Chat with an LDS missionary

Chat with an LDS missionary
Chat with a missionary

Tuesday, August 18, 2009

define my meaning better?

I was realizing that there were better word to express myself, than what I said. I believe I said that I felt "sorry for those with Same Sex Attraction"--

I think it would be more accurate in expressing my feelings to say it more like this--

I feel concerned for the challenge and weight of the difficulty/situation to find ones' self in such a situation. I feel to pray for them, for more strength to overcome, and to heal.

I feel as I would for anyone who has an illness or has been hurt in an accident and now needs to do a LOT of work to get up to speed, to be there best. I am thankful that my own challenges are not any harder for me to deal with, and I am glad I don't have to carry others challenges!

I consider that maybe they were/are such a accomplished or strong spirit that they needed a really strong challenge to be enough to challenge them to grow as they best could-- kind of like I think a handicap in golf is supposed to work? Or like when one accomplished chess player agrees to play a novice without their own Queen.

I do NOT feel they are any "less"-- not at all! Neither do I feel that way for anyone with a physical handicap. Who am I to judge-- NOBODY!! I don't think anyone ASKS for handicaps (when they are in this life-- though possibly they agreed to it before this life, for what strength they could develop from overcoming it?? I sure don't know!)

Anyway-- my heart hurts for them, and if I am aware that another may have ANY challenge I do pray for them for the best possible to happen for them-- Gods' will! Gramajane

What am I doing here? Where do we go from here?

Well, from my life experiences and studies so far in my 61 years on the earth, my conclusion is that I (and everyone of us human beings, plus even animals and bugs) have a spirit in our bodies. The presence of our spirit is what keeps us alive, and when it leaves are bodies are counted dead by the medical community.

I believe that we humans are spirit children of Our Father in Heaven. I believe that God also created the spirits of the animals and even bugs, but they are not his children. Even the very earth has a spirit too (this from reading the Bible mostly).

I believe that we lived with our other spirit brothers and sisters in heaven before we came here, and that we were a family there, and so there must have been (and still is) though the Bible does not mention it-- a Heavenly Mother. There is even a Bible scripture with this quote "family in heaven". I believe that our spirits return to God when we leave this life.

I believe that what choices we make in this life, will determine how happy we can be in this life and in the life after this. Part of the reason that I believe there is a life after death is because of many experiences of members of my own family and from the Bible, and from Near Death Experiences that I have read in a whole shelf of books. One of my cousins wrote a book about it too. His name is/was Lance Richardson. He is about a 4th cousin and I haven't gotten to a family reunion in over 35 years-- so I don't know if he is still alive. The title of his book is I believe, "The Message". It tells about his dying and what his spirit experienced while it was out of his body, and what happened when he came to life again.

Oh, please note that this is NOT resurrection! Resurrection is when your body is changed by Christs' gift, so that you can never die again. It is restored to its perfect condition (and if you were born with something wrong or missing from your body-- that is perfected too).

I believe that resurrection is a gift from Jesus Christ, who is the second member of the Godhead, and the Savior and Redeemer of the world-- the literal Son of God. I believe that we don't have to "do" anything to receive this gift. I believe however that it is our choices in this life, that will make the difference in what level of happiness or exaltation we will experience after this life.

The Bible speaks of the resurrection as three levels, like the Sun, Moon and Stars-- and also of a 3rd heaven. My church teaches that these are 3 kingdoms-- and that there is also "outer darkness" with no light.

There is so much that I could share with you about this. This knowledge has helped me to live a happy life (sure I have challenges too!) still knowing why I am here, and where I came from, and will go after I die, makes a huge difference.

I believe that this Earth life is like a boarding school for Heavenly Father. He sends us here (yes we were willing and anxious to come too!) to learn and grow and prove to our selves-- what we will choose, and to grow from our choices of our reactions to what happens to us.

I believe that God has from the beginning communicated with the more righteous of us, calling them as prophets-- to help us see what we need to do. That there were inspired people in all the peoples of the world. I believe that Adam and Eve were taught that Jesus would come and to look forward to Him. I believe this is why so many nations have threads of that teaching still left in their legends. Like the basic story of Hercules even.

I believe that God made a covenant with Abraham and his posterity-- that if they would obey his commandments-- that he would guide and help them, that they would keep a record of their history and interaction with God-- and this is our Old Testament.

I believe that Jesus Christ is the Savior of the World, and that he died to save us all and let us live again. The New Testament tells about this, and it is the greatest thing to have ever happened.

Another book of Holy scripture-- from records kept by descendants of Abraham also, through descendants of the Joseph who was sold into Egypt, - is The Book of Mormon which is another testament of Jesus Christ, and tells of his coming to this American Continent.

This book-- which you can have a brand new copy of -- FREE-- hand delivered to you or mailed to your home (you choose) -- or access it free on the web site -- along with our other scriptures (or you could get a free King James Bible-- with all the special study helps in the LDS edition) by going to also.

I believe that the scriptures can help us to find our way in this life. This is also the purpose of The Church of JESUS CHRIST of Latter-day Saints, to help us be better people, and know what God expects of us. It is my prayer that we will all seek for our purpose in life.

I believe we each have a smaller role to play in life also. My personal purpose I believe-- after my MAIN goal of living my life after the pattern of loving others as Christ showed us etc, I believe is to have been the mother of my children, and a supportive wife to my husband, along with developing my own talents and serving others I come in contact with in any appropriate way.

I feel blessed that we were able to be sponsors for 3 groups of Vietnamese refugees. That we also were blessed to be foster parents for 10 years and got to bring 20 foster children into our home. I think of them often and wonder how some I have lost contact with are doing now. I pray for them, to make choices that will bring them happiness. May we all so do. Gramajane

p.s.-- It was interesting to me to google my nick name, Gramajane-- and find that the words of a self proclaimed gay man from a facebook discussion board, were found where he claims that I said terrible things about gays (but he gives no quotes-- as there was nothing to quote-- as I don't call names or do such things) -- I told about the situation on early posts on this blog. I feel sorry for those who are challenged with Same Sex Attraction -- but I believe that it can be overcome-- as I know of some who have done so. There is even a book titled "Born that Way?" about this. I believe that we all have challenges in our lives, and that as we work to overcome them, we will better people, than we would have been if we had never had any challenges.

To me it is rather like a coach who has his team members work on different assignments for their individual bodies, some need to strengthen legs, or arm muscles for throwing, or whatever. While the coach also has all of them do other exercises or activities to help all of them work together. I think life is kind of like that.

To me-- God showed us the pattern of a man and a woman- made for each other, and sealed to each other in holy marriage is the ideal. In this way there is a safe place of commitment so that they could "multiply" and bring other spirits into bodies they helped make. I think any "other lifestyle" is a thwarting of Gods' plan. It will not bring happiness, but I still believe that we are given choices and that is a persons freedom to choose what they do, as long as it does not encroach on the choices of others.

This is where I have concerns with "gay" marriage-- as it changes the very meaning of marriage-- as there is no way that same sex couples can multiply in themselves. To let them adopt or be fertilized in another way-- I feel would be to not make appropriate role models for any children they would raise. Not that all parents or adoptive parents are perfect by any means-- but I feel that at least it starts out with the right coupling. What is the first question asked if someone is expecting? Isn't the question-- is it a boy or a girl?

Anyway-- I think I had better stop now, and try to get some more sleep. It is almost 3:30 am. May God bless us all to seek and do His will in our lives. Gramajane (I'm not taking time to read back over what I wrote-- which I rarely do anyway. I just pray that it is ok, and that any who read will realize I'm not claiming perfection either! ;)-- God isn't finished with me yet!

Monday, August 10, 2009

What others have said on marriage laws-- INTERSTING!

This is from a married with five kids, son of ours -- in response to the article (included after his writing) from Meridian Magazine about marriage laws. VERY INTERESTING!!!


A year ago, I would have agreed with this completely. But no longer.
Before you condemn me as a heretic, let me explain.

In summary, don't strengthen the marriage laws, get rid of them altogether!

The role of government in people's lives is all about force. They are
the ultimate authority, everyone agrees that they have the gun and are
authorized to use it when necessary. Taxation is money taken by force
(if you don't believe that, try not paying taxes) to be spent in ways in
which you have very little influence, and therefore all government
programs rely on force to exist. This is another large topic, which I'd
be willing to continue on if desired, but for the sake of my argument,
I'll assume that we agree that government constitutes the mutually
recognized and authorized wielder of force.

Why does government even need to be involed in marriage at all? Why do
we need a legal definition? Why are there laws in the books about
marriage? What force is required here, that necessitates the involvement
of government?

One of the vital roles of government is to enforce contracts. Legally, a
marriage is nothing more than a contract. But the terms of the contract
are a giant mass of impossibly confusing laws. Why do you think that
divorce lawyers make so much money? The system is broken, people! It
doesn't need to be this much of a mess. Mixed into the mess are relgion,
legal definitions, tax laws, marital benefits, prejudice, sex laws, rape
laws, child protection laws... gadzooks, what a nightmare. I just
recently finished reading the Constitution, and there is nothing in
there about marriage (if I missed it, let me know).

Government should NEVER be used as a tool to enforce one person's
morality upon another, even when you are sure that your morality is
correct and beneficial. The federal government just needs to follow the
constitution, nothing more.

Here's how to fix it:

1. Throw out all marriage laws in the books. Government should not care
about it at all, especially at the federal level. We don't need a legal
definition if there are no laws about it.

2. A marriage is a contract. Treat it as such, for legal purposes! When
a couple wants to make a commitment to each other, they find a contract
that they both agree to, and have it witnessed and signed, with a copy
filed by the government. Now, if there is a breach of the contract, it's
the governmnet's job to exercise force if it is needed. This covers
child support, divorce, and so on. If the couple wants it to mean more,
having to do with relgion, that's their business.

3. Adjust the tax laws accordingly. A government adopting the principle
of liberty, and following the Constitution, will be minimal, and won't
have much in the way of taxation.

Government works best when it is pushed down to the lowest level
possible; if a community decides they want to recognize certain marriage
contracts for some reason, and that community votes accordingly, so be it.

"... Government power must be dispersed. If government is to exercise
power, better in the county than in the state, and better in the state
than in Washington. If I do not like what my local community does, be it
in sewage disposal, or zoning, or schools, I can move to another local
community, and though few may take this step, the mere possibility acts
as a check. If I do not like what my state does, I can move to another.
If I do not like what Washington imposes, I have few alternatives in
this world of jealous nations." --- Milton Friedman

Now, do you see how this solution completely resolves the whole problem
of gay marriage? There is no more problem! If someone wants to make a
legal contract with another person, for whatever reason, they can do so,
and call it whatever the heck they want to. It doesn't have any bearing
on anything else. If a local government wants to recognize it for some
purpose, sure! If I don't like the local laws, I have a chance as
getting heard. If it bugs me enough, I can always move elsewhere, near
people who believe the way I do.

Hopefully this clarifies my position on this issue. If anyone can find
any holes in any of this, let me know!

--- Eric

article from Meridian Magazine--

> Gay Marriage, Democracy, and the Courts
> The culture war will never end if judges invalidate the choices of voters.
> We are in the midst of a showdown over the legal definition of marriage.
> Though some state courts have interfered, the battle is mainly being
> fought in referenda around the country, where “same-sex marriage” has
> uniformly been rejected, and in legislatures, where some states have
> adopted it. It’s a raucous battle, but democracy is working.
> Now the fight may head to the U.S. Supreme Court. Following California’s
> Proposition 8, which restored the historic definition of marriage in that
> state as the union of husband and wife, a federal lawsuit has been filed
> to invalidate traditional marriage laws.
> It would be disastrous for the justices to do so. They would repeat the
> error in Roe v. Wade: namely, trying to remove a morally charged policy
> issue from the forums of democratic deliberation and resolve it according
> to their personal lights.
> Even many supporters of legal abortion now consider Roe a mistake. Lacking
> any basis in the text, logic or original understanding of the
> Constitution, the decision became a symbol of the judicial usurpation of
> authority vested in the people and their representatives. It sent the
> message that judges need not be impartial umpires—as both John Roberts and
> Sonia Sotomayor say they should be—but that judges can impose their policy
> preferences under the pretext of enforcing constitutional guarantees.
> By short-circuiting the democratic process, Roe inflamed the culture war
> that has divided our nation and polarized our politics. Abortion, which
> the Court purported to settle in 1973, remains the most unsettled issue in
> American politics—and the most unsettling. Another Roe would deepen the
> culture war and prolong it indefinitely.
> View Full Image
> George
> David Klein
> George
> George
> Some insist that the Supreme Court must invalidate traditional marriage
> laws because “rights” are at stake. But as in Roe, they are forced to
> peddle a strained and contentious reading of the Constitution—one whose
> dubiousness would undermine any ruling’s legitimacy.
> Lawyers challenging traditional marriage laws liken their cause to Loving
> v. Virginia (which invalidated laws against interracial marriages),
> insinuating that conjugal-marriage supporters are bigots. This is
> ludicrous and offensive, and no one should hesitate to say so.
> The definition of marriage was not at stake in Loving. Everyone agreed
> that interracial marriages were marriages. Racists just wanted to ban them
> as part of the evil regime of white supremacy that the equal protection
> clause was designed to destroy.
> Opponents of racist laws in Loving did not question the idea, deeply
> embodied in our law and its shaping philosophical tradition, of marriage
> as a union that takes its distinctive character from being founded, unlike
> other friendships, on bodily unity of the kind that sometimes generates
> new life. This unity is why marriage, in our legal tradition, is
> consummated only by acts that are generative in kind. Such acts unite
> husband and wife at the most fundamental level and thus legally consummate
> marriage whether or not they are generative in effect, and even when
> conception is not sought.
> Of course, marital intercourse often does produce babies, and marriage is
> the form of relationship that is uniquely apt for childrearing (which is
> why, unlike baptisms and bar mitzvahs, it is a matter of vital public
> concern). But as a comprehensive sharing of life—an emotional and
> biological union—marriage has value in itself and not merely as a means to
> procreation. This explains why our law has historically permitted
> annulment of marriage for non-consummation, but not for infertility; and
> why acts of sodomy, even between legally wed spouses, have never been
> recognized as consummating marriages.
> Only this understanding makes sense of all the norms—annulability for
> non-consummation, the pledge of permanence, monogamy, sexual
> exclusivity—that shape marriage as we know it and that our law reflects.
> And only this view can explain why the state should regulate marriage (as
> opposed to ordinary friendships) at all—to make it more likely that,
> wherever possible, children are reared in the context of the bond between
> the parents whose sexual union gave them life.
> If marriage is redefined, its connection to organic bodily union—and thus
> to procreation—will be undermined. It will increasingly be understood as
> an emotional union for the sake of adult satisfaction that is served by
> mutually agreeable sexual play. But there is no reason that primarily
> emotional unions like friendships should be permanent, exclusive, limited
> to two, or legally regulated at all. Thus, there will remain no principled
> basis for upholding marital norms like monogamy.
> A veneer of sentiment may prevent these norms from collapsing—but only
> temporarily. The marriage culture, already wounded by widespread divorce,
> nonmarital cohabitation and out-of-wedlock childbearing will fare no
> better than it has in those European societies that were in the vanguard
> of sexual “enlightenment.” And the primary victims of a weakened marriage
> culture are always children and those in the poorest, most vulnerable
> sectors of society.
> Candid and clear-thinking advocates of redefining marriage recognize that
> doing so entails abandoning norms such as monogamy. In a 2006 statement
> entitled “Beyond Same-Sex Marriage,” over 300 lesbian, gay, and allied
> activists, educators, lawyers, and community organizers—including Gloria
> Steinem, Barbara Ehrenreich, and prominent Yale, Columbia and Georgetown
> professors—call for legally recognizing multiple sex partner
> (“polyamorous”) relationships. Their logic is unassailable once the
> historic definition of marriage is overthrown.
> Is this a red herring? This week’s Newsweek reports more than 500,000
> polyamorous households in the U.S.
> So, before judging whether traditional marriage laws should be junked, we
> must decide what marriage is. It is this crucial and logically prior
> question that some want to shuffle off stage.
> Because marriage has already been deeply wounded, some say that redefining
> it will do no additional harm. I disagree. We should strengthen, not
> redefine, marriage. But whatever one’s view, surely it is the people, not
> the courts, who should debate and decide. For reasons of both principle
> and prudence, the issue should be settled by democratic means, not by what
> Justice Byron White, in his dissent in Roe, called an “act of raw judicial
> power.”
> Mr. George is professor of Jurisprudence at Princeton University and
> founder of the American Principles Project
> (

Sunday, August 9, 2009

Happiness is me!

I'm so happy. I have discovered that what I have perceived as more difficult for myself, than things seemed for other has a factual foundation! I have felt that in areas like energy levels, occasional "brain fog", cravings for bakery goods and starchy foods in general, and not being able to lose weight and keep it off, I have had more difficulty that the average person.

I found a book about Carbohydrate craving by a married couple, named Heller, both with PHDs. There was a test in the book, which I showed up as a "severe carb. craver". I felt like it was describing my life.

I have now been on the eating plan for three weeks, and I have lost nine lbs. What makes me even MORE happy is that I have had MORE energy than usual by a great amount, and so I have gotten a LOT more done on my to do lists. I have taken about six less naps a week. I have even been able to consider and understand more complicated things, like my computer problems, and even my computer guru son commented that I was not being overwhelmed when he explained, but I was asking appropriate questions which showed I understood. He was surprised and happy for me, and it was even my "usual nap (read pass out) time". I also have not been as hungry as I usually am when I would eat a normal "balanced" diet!

I even sat in the car, an hour late for my lunch, for an hour as we drove home, with my husband eating a Costco blueberry muffin right at my elbow, and the whole tray right on the seat behind me and I didn't even crave any! It was easy!

One thing that helps is that each day I get to have a "reward meal" where after I eat a salad, and divide a dinner plate up into thirds, with the *amount* of food in each 1/3 the same (forget counting calories or points etc!). So in 1/3 of the plate is the carb reducing protein (just about any meat, or cheese or tofu-- cooked any way except breaded) and 1/3 of the plate for a carb. reducing vegetable-- the non starchy kind-- (you can see the lists on line I think, and I may put the lists on here later) so it is like fresh or frozen veggies of green beans, celery, cucumber, sprouts, broccoli.----- THEN in the last 1/3 of the plate, I get to have **WHATEVER** carb rich thing I want.

This last 1/3 amount of ANYTHING I want, makes it so I don't feel deprived! :) Mostly I have some bakery goodie, like Costco chocolate muffins with ice cream, or I have pie, once I had two Dove candy bars etc! ) I know I can save any goodie that I would have eaten during the day, until my reward meal that evening (or it could be any time of day, but not before 24 hours of the last rewards meal.

We are also to drink the recommended amount of water- 6-8 glasses a day. So when I drink my water whenever I am wondering if I am getting hungry-- I usually find I was REALLY just thirsty! I try to drink my water before my meals.

I find that I think and crave food so much less-- it is amazing. I'm so happy just working away at my lists of to dos. I have also now with losing the nine pounds been able to go get 1/2 of my too small clothing and it fits! :)

How this all works is because of my body over producing insulin-- which is the body chemical that makes us hungry. Also my cells getting insulin resistant, and my family history of having "thrifty genes". Stress also plays a large part too.

Insulin production is prompted in the body by eating carb rich foods, so when I am not "pushing that button" but once a day, and the reward meal is to be totally consumed within one hour of time- it is allowed and even encouraged to be dormant.

I have said in the past that it seemed that if I would just SEE food, that I would gain weight. This has now proven true-- that for many people if they see or even THINK of food, their body assumes that it will be getting some soon, and so it pumps in the insulin (making us hungry!-- and begins converting any blood sugar into FAT-- as my cells are resistant to burning it like they should! -- It was true!!

Anyway, I urge any of you if you think you may be a carb craver, to check it out!

I also always felt it was easier to fast on Fast Sunday-- than to not have a morning snack or just miss a regular meal on any other day, and I would even feel hungry at 9:30 or 10 after having a BIG breakfast, than I would on Fast Sunday (when we have no breakfast and no lunch!). I complained to my dear husband that I felt better when I didn't even eat ANYTHING than I did to eat a day of "balanced" meals! It was true!

He and I could eat the same foods and amounts, I would still be hungry later and I would gain weight without eating any more, and even by eating LESS than he did!

Another thing the diet said to do was to avoid MSG-- like the plague! It CAUSES hunger, and appetite-- which is why so many love Chinese foods, and are hungry so soon after eating a ton! That even if they don't PUT MSG in the foods-- it IS in the soy sauce and the bean curd naturally, and is even a "Natural flavors" in MANY processed foods. So the best is to make your own foods and buy frozen but unprocessed foods, and organic of course is the best of the best.

Also avoid High fructose corn syrups and sugars in all forms (except for your 1/3 plate reward meal) and then it is still best to avoid the High Fru. stuff-- which also causes hunger/appetite! Caffine they said ALSO causes weight retention/gain!

Anyway-- I am pleased to share this with any-- as it has brought joy to my life. I feel like I could continue to eat this way the whole of the rest of my life, even if it didn't help me to lose weight.

I don't have to spend time cooking. I mostly just eat something like celery with cream cheese in it for breakfast (though I could have eggs like in an omelet etc) and for lunch a pure all beef hamburger patty, or slice of ham (not sugar cured) and a salad, and to eat out I have a grilled chicken salad (remove the carrots!) and I feel full and have energy and my thought process is working MUCH better! I feel that Heavenly Father helped me find that book in the thrift store, as I had prayed to find things I needed and not buy anything that I didn't need. May you be so blessed! Gramajane