undie run

The undie run is a marathon type event where thousands gather together in their underwear and run around Salt Lake. Before they take off though, it's important that they all pose in front of the temple to mock the fact that the church would probably be against it. So, I remember as a child that my mother taught me not to retaliate -- which the church didn't do. But, they're in fact doing so by showing a lack of respect against the church for all this prop 8 stuff, the laws that were started here because of the church and so on.

I have seen some of the comments on Facebook where people have complained, asking to keep the church out of it and then the runners responding with things like "if it were any other church, you'd be ok with it." I doubt that very much, for one thing -- mainly because no one would ever do this to any other church. Secondly, I doubt that because I don't think that it's the best way to pose an argument. "Hey, let's piss them off and see if that'll make them treat us better!" Sounds like a horrible plan to me.
I'm all for letting people run around in their undies, but this is, on a grander scale, something that bothers me very much.

Once upon a time I posted a picture on Instagram that said:

 "unfortunately in this world of "free speech," if I were to speak freely about my opinions I'd be ridiculed and attacked by "open minded" people."

I feel very strongly that if I were to post this blog post on Facebook, I'd get a huge kick-back and everyone would call me a bigot and so on. Personally, I don't mind what people positions are politically, sexually, etc etc. but what does bother me is when someone says "don't judge me" but when I state my opinion, I'm judged by the audience.

I have been told that God doesn't care, things aren't sins and so on but that's subjective. You can't tell me what my God thinks. A lot of things are subjective, I'd even go as far to say that morals are subjective. If someone has no morals or no moral compass, of course they'll say that you're a bad person when you say something about morals.

Put simply, with subjective arguments I don't ask people to do anything I wouldn't. I would walk around outside of the figurative opposite of the temple to desecrate someone else's beliefs. I don't want someone forcing on me an opinion. I want to have my opinion, my belief in my God and what I believe to be right.

My morals are guided by God as whom I believe Him to be. If one believes that God doesn't exist, that doesn't mean that it's ok for that person to force me to forget about Him, or change my values.

When I remember what exactly it was that my business class teacher said, I'll post references but let this suffice for now:

Non-sense, meaning something that doesn't have sense or reason, is what God would be defined as because He cannot be proven nor disproven (there are many that beg to differ, but that's exactly why He would fall under the category "non-sense"). So, we cannot prove or disprove Him 'perfectly' so that every single person on earth either believes or doesn't until He either comes down or the world decides that there is no God. But until that time, morals, opinions, commandments, right & wrong, sin, and righteousness are completely subjective. 

"We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may."
-Articles of Faith, 11

"It's funny because we travel to other countries as Americans and make a big deal about respecting foreign cultures but can't respect different cultures within our own society" -Friend who shall remain nameless

♬

You need new music. Here's some help.

James Blake - The Wilhelm Scream (POINDEXTER Remix) by POINDEXTER

POINDEXTER - HELPLESS (Out on Kitsuné America May 7th 2012) by POINDEXTER

Madeon - The City by Madeon

Yelle - Que Veux Tu (Madeon Remix) by Madeon
POINDEXTER - LIGHT YEARS (FOREVER EP) by POINDEXTER

caffeine and mormons

"On Wednesday, the LDS Church posted a statement on its website saying that "the church does not prohibit the use of caffeine" and that the faith’s health-code reference to "hot drinks" "does not go beyond [tea and coffee]. ... A day later, the website wording was slightly softened, saying only that "the church revelation spelling out health practices ... does not mention the use of caffeine." (http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/54797595-78/church-drinks-caffeine-lds.html.csp)

Finally, it has been said. May I just add my 2¢.

Before I served my mission I really wanted to figure this whole thing out, I wanted to understand "why do I not feel bad at all drinking soda, but I feel so strongly against drinking tea and coffee?" So I busted out my scriptures and started reading and what I found is that it's true, the scriptures don't claim anything about caffeine and as I read I started to understand that it's simply obedience. There are probably a million things in coffee and tea that are good for me, but I don't drink them because God asked me not to, and that's all the reason I need. I also know that it's not the caffeine because when I think about it logically that would mean we can't eat chocolate... that would be impossible for me. I'm glad that the church released this statement because it was such a silly thing that people thought we couldn't drink any caffeine at all.

I will never forget going to a member's house and the member stopped me and said, pointing at my coca-cola "Elder! We can't drink that!" So we sat down and had a nice talk about how the missionary that taught her that was, in my thoughts, teaching his own doctrine.

God could say to stop using Aspirin or Ibuprofen but does that mean we should start doing chemical tests to find out why? No, it means we should just do what God asks us. There were times that I did things on my mission just to be obedient, not for any other reason. We shouldn't be so quick to ask why, but just ask how if we need help.

I'll never forget what my companion told me "if the prophet told me to walk off of a cliff I'd do it, because in the end, God would bless me for following the prophet, whether that was the right thing or not."

It's nice to see this type of development, it shows insiders and outsiders that we aren't supposed to be picking apart coffee and tea chemically and finding what's good or bad. Just do what God said and you'll be happy. We were splitting hairs, wasting time on things that don't really matter. I'm sure there's a great scripture to go along with this, but my brain might explode if I don't go to bed soon.

To finish up, I will say that the word of wisdom does tell us to be careful about addictions in any form. So I completely agree with not drinking caffeine or eating sugar or something else if it's an addiction. We're here to become masters of our own domain!

citizenship = worthiness?

I was lurking on facebook the other day, a popular website for "social networking" as it is called; or in other words a big website where you can post stupid stuff and invite your friends to help you farm in farmville. (one of these days I'll make a post about feisbuk.) ANYWAYS, a girl stated, paraphrased,  "Obama had to show his birth certificate to prove his citizenship, I want to see Romney's Temple Recommend." For those of you who may not know what a Temple Recommend is, it's a small card that members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints use to attend the many temples that spot the world. In those temples we do special worship where we can help save our ancestors and ourselves and also do marriages there. To hold a temple recommend you have to live up to certain standards of the church.

I know what she was getting at but comparing a birth certificate and a temple recommend is ridiculous. There are a few holes in this logic.
-Apparently according to her to be a president, you must be a worthy recommend holder
-She's saying that Romney isn't worthy (not her call, I'll explain in a bit)
-If Romney were non-denominational, no one would care about his moral choices

I'm just going to explain the second bullet quickly. To receive a recommend you have to go through two interviews, one with your local Bishop (like the pastor you could say of your certain area) and then your Stake President (he's in charge of a few different bishops, it's like the Bishop is the electronics manager and the Stake President is the store manager). They will ask you a series of questions that you respond to to see if you are worthy to hold a recommend, but here's the kicker! These questions are self-reflective. When you say yes or no, you are supposed to be doing a self-review and then you answer what you feel is right. In the church, we believe strongly in the Holy Ghost who guides our choices, so we try our best to make good choices so that the Holy Ghost sticks with us, The Spirit can help us decide if we're worthy or not by feelings or thoughts. Now, if you are NOT worthy -- say you are sexually immoral but you tell the Stake President you are clean he will still give you your recommend, why? Because it's YOUR salvation. YOU make your own choices. God will not hold the Stake President responsible for allowing you to enter, you will be held responsible for lying to enter God's house. So where I am going with this is basically to explain that even if you don't think that Romney is worthy, if he sat in the interview and he personally feels that he is, that's between him and his Heavenly Father.

People boob so hard about how they think Christians are judgmental and that we condemn people, but then seeing something like this is the exact same thing! Anyone with these thoughts about Romney is judging his worthiness and sticking their nose in someone else's business.

There was something else, but I can't remember now -- if I remember I'll update it.

Moral of the story: no one's perfect, not even Romney, nor does he claim to be.

i don't like sports and i don't care who knows.

I refuse to pretend to love something that won't change my life in any way. People hinge their days on sports and I find it really sad. If their team loses they have a bad day, why? What would be different had they won (unless you're gambling)? nothing at all... same old crap. If you don't watch it, you save the money you spent in gas and the ticket or the cable bill and electric bill. So it's always a lose lose. Why cheer for someone that can't even hear you, or get frustrated when they drop a ball? Like sure, it sucks, but everyone makes mistakes -- and it's just a game. In real life, the only person that that fumbled ball affects is the player (and possibly the team, but I'm looking at it through a longer scope). Getting excited or sad over sports, I feel, is a fabricated feeling that we put together in our minds and convince ourselves matters. 

Aside from all of that, I just find them to be boring and a scheme to get money out of people. Watching sports is like watching someone run on a treadmill and cheering for them or watching someone work out, which is basically what the olympics are, no wonder they're overly-boring. I like to play soccer or ride a bike just as much as the next guy, but watching someone do it just doesn't do it for me. Sure, they're great at it and that may be appealing to some people, but I just don't find anything about it interesting. For years those basketballs have been put into the same hoops but for some reason we keep coming back to watch the same thing over, and over, and over. BOO.

I must say, though, that sports put food on my table for years. My father worked for a professional sports team and so I think from there is where this all stems, I overdosed on sports as a young child. I had every child's dream in that I could walk into the locker room and get a free soda and leave and that's about how I treated it. It was so normal to me, seeing professional players was just like seeing someone that works with my father. Whereas most kids would walk in there and want to meet all those players and get autographs, I was more interested in the fact that the soda was FREE. (Who doesn't like free soda?)

Lastly, I am afraid that sports have become less about the love of the game and fans and more about looking cool. I think it all started right around when Kobe started playing and it reached it's highest point of vanity when LeBron James started playing. It wasn't about who won, but about who looked coolest while winning. 

BRING IT BACK:

My Online, Sarcasm Filled, Pessimistic Diary

I have never written a blog or attempted to do so, so I doubt many people will read this but if you do, welcome! I am usually totally against these kinds of things because every time I see a blog I think "who really cares what you think?" And the answer might be no-one, but I decided that this is a better place for me to post my thoughts because if you like it you can stick around and see what I add next. I'm very pessimistic, so there will be plenty of updating. Enjoy reading.