Friday, July 24, 2015

Borrowing the Purest Heart

Recently a lot of things about the need to control our thoughts have come to my attention. We need not face this struggle (or any other struggle to do what God has commanded) alone—we can get help, grace, power beyond our natural abilities to assist us. When the Lord gives commandments, He also prepares ways to get those things done.

Why do we struggle sometimes to keep our thoughts pure? The answer is simple—because our hearts naturally want impure things. An appetite for unrighteous sex, violence, raucous music, and so many other things that should not occupy our minds is what keeps them there. If our hearts did not yearn for these things or find them appealing, they would slough off from our minds like fluff off a dandelion. Little children do not struggle with impure thoughts because their hearts are pure. Impure images might be presented to them, but they do not stick in their minds because there is no way for these thoughts to get root in their innocent hearts.

Think of God. He sees everything everywhere, good and bad. Does seeing all that iniquity and evil corrupt Him or make Him bad? No, because His heart is pure. He is sickened, saddened, and angered by our sin, but none of it appeals to Him; everything that might tempt us repels and disgusts Him. He does not need to “manage” impure thoughts because He has no impure feelings.

This is good news for God and little children—what about the rest of us, who are neither ignorant nor perfectly pure in heart? The most common response in the Church to this and other problems is to “work harder.” We should snap our wrists with rubber bands, hum hymns to ourselves, distract ourselves with good things, and other reliance upon our own strength, wisdom, and abilities (what Nephi calls the cursed “arm of the flesh”). We should row our boats until we are exhausted. It seems no one is aware that we are allowed to put up our sails and catch the ever-present breeze as well.

The At-One-ment

Whether it is our heads or our hearts that are full of uncleanness, how can we get divine help to clean things up inside?

We can approach the question a little bit differently, by asking a seemingly unrelated question:

The New Testament tells us about what happened when Jesus worked out the Atonement on our behalf. We get clear eyewitness testimony of what happened. Yet the greatest explanations of WHY all that suffering was necessary, and WHAT we can do to take advantage of it, are found in the Book of Mormon, not the New Testament.

The authors were able to see those events in vision (Nephi describes seeing the birth, ministry, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ in vision; see 1Ne. 11-12). But the authors of the New Testament bore witness of “That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life…

“That which we have seen and heard declare we…” (1Jn. 1:1, 3). Yet the best, most powerful discourses about why Jesus suffered and died for us, and how to take advantage of it, are found in the Book of Mormon.

Why were the Book of Mormon authors able to write so powerfully about the Atonement? Aside from visions and the promptings of the Spirit, there is another possibility—these men all worshipped at Temples like the ones Moses and Solomon tried to establish, and these Nephite Temples were not corrupted when they were in use. The Tabernacle or Old Temple model taught worshippers through emblems they could touch, taste, see, smell, and hear, about the future Atonement of Christ, and instructed them in the various ways we can become at one with Him. “And we did observe to keep the…law of Moses…

“And I, Nephi, did build a temple; and I did construct it after the manner of the temple of Solomon…” 2Ne. 5:10, 16). The Temple of Solomon, the Temple of Herod, and even the Tabernacle of Moses each fell into apostasy at some point. The Nephites had more consistent and legitimate spaces for worship, where the rites were carried out properly.

“And, notwithstanding we believe in Christ, we keep the law of Moses, and look forward with steadfastness unto Christ, until the law shall be fulfilled.

“For, for this end was the law given; wherefore the law hath become dead unto us, and we are made alive in Christ because of our faith; yet we keep the law because of the commandments” (2Ne. 25:24-25). Then comes the verse we quote so often:

“And we talk of Christ, we rejoice in Christ, we preach of Christ, we prophesy of Christ, and we write according to our prophecies, that our children may know to what source they may look for a remission of their sins” (2Ne. 25:26). Part of the context for Book of Mormon teachings on the Atonement is that Old Temple milieu, the place of sacrifices and offerings and anticipatory, symbolic blood atonements.

What does all this have to do with having a pure heart and clean thoughts? I am not suggesting that we slaughter animals—the Lord did away with blood sacrifices as a legitimate form of worship (see 3Ne. 9:19). Nevertheless, we can use our imaginations and still derive legitimate knowledge about how the Atonement works from reading about the rites and sacrifices performed in the Old Temples.

Book of Mormon prophets learned through the symbolism of blood and smoke and fire about the real thing; we can, too.

Amulek taught, “Behold, I say unto you, that I do know that Christ shall come among the children of men, to take upon him the transgressions of his people, and that he shall atone for the sins of the world; for the Lord God hath spoken it.

“For it is expedient that an atonement should be made; for according to the great plan of the Eternal God there must be an atonement made, or else all mankind must unavoidably perish; yea, all are hardened; yea, all are fallen and are lost, and must perish except it be through the atonement which it is expedient should be made.

“For it is expedient that there should be a great and last sacrifice; yea, not a sacrifice of man, neither of beast, neither of any manner of fowl (the Nephites had seen these sacrifices in their Temples); for it shall not be a human sacrifice; but it must be an infinite and eternal sacrifice” (Alma 34:8-10).

Nephi constantly refers to Jesus Christ in his vision in 1Ne. 11-14 as “the Lamb,” and “the Lamb of God.” For anyone familiar with the old blood sacrifices, this phrase would be loaded, and communicate a wealth of symbolism and information. Instantly it reminds us of the balance between justice and mercy, innocence suffering while the guilty go free, release from debt, blood atonement, death, vicarious suffering, and trading identities.

That last part may not be as familiar, and yet this part of the old rituals, trading identities, can help us to understand the Atonement.

Offering

When a patron at the Old Temple or at the Tabernacle had committed certain sins he was required to bring a specific kind of animal, depending on the sin, to the altar as an offering to atone for his sins.

Before the animal was taken from him by priests to be washed and butchered according to the rules, the man who had brought the animal for a sin offering would place his hands on the head of the animal.

What did this gesture symbolize? An inaccurate view would interpret this as wiping off his sins onto the animal, like wiping mud onto a rag to clean one’s hands. This is not what we are doing either with Jesus—He did not just take our sins away from us. Placing one’s hands on the head of a sacrificial animal represented TRADING IDENTITIES with that animal.

The name, and identity, and thus the guilt, of the one bringing the sin offering were transferred to the animal. But the identity, hence the innocence, of the animal were also transferred symbolically to the one offering it. The sinner would enjoy the safety of his new identity as an innocent “lamb,” while he watched the lamb, now carrying his guilt, suffer and die in his place, bearing the punishment he deserved.

This is a powerful image, and it has power to teach us more fully what Jesus did for us, and what He offers us.

“…there can be nothing which is short of an infinite atonement which will suffice for the sins of the world.

“Therefore, it is expedient that there should be a great and last sacrifice…then shall the law of Moses be fulfilled…

“And this is the whole meaning of the law, every whit pointing to that great and last sacrifice; and that great and last sacrifice will be the Son of god, yea, infinite and eternal.

“And thus he shall bring salvation to all those who shall believe on his name…” (Alma 34:12-15).

Why the fixation on “his name?” We do not perform sacrifices, but we still use emblems of bread and water each week, and witness that we are willing to take the NAME of Christ onto ourselves. Remember, we are not just passing our sins to Him—the point of the animal sacrifices was to adopt, to borrow, the identity of an innocent party to free us from the demands of justice.

At One

We can be at one with Jesus in a similar way—He took our names, our guilt, the punishments we deserve upon Himself when He suffered and died for our sins. We benefit from this sacrifice whether we are aware of it or not, but to enjoy more benefit from it, we must take His name, His identity, and what He earned, onto ourselves, and do it more fully, all the time.

We are imperfect, yet we can borrow a portion of the Spirit bigger than what we have earned: we “may always have his Spirit to be with [us]” (D&C 20:77). If you ask a member of the Church the way to have the Spirit, the most common response would be “keep the commandments.” Our problem is that we break the commandments instead. We need the Spirit in order to receive enough grace to keep the commandments; if the only way to get the Spirit is through perfect obedience, we are sunk. By taking the name of Christ onto ourselves, we also get an unearned infusion of His Spirit to prime that cycle of obedience and receiving the Spirit. All He asks initially is that we be WILLING to take His name upon us, WILLING to always remember Him, and WILLING to obey. Being willing is not the same as actually doing, but He has promised we can have the Spirit for maintaining that internal state of willingness, regardless of how poor the results of our initial earnest attempts may be.

“I am Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who was crucified for the sins of the world, even as many as will believe on my name, that they may become the sons of God, even one in me as I am one in the Father, as the Father is one in me, that we may be one” (D&C 35:2). How can we be more “one” with another person than by adopting His name and enjoying what He earned, while He adopts our identities and suffers in our place? We can regain our status as worthy sons and daughters of God by borrowing that worthiness from Jesus Christ, and we can also grow into it as we progress spiritually.

“But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed” (Isa. 53:5). He does not just suffer for our sins; we can enjoy the peace He earned through His perfect obedience. He does not just take our places in suffering; He offers us a chance to sit in His chair, to wait in His seat and enjoy the benefits.

His Name

Even without sacrificing sheep, we are still commanded to take the name of the real Sacrifice, Jesus Christ, upon ourselves.

The idea of taking His name onto ourselves was taught to Adam by an angel. Adam obeyed “commandments, that they should worship the Lord their God, and should offer the firstlings of their flocks, for an offering unto the Lord. And Adam was obedient unto the commandments of the Lord.

“And after many days an angel of the Lord appeared unto Adam, saying: Why dost thou offer sacrifices unto the Lord? And Adam said unto him: I know not, save the Lord commanded me.

“And then the angel spake, saying: This thing is a similitude of the sacrifice of the Only Begotten of the Father, which is full of grace and truth.” What does all this have to do with Adam, or us?

“Wherefore thou shalt do all that thou doest in the name of the Son, and thou shalt repent and call upon God in the name of the Son forevermore” (Moses 5:5:-8).

Even without blood sacrifices, we still observe this last rule—repent and act in all things in the name of the Son.

We perform all our ordinances and close all our prayers “in the name of Jesus Christ.” Why are we pretending to be Jesus? Because that is our role, our privilege, our responsibility, and our ticket to heaven—taking the name, hence the identity and merits (what He deserves) of Jesus onto ourselves.

Left to our own efforts, capacities, abilities, strength, wisdom, obedience, and good intentions, however valiant our attempts, we are sunk. “…all are hardened; yea, all are fallen and are lost, and must perish except it be through the atonement which it is expedient should be made” (Alma 34:9). Unless we start learning to borrow Jesus’ name, His merits, His powers, His Spirit, His identity, and start acquiring His nature from Him, we will not be worthy to cross the line separating us from God.

Pure Hearts

We started out talking about pure thoughts and feelings, and digressed a mile from the typical discourse on the subject. Let us now see what kind of “practical application” all this stuff about adopting name of Jesus has in real life.

Experience creates serious doubts in any observer that we humans are able to make ourselves holy through our own best efforts, even when they really are our best.

Jesus said, “…I am able to make you holy…” (D&C 60:7). Just as a child who wants a good haircut must sit still and otherwise cooperate with the barber, so we must learn what Jesus requires of us before He will make us holy. I have never heard anyone say that in heaven we will still be plagued by feelings of lust or greed or revenge or delight in violence as entertainment. We all agree those things will be absent in us by the time we get to heaven. When exactly will they be removed between now and then?

Humble + Faith

We have already mentioned the futility of working harder to clean our hearts; we can change our behaviors, but not our natures. But the Lord does have power to change nature.

Elder Bednar taught, “The gospel of Jesus Christ encompasses much more than avoiding, overcoming, and being cleansed from sin and the bad influences in our lives; it also essentially entails doing good, being good, and becoming better. Repenting of our sins and seeking forgiveness are spiritually necessary, and we must always do so. But remission of sin is not the only or even the ultimate purpose of the gospel. To have our hearts changed by the Holy Spirit such that ‘we have no more disposition to do evil, but to do good continually’ (Mosiah 5:2), as did King Benjamin’s people, is the covenant responsibility we have accepted. This mighty change is not simply the result of working harder or developing greater individual discipline. Rather, it is the consequence of a fundamental change in our desires, our motives, and our natures made possible through the Atonement of Christ the Lord. Our spiritual purpose is to overcome both sin and the desire to sin, both the taint and the tyranny of sin” (Pure Hands and a Clean Heart, Oct. 2007 General Conference, my emphasis added).

While all efforts at obedience are good, we are not that good at obedience, and so we need a boost to get the portion of the Spirit necessary to be cleansed from the desire for sin. If perfect obedience is not the prerequisite for this change, what is?

“Now this is the commandment: Repent, all ye ends of the earth, and come unto me and be baptized in my name, that ye may be sanctified by the reception of the Holy Ghost, that ye may stand spotless before me at the last day” (3 Nephi 27:20, my emphasis added). This change comes by reception of the Holy Ghost, in a greater portion than we are often used to.

The Book of Mormon teaches plainly that humility and faith in the Savior are the keys to receiving this greater portion of the Spirit, one we have not really earned, but which the Lord gives us anyway because of deepened humility.

“Nevertheless they did fast and pray oft, and did wax stronger and stronger in their humility, and firmer and firmer in the faith of Christ, unto the filling their souls with joy and consolation, yea, even to the purifying and the sanctification of their hearts, which sanctification cometh because of their yielding their hearts unto God” (Hel. 3:35, my emphasis added).

“And it came to pass that I, Nephi, being exceedingly young, nevertheless being large in stature, and also having great desires to know of the mysteries of God, wherefore, I did cry unto the Lord; and behold he did visit me, and did soften my heart that I did believe all the words which had been spoken by my father; wherefore, I did not rebel against him like unto my brothers.” And why did the Lord soften Nephi’s heart?

“And it came to pass that the Lord spake unto me, saying: Blessed art thou, Nephi, because of thy faith, for thou hast sought me diligently, with lowliness of heart” (1Ne. 2:16, 19, my emphasis added).

“And if men come unto me I will show unto them their weakness. I give unto men weakness that they may be humble; and my grace is sufficient for all men that humble themselves before me; for if they humble themselves before me, and have faith in me, then will I make weak things become strong unto them” (Ether 12:27, my emphasis added).

“And ye shall offer for a sacrifice unto me a broken heart and a contrite spirit. And whoso cometh unto me with a broken heart and a contrite spirit, him will I baptize with fire and with the Holy Ghost, even as the Lamanites, because of their faith in me at the time of their conversion, were baptized with fire and with the Holy Ghost, and they knew it not” (3Ne. 9:20, my emphasis added).

These are just a few examples of the same principle taught over and over again. If our behavior is imperfect, the best way to correct it is to come to Christ in deep humility with faith in Him. He can then increase the portion of the Spirit we receive from Him, which increases the effects of the Atonement on our hearts and minds. This spiritual rebirth enables us to exhibit improved behavior, as well as having purer desires and thinking purer thoughts.

This is far different from working harder at controlling bad thoughts—Jesus wants to pull our spiritual weeds up by the roots instead of merely taming them or trimming them. The deeper our faith and humility, the more effectively He can cause this change in us. This “mighty change” will probably only last as long as we keep our faith and humility at those deeper levels—it cannot be a quick, convenient one-time, one-shot offering. It must last a lifetime if we want that rebirth to be permanent, too.

It is not easy to stay so humble all the time, but it is much easier to be very humble than it is to manage a swarm of ungodly thoughts and feelings swirling in our heads and our hearts. It is smart to learn when we are supposed to work ourselves into exhaustion, and when the Savior can save us instead. He not only saves us from damnation, but from unnecessary frustration and weariness.

“And this I know, because the Lord hath said he dwelleth not in unholy temples, but in the hearts of the righteous doth he dwell; yea, and he has also said that the righteous shall sit down in his kingdom, to go no more out; but their garments should be made white through the blood of the Lamb” (Alma 34:36).

We are so quick to applaud the application of human effort in our attempts to resist evil that we often miss the miracle of being made holy by Him instead. The sad part is that those efforts, however valiant, are incapable of earning salvation on their own. Only Jesus “merits” (deserves) salvation and exaltation through His own efforts, and we must rely on that success, not our merits, to have the same things He enjoys:

“Wherefore, how great the importance to make these things known unto the inhabitants of the earth, that they may know that there is no flesh that can dwell in the presence of God, save it be through the merits, and mercy, and grace of the Holy Messiah, who layeth down his life according to the flesh, and taketh it again by the power of the Spirit, that he may bring to pass the resurrection of the dead, being the first that should rise” (2Ne. 2:8).

We do not expect to resurrect ourselves; why should we expect to be able to change our own hearts? That is His job. Ours is to be humble, exercise faith, and receive that change—to receive the name of Jesus Christ, then His nature, His heart, as a replacement for ours.

Thursday, July 9, 2015

Family

We can look at the arc of life, and see the influence of family on an individual throughout her or his life. Should ideal conditions be the rule, or the exception? We all hope for the best, so we can examine the ideal. It is not that difficult to achieve.

The ideal conditions for entry into mortal existence are birth into a family consisting (at least) of one’s biological mother and father. Circumstances do not always allow for this ideal, but it is still the best condition. Having both sources of one’s DNA present in the home provides ample identity, psychological clothing many Americans lack. Seeing a man and a woman, two disparate creatures in form and thought and appetite, exemplifying mutual tolerance and flexibility and adaptation to each others’ needs, cannot help but benefit their children. Learning how to get along with others who see things in a different way is a critical life skill.

Shooting words at children is far less effective than displaying actions in front of them. When a child sees parents exchanging affection, all is right in that child’s world. The quality of parents’ relationships determines many things about how their children will develop on a fundamental, emotional level. Are others trustworthy? How should I treat them? What goals should I have in life? What should my marriage and family look like? A close look at the relationship of a person’s parents will explain a lot about how he or she answers these questions.

As long as Mom and Dad stay together, it provides an emotional sense of security, as well as very tangible, demonstrable physical and financial security, for a child. Dad’s physical presence wards off potential threats. The sense of identity created by parents’ strong, loving relationship deters kids from falling prey to enticements like gang membership and drug addiction. A host of social ills can be traced back to absentee fathers; when Mom and Dad stay together many problems their children face are halted at their roots.

It is a sacrifice for Mom and Dad to stay together. Yes, there is joy and love and romance as well, but marriages are contracted at altars, those ancient places of sacrifice, for a reason. Family is not just about “me, me, me.” It entails enduring discomfort on each others’ behalf. When a man and a woman stay together to raise their children and care for each other, and ignore temptations to wander, commit adultery, or play incessantly, they do more than benefit their kids—they benefit everyone their kids will contact in the future. Telling kids to do the right thing and sacrifice for others is not enough; more often than not altruism must be exemplified before they will adopt it. The sacrifices involved in marriage and child-rearing pay dividends for society at large.

As kids turn into teens, the intense burden of sexuality slams onto their shoulders. What will they do with all that instinctive energy? Get pregnant? Impregnate someone else? Have sex indiscriminately? Get tattoos and piercings and listen to horrendous noisy music to drown out the incessant tapping of conscience? Having parents with a healthy sexual relationship, who discuss procreation and sex openly and frankly with their children, protects those children in two ways. First, it protects them from shame, which leads to acting out in secret and hiding sexuality. Second, it gives them a sense that everything they are experiencing is normal, and that self-restraint is healthy and completely possible, too.

In young adulthood, body and brain catch up with sexuality, and then marriage becomes a realistic option. If sex is taken out of its family context, viewed primarily as self-indulgent recreation, then it is more likely to happen during teen years, without any lasting commitment. When sex is seen as a central element of family life, between two life-long committed, exclusive partners, then kids will wait until they are adults. They will see the reality that the main point of sex is begetting children, and see this as a blessing, not just an inconvenience or a burden. Sacrificing on behalf of others is already ingrained in people who watched their parents exemplify it.

As children start having their own children, the first generation becomes grandparents, happy babysitters. Who are these wrinkled, gray strangers who smell funny and dole out candy? Grandkids do not care, as long as love and goodies keep appearing. They see the kindness between their parents and their grandparents, and instinctive inklings about intergenerational love begin to form in their minds. They will understand fully such strong love and devotion themselves when they enter young adulthood, and later learn about parental feelings from their own experience.

Roles reverse as Grandma and Grandpa age. The original caregivers need care themselves. Children and grandchildren come back to visit and share love. The luckiest kids, children or grandchildren, get to sit with Grandma and Grandpa and listen to their stories about past family members. This serves to further strengthen a sense of identity, mission, purpose, and potential in successive generations.

Finally comes the funeral, a family reunion where first, second, third, and maybe even forth generations come to cry and rejoice and reunite and remember and bond with each other.

Does all this seem oversimplified, unrealistic, and idealized? Does it sound like a fairy tale to your jaded, cynical, modern mind?

It is not unrealistic. I have watched all of these things unfold in my own extended family. It is within reach of anyone who has a body healthy enough to procreate, and a spouse who wants these things, too. Maybe it seems unrealistic because the main ingredient, aside from sex and love and following pre-programmed genetic tendencies, is the steady application of one unpopular virtue: altruism, or self-sacrifice.

Begetting children instead of preventing them or aborting them? Sacrifice. Staying with your spouse instead of divorcing or cheating or shopping around? Sacrifice. Raising children instead of putting them up for adoption? Sacrifice. Dealing with frustrated, frustrating teens? Sacrifice. Paying for a reception, giving those kids away when they find the right person? Sacrifice. Babysitting grandkids? Sacrifice. Caring for aging parents? Sacrifice. “Great Big Self” has to take a back seat in order to achieve all this idealistic stuff I have described. Loyalty begets sacrifice, and sacrifice begets more loyalty, which strengthens trust and creates a safer space for love.

As I said, I have seen it all in real life, in my own family.

Motivation

Whether a bride and groom begin life together asking, “What’s in it for me?” or place each others’ needs above their own, if their relationship is to continue for very long the primary question they must soon begin to ask is, “How can I help my spouse and kids?” The best thing for children is to be raised by the woman and man who physically begot them. Even with a selfish start, longevity in marriage and family comes from a willingness to put others first.

What happens when we base our definitions of marriage and family on less altruistic motives? What happens when marriage licenses (de facto adoption/parenting licenses) are distributed on the basis of selfish concerns rather than asking what will be most beneficial for the next generation?

Though traditional male-female marriages may or may not begin with self-serving attitudes, they tend to serve the next generation far better than contrived substitutes.

To declare that male-male, or female-female relationships are an adequate replacement for two biological parents is to officially detach sex from its family context, and from accountability for the use of procreative powers. Why be wise or unselfish when deploying the power to procreate? Why expect biological parents to be actual parents? A handful of people in America’s highest court have overturned the will of the majority, and answered those questions with a resounding (if inadvertent) “It Doesn’t Matter.” The demand that biological mothers and fathers assume responsibilities and roles of parenthood has been officially curtailed.

The opposite of the altruistic attitude necessary for keeping families stable is a self-serving, what’s-in-it-for-me mentality. Those who are possessed with this mindset are unprepared and unwilling to step into those inconvenient, even embarrassing roles. In the absence of real biological parents, whom do we assign? If we want to mimic nature, we would assign another loving male and female to assume responsibility of orphaned kids.

Instead, some want a man and a man, or a woman and a woman, to take over that role originally filled by a man and a woman together. What was the leading question that prompted this change? Was it, “what is best for the kids?” No, it was, “what will make the adults feel good about themselves?” It may make homosexual partners feel good to be given parenting licenses by the government, but it will not be as good for their children (by extension, all of society) as to have both biological parents present, married, and loving each other in front of the next generation. Whenever guardians are male-male, or female-female, necessarily one or both biological parents are missing from a child’s life. (Or the child has different groups of guardians sharing confusing custody arrangements, which is selfishness unfurled.) The argument is for equality, but equality really does not exist as far as procreation and parenthood are concerned.

Now the desires of adults take precedence over the needs of children.

Misapplying labels, calling any group a “family,” may cover it with cuddly, warm feelings, but it will not endow it with the same strength that a traditional nuclear family has. People have many rights, but the instant “reproductive rights” and parenting enter the picture, we are talking about creating a new person who has rights as well. Children have the right to be raised by their biological mother and father.

Marriage between a man and a woman is still the best source for healthy, well-adjusted, law-abiding citizens. No institution contrived by governments or science can adequately replace it (though there have been a few failed attempts—separating children from parents makes them more susceptible to government brainwashing. A subservient populace is the stock ambition of wicked and perverse political leaders in all generations).

Modern prophets and Apostles have given this caution: “…we warn that the disintegration of the family will bring upon individuals, communities, and nations the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets” (The Family: A Proclamation to the World, 1995). You might think of this as a threat that fires and earthquakes and other natural disasters will destroy us if we tamper with God’s definition of family. This may be true, but it is also likely that self destruction will be the main “calamity” we face initially. Deliberately depriving children of one or both biological parents is asking for trouble.

“We call upon responsible citizens and officers of government everywhere to promote those measures designed to maintain and strengthen the family (married couples begetting kids) as the fundamental unit of society” (The Family: A Proclamation). The rights and entitlements of adults end where the needs of children, of the next generation, begin. We are now conducting a massive social experiment at their expense, to serve relatively few adults who want to enjoy the label of “equal,” whether or not what they have to offer as parents actually is equal. Dead-beat dads and mothers who want to put children up for adoption have been given tacit approval to neglect their parenting responsibilities.

An unwillingness to ask tough questions about the future, shortsightedness, is also a characteristic of selfishness. Does it matter whether biological parents raise the next generation? Does it matter what we call a “family?” Is any group of people qualified to replace a traditional nuclear family and raise other people’s children? What will be the impact and long-term ramifications of redefining marriage and family this way? In all the war of words about legalizing homosexual versions of marriage, few (if any) bothered to ask these pertinent, legitimate questions. We will all be forced to deal with the answers to these questions, the consequences, whether or not we are prepared, and whether or not the answers are pleasant or convenient. We do not live in a vacuum; I feel the right to express myself on this subject because everyone, even the unborn of the next generation, will ultimately be affected by it.

“Truth will cut its own way” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 313), meaning that we need not shove the truth in other people’s faces—inevitable consequences will force everyone to acknowledge truth eventually. But I would rather not get in the way when it starts cutting.

“The devil has great power to deceive; he will so transform things as to make one gape at those who are doing the will of God” (Teachings, p. 227). It is in the misapplication of virtues that we find the greatest support for gay marriage. Virtues such as open-mindedness, willingness to try new things, generosity, kindness, and empathy are all likely motivators for its acceptance. But there is a hierarchy of virtues, and concern for what is best for the next generation should trump concern for the immediate desires of adults.


If we see the primary purpose of marriage as serving adults, then denying marriage licenses to anyone will seem cruel. If we see the primary purpose of legally recognizing marriage as assigning guardianship for the next generation, as creating a safe landing place for kids before they are even born, and ultimately serving society at large, then limiting the legal definition of marriage to one man and one woman will not seem strange or bigoted at all.