The Default is Off

Michelle from Mormon Women cued me into Having another child: Questions couples can consider by the Eyres.  I really liked what they said about the function of the family:  ". . .family is the core rather than the periphery. Children are part of the purpose rather than the sidelight. Work supports family rather than the other way around."

Then they gave the "default" analogy:

Most electronics have "default positions" that control the device's operation unless we override it. In terms of having children, should our default switch be OFF (assume you should not get pregnant until you receive inspiration that you should), or ON (assume that we should have a child in a reasonable amount of time unless, as we pray, we feel that we should wait). . . .  In light of the gospel and the restoration and the plan, would it not be a better idea to generally have the default switch on ON — to assume that God wants you to have children (or another child) reasonably soon until you feel, in your prayers, that he wants you to wait, or to be finished?

We live in a culture where the default to have families is generally OFF; we wait and wait to have children, but we need to remember that God intended married people to have families.  We are a part of His plan.

The Value of a Mother

"All the  nuns in the world are not worth as much as one mother in the formation of a young girl's soul."  Victor Hugo in Les Miserables (the book)

My Testimony

Joni Martin asked me to answer some questions for her on her blog, Hope's Journey.  I realized what I wrote is much of my testimony.

My (Mormon) musings on life and faith: A Mormon Woman's Thoughts On Faith, Feminism, Gender Equality: Introduction

Michelle is starting a little series on: My (Mormon) musings on life and faith: A Mormon Woman's Thoughts On Faith, Feminism, Gender Equality: Introduction

I'm quite sure she'll have some enlightening things to say! Stay posted!

Faith and Feminism

Here's a recent discussion from the Washington Post site regarding faith and feminism:

“The discrimination against women on a global basis is very often attributable to the declaration by religious leaders in Christianity, Islam and other religions that women are inferior in the eyes of God,” former President Jimmy Carter said last week. Many traditions teach that while both men and women are equal in value, God has ordained specific roles for men and women. Those distinct duties often keep women out of leadership positions in their religious communities. What is religion’s role in gender discrimination?

My thoughts are, first of all, because there is still discrimination and abuse toward women all over the world from whatever source, this is why I like people (defined feminist or not) who fight for equal work rights, pay, voting, political opportunity, education, health care, respect, etc. for women (and the rest of humanity for that matter). 


Secondly, I think it's great that religion teaches "that while both men and women are equal in value, God has ordained specific roles for men and women."  President Monson in the LDS Church's General Conference in April just re-stated :

Your wife is your equal. In marriage neither partner is superior nor inferior to the other. You walk side by side as a son and a daughter of God. She is not to be demeaned or insulted but should be respected and loved. Said President Gordon B. Hinckley: “Any man in this Church who … exercises unrighteous dominion over [his wife] is unworthy to hold the priesthood. Though he may have been ordained, the heavens will withdraw, the Spirit of the Lord will be grieved. . . .” ⁸

The LDS Church's Proclamation on the family teaches: 

By divine design, fathers are to preside over their families in love and righteousness and are responsible to provide the necessities of life and protection for their families. Mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children. In these sacred responsibilities, fathers and mothers are obligated to help one another as equal partners.

Clearly, men and women are equal, yet there are also some role guidelines.  To me, the role division keeps me from being too busy and taking on too many responsibilities.  It keeps our duties slightly divided so we can each have our own turf. Although the separate guidelines are there, there is a lot of overlap.  Several times, I've heard a father encouraged to be the one to leave a church meeting with a fussy child so that the mother may stay and enjoy the meeting.  Several times, I've seen mothers serve in heavy duty leadership positions.  It's not always the men in leadership positions, nor is it always the women taking care of the children.

I see marriage as a partnership.  My husband holds the priesthood which he uses to bless and lead our family; I carry and primarily care for the children (at least when my husband is not home).  It's not much unlike body parts.  Is my arm more important than my leg?  Is my vision more important than my hearing?  Is a man more important than a woman?  We each have our particular roles and work together as a team.

Thirdly, by stating "those distinct duties often keep women out of leadership positions" obviously shows that whoever is asking the question is valuing leadership over other duties.  If we valued following, or nurturing, or something else more than leadership, would this even be a question? Actually though, in the LDS Church, there are very few positions in which women don't serve.  Some of these include bishop (leader of a congregation) and prophet (leader of the world-wide church), but women are plenty involved on the home-front all the way to the general level of the world-wide Relief Society.  (By the way -- there are also positions in which men DON'T serve!)

Lastly, I agree that some of the abuse and discrimination against women is carried out in the name of religion, but I don't think that a separation of roles is a direct form of abuse or discrimination.  I don't know specifically what many religions teach or practice that is interpreted as or is truly discriminatory, but I wonder how much of the abuse and discrimination is actually cultural in nature, not religious.  I'm sure some people want us to conclude that religion breeds discrimination, but I see role division as a way to help us unite as women and men and to simplify our lives.


4/20/11:  And wow, on the other hand ... this just in today:

People across the world are suffering from persecution. “And why are they suffering?” John Graz said. “Are they dangerous for their country? Are they bad people? No, most of the time they are good people. But they are suffering, they are discriminated against, they are excluded only because of their religion.” 

So either religion is the culprit of discrimination, or those who are religious are discriminated against.  How confusing.

Dressing (or not fully dressing) Little Girls

You may have seen this great editorial, but I love how he really expresses that there is no need for little girls to be dressing inappropriately and if they are doing so, it is most likely because adults are buying them questionable clothing. It is a great and thought-provoking quick read and I thought that the implications he lays down at the end for the "early sexualization of girls" is so sad, I hope that parents will reconsider what they are letting their kids wear.

Perspective: Raising Children You Will Like as Adults

This summer we are planning a big family campout and are inviting lots of our old friends.  I thought how exciting it is going to be to see some of these people.  Aw, the good old days!  Then I began thinking about our children, and I hoped that in the future, when they are grown, they can also be our good friends whom we will want to spend time with.

In the LDS Church, I've heard some people say that they believe they knew their families before they came to earth.  Now I don't believe there is any confirmed scripture or doctrine on that specific point*; however, I did ponder that if that is true, and I did, in fact, know my family in the pre-earth life, we probably were really good friends who said we wanted to help each other through this earthly journey.  I even pondered that perhaps I committed or even covenanted that I would provide bodies for those spirits who would become my earthly children!  Again, don't take that as LDS doctrine; I'm just pondering here.

The whole idea that my little children could have been my friends before this earth life, and that they can be my friends, people I actually like to be with, when they are grown, made me feel a little more patient and a little more excited in being diligent in teaching them to become people that I will like as adults, as Julie Beck similarly stated in her Conversation on the Mormon Channel.

*If you've found an article on this topic of knowing our families before we came to earth, please save me some time and point me to it!