I've read many an application of religious principles in the last few years, from the bizarre to the beautiful. (Ah, the joys of the bloggernacle!) The Baron wrote an excellent series on science & religion earlier this year, refuting the 'it can only be one or the other' fallacy. I hadn't realized just how deeply some people out there are firm in their position that anything that says the earth is more than 6500 years old is a ploy by Satan to steal our souls and destroy all faith in a Creator. Until a recent e-mail exchange, that is.

Now I believe.

Imagine a particular type of congenital heart defect that strikes children from birth and dooms them to an early death, usually before they are a year old.   Suppose every year throughout human history about 100 children worldwide are born with this defect and pass away within a year, with really nothing anyone can do about it.

Kaimi asks whether it's hypocritical for the Church to oppose same-sex marriage on a 'marriage = one man and one woman' basis, given its polygamous history.

Is it contradictory to oppose gay marriage while allowing (in principle) for polygamy?  Not at all:  polygamy does not, in fact, violate the 'marriage = one man and one woman' principle.

"Milk before Meat" is how the axiom goes--see 1st Corinthians 3:2.  Not so in the blogosphere, where largely we view ourselves as full-fledged carnivores looking for the juiciest steaks we can find.

Or perhaps not.  It came to me one day as I was sitting in a recent Sunday School class...

There is no 'meat' in the gospel.

Or rather, rephrasing: the milk *is* the meat.

"Wherefore, whoso believeth in God might with surety hope for a better world, yea, even a place at the right hand of God, which hope cometh of faith..." (Ether 12:4)

"O ye that are bound down under a foolish and a vain hope, why do ye yoke yourselves with such foolish things?" -- Korihor (Alma 30:13)

Question: what's the difference between a real hope and a false (or 'vain') hope?

I knit. I don't know how I came to enjoy knitting so much, especially since I live in a convection oven. There isn't much demand for knitted goods around here, so I end up giving quite a few things away.

I received a copy of an email from one of our High Council members that informed us that ward mission leaders were supposed to report baptism numbers and goals every month to the stake. The reason for this was reported to be that baptism numbers in North America were down 80% this year. This is a huge drop in baptisms over a significant amount of time in a large area. From the email, it appears these numbers are coming from an Elder Pitts who is our Area Authority Seventy.

On August 6th, 1945, the US dropped an atomic bomb on Hiroshima, Japan--quickly followed three days later by another on Nagasaki.   This bombing essentially ended World War II in the Pacific front, as Japan surrendered to the Allies immediately after.

The use of atomic bombs to end the war—causing over 200,000 deaths within the first year, and many more following due to radiation exposure—was and is, to say the least, a controversial decision.  Was dropping two atomic bombs on Japan a ‘mistake’ by the US?  Something that, in hindsight, was highly regrettable, and shouldn’t have happened?

Recently, I received the following spam email from a local member:

I am contacting as many Mormon bloggers as I can to spread the word about my petition, “LDS Financial Disclosure.” As you know, the Church does not disclose any of its financial records.  Financial disclosure is an easy way for any organization to do right by its supporters and publicly declare that it is ethically managed and putting its funds to good use. Further, this will enable the church to clear the air of any detractors and demonstrate how it is using Church funds to bless lives.

This is a oft-heard complaint, and one of the classic 'no-win' situations for the Church...

(Continuing on from Part 1 & Part 2)

Discussing the question of whether gay marriage should be legal involves asking the right question in the first place.

Many gay marriage supporters ask, “Why shouldn’t there be legalized gay marriage?”  That’s the wrong question...

Continuing on from Monday's analysis of the gay marriage issue…

It’s important to note that the pro-gay-marriage side is no less susceptible to arguments that are weak, irrelevant, and/or mistaken as the 'anti-'s are.  Let's look at the arguments from the other side of the debate.

What the arguments for legalized gay marriage are NOT:

It's 110°F right now--I'm waving farewell to spring from the Valley of the Sun. What do I do in the summertime when most anywhere else is green? I hide out in air conditioned places, that's what I do. A friend who moved here in August discovered lots of people do the same. "There isn't anyone outside in my neighborhood," she told me. "How am I supposed to meet anyone or make friends when people are holed up in their homes?"

With the recent California Supreme Court decision regarding gay marriage thrusting the issue back into the spotlight, it’s understandable that many inside and outside of the Bloggernacle are taking sides.

For the record, I don’t support legalized gay marriage, although I also don’t support many of the common arguments made against gay marriage by opponents.  Those who oppose gay marriage inside and outside of the Church would be wise to recognize which arguments against legalized gay marriage are weak, irrelevant, or downright false, and not muddle their case by making things easier for the other side to refute.

Let’s look at what the arguments against gay marriage are NOT:

THE priesthood, in general, holds great blessings and privileges to all who desire to have them. Through the priesthood we are able to receive the necessary saving ordinances, receive various types of blessings, and participate in an orderly, organized church with a worldwide leadership structure. These great blessings and privileges are available to all - whether they are men, women, or children.

Not to steal the Baron's thunder, but his post really got me thinking. When my response got way too long to justify putting it into a comment, I decided to make it into a post. I'm sure you understand:)

The debate comes up regularly among our member friends from around the country (and the world): Is it better (by whatever definition we choose) to be a Church member in the “Mormon Corridor”--Utah, Idaho, and areas of Nevada and Arizona--or in the “mission field” (everywhere else)?

[Note: I don’t personally support the use of the phrase “mission field” to describe every other part of the world, but that’s the colloquial usage around here…]

There are some songs in the Primary songbook that just ooze hand motions. These songs are generally wiggle songs (My hands, I wiggle, etc.), but hand motions are incredibly useful in holding the kids' attention, and helping them remember the songs. Unfortunately for most reverent songs it is incredibly difficult to make up movements. Another wrench in the process is that my ward follows a policy that doesn't allow hand motions when singing in sacrament meeting, with an exception for American Sign Language.

So, over at fMh a commenter named Whitney said this: "I asked a question about how women can consider themselves active members of a patriarchal system and also consider themselves feminists." I gave her a snarky answer, but then thought that it wasn't very nice and decided to tackle her question in earnest. I do consider myself a feminist, sometimes I even consider myself a radical feminist.

It’s been a while since we’ve used mathematics to discuss gospel subjects, so let’s introduce two common problems in computer science:

Problem 1:  Imagine a lake, which due to an amazing geological miracle happens to be shaped in a perfect rectangle.  On the lake are N boats, each at their own unique (X,Y) locations on the lake.  The task is:  Find the two boats that are closest in distance to each other.

Who'd have thought that Doctrine and Covenants seminary would prepare me to take on a bigot from the New York Times?