Religious Freedom, Fairness and Feminism
I've been working on this post for a few days, and I don't know if now is the most appropriate time to share it. There is a lot going on in this world. Right now the news is focused on policemen and #BlackLivesMatter - which is very important. I don't want to take away from that discussion at all, but there are things that concern me, and I want to share my voice on those things before it is too late.
Religious Freedom and Fairness
There have been more and more talks from leaders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS) the last few years about the need to defend religious freedom. I've been somewhat ignoring them - I think because I was in denial that it was really an issue or because I was afraid of what that truth might mean for me. It is such a heavy responsibility to think of standing up for religious freedom if courts and government and the public are attacking it. How can I do anything? But this month I felt a great need to learn more and to try and do my part. This blog post is my first step. If you feel like me, I hope you find strength or ideas from my post to help you do your part. If you feel differently, that's okay too. Most of my sources are LDS sources, because that is my religion and what I read mostly, but I'm sure whatever religious background you are from, you can relate in some way and surely also care about religious freedom.
Elder Christofferson shared a message called "Religious Freedom Under Fire." He encourages all of us to stand up for religious freedom by 1. becoming informed, 2. speaking up and getting involved in cultural and civic organizations, and 3. participating in our political parties. That 3rd one is difficult for me, because I don't feel a close connection with any parties in the United States right now, but I do have friends in both parties that I can have these important conversations with.
The prophet Joseph Smith said this,
"I am bold to declare before Heaven that I am just as ready to die in defending the rights of a Presbyterian, a Baptist, or a good man of any other denomination [as for a Mormon]; for the same principle which would trample upon the rights of the Latter-day Saints would trample upon the rights of the Roman Catholics, or of any other denomination who may be unpopular and too weak to defend themselves. It is a love of liberty which inspires my soul-civil and religious liberty to the whole of the human race." And he did die for that.
There are many more amazing videos and talks to help us learn how to defend religious freedom. You can find more here, here, here, here and here. Whew! There's a lot out there (:
Elder Christofferson also said (in the talk I quoted above), "We live in challenging times. Religious freedom is indeed under fire. And things may get worse before they get better. But these are our times. This is our moment to defend our fundamental freedoms." I love that. It gives me courage, and reminds me that even if I fail, and things do get worse, that if I've done all I can do, I've done enough.
Feminism and the Female Draft
Today, I want to exercise my freedoms of speech and religion by sharing my personal opinions on what I feel about the proposed law to include females in the draft - to require females, 18 or older, in the USA, starting in 2018, to register with the selective service. I do not claim that the following opinions are official beliefs of the LDS church or any other religion. I haven't seen any statements from churches about the matter. These are my beliefs and my fears and why I wrote to my Congressman asking him to not support this law. You may completely disagree with me, and that is ok. It is a beautiful thing that we can disagree. I've come to appreciate that more while living in a country where you can't share your beliefs publicly or can't disagree on many issues. I am so grateful that in the USA I have the right to share what I believe in a public way.
First - I do not believe that this law improves equality for women. On the contrary, I think it is anti-equality. I think it is like saying, "women are not equal to men unless they are also required to fight." But hello - women are already equal to men. They don't have to do anything men do to be equal! They are equal just by being who they are. Can they do what men do? Can they fight for their country? Can they have a career? Do they make great police officers and Congresswomen and firefighters? Absolutely. But does that make them equal? No, I am just as equal to a man whether or not I do those things. In fact, I feel that my calling in life is to be a mother, and to stay-at-home if at all possible (forget the fact that I don't have children yet, so I do have a career, and I expect fair pay equal to any man who has my same position). Does that make me less equal to men? Absolutely not.
Second - The idea of sameness of men and women is wrong. Men and women are different - but that is what makes them special and cool. If men and women were exactly the same, there would be no need for marriages and families. I'm not saying gender stereotypes (like men can't like pink, men can't cry, women always cook and do the dishes - ickkk) are true, but there are inherent differences between men and women that are awesome. Like a man's innate desire to provide and protect. If we take that away, we take away from some of the specialness of men. And the natural compassion and nurturing ability of women is also amazing. And despite differences, men and women are equal. Saying men and women must do the same things to be equal takes away from the value of family, unity and true equality. Should men be required to register with the selective service? I guess that's another political issue entirely. I personally think it is a duty of men to defend their county if called upon, and the right (but not required duty) of women to do so. I guess that personal opinion is based on what the Gospel of Jesus Christ teaches about the eternal nature of gender and families and how eternal families are the ultimate goal of God's plan for His children.
The LDS document "The Family: A Proclamation to the World" says the following things about gender and equality that may sound controversial, but are actually true and incredible. "All human beings -male and female- are created in the image of God. Each is a beloved spirit son or daughter of heavenly parents, and, as such, each has a divine nature and destiny. Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose...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. Disability, death, or other circumstances may necessitate individual adaptation."
I am so grateful for the men AND women that defend my country. But if women choose to be mothers, to stay home or help their country in other ways - like raising the next generation that will lead the country - I am grateful for them too. I'm grateful for men who love their families and their children, who uphold virtue and who ignore the world's claims that they need to be crude and tough, and instead show kindness, patience and mercy towards others. I think God's understanding is much better than the world's and brings the ultimate happiness and peace for individuals, families and nations.
There are several other reasons I oppose the female draft from becoming a law - but the reasons I've shared are the foundation. I don't think the government should require women to leave their homes, families, children or jobs to protect the country under a guise of ensuring equality. To those who would say that there hasn't been a draft in a long time, so we don't need to worry about it happening again, try looking at the history of the world from a long-term perspective and realize that the draft really wasn't that long ago, and that the USA hasn't really been around that long compared to countries like China that have a long history of war after war after war. Why make the law in the first place if the principle behind it is wrong, regardless of whether a draft happens again or not. It isn't going to prove that women are finally equal to men but rather just tears them down and tells them they aren't good enough how they already are.
If you truly believe that this law would make women and men more equal and is a really good thing for the USA and for our future children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren, I respect you for having your beliefs, blogging about them and defending them as you feel is right.
God Bless America - and the whole world.
Religious Freedom and Fairness
There have been more and more talks from leaders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS) the last few years about the need to defend religious freedom. I've been somewhat ignoring them - I think because I was in denial that it was really an issue or because I was afraid of what that truth might mean for me. It is such a heavy responsibility to think of standing up for religious freedom if courts and government and the public are attacking it. How can I do anything? But this month I felt a great need to learn more and to try and do my part. This blog post is my first step. If you feel like me, I hope you find strength or ideas from my post to help you do your part. If you feel differently, that's okay too. Most of my sources are LDS sources, because that is my religion and what I read mostly, but I'm sure whatever religious background you are from, you can relate in some way and surely also care about religious freedom.
- How is religious freedom under attack in the world? I'm sure you've heard how Russia is enacting a new law this month that restricts missionary and proselyting activity for all religions. What a tragedy that would be if it happened in the USA.
- In the USA, I heard that a CEO was recently fired because of his religious support of traditional marriage between a man and a woman. The LDS church has been clear that there should be fairness for all. Just like a homosexual individual should not be fired from a job for being gay, an individual should not be fired for believing that marriage is ordained of God to be between a man and a woman. Both should be protected regardless of belief.
- The first amendment of the US Constitution guarantees the free exercise of religion. Not just believing, but exercising your beliefs at home and in public. It's okay to have different opinions. It's okay to share those opinions. "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."
- And it is okay for a religion to have a voice in public debates and to try and influence policy. That is what this nation is about - different voices coming together with those opinions and then giving people the ability to vote and decide for themselves. Individuals, interest groups, nonprofits, churches, and so on. That is one way people exercise their religion, by sharing their beliefs related to society and how to have the best society - not forcing those beliefs, but certainly sharing when they so desire.
- The above point was expounded on by Cardinal George, the president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and Archbishop of Chicago, in a recent address he gave at BYU. He said that "freedom cannot be reduced to just freedom of worship or even freedom of private conscience, but that individual and religious groups must have the right to exercise their influence in the public square. 'civil government should never stand between the consciences and the religious practices of its citizens and Almighty God.'"
Elder Christofferson shared a message called "Religious Freedom Under Fire." He encourages all of us to stand up for religious freedom by 1. becoming informed, 2. speaking up and getting involved in cultural and civic organizations, and 3. participating in our political parties. That 3rd one is difficult for me, because I don't feel a close connection with any parties in the United States right now, but I do have friends in both parties that I can have these important conversations with.
The prophet Joseph Smith said this,
"I am bold to declare before Heaven that I am just as ready to die in defending the rights of a Presbyterian, a Baptist, or a good man of any other denomination [as for a Mormon]; for the same principle which would trample upon the rights of the Latter-day Saints would trample upon the rights of the Roman Catholics, or of any other denomination who may be unpopular and too weak to defend themselves. It is a love of liberty which inspires my soul-civil and religious liberty to the whole of the human race." And he did die for that.
There are many more amazing videos and talks to help us learn how to defend religious freedom. You can find more here, here, here, here and here. Whew! There's a lot out there (:
Elder Christofferson also said (in the talk I quoted above), "We live in challenging times. Religious freedom is indeed under fire. And things may get worse before they get better. But these are our times. This is our moment to defend our fundamental freedoms." I love that. It gives me courage, and reminds me that even if I fail, and things do get worse, that if I've done all I can do, I've done enough.
Feminism and the Female Draft
Today, I want to exercise my freedoms of speech and religion by sharing my personal opinions on what I feel about the proposed law to include females in the draft - to require females, 18 or older, in the USA, starting in 2018, to register with the selective service. I do not claim that the following opinions are official beliefs of the LDS church or any other religion. I haven't seen any statements from churches about the matter. These are my beliefs and my fears and why I wrote to my Congressman asking him to not support this law. You may completely disagree with me, and that is ok. It is a beautiful thing that we can disagree. I've come to appreciate that more while living in a country where you can't share your beliefs publicly or can't disagree on many issues. I am so grateful that in the USA I have the right to share what I believe in a public way.
First - I do not believe that this law improves equality for women. On the contrary, I think it is anti-equality. I think it is like saying, "women are not equal to men unless they are also required to fight." But hello - women are already equal to men. They don't have to do anything men do to be equal! They are equal just by being who they are. Can they do what men do? Can they fight for their country? Can they have a career? Do they make great police officers and Congresswomen and firefighters? Absolutely. But does that make them equal? No, I am just as equal to a man whether or not I do those things. In fact, I feel that my calling in life is to be a mother, and to stay-at-home if at all possible (forget the fact that I don't have children yet, so I do have a career, and I expect fair pay equal to any man who has my same position). Does that make me less equal to men? Absolutely not.
Second - The idea of sameness of men and women is wrong. Men and women are different - but that is what makes them special and cool. If men and women were exactly the same, there would be no need for marriages and families. I'm not saying gender stereotypes (like men can't like pink, men can't cry, women always cook and do the dishes - ickkk) are true, but there are inherent differences between men and women that are awesome. Like a man's innate desire to provide and protect. If we take that away, we take away from some of the specialness of men. And the natural compassion and nurturing ability of women is also amazing. And despite differences, men and women are equal. Saying men and women must do the same things to be equal takes away from the value of family, unity and true equality. Should men be required to register with the selective service? I guess that's another political issue entirely. I personally think it is a duty of men to defend their county if called upon, and the right (but not required duty) of women to do so. I guess that personal opinion is based on what the Gospel of Jesus Christ teaches about the eternal nature of gender and families and how eternal families are the ultimate goal of God's plan for His children.
The LDS document "The Family: A Proclamation to the World" says the following things about gender and equality that may sound controversial, but are actually true and incredible. "All human beings -male and female- are created in the image of God. Each is a beloved spirit son or daughter of heavenly parents, and, as such, each has a divine nature and destiny. Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose...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. Disability, death, or other circumstances may necessitate individual adaptation."
I am so grateful for the men AND women that defend my country. But if women choose to be mothers, to stay home or help their country in other ways - like raising the next generation that will lead the country - I am grateful for them too. I'm grateful for men who love their families and their children, who uphold virtue and who ignore the world's claims that they need to be crude and tough, and instead show kindness, patience and mercy towards others. I think God's understanding is much better than the world's and brings the ultimate happiness and peace for individuals, families and nations.
There are several other reasons I oppose the female draft from becoming a law - but the reasons I've shared are the foundation. I don't think the government should require women to leave their homes, families, children or jobs to protect the country under a guise of ensuring equality. To those who would say that there hasn't been a draft in a long time, so we don't need to worry about it happening again, try looking at the history of the world from a long-term perspective and realize that the draft really wasn't that long ago, and that the USA hasn't really been around that long compared to countries like China that have a long history of war after war after war. Why make the law in the first place if the principle behind it is wrong, regardless of whether a draft happens again or not. It isn't going to prove that women are finally equal to men but rather just tears them down and tells them they aren't good enough how they already are.
If you truly believe that this law would make women and men more equal and is a really good thing for the USA and for our future children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren, I respect you for having your beliefs, blogging about them and defending them as you feel is right.
God Bless America - and the whole world.
Comments
As a man, I really do not want to fight. I hate fighting, in fact. If I am ever drafted in a time of dire need for our country, I would try to do everything possible to support my fellow troops without having to take a life. But I will do what I can to support my country. My question is this: if women have equal rights, shouldn't they also have equal responsibilities? This isn't 1950, when it was believed that only men could fight. With new weapons, women can be just as capable soldiers as men. And yet you still want men alone to fight while you, as a woman, stay safe and protected? You need to do your share of the fighting. As to the idea that your motherhood should exempt you from fighting, what about my fatherhood? Why is it that it is ok for a father to be drafted and die in a war, but not a mother? Are you saying that mothers are more valuable and less expendable than fathers? Perhaps we could have a family draft, where one parent is required to go to combat, but it doesn't default to the father. That way it is true gender equality. Each family can decide which parent will go off to protect the family. Because feminism is about choice, about not requiring one sex to conform to a gender role if they do not want to. Forcing men to fight is like forcing women to be stay at home mothers. Sure, some men like to fight, and some women like to be raise children. But no one should be FORCED into that role. Agency, remember?
And Fairness For All. This is a complex one.
On the surface I agree with you. Religions should not be obligated to violate their beliefs, and they should have an equal voice in public discourse and the democratic process. People should not be fired for their beliefs either.
The issue arises when the Church says they want fairness for all and then categorically deny it to certain other groups (like LGBTQ people, for instance). Some of the religious freedom bills that have passed are pretty horrendous. They say that any business owner can refuse service to someone if it disagrees with their religious beliefs. In other words, a gay couple could be refused service at a restaurant if the owner doesn't believe in gay marriage. Can you imagine if someone believed that mixed-race couples were bad (which was taught in the LDS Church only a few decades ago)? They could deny a black man and a white woman service because of his skin color, since it was against their beliefs. We could do the same thing with Mormons. You don't believe in the trinity? Sorry, that's against my beliefs, so you can't eat here. Now, in all fairness the LDS Church has been slightly more diplomatic in these instances, but broad religious freedom bills in other states have done exactly this. So I cannot in good conscience or in good reason support religious bills of this nature.
There are other instances where the Church has been less kind, though. For instance, recently a bill was presented that would protect against hate crimes. It included crimes against religious beliefs and sexual orientation. Balanced, right? The Church didn't think so. No one had consulted with them, so they shut it down with a sentence. So in Utah, no bill that protects the LGBT community can be passed without the Church's approval. Turn this around to the LGBT community. If the Church wants a bill passed that would harm the queer community (like gay marriage being made illegal, for instance) then the LGBT community gets no say in the matter. Hence their recourse to federal judges who can override the Utah legislation.
This is what the Church is worried about happening in other places where it doesn't unofficially control the state legislature. In other states, LGBT people might have the majority power and use it to impose restrictions on religious people (like not being able to publicly speak their mind about their disapproval, for instance). I think this would be wrong as well. Fairness for all, real fairness, will only be achieved when queer people and religious people (and especially queer religious people) sit down together and talk. Really talk and listen to one another. And the LDS Church doesn't have the best track record of listening. Hopefully they can improve in that quarter.
There's one other issue. Churches don't pay taxes. In part this is because of their humanitarian work, and in part because we give a special status to churches as sacred institutions. The argument that some people have is that if churches want to lobby for certain laws, they should also pay taxes. As it stands now they have representation without taxation, which some regard as unfair. I'm somewhat neutral on this issue, to be honest, but I thought I'd throw it out there as part of the overall topic.
Anyways, I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts.
1st - with men having to fight. I'm not saying a male draft is amazing in the first place - in a perfect world, no one would have to fight. War is horrific, and I'd prefer that neither men nor women would have to experience killing other people and the other devastation that comes with war. But since there is a selective service in the USA, I guess it stems down to my religious beliefs why men should be required to register rather then women. I feel like one of the primary roles of men is to protect their families/country/etc. Women of course can share in that role, but I don't believe that is their primary role. Men also nurture children in their home, but their primary roles are to protect and provide. Of course, since this is a religious-based view, it may not make sense in the eyes of some who are not religious - thus the benefit of having religious ideas and non-religious ideas shared when important matters of public policy are discussed and voted on.
About the LDS church's influence in Utah - I don't know much about that since I do not live in Utah. I'm sure they are very influential as an interest group there. However, the state legislature certainly doesn't have to listen to what they say. The Church will not tell votes who to vote for, but many voters in Utah are LDS and agree with the Church's stances on public policy - though not all of them do.
Fairness for all isn't easy to pin down - you're right. What about small business owners who would reject a mixed-race family and claim it's against their religion - absolutely wrong. But what about a doctor who has religious beliefs in the sanctity of life - should he be required to perform abortions when there are other doctors who wouldn't mind? Can his beliefs be respected, even if it is less convenient for the family? Or if a marriage-counselor believes in marriage between a man and a women and a gay-couple approaches her for counseling, can the counselor respectfully recommend other counselors that they can approach? Wouldn't that be better for all involved? Since this is such a tricky issue - it's important that voices on both sides are heard, and that both sides support each other's rights. That way laws will be more fair as these difficult questions are addressed by policy makers. You are absolutely right - they need to really come together and talk. Love that point.
With BYU having rules about PDA for gays and housing rules - I think that is entirely up to them. They have an honor code which students may or may not choose to follow. College students can select another institution if they would like to. Because it is a religious-run, private school it can make those decisions. Though it certainly can't determine what other private or public academic institutions do. Those rules seem unfair from one perspective, but if there is still choice (to attend or not attend) then I would consider that fair - though still frustrating for those students, and I feel for them.
With regards to churches not paying taxes - most nonprofit organizations, religious or not, have tax-exempt status. In some cases this can prevent them from lobbying Congress and local legislatures, but there are provisions that allow nonprofit organizations to lobby. When I worked on Capitol Hill, I met representatives of nonprofit organizations on a daily basis. They were either meeting with their Congressmen or holding lunches where they could share their opinions with Congressional staff. Should tax-exempt status continue for churches and nonprofit organizations? Maybe not, that is another matter entirely, but very interesting point, so thank you for bringing it up.
Those are just a few more of my thoughts - and of course just opinions. Thanks again for sharing yours!