationship.
the day started with my supervisor telling me to change one of the policies i have for my students. i completely disagreed with him and told him why. we had a long discussion about it (that was extremely awkward because he would stop talking and smile whenever someone walked by, and also made me move locations several times so no one would overhear us talking--too bad i don't have an actual workspace or that wouldn't be a problem). the problem was one i had long been dealing with and had brought up to him several times over the last few years only to have him completely dismiss my concerns. without his acknowledgement or help, i developed my own solution. still, he told me he was "confident and settled" with his decision (which he didn't ask me about even though it effects every minute of every shift for everyone on my team, and also my eight hour work day) and that when i talked to my employees i could blame it all on him and he was fine with that (because that will really help me retain the good, open, appropriate relationship with them them that i have worked and sorrowed for years to build). after it was all done, he said, "i just want you to know i'm not mad at you."
i was stunned and replied with a matter of fact "i'm not mad at you either" even though he had already walked away from me; he didn't look back and said nothing. it was so condescending and i couldn't BELIEVE he thought that the most important last thought to leave me with, that the final word of a frank but completely unemotional professional conversation should be him assuring me that he wasn't mad at me.
fast forward a few hours: my other direct supervisor, who i barely even see, had asked me at the very last minute to order lunch for him and some others because they would be in meetings all morning. never mind that i myself was in meetings literally all morning. when i finally got there and found out the food had never showed up, i took care of it immediately and then took the food in as soon as it got there. "i'm sorry," i said when i took it in, "i haven't been here all morning so i wasn't able to take care of this sooner." my supervisor said, as if to a child, "oh don't worry, don't feel bad about it. it all worked out." not only did i not give a shit about their sandwiches that they asked me to order while i was literally walking out the door that morning not getting there on time, but it's not like i was shaken up or overly apologetic or anything. it was a courteous, professional apology for a mistake that wasn't mine.
why do these men who are my supervisors feel that they need to not only invent but coddle emotions for me? sometimes i second guess myself: are people really being sexist or am i being sensitive? but in two years i haven't heard either of them make a statement like that to my male co-workers, even after heated (even yelling) conversations on work-related topics. the first supervisor steam rolls people ALL the time, and the second one is flakier to everyone than most i've worked with, but the difference with me is that they think my emotions are not only part of but the defining aspect of our professional relationship.
in the summer of 2010, as a CA, i had contemplated and all but decided to take my own life after learning about the church's history with polygamy, its likely continued practice in heaven, and the true meaning of the covenants i would make if i were to marry in the LDS temple. the single, uncomplicated thought that kept me from leaving was that god loves me. believing that has kept me in the church and has also led me to feminism. feminism is what gives me faith, and the Savior is whom i have faith in. faith he will provide answers to his church in his time and that he will balm my soul and allow me to continue until that time.
it is not the right thing to excommunicate kate kelly.
it is not the right thing to excommunicate kate kelly.
"how was your family reunion?"
well, on sunday i stayed home from church because my dad woke up and told my mom, "i don't think i feel like going to school today." my mom asked me to please quietly check up on him every half hour and make sure he was still breathing.
i also found out my dad's latest development is that he randomly loses control of his bowels. my mom has picked him up twice from work, and it happened again while he went in some place alone to get himself take out of something he could stomach.
he cried a couple times, and several more times when he was alone with my mom, because he felt like he was "just a problem" and that he was keeping everyone from having fun.
f--- work, f--- church. i don't know how any of us function. i don't know how to act like everything's fine.
how was your weekend?
i also found out my dad's latest development is that he randomly loses control of his bowels. my mom has picked him up twice from work, and it happened again while he went in some place alone to get himself take out of something he could stomach.
he cried a couple times, and several more times when he was alone with my mom, because he felt like he was "just a problem" and that he was keeping everyone from having fun.
f--- work, f--- church. i don't know how any of us function. i don't know how to act like everything's fine.
how was your weekend?
unfortunately for me, one of my employees has been writing up and preparing her wedding invite address labels at work. unfortunate because she has been saying things like "i hate the whole feminist-keep-your-last-name-thing. i mean, i get the sentiment behind it, but it just makes it so long to do his name and her name" and making my blood boil. i'm so, so, so, so, so sorry that some woman's need to exert her own identity and be true to herself is causing your address labels to not fit like you want them to.
what i said: "yeah."
what i should have said: "i'm considering changing my name back. i think it's awesome and really personal."
there was a small win when she asked me if it was better etiquette to write "mr and mrs [his name]" or just "his and her name". i told her i personally HATE the "mr and mrs his name" shtick (yes, i added that much emphasis) and that it's technically correct but really ridiculous. she decided against the "mr and mrs woman doesn't exist" way and that made my heart soar!
what i said: "yeah."
what i should have said: "i'm considering changing my name back. i think it's awesome and really personal."
there was a small win when she asked me if it was better etiquette to write "mr and mrs [his name]" or just "his and her name". i told her i personally HATE the "mr and mrs his name" shtick (yes, i added that much emphasis) and that it's technically correct but really ridiculous. she decided against the "mr and mrs woman doesn't exist" way and that made my heart soar!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)