Thoughts for the day

From About.com's Bob and Sheri Stritof, marriage guides: "Don't put yourselves on hold, either personally or as a couple. Take care of yourself both emotionally and physically. Make time to take a walk, read a book, relax in a hot tub, laugh, listen to music you enjoy, get a good night's sleep."

I am definitely doing this - as soon as I get a chance:) Right now the priority is Jon's wedding, but then it's "me time" - really! I'm planning my future to head in a positive direction and decrease stress ASAP!

A sign I saw inside a mobile pizza by the slice/soup shop parked on Main Street at lunch time:  "If I had my life to do over again, I'd find you sooner so I could love you longer."  Amen - (and though none of us ever know exactly how much time we have, as I get older it's a given it will be shorter rather than longer).

Getting a second chance at happiness is a huge and rare blessing. This time I'm not letting anyone or anything get in the way.  That's a promise I'm making to myself.

Disagreement in marriage

"It is OK for kids to know you disagree sometimes, even to see a disagreement now and then, so long as it is not violent or hurtful. What is essential, though, is that they also see you resolve it. That they see you make up. That they see you loving each other and explaining to them that two people can have differences and can learn from each other's viewpoint and can communicate and grow and find resolution." ~ Richard and Linda Eyre

National Marriage Week

I know, I'll get some jabs on this one...

Click on the post title for DesNews report on the study of Great Recession and Marriage or here for marriage and overall improved health.
"The most important thing is to speak up, in love, for the truth about marriage," said Maggie Gallagher, president of the National Organization for Marriage and co-author with Waite on the book, "The Case for Marriage: Why Married People Are Happier, Healthier, and Better Off Financially."

The Divine Institution of Marriage

Read the church's official statement here and the article about the joint efforts of the church with other religions in making a statement here.

Imperfect Marriage

Don't be fooled by the Christmas letters and pictures of perfect families.

Marriage is never what it appears. Behind every beautiful facade....
Is a complicated power structure.
Behind every hand stitched memory...
Behind every well-placed piece of furniture or decor...
Is a dust ball, a broken ornament or that missing extension cord needed to light that star on your tree.

~ Andrea Fraser (Good Housekeeping 11/29/10)

This said, even in divorce - "there is no better reason for being on your best behavior during the holidays than your children." ~ Cathy Meyer

And with more and more marriages going down the tube, now we have "sexting" - which basically falls in the category of emotional affair or infidelity. People defend this behavior by saying it isn't cheating if they didn't have sex. Just another sign of today's attitudes toward marriage, commitment and infidelity. Yvonne Thomas, PhD, an L.A. psychologist says, "When you're going outside the boundaries of what you're supposed to share, emotionally and physically, only with your partner, cheating is cheating." It would seem though that some have a skewed idea of the boundaries in marriage.

In fact, it seems boundaries are the cause of many problems we have in relationships of all kinds.

In "sexting" the desire for outside sexual stimulation is more important than the pain it would cause the spouse he/she had vowed to be faithful to. I liked Cathy's observation that sometimes much more effort goes into planning an elaborate wedding celebration than in planning how to have an effective, committed and long-term marriage. Setting goals as a couple and making the health of the relationship the main focus is often forgotten these days.

Good counsel from Elder Scott

A few thoughts from a talk, To Have Peace and Happiness, given at a BYU CES Fireside on Sept. 12, 2010.

Are you faithful to your spouse mentally as well as physically? Are you loyal to your marriage covenants by never engaging in conversation with another person that you wouldn’t want your spouse to overhear? Are you kind and supportive of your spouse and children?

As a husband, be aware of what you might unconsciously communicate by how you treat your wife in public. As I shake hands with members at the end of a meeting, occasionally I note that a man is in line in front of his wife. That is inappropriate—as a matter of fact, it’s just plain stupid. It is demeaning to her. The simple gestures like opening the door on the car or in a room for a woman show you want to give her the respect she deserves.

As husband and wife, work as a partnership to build on each others' strengths. Listen to each other and help each other. I have seen men reject counsel from a wife who likely has struggled for a long time to find just the right moment to mention something the husband needed to change. Don’t do that.

Some of you may feel lonely and unappreciated and cannot see how it will be possible for you to have the blessings of marriage and children or your own family. All things are possible to the Lord, and He keeps the promises He inspires His prophets to declare. Eternity is a long time. Have faith in those promises, and live to be worthy of them so that in His time the Lord can make them come true in your life. With certainty, you will receive every promised blessing for which you are worthy. I pray that it will be on this side of the veil.

Of course there is more. Click the post title to read the transcript of his talk. These thoughts apply to both spouses and the bottom line is respect, loyalty and true love!

Observations on California's vote overturn

Even the judge agreed that marriage is not a constitutional right, yet the media has interpreted it as such. Read here. There's more to marriage than benefits. If it were about equal benefits, there would be no problem. It's not about benefits or love or freedom. It's about the sanctity of marriage ordained by God and begun in the Garden of Eden.

A good article on the ruling is found here as well (Witherspoon Institute). Then there is the question of why government is involved in marriage at all (if it's strictly a religious or moral observance)? If it doesn't mean anything any more in a moral society, why not leave it to the churches who can decide who can marry whom and aside from that, anyone who wants can recite vows or poetry to each other and take up residence. Read more here.

Another opinion is here. Judicial Tyranny?

Needs

The First Thing She Can't Do Without - Affection

The First Thing He Can't Do Without - Sexual Fulfillment

She Needs Him to Talk to Her - Conversation

He Needs Her to Be His Playmate - Recreational Companionship

She Needs to Trust Him Totally - Honesty and Openness

He Needs a Good-looking Wife - An Attractive Spouse

She Needs Enough Money to Live Comfortably

He needs Peace and Quite - Domestic Support

She Needs Him to Be a Good Father - Family Support

He Needs Her to Be Proud of Him - Admiration

This is from a good marriage book, His Needs; Her Needs by Willard Harley, Jr. I read the book, then heard him speak. He has summarized the most typical needs of men and women in relationships and he admits they are sometimes in a little different order, but usually the five needs for each pop up. It's pretty basic, but profound stuff.

Wisdom and comic relief

Art Linkletter: Art died of natural causes at the age of 97 on May 26, 2010 at his home in Los Angeles, California.  I hope he got as much joy from his life as he gave in the early years of television with House Party, People Are Funny and Kids Say the Darnedest Things and other ventures (causes, endorsements, entertainment)  He was abandoned as an infant, adopted and raised by a one-legged preacher and his wife.  He was raised in a poor but happy home, rode the rails, maintained his honesty and became hugely successful in entertainment and, it appears, marriage (74 years).  He is the author of 16 books.  He was a naturalized U.S. citizen.  He was conservative in his views, opposing the liberal AARP and speaking out against socialism in America.  He said,

"We've become a rich country because of freedom. Freedom. The ability to speak and worship and do business and run your own affairs and have a limited government which promoted enterprise, in the early days, instead of trying to run everything -- like now."

I like these quotes from him:  "I have a good marriage, which reduces a great deal of stress."


"To be married happily you have to have a sense of humor and you have to communicate. Don't go to bed mad. In other words -- and this is very important: You can disagree, but you don't get disagreeable. That "a-b-l-e" is the big difference between disagree.

He called his kids (five of them) his "Links."  Very appropriate I think.

Hiding

Some years ago while attending a BYU Campus Education Week  I heard a speaker whose name I have since forgotten but whose message was etched in my heart because I knew at once the truthfulness of it.

It was a marriage relationship class and he spoke of a key warning to help us to stay on track and avoid straying/sinning since all are vulnerable to Satan's enticings and temptations of the flesh (I would add the mind/psyche/ego).  The concept was "hiding" and he emphasized that openness and honesty were keys for successful marriage and when it was missing, the chances of long-term success were greatly reduced.  I felt right away it was absolutely essential and without it any meaningful relationship was doomed to failure.

His message was this:  Anything that must be hidden from one's spouse should be a clue that something is not right and you should step back and ask yourself why there is "hiding" involved.  This is not just in marriage, though that was the subject of his talk.  It is about sin in general.  He said it is one way the spirit speaks to us - we know when we are lying or only telling half-truths, or when we embellish a story.  Our conscience or Holy Ghost whispers to us that it is wrong.  Sometimes we even justify that it is OK because it spares the other person the pain of knowing the truth.  We can ignore it, push it aside and it will be lost as a warning to us. 

Well, the problem isn't in the knowing or not, but in the fact it is something that must be hidden at all.  If you have to keep it from your spouse, you should examine your motive.  Why must it be hidden?  If we are honest with ourselves we will realize it is a blessing to feel that nudge.  Get rid of the offender (Matthew 5:30) and determine to be honest and open.  That doesn't mean you have to say everything that pops into your head (i.e. you look fat today).  But if you are married but having an online or other relationship with someone else, that is a little too interesting to give up but you justify as innocent (though you also wouldn't share it with your spouse)... OR if you are reading or viewing something you need to delete from your computer history or password protect if your spouse has access to your files...OR if you participate in an activity or visit a location you wouldn't want your spouse (or other friends/relatives) to know about so you hide the evidence and ignore your conscience pricks, these are instances of hiding and they should be a warning.   

Liz Hale, a licensed clinical psychologist, spoke at the spring conference of the Association of Mormon Counselors and Psychotherapists on April 1.  Click here to read the summary of her talk and here to read more good stuff she wrote.

Hale said she believes every couple is vulnerable to infidelity -- be it sexual or emotional -- if individuals aren't actively curbing all the subtle and often innocent beginnings of unfaithfulness that can emerge.

"Is it secret or deceptive?" she asked. "Then it's an affair. Any outside relationship with a sexual or emotional connection that is kept secret can be defined a true-blue affair. No doubt about it."

She, as well as relationship therapists in the audience, cited several infidelity risk factors: impulsivity, long periods of separation (military service), having a narcissistic personality, being sexually or violently abusive and a habit of making friends online...

A survey completed by cheating respondents showed something bothered the victim spouse more than the sexual infidelity itself: "It was the deceit. That was the most painful. That takes a long time to heal," Hale said. ...

Hales mentioned several practical things couples should practice to avoid potential future infidelity:

• Recognize you're vulnerable: Temptations aren't fussy; they'll approach anyone.
• Communicate on a deeper level: Share attractions -- responsibly. Tell your spouse in a mature way if you're attracted to someone. Doing so eliminates infidelity's main ingredient -- secrecy -- by taking it out of the shadows. "It's the secrecy that really tends to build and excite and keep the emotion," she said.
• Keep focused on your partner: Call her, text her, serve her.
• Satisfy sexual intimacy.
• Avoid connections with people on the Internet: Marry your Facebook accounts; choose online friends wisely. Mention your spouse often in the posts, blogs, etc.
• Keep professional boundaries: Going to lunch at work with the opposite sex is one of many places "we ought not be. Go to lunch in groups."
• Always wear your wedding ring. "I'm a fan of wedding rings," Hales said. "It's some token, some sign to the world that we're committed."

Fighting, Respecting, Loving

Good article about handling differences in marriage. The link probably won't last long. Read it at DesNews.com

Gray Divorce

Predictors of happy marriage

Click the post title to read from the Times (UK) about a study to discover the formula for happy marriage. The results did not surprise me and include:

• Wait until you're 25
• Don't cohabitate before marriage
• Don't be irresponsible at 16 (it matters what you did before you even met)
• Get an education
• Be religious
  
• Come from a family with good marriages in the "tree"
• Location makes a difference too but since this study was done in the UK it won't help us here in the USA

I tend to agree. Of course I would add a few things to the list...

Courtship Concepts from Genesis

This is a good article about finding the right spouse with concepts taken from Genesis. Click the photo to read the story.

Other News: The new FamilySearch is now available in Utah. We were the last in the world to get it because everyone was so excited it would have overwhelmed the system. They ran the pilots in more remote areas and gradually introduced it around the world over the past couple of years. It's working, so now we get it!

SL Tribune & Heritage Foundation Discussion

The Tribune reported on both sides of the issues following Elder Oaks' comments about religious freedom. It is worth reading to see particularly where some of our rights have already been harmed. For those that believe churches will not be affected by same-sex marriage, I suggest you read the whole article. And for those readers who do not trust the Deseret News may feel it is more objective - the Trib tends to be a very liberal news source. (Don't kid yourself - media is biased and "yellow journalism" is no longer the concern it once was.) These online articles tend to only be available on line for a time, then you would need to search in the archives but click on this post title or here to read the article. It was on the list of most popular articles. It is very sad to me that freedom of speech apparently only applies to certain sides of an argument. And now people should be able to see the reasons for our fears. We are losing freedoms right and left. There is a lot to read here, but it's worth it to go to the sites directly.

Some cited situations:

» The Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association, owned by a Methodist church in New Jersey, rented out its beachside pavilion to various groups. The church declined to allow a lesbian couple to use the pavilion for their civil-union ceremony. Local authorities stripped the association of its exemption from property taxes and billed it $20,000.

» The Salvation Army lost $3.5 million in social-service contracts with San Francisco because it refused, on religious grounds, to provide benefits to same-sex partners of its employees.

» Catholic Charities of Maine was forced to either extend employee benefits to registered same-sex couples or lose eligibility to all city housing and development funds.

» A pair of Christians who co-own Elaine Photography in New Mexico refused to take photos for a lesbian commitment ceremony. The lesbian couple filed a complaint with New Mexico's Human Rights Commission, which found the photographers guilty of discrimination and levied a $6,000 fine. To head off looming lawsuits, religious-liberty experts suggest writing religious exemptions for individuals and religiously connected businesses into same-sex-marriage laws.

Perhaps the most emotion-packed issue is what to teach children. A Massachusetts case became a rallying cry for Prop 8 proponents and is being used again in the publicity surrounding Maine's ballot measure. Robb and Robin Wirthlin, an LDS couple in Lexington, Mass., were horrified to learn that their son's second-grade teacher read aloud a fairy tale, called King and King, about a prince who falls in love with and marries another prince. When the Wirthlins objected, they were told the school had no obligation to give them notice so their son could opt out.

Such situations are likely to multiply as same-sex-marriage laws are passed. "Children are likely to encounter textbooks and other educational materials in which same-sex marriages are portrayed as a normal and unexceptional part of society," says Fred Gedicks, who teaches law at LDS Church-owned Brigham Young University.

"That will make it more difficult for those who oppose same-sex marriages to teach their children conservative values, especially in school districts that are not sensitive to parental rights by allowing them to opt out of certain activities or parts of the curriculum."

Read here about the Price of Proposition 8 by Thomas M Messner, a Visiting Fellow in the Richard and Helen DeVos Center for Religion and Civil Society at The Heritage Foundation.at the Heritage Foundation. It's a long article but for those who want more than the liberal headlines, it's worth reading.

Abstract: Supporters of Proposition 8 in California have been subjected to harassment, intimidation, vandalism, racial scapegoating, blacklisting, loss of employment, economic hardships, angry protests, violence, at least one death threat, and gross expressions of anti-religious bigotry. Arguments for same-sex marriage are based fundamentally on the idea that limiting marriage to the union of husband and wife is a form of bigotry, irrational prejudice, and even hatred against homosexual persons. As this ideology seeps into the culture more generally, individuals and institutions that support marriage as the union of husband and wife risk paying a price for that belief in many legal, social, economic, and cultural contexts.

"Because of the California donor disclosure law, some Prop 8 supporters have become targets without ever placing a sign in their yard, putting a sticker on their car, or appearing at a public rally. These more public forms of support for Prop 8 certainly generated plenty of animosity, as documented below. However, many individuals became targets for harassment, intimidation, and reprisals simply for donating $100 or more in support of Prop 8....

When people stand firmly by their beliefs about marriage as the union of husband and wife despite facing social stigmatization, economic hardship, and other reprisals, they provide an important example of civic courage and inspire particular vir­tues that are essential to the proper functioning of any free and open society. The freedom of parties on both sides of the marriage debate to voice their views and to promote them in public policy should be respected."

Read here about what's happening in Maine. I'll add one quote from the article:

"If Proposition 1 fails and the new law goes into effect, the following text (and more just like it) will be deleted from Maine’s code of laws: “The union of one man and one woman joined in traditional monogamous marriage is of inestimable value to society,” and the State of Maine “has a compelling interest to nurture and promote [this] unique institution . . . in the support of harmonious families and the physical and mental health of children.” This language was put into Maine’s code of laws just a dozen years ago.

If the people of Maine no longer believe the statement just quoted, then by all means they should eliminate it. Is it possible, though, that Mainers don’t believe that man-woman marriage is of “inestimable value” to society, and to children in particular?

Breaking her heart...

"Ladies: A rocky relationship may do more than just break your heart.

A new University of Utah study shows the more strained a woman's marriage is, the more likely she is to suffer depression - and that can lead to a higher risk for "metabolic syndrome," a group of risk factors for heart disease, stroke and diabetes.

And your husbands?

Anger, conflict and hostility can lead to depression for them, too, they reported in questionnaires. But unlike women - and for reasons researchers are still exploring - it doesn't translate into hypertension, obesity around the waistline, high blood sugar, high triglycerides and low levels of HDL, or "good" cholesterol.

One explanation for the difference may be chalked up to women's heightened sensitivity to relationship problems - an observation borne out in a growing body of research on marriage and health." (SLTribune)

Click to see the DesNews write-up.

There are admittedly limitations to this study but I suspect a lot of women would say, "amen."

Married Love ~ Survival Tactics

February - and love is in the air.

This is what real love looks like. What a great example these two are. http://marriage.about.com/od/presidentialmarriages/ig/Obama-Marriage-Photos/?nl=1

http://marriage.about.com/cs/leadershipcouples/ht/supercouple.htm?nl=1

This is a nice thing to see in our leaders (think Bill Clinton by comparison)...

Everyone should be outraged

Good article here (non-LDS Townhall.com) in reaction to the fallout after Prop. 8
http://townhall.com/Columnists/KathrynJeanLopez/2008/11/26/mormons_in_the_crosshairs (or click on post title). This is Kathryn Jean Lopez's closing comment from the article.

"Surely we don't have to be Mormon to be outraged. I make no statement about their recruitment strategies when I say, watching California, "We're all Mormons now." Next time the violent backlash may be in response to a brave Catholic bishop teaching responsibility at the voting booth. Next time it could be an online evangelical dating service hauled into court by a state "civil rights" office for not providing same-sex matchmaking. Oh wait, that already happened in New Jersey.

Now I know why Mormons were so nervous. They were warning the rest of us. Our freedom to believe is at hazard, and it's time we all had the Mormons' backs." (From One News Now)

Another resource for details on actual spending, and answers to allegations. Read the truth and statistics from the L.A. Times here:

http://www.ldsmag.com/critics/081202false.html

And...

"Challenge against Oklahoma marriage laws has been stopped.

Two lesbians married legally in Canada and then moved to Tulsa, Oklahoma where Alliance Defense fund attorney Austin Nimocks says the women filed for divorce.
"[O]klahoma voters reject[ed] those types of relationships by a constitutional amendment [and] the court upheld the will of the voters," said Nimocks.
Seventy-six percent of Oklahoma voters voted for the constitutional amendment, but Nimocks says the Oklahoma case is only one example of tactics by homosexual activists.
"We're constantly fighting those who want to redefine marriage in this country and they are constantly asking judicial activists to redefine the law to bend to their will," he points out.
Nimocks expects the case to be appealed, but also to be upheld."

(American Family Association)

The other side - Appreciation

Read the full article citing a petition thanking LDS church members for their support of Proposition 8. The list includes Dr. James Dobson and Tom Minnery of Focus on the Family, Chuck Colson, Tony Perkins, Gary Bauer, Bishop Harry Jackson and other marriage advocates. The public is invited to sign on, as well, according to the article. Read it at MormonTimes.com (click on the post title to read the letter addressed to the first presidency of the church). CitizenLink.org has the petition created by AboveTheHate.com with links to the petition for public signatures.

Thanks to all our friends who believe in our rights to vote our conscience, support just causes and elevate lives.

Today is Ashlie's birthday. I'll write more on my other site that's dedicated to the grandchildren. If you need an invitation to my private blog, let me know. You have to create a gmail account name, but you don't have to use gmail. Once you have logged in, blogspot will recognize you in the future.

Update - Press Conference

Religious Leaders and the Protect Marriage Coalition Leadership Unite against Vicious Attacks by Prop 8 Opponents
Friday, leaders representing the broad coalition of Californians who supported Proposition 8 called on leaders of the No on Proposition 8 campaign, in addition to Senator Diane Feinstein and Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, to denounce the attacks against citizens who supported the constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman.

"Amidst all this lawlessness, harassment, trampling of civil rights and now domestic terrorism, one thing stands out: the deafening silence of our elected officials. Not a single elected leader has spoken out against what is happening. Where is Governor Arnold Schwarzenengger while churches are being attacked? And where is Senator Dianne Feinstein while people are losing their jobs and grandmothers are being bullied by an angry mob?" said Campaign Co-Manager Frank Schubert.

The statement was made at the first press conference of the Protect Marriage coalition since election night when Proposition 8 was passed by California voters with 52.5% of the vote. In the past ten days, hostility has increased against people whose only offense was to exercise their right to participate in the political process.

Some of the outrageous activities include:

* In Sacramento, a musical theater director was forced to resign after he was blacklisted for contributing $1000 to the initiative;
* A Mexican restaurant in Los Angeles has been boycotted after a relative of the owner donated to the coalition;
* Numerous churches have had their property defaced;
* And an unknown white powder was mailed to several LDS temples and the National Headquarters of the Knights of Columbus, a Catholic organization that supported the campaign.

The leadership of the ProtectMarriage.com coalition, a group of interfaith religious leaders, community leaders from a wide range of ethnic groups, and approximately 500 supporters of Yes on Proposition 8 gathered in Santa Ana to voice their opposition to the increasing attacks and harassment against supporters of traditional marriage.

Speaking on behalf of the African American community, Pastor Ed Smith of the Zoe Christian Fellowship of Whittier said: "Marriage is important to members of all faiths and all communities, but an election was held, the outcome was fair and people throughout California should honor it."

"For 14 months, we have been called bigots and hatemongers and we have not retaliated against these unprecedented attacks," Pastor Jim Garlow said. "But we will not be silenced."

(ldsmag.com)

Click on the post title to see and/or sign if in California, a petition for Gov. S who wants the courts to reverse the voters' decision.

Who would have guessed?

The Mormons have traditionally been "blamed" for anything people don't like about Utah (although ironically we are rarely lauded for what they like - and if we ran the state, shouldn't we also get the credit there?).

Now we're being targeted for California too! Do we have some influence? Sure (apparently less than 5% of the yes vote - I suppose all the others were influenced by us). Does this mean all those people are the "sheep" we are accused of being - blindly accepting what we are told by church leaders? But, on the other hand, the liberals are voting intelligently, not being influenced by anyone? And, the fact they have spent more on this campaign to kill proposition 8 than any other issue is immaterial. They can spend millions to kill it but we weren't supposed to spend money to support it? I can't get over the irony here.

Everyone - liberal and conservative - has the right to express their political and moral views. We also have the right to support what we believe through time, efforts and money - just as the gays have the right to rally, raise money and support their cause. But when our opinion is that there are moral issues at play here and there really is a right and wrong - not just "anything goes if it feels good to you" it becomes "intolerance," "racism," "inequality" and "hate." The hatred I'm seeing here is from the liberals against the conservative, Judeo-Christians. The position of the church has always been to love those who believe differently while supporting the commandments of God (and for Christians, the teachings of Christ). There really is "sin" and the public opinion does not change eternal truth.

The liberal agenda would include changing the Bible to say what they want it to say - or better yet - get rid of the Bible altogether. Why do we need a Bible to tell us what to do? Shouldn't we be able to choose whatever we want to do? Some may want to get rid of the commandment that murder is wrong and so far, fortunately, society still believes and accepts that one for the most part. But, no doubt, the murderer sitting on death row would love to see society accept that as right also - because it "felt good" to him at the time. Doesn't he have the "right" to do what he wants?

And since when does supporting marriage between man and woman become bigotry? This is belief in a divine law. And since when does the vote of the people mean taking away "rights" that 4 of 7 judges determined. I thought we were a government of the people and by the people. This is why we can vote and why the vote of the people can override a few judges. We would be in a monarchy otherwise.

It appears to me that certain liberals would have us lose our freedoms altogether. They would vote for communism if it meant getting rid of religion (which it traditionally does) and putting laws into the hands of a few who support what they think they want. In the end, the result would be disastrous but as we saw with Hitler and others - if you promise people a few perks, they may fall for the whole package before even realizing what they are getting into. And by the time they realize it is too late.

Check it out on the LDS Newsroom site for official statements. http://newsroom.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/