An article at National Review brings out some interesting statistics here in the USA and other countries that have long had civil unions/marriages for homosexuals: First, very few homosexuals are actually getting married here or elsewhere.  Second, in Norway and elsewhere, gay men have a 50% greater divorce rate than heterosexuals. Third, in Norway, lesbians have an astonishing 167% higher divorce rate than heterosexuals, while it is very high in other nations (partially due to the fact that women in all relationships tend to file for divorce more often).

These stats suggest that the importance of marriage really is not reflected in the homosexual community overall.  To grant them equal consideration may actually diminish the importance of the marriage covenant, turning it ever more into just another “right” that has no personal responsibility connected to it.

Perhaps it is time to refocus marriage on what made it important in the first place: progeny, covenant, til death do you part (or all eternity, if LDS).

Giving marriage to another group that does not really seem to take it as serious as it needs to be, seems like the perfect way to destroy its real meaning.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/299944/gay-divorcees-charles-c-w-cooke#

Note the Scientific American article stating that regulations from EPA will effectively end the development of new coal-fired plants and eventually force current ones out of business.  Hey, we can replace them with cheap oil, right?  I mean, coal only manages 23% of our nation’s fuel/energy.

The good news is that we’ll be able to export all of that coal to other nations to pollute the atmosphere with, while our energy production goes down, and gas/oil prices jump up to replace coal. And of course, we’ll have to get more of that oil elsewhere, because we aren’t allowed to pump/refine it here. And the transportation of oil to USA, and transportation of coal elsewhere will also add to cost and pollution.

So, who wins?

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-end-of-coal-burning-in-the-us

Recently, someone asked me why the Church does not have a set of specific doctrines to neatly create a broad theology and foundation for all we believe. Why don’t we have an established theology, developed by great philosopher-prophets like St Augustine, Origen, More or Aquinas?

In pondering it, I believe the LDS Church intentionally does not have a set theology, but only a few core doctrines, leaving room for  lots of personal revelation for individuals to seek God for themselves.  While Mormons do not have a specific theology, some Mormons DO theology. Check out saltpress.org as an example of this.  There are LDS philosophers, BTW.  James Faulconer, Joseph Spencer, Adam Miller, Blake Ostler, Clark Goble and others are excellent philosophers.  You can find many of them blogging about philosophy and the Church, as well as articles and books from several of them (like at saltpress.org).

The real problem isn’t philosophy, but philosophy that becomes doctrine or dogma.  When we establish creeds that are imperfect, then we close off the heavens and refuse to let them shower new revelation down upon us.  So the “philosophies of men, mingled with scripture” becomes bad when we establish such as dogma, rather than keep it as theory.  For the full gospel to be revealed, it requires that we keep an open mind to the things God wishes to reveal to us. It is possible that some LDS dogma of the past (Curse of Cain, etc) may have kept our members and leaders from receiving revelation on the priesthood until 1978, when most members were ready to hear and receive such a revelation and negate the wrong dogmatic claims made for over a century.

We’ll remember that the Lord told Joseph Smith not to join any other churches, because their creeds were an abomination to Him. Why were they an abomination, when most of us would agree with at least some/many aspects of the creeds?  Because, even if mostly true, they closed off the heavens to mankind, keeping them from receiving purer and more correct truths from heaven.

So, philosophy is not necessarily bad.  Doing theology isn’t necessarily bad.  Creating creeds and dogmas IS bad, as it nails the coffin shut on receiving any new light.

Lesson 19 is now on my blog.  I did some close review of the text this time, bringing up questions and thoughts of things not explained in the story line. Hope you like it.

http://joelsmonastery.blogspot.com/2012/05/book-of-mormon-lesson-19-none-could.html

Read there / comment here

CATO notes that austerity measures in Europe have not worked up to this point, but caused a deeper recession.  The reason?  The austerity measures have been against private business and investment.  For example a tax increase on first time home buyers implemented in Italy has simply slowed down spending and investment.

So, now Italy recognizes that they need to cut spending by the government. Their new austerity package mostly focuses on cutting their government by several billions of Euros.

Here in the USA, we have also found that austere impositions against the private sector just slows down the economy.  Threat of punishment, more taxation, or regulation keeps businesses from expanding.  Such also keeps over $2 Trillion of money overseas.  Why did Apple pay less than 10% tax? By moving lots of its money overseas in legal loopholes.

Reality is, Medicare and Social Security are going bankrupt.  It is easier to fix them now, rather than wait until they go over the brink. Do we tell 80 year olds now that they cannot have a hip replacement, or do we tell their grandchildren that we cannot afford to deliver a baby or perform a life saving operation on a young person later?

Spending more money has not fixed the economy. As insistent as Paul Krugman is, the world is not going to forever lend us money to spend on everything and anything. Of course, he possibly gave the same advice to Enron. And his advice of borrowing more and more, and entering into greater and greater debt worked until everyone found out that the Emperor had no clothes, and the collapse came swiftly afterward.

It is time we return to small government and free markets.  Let’s insist our Congress and President go in this direction, or replace them.

CATO article