Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts

Wednesday, January 21, 2009

to the new family in the white house

congratulations.  and though i can't imagine what an amazing adventure your family is embarking upon, i think that these two could.


i think this might be the best part...

"And finally, although it's an honor and full of so many extraordinary opportunities, it isn't always easy being a member of the club you are about to join.  Our dad, like yours, is a man of great integrity and love; a man who always put us first.  We still see him now as we did when we were seven: as our loving daddy.  Our Dad, who read to us nightly, taught us how to score tedious baseball games.  He is our father, not the sketch in a paper or part of skit on TV.  Many people will think they know him, but they have no idea how he felt the day you were born, the pride he felt on your first day of school, or how much you both love being his daughters.  So here is our most important piece of advice: remember who your dad really is."

i think that could be said about most people in the public eye.  

Monday, November 24, 2008

dear uber liberal french teacher

dearest lecturer,

first, let's not start on the wrong foot.  so i shall put this forward-i think you are a wonderful person.  i appreciate your ramblings into Mr. Holland's Opus and how it is a case study of education, your endearing french accent, and how you have encouraged all your students to find a christian church like you have to fulfill our need to worship.

however, your socialist ideals are beginning to encroach far too much into your teaching.  i understand that you think education is above the market/business model.  and i know that you think that the invisible hand has failed to regulate the markets.  but i really don't want to hear only one side of the political spectrum-all the time.  i would appreciate an unbiased or at least even opinion of the topic at hand...in this case, today was accountability in educational administration.  a simple list of pros and cons would have done nicely.

i propose the following-
1) please stop bashing on marketisation of schools unless you find a better model than markets to govern the competing interests of stakeholders in the educational system.   you keep saying that education is dealing with the molding of young minds, not simply products of a machine. i agree with you.  however, is business simply working with products?  don't businesses have to work with and develop their employees as well?  aren't those employees...gasp...people?  i don't see how private and public organizations are that different.  both are run by people, just vying for continuation of existence.

2) please learn more about economics before you propose the markets have failed.  the fact that these banks are failing is a sign that the market is working.  it is weeding out those businesses that have made poor investments (and have all this corruption that you are complaining about).  the government is only failing to allow the market to work (yes, i agree with you that the governments should NOT be bailing out these businesses).

that's about it.  i would appreciate a good grade as well.  even if we disagree.  i hope the external examiner will be open-minded.

your sole conservative student,
amanda 

Tuesday, November 4, 2008

vote today!

get out there and vote and make our ancestors proud!


and for those of you in California---

PROPOSITION 8: FROM SOMEONE WHO'S BEEN THERE

I am going to attempt the impossible: I want to try to discuss Proposition 8 in an honest, equitable manner.

To demonstrate the divisiveness of the issue, let me first point out that I could only call it "Proposition 8." If I'd called it by its original name, "Proposition 8: California Marriage Protection Act," you would think that I want you to vote "Yes on 8." After all, who wouldn't want to protect marriage? If I'd called it by its new name, as determined by California's attorney general and legislative analyst in July, "Proposition 8: Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry," you would think that I want you to vote "No on 8." After all, who would
want to eliminate someone's rights?

And, to demonstrate how far-reaching its effects, I didn't even need to call it "California' s Proposition 8." No matter where this email goes, to any of the 50 states that may have propositions up for vote, I'm confident people will know which state's "Proposition 8" I'm talking about.

Laurie Goodstein of the New York Times describes the Proposition with poetic imagery: "it is raging like a wind-whipped wildfire in California." More poetic still...from an article in Monday's San Francisco Chronicle:

"Michelle Sundstrom and her husband gave $30,000 to the Yes on 8 campaign and put a sign on their home. But in response, two women parked an SUV in front of their home, with the words 'Bigots live here' painted on the windshield. Sundstrom believes such responses must come from deep places of pain-and that gays and lesbians are entitled to the same rights as heterosexuals, just not the word marriage. Any animosity toward gays or lesbians is wrong, she said.

"There must be such deep, deep, deep hurt; otherwise there couldn't be so much opposition," she said. "They've lived with this. I guess we're getting a taste of where they live."

Wow. Perhaps all this craziness and hate-slinging is actually getting us somewhere. A heterosexual Mormon couple has a "Bigots live here" sign parked in front of their house, and what's their response? "They've lived with this. I guess we're getting a taste of where they
live."

And she didn't just say "deep hurt." She said "deep, deep, deep hurt." I know the depth of that pain. I grew up Mormon and gay back in the 1970s. That was when we were shunned, ridiculed, bruised, battered, and discriminated against by nearly everyone, religious or otherwise. We hid in the closets because it hurt too much to come out. People who did come out were called perverts, child molesters, predators, queer, sick, you name it. For those of us who were Mormon, it was even worse. We were attracted to the same sex, yet Mormon doctrine stated we were supposed to get married only to a member of the opposite sex. It is a direct conflict between the two strongest, most significant desires in life.

When I was in college, I met a woman with whom I thought I'd spend the rest of my life. But after a couple of years, we broke up. That was when I had this feeling, an impression, to talk to my bishop. I had no idea who he was because I hadn't gone to church in years.

That bishop used the power of the priesthood in my behalf, just as the divine plan had been laid out. He met with me for almost three years as I struggled and faltered. Suicide was a very real threat. I feel blessed, or lucky, or both, not to be among the many who have already pulled
the trigger. I wasn't suicidal because of the Church's unwavering stance onmarriage, however. I hadn't been forced to believe, or guilted into it. I had not been brainwashed. My testimony came from the heart.

In time, my spiritual identity began to gain strength over my sexual identity. I was finally able to choose the right. But it was a troubling choice. I had no desire, whatsoever, to spend a lifetime with a man - much less an eternity. So that left me with celibacy. To this day, sacrificing same-sex relationships is the greatest sacrifice I have made.

Years ago, a friend said: "The sacrifice of a loved one for an attempt to live righteously
cannot go unnoticed. The loss is real, the sadness is real, in a world where so few things are real." Now, the loss and pain are being publicly recognized by Church leaders. In a fireside for Latter-day Saints in California, Elder Quentin L. Cook said, "There are faithful temple-worthy members of the Church who struggle with this great challenge, often in silence, fear, and
great pain. Our hearts go out to these good brothers and sisters even as we uphold the divine truths the Lord has revealed about marriage."

Back when I was struggling with same-sex attraction, I couldn't find any LDS resources that
dealt specifically with the issue. I'd insist, "The Church doesn't understand. They don't even care enough to help." Finally I realized the Church I was critizing was not just "they", it was also "I". And perhaps "I" should quit complaining and start writing. So I did. The title of my book sums it up: Born That Way? A True Story of Overcoming Same-Sex Attraction. Few people were offering hope back then for people who wanted to overcome same-sex attraction. I felt compelled by the spirit to provide hope for others with struggles similar to mine.

The secular resources did more harm than good. Back then, the only claims you heard from the
"experts" were: "Sexual attractions are a permanent part of who you are. They're indelible, unchangeable, and unavoidable. " Fortunately, the "experts" are now realizing that, just like other aspects of who we are, sexual attractions are influenced by genetics, environment, upbringing, experiences - all of it. Nature and nurture are no longer pitted against each
other.

I've had the unique opportunity to witness the journey of many people who struggle with same-sex attractions. In 1990, I volunteered as a phone counselor - originally referred through Evergreen, an organization established to help Mormons who face this trial. Over the span of almost 20 years, I've seen some Latter-day Saints get married in the temple, and others work to remain celibate - either because they have not found a spouse yet, or because they have not developed attractions toward the opposite sex. I also have friends, who once had very strong
testimonies, who tried desperately to bring their lives into accordance with gospel principles, but finally gave up. At least for now.

THIS IS SO IMPORTANT:
Some people, no matter what they do or how hard they try, will never find themselves attracted to the opposite sex, in this life. They deserve our utmost respect. So do those who identify as gay or straight or bisexual or none of the above. They all deserve our respect.

It's not difficult for me to understand how the body of the Church in California has become divided over this issue. I have felt divided, too. Our family lived in California in 2000, when the Defense of Marriage Act came up for vote the first time. My husband and I were sealed together for time and all eternity, and our children were born under the new and everlasting covenant. We, as an eternal family, were and are the direct beneficiaries of the Church's unwavering stance on marriage. What once created angst so severe I considered suicide has led me to a life I never thought possible. One in which I have been happily married - to a man - for 15 years.

However, I know all too well what it's like to be discriminated against. "Eliminating" someone
else's rights seems wrong. And up until this past week, it seemed to go against my sense of fairness, democracy and justice as a citizen of the United States. It also seemed to run contrary to the core of my faith - the second greatest commandment - to love one another.

Despite my apprehensions in 2000, my husband and I acted in faith and supported Proposition 22 because the prophet asked us to. I hate to admit this, but it wasn't until this week that I was finally able to reconcile the opposing viewpoints I continued to debate with myself. I finally realized why the leaders of the Mormon Church have been taking such an active role in
all this. It happened when I read a National Public Radio report entitled "When Gay Rights and Religious Liberties Clash". It says, "In recent years, some states have passed laws giving residents the right to same-sex unions in various forms. Gay couples may marry in Massachusetts and California. There are civil unions and domestic partnerships in Vermont, New Jersey, Connecticut, New Hampshire and Oregon."

I was astonished when I read: "So far, the religious groups are losing." They listed examples such as Catholic Charities in Massachusetts. They had to pull out of the adoption business because they refused to adopt to same-sex couples. Even individuals' religious rights are being revoked. A woman declined to photograph a same-sex couple's commitment ceremony, saying her Christian beliefs prevented her from sanctioning same-sex unions. She was found guilty of discrimination.

When I read that article, it was like a light bulb went on. More importantly, I also felt a spiritual confirmation that the prophet truly is prophetic. Here is the impression that came to me as I read: It's not that the Mormon Church is trying to get into politics. It's that politics is trying to get into the Church. And not just our church. Any church or congregation or individual who believes that only a marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God.

I'm sorry I couldn't see what the prophet could see-until this week. I'm sorry I'm not sending this letter out till now. And I'm sorry for my apathy - for being "lukewarm". Why, just last week I thought it was only a matter of time before same-sex marriages became legal everywhere. How wrong I was.

Yes, we're behind in the polls. Yes, it's the Friday before Election Day. So PLEASE, email this letter to anyone and everyone you think could benefit from it - as quickly as possible!

Unfortunately, someone has to lose with Proposition 8. Somebody's right to something will be limited at the end of the day on Tuesday.
I, for one, do not want it to be my right to worship as I please.

Sincerely,

Erin Eldridge

P.S. For those who would like to respond to this letter -whether in anger or frustration or support - I will do my best to respond to every email I receive. But please, be patient. All our kids are still at home and I work part time. Email riverwalk8@gmail. com.


Wednesday, June 18, 2008

do it. you will be happy.

warning- this is a shameless plug. but you should read it. and listen to NPR.

Dear bloggers,

I understand that you are a busy crowd with children, jobs, friends, family and a continual change of addresses that makes it hard to continue your education (and for me to keep track of you). I understand.

However...I must tell you... there is a way to gain knowledge and continue whatever tasks that you are currently required to complete. You can listen to National Public radio! You may be groaning right now... You may start thinking of names to call me such as old fogie, liberal fool, or overeducated hippie. But I must ask you to withhold those names until you have tried it yourself.

NPR has an amazing variety of information for every type of listener, and best of all, each program ranges from 5-20 minutes, just long enough to be interesting , and short enough to keep your attention.

Do you love music? peruse their music section. You can find interviews with up and coming musicians, spotlights on those who are in the twilight of their career, or explanations and analyzations of life-changing performances. Interviews with P-Diddy, Sheryl Crowe, and Kathleen Edwards (don't know who she is? go listen!) are available for enjoyment.

Do you like politics (or just need some help understanding the big fuss)? Find interviews with incredible professors, staticians, and politicians who are analyzing and changing the face of our government. Find out what economists think about the economy and what politicians 'really' think we should do about it. Trying to decide how you feel about an issue? Don't worry, NPR provides well-crafted interviews with experts from both sides of the political divide.

Are you looking for a good book? NPR has listeners provide book reviews that are honest and entertaining... and best of all, many reviews are from readers like you and me.

And finally, one of my favorites...the program 'This I believe', outstanding essays written by listeners on their own personal credos. You will find nothing more inspiring, honest, or interesting in entertainment today.

So. Friends. family. fellow bloggers. listen to NPR. You will be smarter and more intellectually stimulated because of it.

Love,

your ever vigilant educational opportunist-Amanda

Monday, June 2, 2008

The End of Poverty, what do you think?

Today I finished The End of Poverty by Jeffrey D. Sachs. After reading both the The Bottom Billion by Paul Collier, and the former, here are some questions that I believe will help you determine what side of the development divide you are on (and possibly the political divide).

1) Healthcare- Is it a right or a privilege?
a) legal right
b) privilege
(a small problem with this question is the broad range of care that is available. If you do determine that it is a legal right, you must determine at what point it is no longer a right. Is it illegal if someone who requires a new heart doesn't get one? What about cancer treatment? Your next question to yourself should be what level of health care you believe is a legal right and how to measure when that level is reached.)
2) You have unlimited dollars to give to achieve Economic and Human Development in the country of Zimbabwe- how do you think we should use it??
The following question will help you know your development possibilities-
3) Do you think development is best achieved from the top down or the bottom up?
a) top down- Rich governments (the U.S., Europe) should fund poor governments (Africa, South America) to improve infrastructure, education, and healthcare. Professionals who have spent their whole lives studying economics, education, and public health are the advisors to these nations, determining where this money goes and how it will best be used, based upon years of research and studies.
b) bottom up- Organizations (private non-profits, NGO's, Oprah, you, me) fund individuals through micro-loans to start their own businesses. These individuals improve their income, pulling themselves out of poverty. They also can now pay more taxes so the government can afford greater infrastructure, improved education, and more healthcare. Basically individuals within nations determine where the monies go by their own investments.
4) Who should decide how to allocate funds?
a) You and me as voters in the rich countries (It is our money that is being sent over there).
b) the citizens of Zimbabwe (and other developing nations). They live there, so they probably know better than anyone else the daily problems that they face.
c) Someone with a PhD in Economics, Health, Education, or just experts in Development in general. After years of research and study, their studies give a good idea of what the world really needs, probably better than your guess, or the people of Zimbabwe.
5) How do we measure success?
a) by that fuzzy feeling that you and I get when we donate?
b) the GDP of a nation?
c) or the fact that the farmer that we gave a loan to in Zimbabwe is now feeding his family and is selling the excess to save for the fancy fertilizer?

Now...the secret revealed....

(note: I don't guarantee my test's accuracy)

If you answered
1-a
3-a
4-c
then you are probably liberal.

If you answered
1-b
3-b
4-a or b
then you are probably conservative.

Don't worry, there are no right answers. I suspect that a balance between all of the above would be the best answer. The problem is riding that precarious teeter-totter.

Just remember, whatever you give, GREAT! Keep on giving, whether it is time to your local orphanage or monies to the World Bank. It doesn't matter what the best way to give is if there isn't anyone giving!