Sometimes weird thoughts pop into my head. The other day, as we were saying a blessing on our dinner, the thought occurred to me - what exactly are we asking God to do when we say "please bless this food?"
I can understand giving thanks for providing the food. I can understand blessing a person - that they may be filled with the spirit. I can understand blessing a home or a temple - that the spirit may reside therein. But, what are we expecting from blessed food? Are we asking that the spirit reside in the food that we are about to consume? Isn't that a bit creepy - we're going to eat the spirit? Are we asking God to change the chemical and/or biological makeup of the food so that it is more nourishing than unblessed food? Why can't we just give thanks for the food? Why do we have to ask that it be blessed?
It's just one of these things we repeat by rote without ever really thinking about what we are saying - at least I've never really thought about it before.
Growing up outside of the LDS church, we didn't bless the food - we said grace. I remember once, as a small boy, we were at a family reunion in Pennsylvania. They asked my uncle - a methodist minister - to say grace. We all bowed our heads. He then said "Grace" - "OK, let's eat." Not that he was an irreverent man - I just think he felt that there was a time and a place - and a family reunion was neither the time nor the place for a long drawn out dissertation in the form of a prayer - I can think of some Mormon's I've known who could take some advice in that regard.
I remember a family I met while serving on my mission who invited us over one Sunday for dinner. When it came time to say the blessing on the food - they got dessert out of the refrigerator and set it on the table during the blessing - then they put it back in the refrigerator until we finished dinner. They also took the lids off of the salad dressing bottles during the prayer. So, I guess blessings are not able to permeate refrigerator doors or plastic lids to reach the food.
Personally, wouldn't it be much more efficient f we would just bless the grocery store? Then we could say a quick prayer of thanks before we eat it - think of all of the time we could save.
Ron Jones authored a book titled "No Substitute for Madness" where he tells of a social experiment he initiated in 1968 while teaching high school in Palo Alto, California.
When a social studies student asked about the German public's responsibility for the rise of the Third Reich, saying "it couldn't happen here", Jones decided to try and simulate what happened in Germany by having his students "basically follow instructions" for a day. He turned his class into an efficient youth organization, which he called the Third Wave. Some students were informers, and some were told they couldn't go certain places on campus. He insisted on rigid posture and that questions be answered formally and quickly.
The experiment, initially scheduled for one day, stretched into five. "It was strange how quickly the students took to a uniform code of behavior. I began to wonder just how far they could be pushed," Jones wrote.
To his surprise, Jones found that students recited facts more accurately in this authoritarian environment and that he had no discipline problems. One previously lost soul suddenly had a role in the school--he became Jones' bodyguard.
The students got very involved in the Third Wave, many sporting black armbands to signify their membership. Others actively proselyted other students. Banners appeared around the school, and announcements were made over the PA system. "... by the third or fourth day, there was an obvious explosion of emotion that I couldn't control." wrote Jones.
But soon the experiment began spinning out of control. There was betrayal among teens who had been close friends since childhood when one would refuse to conform. Jones wrote "I kept hoping someone would walk in and ask what was going on, so I could point to them and say, 'That's right, look what you're doing, you've become just like fascists' and end it. But it didn't happen."
At a Friday assembly, five days into the experiment, Jones announced, "We can bring (the nation) a new sense of order, community, pride, and action. Everything rests on you and your willingness to take a stand," he told students.
As one, the students shouted, "Strength through discipline!"
After a long silence, Jones began to speak. "There is no such thing as a national youth movement called the Third Wave. You have been used. Manipulated. Shoved by your own desires into the place you now find yourselves."
He showed a movie of Hitler at the Nuremberg rally. The students and teachers saw that they had only too readily adopted many of the behaviors they were witnessing on the screen. They realized the possibility that it could happen here.
Someone recently commented on my blog about her experience in California
"The realization that not only am I a pariah for voting No, but that I'm not allowed to talk about it, "preach what I believe," shook my core foundation. I'm not out to ruin the church or mislead its people. I just really disagree here and it struck me weird that I couldn't talk about it without people telling me I had little faith or I was going against the Prophet."
As I read this, I recalled watching a PBS special dramatizing the events described in Ron Jones book "No Substitute for Madness". And, I find myself wondering if proposition 8 has spawned our own Mormon version of the Third Wave. With everyone shouting "no gay marriage" and "protect the traditional family" as one voice. And, those who are not in lock step with the movement having their faith and commitment called into question, perhaps even being ostracized, with long time friendships and family relationships being torn apart.
"Mormongate" is starting to show up in the press. And not just the gay media - the mainstream media is starting to pick up on it.
The LDS church is embroiled in a PR disaster. Mormon historian Jan Shipps calls it the perfect storm. Some events are not of its doing - such as the Mitt Romney run for the presidency, or the FLDS fiasco which some, erroneously, associate with Mormon's. Other events are a direct result of its overt actions - such as involvement in getting proposition 8 passed. But, all of the events in the past year are conspiring together to form the perfect storm.
Now, we've always had our enemies - people who protest whenever we open a new temple or at general conference. But, it's always been fringe elements who are doing the protesting - people that few take seriously. The difference now is that mainstream society is starting sit up and notice that something doesn't quite seem right. There is the old adage "where there's smoke, there's fire" - and right now there is lots of smoke. And, the LDS church is doing an abysmal job at putting out the fire.
As an organization, the LDS church is very private - disseminating information very carefully and succinctly. It is also very image conscious. These characteristics have worked very well for the LDS church over the years - until now. People are asking lots of uncomfortable questions - questions which are going unanswered; and, our image is being dragged through the mud. The very traits which have worked so well for us are now working against us.
We can handle fringe elements telling us we're evil. We can handle other churches telling us that we're not Christian. We can weather these storms quite easily - we've been doing it since Joseph Smith's time, it's ingrained into our culture.
But now, as a result of events over the past year or so, we're faced with the perfect storm. While we fancy ourselves as being mainstream - more and more, with our fundamentalist views, the world is relegating us to the fringe elements of society. Where we were once admired as being pro-family - we are now only viewed as being pro-[certain kinds of families].
Our doctrine, teachings, and culture are being carefully scrutinized in ways we're not accustomed to. And, it's becoming more and more difficult to defend our policies that just seem petty and silly - such as boys can't wear earrings and God only likes white shirts.
Even members from within are beginning to sit up and question some of our practices and policies - wondering if we are truly being Christ-like in our treatment of certain members of society.
Can the LDS church weather out this perfect storm? Or are we at the cusp of a new era in Mormonism? To survive, are we going to have to rethink what we're doing and where we're going? Have we reached a point where the old ways just won't work anymore?
I won't claim to be smart enough to know the answer. But, I believe this perfect storm is not going to dissipate any time soon. And, I find myself wondering, and fearing, how many of our brothers and sisters are we going to lose before we admit to ourselves that we need to chart a new course?
Lostby Abelard Enigma
Today, we lost another brother He did not abandon us But we abandoned him And, with his departure A part of each of us goes with him We all become somewhat less than what we were Because no one reached out to embrace him To accept him for who he is Instead, he was ignored along with others like him Pretending that he and his soul mates don't exist Forcing him, and others, to hide their true selves Living in constant fear that their secrets will be discovered Is it any wonder that we lost yet another brother? How many more will be lost Before we realize that these losses diminishes each of us? How much more can we be diminished before we too are lost?
The whole explanation boils down to "we were supposed to file by January 31st, 2009, and we met the deadline - so what's the problem?"
First of all, there is a certain arrogance with the phrase "corrects erroneous news reports". Most of us are not versed in the finer details of campaign finance laws. We look at the information at hand and form opinions. The information available to us prior to yesterday is that the LDS church previously filed donations 'in kind' of approximately $2000 - then they submitted a final report detailing out approximately $190,000 of donations 'in kind'. Why wait until you've been blasted in the media before issuing a press release? Why not be a little more proactive and issue a news release simultaneously with the final filing? This is, obviously, a very sensitive topic. Were they truly naive enough to think that they were going to file this and nobody would notice the discrepancy? Did they sincerely believe that no explanation was needed?
It is also disingenuous to point out that their in-kind (non-monetary) contribution is less than one half of one percent of the total funds (approximately $40 million) raised for the “Yes on 8” campaign. The fact is that most of the $40M came from Mormon's. And, it's safe to assume, that most of those Mormon's would probably not have made a donation if the church hadn't ask them to "do all you can to support the proposed constitutional amendment by donating of your means and time" in conjunction with its fundamental principal of "follow the prophet". So, while the church did not make significant contributions, according to the legal definition - it is directly responsible for the majority of the contributions received by the YesOn8 campaign.
The LDS church feels that same sex marriage is morally wrong. They rallied their forces and were successful in passing proposition 8 defining marriage as only being between a man and a woman. They averted a potential catastrophe that was threatening the very foundation of family by redefining marriage. Families in California are now safe from all of those gay couples who wanted their own committed monogamous relationships to be recognized as such. So, why are they now hiding behind legal mumbo jumbo? Why not stand up and be proud of their accomplishment?
In the days following November 4th, Jan Shipps, president of the Mormon History Association (and, interestingly, a non-member), said in an interview: "I think they probably are really astonished that there are demonstrations at temples all over the nation"
I agree with her. I believe church leaders were truly surprised and caught off guard by the back lash following November 4th. I think they truly do not understand the anger the GLBT community has towards Mormon's right now. In their minds, they were simply 'standing up for what they believe' and cannot comprehend why others will not respect that. They don't seem to understand the difference between passively standing up for what you believe - and aggressively going on the offensive to ensure that others comply with what you believe.
They just do not "get it", nor will they even acknowledge that they don't "get it" - and that is what saddens me most.
The decision of the LDS church to get involved in the proposition 8 battle in California has me feeling unsettled; although, it's been in the days since the election on November 4th, 2008 that I'm beginning to realize the extent to which I am troubled.
Why am I feeling distressed?
The LDS church preaches a position of political neutrality. LDS church policy explicitly states that church buildings are not to be used for political purposes - yet the LDS church was actively involved in a political battle in California - and now we learn that church facilities were utilized in this political campaign.
The LDS church asserts that churches and religious organizations are well within their constitutional rights to speak out and be engaged in the many moral and ethical problems facing society - yet, it is not politically involved in other moral and/or ethical issues - even other countries and states with similar measures on their election ballot are ignored.
Our 11th article of faith states: 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- yet, we do not grant this privilege to those who believe that same sex marriage is ordained of God.
One of our hymns has the phrase: "True to the truth for which martyrs have perished" ("True to the Faith," Hymns #254)- yet LDS church leaders participated in the spread of half truths and lies in the days leading up to November 4th, 2008, such as when Elder David A. Bednar, while speaking to a group of young adults, suggested that passage of proposition 8 would result in the church losing its free speech right to preach against gay marriage.
One of the temple recommend questions asks: Are you honest in your dealings with your fellowmen? - yet, we find out this week that the LDS church had had failed to report donations to the tune of $190K - nearly a hundred times more than what they previously reported.
Am I wrong here? Does anything I stated above need to be corrected? Am I taking anything out of context? How can I resolve these conflicts? Why can't just let this go and go back to a state of blissful ignorance?
I'm not sure I know what to believe anymore - and therein lies my conflict: Once I start to believe a modern day prophet can be wrong about one thing - it opens the door to them being wrong about other things.
President Wilford Woodruff taught that a prophet will never be allowed to lead the Church astray. But why? Doesn't the prophet have the same free agency that the rest of us enjoy in this earthly plane of existence? Is this teaching supported by scripture? How do we know President Woodruff isn't leading us astray with this teaching? Isn't it imperative that we all receive our own personal witness and not rely on blind faith?
I suppose some will proclaim that I'm being lead astray by Satan - the master of lies. Others will suggest that my eyes are truly beginning to open to the real truth.
But, I just don't know what to think anymore . . .
By choosing to become politically involved in the proposition 8 battle in California - the LDS church has drawn a line in the sand for all of us - worldwide. But, right now, I feel like I am straddling that line - and I need to decide which side of the line I belong on. The answer is not as clear cut as many would have us believe.
I had setup my DVR to record Prayers for Bobby. It's really quite simple, you find the show you want to record in the online guide and press the record button on the remote - it automatically sets the start time and duration for the recording based on the information in the guide. There really isn't any way to screw it up. Find show - press record.
Well, tonight we sat down to watch Prayers for Bobby. According to our DVR, it recorded 2 hours of Prayers for Bobby. Problem is, we got the last hour of Prayers for Bobby and the first hour of the show that followed it.
I've never seen this happen before. We've had other problems, such as power outages in the middle of a recording. But, we've never had it set the wrong start time. What's odd is that I had also recorded the Matthew Shepherd Story which aired earlier on Lifetime - and it recorded just fine.
Technology is wonderful - when it works
I checked the schedule on Lifetime - and Prayers for Bobby is not scheduled to be aired any time soon (at least in the next two weeks, which is how far out the online schedule goes). I could always watch it on the internet - but I'd really rather sit on my couch and watch it on my TV.
I haven't had a chance to watch the movie yet. It's on the DVR; but, I'm waiting for a time when my wife and I both have a couple of hours to sit down to watch it. I'll post my thoughts after I watch it.
For those who do not have access to Lifetime, they have posted the full movie on thsir website (in multiple parts)
Ray Boltz is a former contemporary Christian music singer-songwriter, whose songs often told stories of faith and inspiration. In 2004 he confessed to his wife of 33 years that he is gay. They've since divorced; but, he maintains a good relationship with his former wife and children.
A few of the blogs I follow are using some sort of new comment form that looks like this
My problem is, this form doesn't seem to work with Firefox - my browser of choice. I select "Google Profile", type in my comment and press "Post Comment" - and nothing happens. If I open the blog in Internet Explorer then it works as expected, prompts me to enter my google userid/password and post my comment.
My question is: Is this just me? Is anybody else able to use Firefox with this type of comment?
It's just a pain to have to bring up IE just to write a comment - and why doesn't it remember my userid and password? I really really have to want to make that comment; more often than not, I won't bother.
Or, maybe that's viewed as a good thing - maybe Abelard's comments are all that appreciated.
Anyway, I just wanted to check to see if this is a common problem - or just a problem for me. And, if anybody has ideas for how I can get this type of comment to work with the Firefox 3.0.5 browser.
I've got my DVR setup to record Prayers for Bobby on Saturday night.
You could also check your local public library to see if they have the book.
Hey,
Great post about Lifetime’s new movie “Prayers for Bobby.”
I wanted to send along additional information about the movie including movie stills, trailer, and interview information.
Don’t miss Lifetime’s new book-to-movie premiere of Leroy Aaron’s “Prayers for Bobby” January 24th at 9PM ET/PT. [8PM CT]
Academy Award nominee and Golden Globe winner Sigourney Weaver stars in this emotional true story about a 1970's religious suburban housewife and mother who struggles to accept her young son Bobby's homosexuality. What happens to Bobby is tragic and causes Mary to question her faith; ultimately this mom changes her views in ways that she never could have imagined.
Check out some photos from the movie and sneak peeks here (they are also attached [below]):
We have a new president of the united states. A young, charismatic, handsome, president - who happens to be black. Although, for me personally, the color of his skin is irrelevant - I'm more interested in his values and policies.
Of course, this means the republicans have lost control of the white house. Prior to this they lost control of both the house and the senate.
So, what are they doing about it?
The republicans in Utah are fussing because restaurants, like Chili's, having bottles of alcoholic beverages in view of restaurant patrons, including children - GASP!!!
I'm a conservative - but I'm not sure I want to admit to being a republican anymore. I'm ashamed of my political party. They need to return to republican values of less government. Regulating whether restaurants can have bottles of liquor on display is more government - not less. If you don't like having your children exposed to bottles of liquor then don't eat at those restaurants. It's as simple as that. If enough people agree with you then restaurants will get the hint and hide their bottles of liquor. If you're in a minority too small to make a difference then just deal with it - don't expect the government to step in to save you and your family.
Of course, the democrats aren't doing any better.
With all of their complaining about the war, the economy, health care, etc. They introduced bill H.R. 4040, the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA), which was signed into law on August 14, 2008 by President Bush and goes into effect on February 10, 2009. It requires retailers to test for lead content in any product intended for use by children under 12, including toys, clothes and jewelry.
Sounds good -right? Anything we can do to protect our children is a good thing - right?
The way the law is written, each specific product (with a unique SKU) has to be tested. So if you have 3 different products all out of the same materials & produced the same, you have to pay for testing on all 3 products. For example, if you have a tank top shirt, a short sleeve tee shirt, and a long sleeve tee shirt - all out of the same fabric & materials with the only difference being in the sleeve length, you test each of these products individually, making testing repetitive and expensive.
Small home based businesses have to conform to the law the same as large scale manufacturers. This will effectively put many such businesses out of business.
The same is true for thrift shops, eBay sellers, etc. Many may have to close their doors since they won't be able to sell used childrens clothes and toys without it being properly tested - not to mention the impact this will have on the people of less fortunate circumstances who depend on these stores.
And, what about the rest of us? We will be facing higher prices since the cost of lead testing will have to be passed onto the consumer.
Our stake relief society is currently involved in a service project making baby quilts which are being donated to a local woman's shelter. After February 10th, this type of service project will become a thing of the past.
This is a prime example of knee jerk reaction legislation that, on the surface, feels good - but is ill conceived and will end up hurting more people than it helps. One of the co-sponsors of the bill is saying that the bill is being interpreted too strictly - although, that doesn't speak very highly of the people who wrote the bill if it is open to such a wide range of interpretation. This is why we need less government - because most of the time they just screw it up and make things worse than before.
Obama is going to save us from all of this - right? Somehow, I'm not instilled with confidence that things are going to get any better.
Even though I didn't vote for him, I will support Obama - he is, after all, my president. Although, I disagree with him on a number of political issues, I consider him a person of honor and integrity - unlike my feelings towards the previous democrat to occupy the oval office. And, who knows, maybe he does have the chutzpah to actually make a difference. For all our sakes, I certainly hope so.
Plus, since I'm, apparently, one of the very few here in the queerosphere who didn't vote for Obama - that gives me exclusive rights to complain - correct???
Prayers for Bobby - True story of Mary Griffith whose teenage son committed suicide due to her religious intolerance, leaving her struggling to make peace with herself. Based on the book of the same title by Leroy Aarons. Stars Sigourney Weaver.
Premieres on Lifetime cable network, January 24 at 9:00pm (8:00pm central) - trailer
As much as it pains me - I find myself agreeing with Rev. Al Sharpton
It amazes me when I looked at California and saw churches that had nothing to say about police brutality, nothing to say when a young black boy was shot while he was wearing police handcuffs, nothing to say when the they overturned affirmative action, nothing to say when people were being delegated into poverty, yet they were organizing and mobilizing to stop consenting adults from choosing their life partners. There is something immoral and sick about using all of that power to not end brutality and poverty, but to break into people's bedrooms and claim that God sent you. -- Rev. Al Sharpton
Tom Hanks has also weighed in while speaking at the premier party for Big Love, on which he is the executive producer
“The truth is this takes place in Utah, the truth is these people are some bizarre offshoot of the Mormon Church, and the truth is a lot of Mormons gave a lot of money to the church to make Prop-8 happen,” he told Tarts. “There are a lot of people who feel that is un-American and I am one of them. I do not like to see any discrimination codified on any piece of paper, any of the 50 states in America, but here's what happens now. A little bit of light can be shed and people can see who's responsible and that can motivate the next go around of our self correcting constitution and hopefully we can move forward instead of backwards. So lets have faith in not only the American, but Californian constitutional process.” -- Tom Hanks,
In the days following the election, I blogged about some of the protests against the LDS church and explored the rhetorical question: Are we reaping what we have sown? It's been 2 months - and the protests are still going on. Not with the same fervor that we saw in the days immediately following the election - but often with better organization and purpose.
For example, on December 20th, there were Light Up the Night for Equality candlelight vigils at shopping malls around the nation. I was impressed by the description and instructions for the event which said
we are not protesting ... This is a peaceful candlelight vigil in the spirit of the holidays ... We will stay silent unless asked a question, we will not yell, instigate, or bear signs ... We do not want to negatively impact any of the parking issues ...
There have also been food drives, toy drives, etc. It seems cooler heads are starting to organize - realizing that angry protests aren't the answer. While they may provide some emotional satisfaction for the moment - they are really not that effective in the long run. For example, the numerous boycotts which have been called for businesses where the owner donated to the YesOn8 campaign have been largely been ineffective (with just a couple of exceptions) - e.g. Utah tourism is doing as well as could be expected given the current economy. Tickets for the Sundance film festival in Park City, Utah are selling strong - even though it's at a Cinimark theater, which was also targeted for a boycott.
The question on my mind is: How much am I going to support these peaceful protests and vigils? Because, the fact is, I am a member of the greater GLBT community - as is everyone else in the Mormon queerosphere. Regardless of our status with the church; regardless of how we choose to refer to ourselves - be it 'gay' or 'struggling with same gender attraction' - we all share a common trait with our queer brothers and sisters; and, we all benefit from increased societal acceptance.
On the other hand, there are still many out there reacting out of hysteria and making some ridiculous claims. For example, there is a YouTube video making the rounds titled Prop 8 - Did Mormons Go Too Far? which claims that the LDS church made far more donations to the prop 8 campaign than reported and suggests that it should lose its tax exempt status. The facts are
With the exception of a few thousand dollars, the vast majority of donations to the YesOn8 campaign came from private citizens. Granted, many of these were Mormon's who believed they were being obedient to a commandment from God as proclaimed by his prophet - the president of the Mormon church. But that doesn't change the fact that they were still private donations.
The call centers that the LDS church used were already in existence and was staffed by volunteers - there was no cost that can be directly attributed to the YesOn8 campaign
Any meetings on this topic, including the satellite broadcast, were under the auspices of preserving marriage. The same is true for the web site produced by the LDS church, preservingmarriage.org. Again, there was no cost that can be directly attributed to the YesOn8 campaign
Say what you will about the LDS church - but the reality is that the people running it are really smart. You can be sure that everything that was said and done was carefully scrutinized by a team of lawyers to make sure they were staying on the right side of the law.
The reason proposition 8 passed in California is because the GLBT community was over confident. For a long time, the NoOn8 campaign was running something like 20 points ahead in the polls; and, they were caught off guard when churches got heavily involved late in the campaign. They were not able to react fast enough and change their strategy to counteract the half truths and falsehoods being proclaimed by the Christian right (which many Mormons also bought into).
All of these calls for IRS investigations and protests at temples and churches is wasted energy - and is counterproductive to achieving increased societal acceptance.
I've publicly stated that I disagree with the LDS church's involvement in the YesOn8 campaign. But, frankly, I'm getting sick and tired of the LDS church being demonized so much by the gay press. They complain about the falsehoods and half truths that were used by the YesOn8 campaign - yet they are guilty of the very same in their attacks on the LDS church.
I know I'm in a "sanctioned" marriage and none of this directly impacts me as it does others. But, can't we turn the other cheek? Isn't being Christ-like - and beating the Christian right at their own game - far more effective in the end? When the dust settles, what is going to have a greater impact on society? Productive members of society - who happen to be gay - making an honest and sincere effort to educate the public? Or a bunch of bitchy queens?
Last week, my wife asked me if there were any movies I wanted added to our NetFlix queue - I said I would like to see Mama Mia. She said she wanted to see it too - so it was added to our queue and came to our mailbox a few days ago. Last night we were able to watch it.
Now, I have to confess that, prior to watching Mama Mia, I really didn't know anything about it. I didn't know it was set on a greek island. I didn't know about the story line of a young girl getting married who didn't know who her father was; so, reading her mothers diary she narrowed down to three guys and sent them invitations to her wedding (this all comes out in the first 5 minutes of the movie - so I'm not really giving anything away). All I really knew is that it was a Musical using songs from Abba and that it had Pierce Brosnan in it and he doesn't sing very well - but that the movie was still pretty good.
With that backdrop, here is a conversation we had last night as we were getting ready for bed
Me:Mama Mia wasn't as good as I wanted it to be Her:I was surprised you even wanted to watch it at all, it's a chick flick Me:I heard it was good Her:No, you heard it was gay Me:That isn't true Her:Sure it is ... Her:You heard it had lots of half naked boys running around
I left it at that. Although, I suspect my silence confirmed her suspicions.
Is this how it's going to be? Is everything I say or do going to be viewed through a gay lens?
Truth is, I really didn't know about all the shirtless guys running around in swim trunks (although, I will confess, it was a pleasant surprise). I didn't know that there would be a hint of gay romance (don't want to give anything away, so I'll leave it at that).
And, the truth is, I like musicals. I was about 9 years old when The Sound of Music came out. I remember going to see it about six times - in an era when it was unusual to go see a movie more than once. Some of my all time favorite movies include Fiddler on the Roof, Little Shop of Horrors, and Amadeus (not really a musical, per se, but it has lots of music in it). I liked the rock opera Jesus Christ Superstar. On my mission, on P-days, while the other elders were playing basketball at church, I would often go into the chapel and practice the organ - I liked to crank it up and play the JESUS CHRIST - SUPERSTAR opening part (I didn't know the rest of the song). In high school, I had the soundtrack for Hair, (although I've never seen the stage play or film) and used to listen to it all the time (much to the consternation of my father). I have fond memories of watching The Wizard of Oz with my family. I liked The Music Man and Labyrinth. More recently, I liked Hairspray and the High School Musical trilogy. When we went to see High School Musical 3 in the theater, afterwards I was still in the mood for a musical, so we came home and watched Enchanted on DVD.
Mind you , I don't like all musicals - I've never been overly thrilled with Singing in the Rain or The King and I. And there are some I've never bothered to sit down to watch, like Phantom of the Opera, Grease, or West Side Story. Although, I am looking forward to Wicked coming out on film - at least, I hope the rumors are true.
Is liking musicals gay? Perhaps, I suppose it could be my gay side exerting itself.
Or, perhaps, since accepting I am gay - I am simply less inclined to try to hide this pleasure of mine. Maybe the wall I've built up around myself is starting to crumble a bit - and my true character is starting to emerge. Maybe that is what's scaring my wife. I don't feel like I've changed - I feel like I'm the same person I've always been. But, perhaps, she is perceiving a change it me - and she feels like she doesn't know me as well as she thought she did.
On that note, I watched the season opening for American Idol last night. I never even watched American Idol until last year, and then I didn't get involved until they were down to the final 10. This is the first time I've ever watched the initial tryouts, auditions, or whatever they are called.
My son asked "why are you watching this" to which my wife answered "it's dads new favorite show" [did I detect a hint of sarcasm and disgust in her tone?]. He watched it for a few minutes and then got up and left. This morning, my wife told me to go ahead and watch it tonight if I wanted and not feel like I should wait for her.
btw, I wouldn't call it my favorite show. But, she only has herself to blame. She is the one who kept insisting I watch it with her last year. I resisted and resisted until I finally caved in and watched it one night, and then the next and the next - and now I'm hooked. She is the one responsible for my American Idol addiction.
Is Ryan Seacrest gay? I know rumors of his preferences have been circulating for years; and, I know he vehemently insists he is straight - even having a former girlfriend come to bat for him. But last night, when bikini girl said she wanted to make out with him, he said words indicating he would like that (but wasn't sure if it was allowed) - but his body language sure seemed to indicate he wasn't too keen on the idea.
And, do these people seriously not realize how bad they are? Frankly, the show had all of the realism of professional wrestling. But, I'll probably watch it again tonight, with a morbid sense of curiosity - sorta like gawking at an accident on the road. I felt sorry for some of the contestants, even feeling embarrassed for them. But, I have to remind myself that they know beforehand what they were getting into. They know how mean the judges can be, they know it's all going to be filmed and that their face could be plastered on national TV. So, I feel a little sorry for them, but not too sorry.
In other news, was anyone else disappointed in the series finale for Stargate Atlantis? Seriously, I liked the show, but after that pitiful ending, I kinda don't miss it.
The second half of season 4 (and final season) of Battlestar Gallactica - final 10 episodes - is scheduled to begin airing on Friday.
I was hoping they'd figure out a way to bring him back from the dead in season 4 (as a flashback, a dream, a cylon, or whatever) - but according to the rumor mill, it ain't gonna happen.
25 Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me. 26 But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children’s bread, and to cast it to dogs. 27 And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters’ table. 28 Then Jesus answered and said unto her, O woman, great is thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour.
...only two options are ... available. On the one hand, we can do what the first Christians did. We can continue to discuss this matter in Christian love with one another and if it seems good to the Holy Spirit and to us, we can remove both our rejecting attitudes and policies and announce to the world that for us all means homosexual people, too. Since there are many who have been taught from the Bible by the church that such acceptance is unthinkable, we will all need to be sensitive to those whose religious conditioning will not allow them to embrace the change.
On the other hand, if the church cannot believe the Spirit is saying this for our time, then it should quit being so sloppy in its table manners and stop allowing crumbs to fall where those not qualified to receive God’s meal might happen upon it. If white Christians really wanted to keep black people enslaved, they should never have allowed them to sit in the balcony of their churches and hear the gospel. If Christian men want to keep women subordinate, they should not only insist women keep silent in church, as the Bible clearly commands, but also insist they not go to church at all, lest they hear the gospel and be set free. And if the church wants to keep gay and lesbian people from sitting or serving at the Lord’s table, it should not drop them any crumbs from the table or otherwise allow them to overhear the gospel.
Why? Because the gospel is the power of God for the salvation of all who believe, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. Any underclass persons who eat its crumbs, even from the floor, will be transformed and empowered in such a way that they will finally find their place at the table of God. It is to that table that Christ now invites us all, regardless of sexual orientation. Amen.
Delivered to a congregation of the United Methodist Church - but apropos to the LDS church as well. Note that he does not suggest that the church needs to change its doctrine - only its rejecting attitudes and policies.
Sometimes weird thoughts pop into my head. The other day, as we were saying a blessing on our dinner, the thought occurred to me - what exactly are we asking God to do when we say "please bless this food?"
