The United States National Health Insurance Act establishes a unique American national universal health insurance program. The bill would create a publicly financed, privately delivered health care system that uses the already existing Medicare program by expanding and improving it to all U.S. residents, and all residents living in U.S. territories. The goal of the legislation is to ensure that all Americans will have access, guaranteed by law, to the highest quality and most cost effective health care services regardless of their employment, income, or health care status. With over 45-75 million uninsured Americans, and another 50 million who are under- insured, the time has come to change our inefficient and costly fragmented non- health care system.
Who is Eligible
Every person living or visiting in the United States and the U.S. Territories would receive a United States National Health Insurance Card and ID number once they enroll at the appropriate location. Social Security numbers may not be used when assigning ID cards.
Health Care Services Covered
This program will cover all medically necessary services, including primary care, inpatient care, outpatient care, emergency care, prescription drugs, durable medical equipment, long term care, mental health services, dentistry, eye care, chiropractic, and substance abuse treatment. Patients have their choice of physicians, providers, hospitals, clinics, and practices. No co-pays or deductibles are permissible under this act.
Here's a link to the full bill: H.R.676
Contact your representatives and ask them why they don't support health care for all.
If you'd like to, please sign the petition at HealthCare-Now.org in support of H.R. 676
Monday, November 12, 2007
Wordy?
One more thing you don't have time to be doing.
I'll admit that I only made it to 41 (which is several points lower than some of my gardening friends). I'd not do well in scrabble against my sister(s).
I'll admit that I only made it to 41 (which is several points lower than some of my gardening friends). I'd not do well in scrabble against my sister(s).
Friends of Scouting not so Friendly Afterall...
Voice of Utah posted about the salary for Great Salt Lake Council Executive Paul Moore.
I don't personally enjoy sending money to support exorbitant salaries, so I think I might just say no thank you, or pass along a note explaining why I'm not donating the next time the friend's of scouting drive comes along.
I'll happily buy scout shirts for boys who need them, and I'll do anything else I can to support scouts. I'm sure as a mother of three boys, I'll be sending plenty of money along to scout headquarters. But really, $215,000?
I thought there was some sort of salary cap on non-profits...
I don't personally enjoy sending money to support exorbitant salaries, so I think I might just say no thank you, or pass along a note explaining why I'm not donating the next time the friend's of scouting drive comes along.
I'll happily buy scout shirts for boys who need them, and I'll do anything else I can to support scouts. I'm sure as a mother of three boys, I'll be sending plenty of money along to scout headquarters. But really, $215,000?
I thought there was some sort of salary cap on non-profits...
Sunday, November 11, 2007
Lets go eat school lunch, e-coli is on the menu...
This story from the Chicago Tribune appeared in the Trib this morning.
WASHINGTON — One federal inspector calls it the "E. coli loophole." Another says, "Nobody would buy it if they knew." The officials are referring to the little-discussed fact that the U.S. Department of Agriculture has deemed it acceptable for meat companies to cook and sell meat on which E. coli, a bacterium that can sicken and even kill humans, is found during processing. The "E. coli loophole" affects millions of pounds of beef each year that tests positive for the presence of E. coli O157:H7, a particularly virulent strain of the bacterium. The agency allows companies to put this E. coli-positive meat in a special category—"cook only."
...Some cooked beef products end up in the National School Lunch Program, which is administered by the USDA. The agency bought 2.8 million pounds of cooked beef in 2006, according to USDA records.
WASHINGTON — One federal inspector calls it the "E. coli loophole." Another says, "Nobody would buy it if they knew." The officials are referring to the little-discussed fact that the U.S. Department of Agriculture has deemed it acceptable for meat companies to cook and sell meat on which E. coli, a bacterium that can sicken and even kill humans, is found during processing. The "E. coli loophole" affects millions of pounds of beef each year that tests positive for the presence of E. coli O157:H7, a particularly virulent strain of the bacterium. The agency allows companies to put this E. coli-positive meat in a special category—"cook only."
...Some cooked beef products end up in the National School Lunch Program, which is administered by the USDA. The agency bought 2.8 million pounds of cooked beef in 2006, according to USDA records.
School Reform To Really Leave No Child Behind
I posted this over at One Utah in a post about the fall of vouchers and what comes next. If we don't come up with some ideas (and likely, even if we do) vouchers will be back.
Of course we want to privatize public education! It works so well with health care. A few people are getting really rich and the rest of us are out of luck. Lets do that to our kids too!
Here’s my suggestion (besides smaller class sizes and paying teachers more)… There is a charter school near me that is grouping kids into “pods” for various subjects. If a student excels at reading but is struggling in math, the “pod” they are in for reading will include other students who also do well in reading, and their math “pod” will be with other children of a similar ability so that the teacher can focus on the needs of that group of students instead of trying to teach to everyone and leaving some students bored and some confused.
I think that implementing this type of ability grouping would require smaller class sizes, or at least some teaching assistants so that classes can be mixed and broken down into small groups of children.
As children master a concept as a group, the group can advance, as children master concepts individually, they can move throughout the different groups as needed. No on gets lost in the classroom, and no one sits bored because they have already mastered what is being taught.
It will be interesting to watch test scores at this particular charter school over the next few years.
Of course we want to privatize public education! It works so well with health care. A few people are getting really rich and the rest of us are out of luck. Lets do that to our kids too!
Here’s my suggestion (besides smaller class sizes and paying teachers more)… There is a charter school near me that is grouping kids into “pods” for various subjects. If a student excels at reading but is struggling in math, the “pod” they are in for reading will include other students who also do well in reading, and their math “pod” will be with other children of a similar ability so that the teacher can focus on the needs of that group of students instead of trying to teach to everyone and leaving some students bored and some confused.
I think that implementing this type of ability grouping would require smaller class sizes, or at least some teaching assistants so that classes can be mixed and broken down into small groups of children.
As children master a concept as a group, the group can advance, as children master concepts individually, they can move throughout the different groups as needed. No on gets lost in the classroom, and no one sits bored because they have already mastered what is being taught.
It will be interesting to watch test scores at this particular charter school over the next few years.
Saturday, November 10, 2007
Quote of the day
“When the people fear their government, there is Tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.”
– Thomas Jefferson
– Thomas Jefferson
Us and Them
I was reading this article on MSNBC about Nancy Pelosi and Iraq financing and troop withdrawl and thought to myself, how did we get this way? The House wants one thing, the president vetoes it, half of the senate wants to pass something, and the other half does all they can to block it. Why do we pay these people?
I'm registered as a democrat. I have family who are registered as republicans. Does it really matter? No one is ever going to agree with another person on 100% of issues 100% of the time, but partisan fighting does nothing to improve our country, or make life easier for the citizens here.
We can disagree on issues and how issues ought to be handled, but when the disagreeing prevents us from getting anything done, it's time to watch Mr. Rogers reruns and learn how to compromise and work together.
It seems like it's time to stop worrying about labels and start worrying about the health and safety of people.
I'm registered as a democrat. I have family who are registered as republicans. Does it really matter? No one is ever going to agree with another person on 100% of issues 100% of the time, but partisan fighting does nothing to improve our country, or make life easier for the citizens here.
We can disagree on issues and how issues ought to be handled, but when the disagreeing prevents us from getting anything done, it's time to watch Mr. Rogers reruns and learn how to compromise and work together.
It seems like it's time to stop worrying about labels and start worrying about the health and safety of people.
Interpretations
Connor has a great post on President Hinckley's War and Peace talk. I too have heard the same talk used to justify the war and to oppose it, so I really appreciated his thoughtful post.
On President Hinckley's War and Peace.
On President Hinckley's War and Peace.
A One-Issue-Voter
In the last presidential election, I know many people who voted based on one or two issues: Abortion and Same Sex Marriage.
Those were the driving factors behind choosing who to vote for. It seems that strategy really hasn't done much for us. I'm proposing a new one-issue.
Health Care.
Here's a letter I sent to my governor, senators and congressman.
I have been watching my health insurance premiums go up, as the level of service goes down. I watch friends who find out they have illnesses and are told they are no longer covered by insurance because their condition was preexistent (even though they had never had symptoms or been treated before).
People seem to think any sort of socialized medical care is evil, but what is truly evil is the system we have now, where people are going bankrupt because of medical bills, or people are suffering or dying because they can't afford treatment and CEO's are getting rich.
I don't have a problem with people making money doing their jobs, but when CEO's of insurance companies are making millions and those who the insurance is supposed to help are struggling to get the care they need, something is wrong.
Health care has to change. I'm at a loss as to what I personally can do about it, so I'm writing to everyone who represents ME in our government to tell them that access to quality health care for everyone is my number one issue. Too many voters in Utah have made abortion and same sex marriage their number one issues, those things are diversions from issues that we should really be working on.
If you want my vote in the next election, I expect something radical to make sure that all Utahns are taken care of.
I've been laughed at for suggesting we do something here like what Canada has. People can say what they want, but it works there, it should be able to work here too. We should be able to take care of each other. It sickens me that in Utah, a state where we pride ourselves on caring for the least of those among us, that we continue to go about business as usual, and let people slip through the cracks. If we don't see it happening, life is fine, right?
Those were the driving factors behind choosing who to vote for. It seems that strategy really hasn't done much for us. I'm proposing a new one-issue.
Health Care.
Here's a letter I sent to my governor, senators and congressman.
I have been watching my health insurance premiums go up, as the level of service goes down. I watch friends who find out they have illnesses and are told they are no longer covered by insurance because their condition was preexistent (even though they had never had symptoms or been treated before).
People seem to think any sort of socialized medical care is evil, but what is truly evil is the system we have now, where people are going bankrupt because of medical bills, or people are suffering or dying because they can't afford treatment and CEO's are getting rich.
I don't have a problem with people making money doing their jobs, but when CEO's of insurance companies are making millions and those who the insurance is supposed to help are struggling to get the care they need, something is wrong.
Health care has to change. I'm at a loss as to what I personally can do about it, so I'm writing to everyone who represents ME in our government to tell them that access to quality health care for everyone is my number one issue. Too many voters in Utah have made abortion and same sex marriage their number one issues, those things are diversions from issues that we should really be working on.
If you want my vote in the next election, I expect something radical to make sure that all Utahns are taken care of.
I've been laughed at for suggesting we do something here like what Canada has. People can say what they want, but it works there, it should be able to work here too. We should be able to take care of each other. It sickens me that in Utah, a state where we pride ourselves on caring for the least of those among us, that we continue to go about business as usual, and let people slip through the cracks. If we don't see it happening, life is fine, right?
Monday, November 05, 2007
Barack Hussein Obama: Oh what a evil man!
I got this email forward today:
Senator Barack Obama, Governor Bill Richardson, Senator Hillary Clinton and Ruth Harkin stand during the national anthem.
Barack Hussein Obama's photo (that's his real name)......the article said he REFUSED TO NOT ONLY PUT HIS HAND ON HIS HEART DURING THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, BUT REFUSED TO SAY THE PLEDGE.....how in the hell can a man like this expect to be our next Commander-in-Chief????
First off, I find it incredibly irritating that the email assumes we should all be outraged at Obama's name. If he has a name like that he's probably a terrorist, right? Maybe President Bush should just lock him up as a preventetive measure.
Second of all, what does the picture really tell us? It bothers me that things like this are forwarded soley to be divisive and lead people to jump to conclusions.
At Snopes.com I looked up the picture and discovered that Senator Obama wasn't refusing to say the pledge. The picture wasn't even taken during the pledge.
From Snopes: The photograph itself is real, one of several images of the Iowa steak fry event published by Time, and shows Barack Obama standing with his hands clasped just below his waist, while New Mexico governor Bill Richardson, New York senator Hillary Clinton, and Ruth Harkin (wife of Iowa senator Tom Harkin) stand with their hands held over their hearts. It's difficult to judge exactly what's going on from a single still image (it's possible, for example, that the photograph captured an instant just before or just after the national anthem was played, and Senator Obama had not yet raised his right hand or had just lowered it), but other accounts (including the following ABC News video of the event) indicate that the picture is as described:
(It's also not clear from the photograph or the video just what the candidates are looking at. The Flag Code advises that they should be "standing at attention facing the flag," but none of them is facing the flag displayed behind the platform on which they're standing. Presumably there's another flag off to the right of the platform, since most of them are facing that direction.)
Such an act would be consistent with Senator Obama's response when he was asked in October 2007 interviews about his not wearing a U.S. flag pin in his lapel, a gesture which he said he had abandoned in favor of actions he considered more meaningfully patriotic:
The truth is that right after 9/11 I had a pin. Shortly after 9/11, particularly because as we're talking about the Iraq war, that became a substitute for, I think, true patriotism, which is speaking out on issues that are of importance to our national security. I decided I won't wear that pin on my chest. Instead I'm gonna try to tell the American people what I believe what will make this country great and hopefully that will be a testimony to my patriotism.
Somebody noticed I wasn't wearing a flag lapel pin and I told folks, well you know what? I haven't probably worn that pin in a very long time. I wore it right after 9/11. But after a while, you start noticing people wearing a lapel pin, but not acting very patriotic. Not voting to provide veterans with resources that they need. Not voting to make sure that disability payments were coming out on time.
My attitude is that I'm less concerned about what you're wearing on your lapel than what's in your heart. And you show your patriotism by how you treat your fellow Americans, especially those who served. You show your patriotism by being true to our values and our ideals and that's what we have to lead with is our values and our ideals.
As for whether this incident was an "accident," whether Senator Obama habitually declines to perform the hand-over-heart gesture, or whether there's any particular meaning to the (non-)action, an Obama campaign spokesperson said:
Sometimes he does, sometimes he doesn't. In no way was he making any sort of statement, and any suggestion to the contrary is ridiculous.
We could not find any information substantiating the claim (made in the text accompanying some versions of the e-mailed photo) that Senator Obama "refused to say the Pledge of Allegiance."
Senator Barack Obama, Governor Bill Richardson, Senator Hillary Clinton and Ruth Harkin stand during the national anthem.
Barack Hussein Obama's photo (that's his real name)......the article said he REFUSED TO NOT ONLY PUT HIS HAND ON HIS HEART DURING THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, BUT REFUSED TO SAY THE PLEDGE.....how in the hell can a man like this expect to be our next Commander-in-Chief????
First off, I find it incredibly irritating that the email assumes we should all be outraged at Obama's name. If he has a name like that he's probably a terrorist, right? Maybe President Bush should just lock him up as a preventetive measure.
Second of all, what does the picture really tell us? It bothers me that things like this are forwarded soley to be divisive and lead people to jump to conclusions.
At Snopes.com I looked up the picture and discovered that Senator Obama wasn't refusing to say the pledge. The picture wasn't even taken during the pledge.
From Snopes: The photograph itself is real, one of several images of the Iowa steak fry event published by Time, and shows Barack Obama standing with his hands clasped just below his waist, while New Mexico governor Bill Richardson, New York senator Hillary Clinton, and Ruth Harkin (wife of Iowa senator Tom Harkin) stand with their hands held over their hearts. It's difficult to judge exactly what's going on from a single still image (it's possible, for example, that the photograph captured an instant just before or just after the national anthem was played, and Senator Obama had not yet raised his right hand or had just lowered it), but other accounts (including the following ABC News video of the event) indicate that the picture is as described:
(It's also not clear from the photograph or the video just what the candidates are looking at. The Flag Code advises that they should be "standing at attention facing the flag," but none of them is facing the flag displayed behind the platform on which they're standing. Presumably there's another flag off to the right of the platform, since most of them are facing that direction.)
Such an act would be consistent with Senator Obama's response when he was asked in October 2007 interviews about his not wearing a U.S. flag pin in his lapel, a gesture which he said he had abandoned in favor of actions he considered more meaningfully patriotic:
The truth is that right after 9/11 I had a pin. Shortly after 9/11, particularly because as we're talking about the Iraq war, that became a substitute for, I think, true patriotism, which is speaking out on issues that are of importance to our national security. I decided I won't wear that pin on my chest. Instead I'm gonna try to tell the American people what I believe what will make this country great and hopefully that will be a testimony to my patriotism.
Somebody noticed I wasn't wearing a flag lapel pin and I told folks, well you know what? I haven't probably worn that pin in a very long time. I wore it right after 9/11. But after a while, you start noticing people wearing a lapel pin, but not acting very patriotic. Not voting to provide veterans with resources that they need. Not voting to make sure that disability payments were coming out on time.
My attitude is that I'm less concerned about what you're wearing on your lapel than what's in your heart. And you show your patriotism by how you treat your fellow Americans, especially those who served. You show your patriotism by being true to our values and our ideals and that's what we have to lead with is our values and our ideals.
As for whether this incident was an "accident," whether Senator Obama habitually declines to perform the hand-over-heart gesture, or whether there's any particular meaning to the (non-)action, an Obama campaign spokesperson said:
Sometimes he does, sometimes he doesn't. In no way was he making any sort of statement, and any suggestion to the contrary is ridiculous.
We could not find any information substantiating the claim (made in the text accompanying some versions of the e-mailed photo) that Senator Obama "refused to say the Pledge of Allegiance."
Sunday, November 04, 2007
We all want what is best for the children
I'm moving, and my son will be in a different school's boundaries. We're keeping him where he is for the rest of the year. Moving causes enough trauma, so I'm trying to limit it where I can.
My dilemna has been what to do about next year. The "neighborhood" school that he should be going to next year is nowhere near our neighborhood, and he will have to ride a bus. The school also scores lower on the yearly testing than his current school, as well as both of the charter schools in the area. I'm thinking about applying to the charter schools, but I've tried to get him in before and his name wasn't drawn in the lottery, so who knows.
I could look into a private school, but I'm not aware of any local private schools that are so superior as to make them worth the extra money (vouchers or no).
I've kind of decided that he will be fine no matter where he goes to school. Partly because he's very bright, happy to be in school, and because we (his parents) are involved in his education. I think more parents, when finding themselves in a difficult situation with their children's education, instead of trying to find a better school, ought to first ask themselves how involved they themselves are in their child's education (but what do I know, my kids aren't struggling).
On the up-side, I discovered that the bus drop off is just at the corner of our street, three or four houses down.
My dilemna has been what to do about next year. The "neighborhood" school that he should be going to next year is nowhere near our neighborhood, and he will have to ride a bus. The school also scores lower on the yearly testing than his current school, as well as both of the charter schools in the area. I'm thinking about applying to the charter schools, but I've tried to get him in before and his name wasn't drawn in the lottery, so who knows.
I could look into a private school, but I'm not aware of any local private schools that are so superior as to make them worth the extra money (vouchers or no).
I've kind of decided that he will be fine no matter where he goes to school. Partly because he's very bright, happy to be in school, and because we (his parents) are involved in his education. I think more parents, when finding themselves in a difficult situation with their children's education, instead of trying to find a better school, ought to first ask themselves how involved they themselves are in their child's education (but what do I know, my kids aren't struggling).
On the up-side, I discovered that the bus drop off is just at the corner of our street, three or four houses down.
Thursday, November 01, 2007
Ugly Chickens
I went out this morning to check for eggs (there weren't any yet today, or any from yesterday), and it looked like a chicken had exploded. Feathers everywhere! The chickens are molting, and boy are they ugly...
Sunday, October 28, 2007
Mobility
The baby has two new tricks. Yesterday he started clapping, and recently he's started scooting to reach things. It's fun to be mobile.
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
Curbside Recycling in North Salt Lake
Awhile back there was a message from the NSL Mayor about garbage cans being like recycling cans because the garbage in Davis County (except for Bountiful I believe) goes to the burn plant, which sells energy to Hill Airforce Base. I'm glad that the burn plant is able to harness the energy from the garbage. I'm also glad that disposable diapers are not putting fecal material (that's poop) into landfills where it can leach into our water supply untreated.
I think calling garbage cans recycling bins is stretching things a bit though.
There must have been others who agreed with me, because on the NSL Website there is currently a poll asking residents if they are in favor of a 3.35/month utility bill increase for a city wide curbside recycling program. Even more interesting, is that of the the 73 votes (as of 10am this morning) 64 of them were in favor. $3.35 a month would save my family some money, since we signed up with with a private curbside recycling company at a price of $10/month.
I would like to know more about the city program. Who would operate it? Where would the recycled materials go?
I think calling garbage cans recycling bins is stretching things a bit though.
There must have been others who agreed with me, because on the NSL Website there is currently a poll asking residents if they are in favor of a 3.35/month utility bill increase for a city wide curbside recycling program. Even more interesting, is that of the the 73 votes (as of 10am this morning) 64 of them were in favor. $3.35 a month would save my family some money, since we signed up with with a private curbside recycling company at a price of $10/month.
I would like to know more about the city program. Who would operate it? Where would the recycled materials go?
I Love You Batman
Today A and I were walking to school to pick up J. A said, "I'm Batman, and you're my boss, because batman has a boss to tell him what to do".
"Okay", I say.
"Hey Boss?"
"What Batman?"
"I love you boss."
"I love you too batman."
Then a few minutes later as we crossed the street, he held my hand and said, "Batman always holds his bosses hand to cross the street".
Later, getting ready for bed, batman became Jeepman (because his batman pj's were dirty, but his jeep pj's were available).
"Okay", I say.
"Hey Boss?"
"What Batman?"
"I love you boss."
"I love you too batman."
Then a few minutes later as we crossed the street, he held my hand and said, "Batman always holds his bosses hand to cross the street".
Later, getting ready for bed, batman became Jeepman (because his batman pj's were dirty, but his jeep pj's were available).
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
I am a Democrat because I am a Mormon, not in spite of it.
Thanks to Frank for the link to Harry Reid's talk at BYU.
If you haven't read it, take a few minutes to do so.
Harry Reid at BYU
If you haven't read it, take a few minutes to do so.
Harry Reid at BYU
Tuesday, October 09, 2007
Tasty Lunches
Yesterday a photographer in our ward, along with the bishop, bishop's wife and two nice sisters came over to bring me some treats (and to take a picture of it- it's for enrichment night or something, I can't remember- I heard treat and said okay to the picture).
One of the sisters brought some homemade flan. I'm not a huge fan of flan, but I'm going to try some because it was a gift. The other sister is from Japan, and she brought battered and fried vegetables and a few pot-sticker type things (I think they're fried won tons). I'm having them for lunch. This picture isn't exactly what they looked like, but you get the idea. I ate the fried won tons first, then the vegetable things (what are they called, I'm having a mind blank, even though I just googled for the image!). Some were onions, and some were green beans and carrots in fried little pile-o-vegetable-goodness.
(are you jealous Adam?)
(I just realized I don't have a "food" label. How can that be!)
Monday, October 08, 2007
Hateful Comments and Being Neighbors
As far as local news sources, I prefer the Salt Lake Tribune. I read online, and occasionally check out the Deseret Morning News website, but for the most part, I like the Trib better. By now, I should have learned to stay away from the online comments. It's a guarantee that anytime there is an article that is even remotely related to the LDS church (maybe someone in the article had a cousin's friend's uncle who was a member) the comments that follow are numerous and hateful.
What's the point? If the LDS church bothers someone so much, why would they spend so much time thinking about it?
I know there's a frustrating level of mixing of church and state because so many of our state officials get "carried away" and forget that their positions are to represent the residents of utah, not the members of the church.
Glendon Brown over at One Utah has a really good post about the liquor laws and how mormons and non-mormons talk around and around but never really talk to each other.
It would be really nice if we could start talking to each other instead of at each other. It would also be nice if LDS people could remember that not everyone wants to be preached to, no matter how good the intentions, and if non-LDS people could be content to simply not be a member and not constantly attack the church or it's members for their apparent short-commings. (I realize that not all people fall into the two groups I just listed, but the people that don't aren't the ones causing problems.)
I recently received a new list of Relief Society sisters to visit. There was one sister whom I had never met before, so I stopped by one day and left a plate of cookies since no one was home. I tried again a couple weeks later and her husband answered the door. He was holding a beautiful baby girl, and from what I saw, he looked like a pretty cool guy, about the same age as my husband. There aren't a ton of neighbors our age, so I was happy to see one. Unfortunately he and his wife didn't want to be visited and he yelled at us until we apologized for bothering him and left.
I really didn't mean to bother him. I didn't want to bother him. Perhaps there needs to be a better way of letting people know if someone with records in the church doesn't want to be visited.
I would like to be friends with the family. It seems really sad that because we belong to different churches, that we can't be friends. I really don't like perpetuating the views that LDS people only want to be friends with non-LDS people if they can somehow get a convert out of the deal. I don't care what religion these people are, they're neighbors and it would be nice to be friends.
I just have to get over my fear of getting yelled at again and introduce myself as a neighbor who is not there to convert them, but just to be neighborly, and hope that they listen long enough to hear what I have to say before yelling.
If someone doesn't want to be my friend because they don't like me, that's okay, but I'd like to not be dismissed just because I'm mormon. I'm sure lots of non-mormons feel the same way.
What's the point? If the LDS church bothers someone so much, why would they spend so much time thinking about it?
I know there's a frustrating level of mixing of church and state because so many of our state officials get "carried away" and forget that their positions are to represent the residents of utah, not the members of the church.
Glendon Brown over at One Utah has a really good post about the liquor laws and how mormons and non-mormons talk around and around but never really talk to each other.
It would be really nice if we could start talking to each other instead of at each other. It would also be nice if LDS people could remember that not everyone wants to be preached to, no matter how good the intentions, and if non-LDS people could be content to simply not be a member and not constantly attack the church or it's members for their apparent short-commings. (I realize that not all people fall into the two groups I just listed, but the people that don't aren't the ones causing problems.)
I recently received a new list of Relief Society sisters to visit. There was one sister whom I had never met before, so I stopped by one day and left a plate of cookies since no one was home. I tried again a couple weeks later and her husband answered the door. He was holding a beautiful baby girl, and from what I saw, he looked like a pretty cool guy, about the same age as my husband. There aren't a ton of neighbors our age, so I was happy to see one. Unfortunately he and his wife didn't want to be visited and he yelled at us until we apologized for bothering him and left.
I really didn't mean to bother him. I didn't want to bother him. Perhaps there needs to be a better way of letting people know if someone with records in the church doesn't want to be visited.
I would like to be friends with the family. It seems really sad that because we belong to different churches, that we can't be friends. I really don't like perpetuating the views that LDS people only want to be friends with non-LDS people if they can somehow get a convert out of the deal. I don't care what religion these people are, they're neighbors and it would be nice to be friends.
I just have to get over my fear of getting yelled at again and introduce myself as a neighbor who is not there to convert them, but just to be neighborly, and hope that they listen long enough to hear what I have to say before yelling.
If someone doesn't want to be my friend because they don't like me, that's okay, but I'd like to not be dismissed just because I'm mormon. I'm sure lots of non-mormons feel the same way.
Wednesday, October 03, 2007
Be on your guard people....
Liberals in Washington are coming after you and your parental choice.
I was talking to a friend the other day and she asked if I was in favor of vouchers or not. Honestly, I don't think vouchers are going to severely damage our public schools. I do think that the Utah voucher program is seriously flawed. If you claim to want to give parents a choice in education, make sure that the vouchers go to people who because of finances, don't currently have a "choice" not to people who can already afford to send their kids to private schools.
The radio ads that warn us of liberals in Washington make me simultaneously feel like laughing and screaming. They'd be hilarious if I didn't think that way too many people believe them.
Anyway, I told my friend what I thought about vouchers and she said that she felt like the anti-voucher group was telling people what to think instead of presenting reasons and letting people think for themselves. My comment was, "and how are the pro-voucher ads any better?"
So, this election, lets all remember to get past the rhetoric and scare tactics and use our brains when we decide how to vote. Or, if you don't have a brain, borrow mine.
I was talking to a friend the other day and she asked if I was in favor of vouchers or not. Honestly, I don't think vouchers are going to severely damage our public schools. I do think that the Utah voucher program is seriously flawed. If you claim to want to give parents a choice in education, make sure that the vouchers go to people who because of finances, don't currently have a "choice" not to people who can already afford to send their kids to private schools.
The radio ads that warn us of liberals in Washington make me simultaneously feel like laughing and screaming. They'd be hilarious if I didn't think that way too many people believe them.
Anyway, I told my friend what I thought about vouchers and she said that she felt like the anti-voucher group was telling people what to think instead of presenting reasons and letting people think for themselves. My comment was, "and how are the pro-voucher ads any better?"
So, this election, lets all remember to get past the rhetoric and scare tactics and use our brains when we decide how to vote. Or, if you don't have a brain, borrow mine.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)