Good Options, Good Life

Is having an abortion wrong or right? Good or bad? Is it a sin, or a right? Is it murder or a choice?

So, it’s really difficult to tackle a question like that. Most of the people who are arguing this issue want to paint the picture in stark contrasts of black and white. It’s a lot easier to fire up your supporters that way. It’s a lot easier to inspire voters and to push agendas that way. The reality, however, is a lot more nuanced. Not only are there shades of gray, there are a lot of other colors involved. 

First of all, an abortion is a difficult response to a difficult situation. It’s not something anyone I’ve ever seen, heard, or read aspires to or looks forward to. I would be hard-pressed for even most supporters of abortion rights to find a situation where it would be a definite “good thing”, rather it might be considered to be a “less bad” or even the “least bad” option available. 

In our current political climate, I see a lot of people, however, wanting to label other people as “good” or “bad” based entirely on their stand on this issue. Rather than to take a look at each other’s positions, thoughts, and even feelings in the matter, it’s easier just to call the other team evil. 

For example, the left says that it’s all about the right to choose. That a woman has a right to make decisions about their bodies that will impact their lives for many years to come. They point out how little autonomy most western women have had, historically, and how difficult it has been for them to have any decision making power in their lives. They point out just how critical the element of freedom and choice is in the fabric of American life, and how long it has taken for women to have access to the same freedom and choice as others. 

Adding to the confusion is the multitude of women who are in this difficult situation through chance, or through the choices of others. Should we remove choices from those that had few choices to begin with? Troublesome and physically dangerous pregnancies, the heartbreak of rape, coersion, abandonment, or many other circumstances can severely muddy the paint on the picture.

Those on the political right want to protect the life of the unborn child. Life is precious and ending a life, even a potential one, is equal to murder. Our nation’s founding documents specifically mention the importance of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”. Clearly that’s a good thing as well, right?

So, we’re at an interesting point, here. There are two “good” values (choice and life) vying for supremacy over the battlefield of something that’s ultimately “not good”.

It’s very easy for us all to call the other side evil. It’s easy for the left to call the right “oppressors” and “tyrants”. It’s easy for the right to call the left “murderers”. Our current political climate facilitates making lots of noise and rage without actually fixing the problems.

To me, the bottom line is that until our society comes to grips with the “difficult situations” that make this “difficult response” even considered as a solution, nothing will change. Until we make a society where everyone’s choices are respected, everyone’s opportunities are maximized, and unwanted pregnancies are rare, abortions will happen. Until it’s the worst option, instead of the “least bad” option, it will still be an option, regardless of its legality or constitutionality.

Mark has a lifelong testimony of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (the Mormon Church). Mark also has other sites and blogs, including MarkHansenMusic.com and his Dutch Oven blog.

Mark's Other Blog Posts: name post, name post,

Game Design, Laws, and Abortion

I make games. It’s one of my hobbies, and one of my personal joys. As I’ve been learning the process of creating games, I’ve been studying and learning a lot, and much of what I have learned applies to life. 

I was pleased to discover, for example, just how similar the world of game design is to the world of politics, and legislation in particular. To be sure, there are many differences, here is how they are very alike: They’re both about making rules.

Now, let’s look at a situation in game design. Let’s say that there’s a problem in the game. Let’s say that there’s a quirk of the board or a strategic option that gives a player a huge advantage, to the point that they win the game every time. Or maybe there’s another situation that makes the game bog down and nobody progresses. Either way, the game is broken. 

A beginner game designer looks at that and says that it’s no problem, we’ll just make a rule that says you can’t do that strategy. Easy fix. 

The problem is that many times that one new rule you made reveals another problem, so you now have to make another rule to fix the one just created. Maybe this one is an exception to that initial rule. But then this new rule triggers new problems. And now, to fix the next problems, you have to make yet more rules and I bet you can guess where this leads.

A more experienced, more professional game designer would look at the initial problem and think about it. They would analyze the situations that would motivate the player to choose the problematic strategy in the first place. They would ask why it’s so appealing. Why would anyone want to choose it in the first place?

Then, you adjust the board, or you adjust the existing rules to make that a less effective in-game strategy. If that choice no longer helps the player, or if other choices are more effective in the long run of the game, then the problem strategy is minimized, or simply goes away.

I would hope that it’s very clear how this applies to the legislature. All too often, our response to the idea of a problem in our society is simply to make that problem illegal. I’m discovering that a better approach would be to ask ourselves, “Why is this a problem? And why are people choosing to do it?” and then to write legislation that would fix THOSE problems.

Let’s look at the problem of Abortion as a big example of this. 

For the record, I am personally and morally opposed to the concept of abortion of a pregnancy. I think that, ideally, a child should be wanted, loved, and anticipated with excitement in a loving and nurturing family. I also know that this doesn’t always happen.

Politically, it’s very easy for those who are opposed to abortion to just say, “Well, let’s just make it illegal!” 

But let’s apply what I’ve learned in game design. Let’s ask some of the tough questions. What makes someone want to have an abortion? Why does a woman want to end a pregnancy? 

The hard part of this question is that there are thousands of different answers from thousands of different circumstances. From what I hear in the debate, it’s not an easy choice for a woman to make. It can be personally traumatizing, socially stigmatizing, and financially overwhelming, among many other things. And yet, in spite of all of those horrors, it is still seen as being LESS traumatic, LESS stigmatizing, and LESS financially devastating than the prospect of bearing a child for 9 months and then raising them for 18+ years.

So, if I, as an advocate of the life of the child (not necessarily in the “pro-life” political camp, though) want to see fewer abortions, it seems to me that the legislation to push for, to vote for, would be the ideas that make having the baby LESS stigmatizing, LESS devastating, and LESS traumatic. If we make laws and circumstances that support a mother in crisis, then we would have fewer abortions. If ending the life of a child becomes the least effective option, it will be chosen far less.

How do we do that? Well, that’s not easy, but here are a few ideas:

1. Make adoption easier. There are many childless couples and households that would dearly love to have a child. My wife and I were in this situation for many years. We looked into the option of adoption and the costs and challenges were almost insurmountable. If you make it easier and more fair, there will be a lessened need for abortions.

2. Provide more support for struggling moms. If a woman sees bearing and raising a child as an overwhelming road that she has to tread alone for years to come, then abortion is a more appealing option. 

3. Better education. If our teens learn more about what is involved in parenting and raising a child, they will approach that phase in their life with greater respect and confidence. This is more than just sex education and contraception. This is all about understanding family and interpersonal commitments. 

4. Holding men accountable for the babies they help conceive is important and right and just. It’s also a double-edged sword in some ways. If a man is facing a lifetime of personal and financial commitment that he’s not ready for, he might well push for an abortion. This is a part of the complication of the issue that I don’t have a great answer for. Still, if the fathers have options, like adoption, and education, this situation will also be lessened.

I, personally, think that many of these options are good for society as a whole, not just people who find themselves caught in the situation of being expectant and uncertain parents-to-be.

This is a very complicated issue. There are no easy answers. I’ve been thinking about it a lot, and I want to share some of my other musings here in my blog sometime soon. I’d love to hear your (respectful) comments below!

Mark has a lifelong testimony of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (the Mormon Church). Mark also has other sites and blogs, including ATaleOfHeroes.com, MarkHansenMusic.com and his Dutch Oven blog.

Thoughts on Guns and School Shootings.

There’s been yet another mass shooting in a school, and so everyone is filling my ears with their opinions and their memes. I have a lot of thoughts bouncing around my head. Here are some.

First, whenever someone starts their argument with the phrase, “The problem is...”, my respect for their opinion automatically drops. No one problem is THE problem. There is not one (pardon the pun) “silver bullet” solution. All proposed solutions are incomplete and flawed. We need to look a lot of the roots of the problems and fix them, and then realize that even those solutions will not “fix” everything.

If we do a lot of things, they will make school shootings less likely, but they will probably still happen. The nice thing about a lot of these solutions is that they will make our nation, as a whole, a nicer place to live.

OK, here are my ideas.

1 - Making guns illegal will not help. I know that’s tough for a leftie to say, but I believe it. When Jodi and I were first married, we took in teenage foster kids. Most were great kids, but most also had criminal records. I knew that at any given moment, I could have given some money to pretty much any one of those kids and within an hour or two they could have come back to me with a gun.

Having said that, I do think it’s valuable to register guns and to license gun owners, just like we do with cars. Will that prevent gun crimes? Maybe not, but it might help prosecute them.

I also think that making certain kinds of weapons illegal is reasonable.

2 - A lot of focus has been pointed at mental health as an issue. Many have rightly pointed out that there are a lot of people with mental health issues that are not violent. I think, at times, that I’m probably chronically depressed, possibly bipolar, and I’ve never shot anyone.

However, I think that every school shooter has some significant mental health issues. To stand in a crowded school hallway, full of your classmates and to start killing them is NOT HEALTHY. That’s NOT NORMAL.

Getting good mental health care in this country is very difficult. Often, insurances won’t cover it, or will barely cover one or two sessions with a counselor. There is no framework (or at least a very weak framework) for identifying those that are struggling and getting them help. This is true of potential shooters, but also potential suicides, and just plain sufferers. Having a token “school psychiatrist” who has to float between 4-5 schools in a district is not enough to identify and serve those that need it.

Many people identified and spoke out about the most recent school shooter long before he took the gun to the school. Why was nothing done? Who was supposed to do it? The school? The police? His family?

And politically, many of the same people who say, “It’s not a gun problem, it’s a mental health issue” are the same people who vote for those that defund mental health services.

So, our schools, and our society, needs a more full and robust support system for mental health, that’s affordable and available.

3 - And while we’re talking about wellness, there’s something very important that we’re missing out on in schools: Social Studies. I mean REAL social studies. Instead of creating fake “zero tolerance for bullying” policies, there should be curriculum that’s taught from kindergarten through high school about how to get along. And EVERYONE should be in on it, not just the peer tutors. The parents should engage in it. We should be teaching everyone how to be nice to each other, and work together. Everyone should learn how to see things from someone else’s point of view.

Maybe as part of high school graduation, there should be a time period of service. You should be required to step outside of your own little world and work for the support of someone else for a time. That would mean that I wouldn’t get to just keep going to church and count that as my service. I would have to seek a new opportunity.

And learning about how society and our government actually works would be good, too.

4 - You can’t blame violent shooting on any one movie or video game.  However, we do have a popular culture that glorifies violence and makes it exciting. Fighting and violence is conflict, and conflict makes for good stories.

Here’s what’s really bad about it, though: It shows that violence has no consequence. If the hero of a movie kills a couple of security guards while he sneaks into the bad guy’s factory, that’s all that’s shown. The nameless, faceless guards fall down, and the hero steps over them and moves on in the story. The guards are never talked about again. But in real life, those guards have families that now have lost their father, wives that have lost their husbands, parents who have lost sons. In real life, they will mourn, have funerals, and struggle to move on. But that’s a different story, so the movie doesn’t show that. They’re just dead and are now immaterial, disposable.

Often in games and movies, violence is shown as the only possible solution to a problem. Faced with an opponent who blocks your agenda? Punch him, or shoot him. Negotiate? Why?

I don’t think legislation will change this, and I’m not sure that it should. But, we should all be aware of it, and think twice about it. I am also fully aware of my own hypocrisy in saying this. We can all do better.

5 - A lot of these proposed solutions will cost money. Personally, I think it will be money well spent. Establishing a robust mental health system, for example, will require a lot of counselors, social workers, and support personnel. Having armed guards in the schools will require hiring a lot of armed guards. Teaching social skills will require hiring specialist teachers.

So, let’s think about that, though. In addition to considering it an “investment in our own survival”, you’re also creating a lot of valuable jobs. All these people you’re hiring will now be employed, and be paying taxes, and buying groceries and cars and taking vacations and spending money on other things. Those business that provide the groceries, cars, vacations, and other things will now be doing more business, and paying more taxes. A vibrant, thriving economy is one where a lot of money is flowing.

Anyway. Those are all of my thoughts for now.  Feel free to leave yours in the comments below



Mark has a lifelong testimony of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (the Mormon Church). Mark also has other sites and blogs, including MarkHansenMusic.com and his Dutch Oven blog.  Also, check out his new fantasy fiction blog: The Hero's Tale: Family-Friendly Role-Playing Game

Policy Changes

While I don’t intend to resurrect a big argument over whether or not women should or ever will get the priesthood, there are many who would agree that women can provide and even deserve a greater leadership role in the church.

Today, I heard a radio discussion about the life, times, and legacy of Thomas S Monson, and there was a lot of comment about this. A few of the commenters were saying that Pres Monson (or his administration) had ignored the wishes of the women of the church in his refusal to give them the priesthood.

First of all, I don’t know how many women are (or are not) interested in full priesthood ordinations. I have heard many women comment that they would like to get more respect and leadership within the church, even if that doesn’t include the actual ordinations.

While the church is very, very traditional, and change moves very slowly, I’ve noticed something that was put into place during Pres. Monson’s leadership which, I think, will be marked as the starting point toward this respect and position.

When they announced the change in the age of missionary service, two things happened. One, a lot more young men signed up immediately. That’s not a surprise. Get going right out of high school, then go on to college afterward. There was another thing, however, that happened, and that was that many, many more young women signed up for missions.

Missions are often training grounds wherein young Mormons learn the commitment and service necessary for church leadership. Many more young women will now be going through this. As they grow up and mature, they will do so within the existing structures to be able to step into greater leadership roles.

Also, and this is going to be a critical part of that equation, the young men who serve with them will grow up seeing them more as equals in service (over time), and will likely (on the whole) grow into treating them more as equals.

This will take time, of course. It won’t happen as fast as the activists want. I do see it as a natural part of the growth of the church, and this simple policy change could very well drive that growth.

Mark has a lifelong testimony of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (the Mormon Church). Mark also has other sites and blogs, including MarkHansenMusic.com and his Dutch Oven blog.

Read the #$%^&%#ing Constitution!

I just saw this picture as a meme on Facebook, and I wanted to comment, but I realized that my thoughts would be way, way too long for just a quick response. It would be bloggin’ time!

I have lots of thoughts about this.  Let me start with this one: a long time ago, while I was in my office at work, one of my co-workers came in and started ranting about something political. This was not strange. Our whole department was quite opinionated, and we were often sucked into some pretty fun discussions of many different topics: politics, religion, even cooking.

This particular rant, while I don’t remember even the topic, was sealed in my head by my friend’s last words, “I just wish everyone would read the #$%^&%#ing Constitution!”

I was taken aback, because he didn’t usually swear like that. After that washed over me, however, I realized he was right. I also wished everyone would read the constitution. I, myself, have read it many times. I don’t have it memorized, but I’ve read it. I think more people should read it and study it.

I think that would be both a blessing and a problem. It would be a blessing because if everyone knew the original words and what it means, we would be a much better governed people. It would be a problem, because many of the options out there for us to study it, many of the books and classes that we can read or take have a particular political angle to promote.

And therein lies the real challenge. The Constitution is very much like scripture in this sense: The words are there, and the words are clear, but what they mean and how to interpret them is not so obvious. I hear it a lot: someone gets on a political rant and says that this or that thing is unconstitutional and should be stopped! This guy or that party is trampling the constitution to dust and we must save it!

And, as I listen to it, I realize that what’s really being said is that something conflicts with their particular interpretation of the words, not necessarily against the words itself.

So much effort is spent trying to prove what the founding fathers really meant when they wrote it. Much more effort is spent trying to render current situational laws into the framework that they set up over 225 years ago, and still keep it relevant.

So, yes, everyone should read it. And everyone should also realize that their own interpretation of it is not the final word. The document itself provides for a mechanism for interpretation, and even that isn’t infallible. At least, if we’ve all read it, we’ll be a bit better in arguing about it.





Mark has a lifelong testimony of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (the Mormon Church). Mark also has other sites and blogs, including MarkHansenMusic.com and his Dutch Oven blog.

When Worlds Collide

A big topic in the news of late is the Arizona bill (passed by the legislature, and currently awaiting signing or veto by the governor) which would effectively allow anyone to refuse service to anyone for religious reasons.  There is a lot of legalese in the text of the law, but the basic upshot of it (and the source of the controversy) is that if there’s a same-sex wedding, and they want to hire someone to, say, bake the cake or take pictures, or perform the service, a person or company whose religous beliefs prohibit same-sex marriage would be allowed to turn down the opportunity.  It essentially says that if your church doesn’t like it, you’re not required to go along with it at your business.

On one side of this argument is the observation that this essentially sanctions discrimination, and undoes decades of civil rights legislation. On the other side of the argument, people are upset that businesses and business people are getting sued for “standing for their beliefs”.  They are frustrated that the government, and the laws it enforces, are requiring them to do things they believe are against their beliefs and principles.

It doesn’t even have to be against gays.  If someone’s Church doesn’t accept the possibility of life on other planets, according to this law, they shouldn’t be required to let aliens in their store.

Add to that this suit being brought against a Church in the UK, and the plot gets even a bit thicker.  The gay couple is suing because the Church won’t marry them.  Even though it’s happening “over there”, many in America are watching with interest because it could indicate a trend or precedent.

I’m a bit befuddled by it all.  I don’t want to legalize discrimination and prejudice, either, but I also support someone’s right to believe what they want and to act on that belief.

This is a situation where we may actually see the colliding of words, the immovable object being hit by the irresistible force. These two viewpoints are completely at odds with each other.  The gays want to get married, and there are many who don’t want to serve them.  Should they be forced to serve? Or should the gays be forced to look elsewhere for services?  What if the services aren’t available elsewhere, or if there are other factors in the situation?

This is why I think the LDS Church fought so strongly against same-sex marriage in California, Hawaii, and other states: the fear that, at some point, the Church would sued and forced to solemnize same-sex marriages in the temple.  I think that without that spectre looming over their heads, the Brethren of the Church would have been much more accepting of the concept.

Honestly, I’m not sure what the answer is.  But, it’s something that I’ll be watching very closely.





Mark has a lifelong testimony of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (the Mormon Church). Mark also has other sites and blogs, including MarkHansenMusic.com and his Dutch Oven blog.

An Update on The Mormon Malian

A lot of folks are talking about the troubles in Mali and Algeria these days.  It seems that Northern and Saharan Africa are the next big trouble spots, taking their places alongside the Middle East, and Afghanistan.

Not long ago, as I was listening to the news about the hostages and the attacks against the kidnappers, my thoughts drifted back.  “Wasn’t there some report once about a Mormon that was running for president of Mali?”  At first, I wasn’t sure if I had confused Mali with some other country there on western Africa.  There are a lot of countries there that I’m vaguely aware of, but unable to properly identify on a map.

I looked it up, and, sure enough, that was the report.  I’m not quite sure of the details, but apparently the election was interrupted by a military coup.  Yeah Samake (the Mormon in question) has been still pressing the current government to step down and to allow the civilian election to proceed.

You gotta believe, though, that if he somehow manages to get into the top spot there, he will have inherited a pretty big mess.  In the meantime, he’s still the Mayor of the community where he started, and is still advocating for his country.  I also found it interesting that although he's the only documented Mormon in his country, a nation that's 90% Islamic, he says he's not been persecuted for his faith.  The most recent thing I was able to find on his story was this interview dated Dec 5, 2012.  

You know, I wish him well.  It will be really interesting to see what opportunities for national service come to him in the current crisis.  I haven't met him, so who knows what he's like up close and in person.  But reading his words makes me think a bit about King Benjamin, and his political treatise in Mosiah...  Time will, tell, and I know I’ll be paying attention.






Mark has a lifelong testimony of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (the Mormon Church). Mark also has other sites and blogs, including MarkHansenMusic.com and his Dutch Oven blog.

Romney, Gingrich, and the Republicans

Religious Discrimination, Then and Now


In 1982, I had a girlfriend.  I was also contemplating and deciding whether or not to go on a mission.  Under the best of circumstances, that would complicate life enough.  My situation, however, was even more messy.

I lived in Indiana, where Mormon girls were rare.  So, in high school and early college, I dated mostly non-members.  Even though at the time, most of the church leaders were trying to discourage this, I didn’t have many options.  Not only were there few Mormon girls, they didn’t like me much.

So, this girlfriend I had was not a member of the church.  She didn’t understand my growing commitment to my faith, and didn’t get why I had to make any kind of choice to leave.  Still, we were “in love” (whatever that means to a 19-year-old).  One thing she had going for her was her morals.  She was one of the few in the college there in my home town who understood that it was a good idea to wait for marriage.

One thing that worked against her, however, was her mother, and this is really what I wanted to talk about today.  This lady hated Mormons.

Let me restate that:  This lady H A T E D Mormons.

In her eyes, I was just this side of the spawn of Satan himself, and why her beautiful daughter would waste her time with me was just beyond her.  She spent a lot of effort trying to get her girl to break up with me, both while I was deciding whether or not to go on the mission, and, later, when I actually was out in the field.

One of her tactics was to try and get her back with her ex-boyfriend.  My girl and this guy had been together about a year and a little more before she and I had started dating.  This guy was a prize, truly.  A real mother’s dream.  In the two years that followed their time together, spanning the time that the girl and I were dating, this guy was married and divorced, all the while trying to get back together with my girl and having a baby with yet a third girl.  My girl used to tell me about how he’d get drunk and come on to her, but she had always been able to keep him off.

And yet, when you add up all of his points, he still some how totalled up to be a better choice than a Mormon.

To tell the end of the story, by about a year into my mission, I could tell that this wasn’t going to work out, so I ended it.  Her next few letters made it clear to me that it was the right choice for both of us.

Then, fast forwarding to now, I’m looking at Mitt Romney, and I’m feeling connection.  Not a political one, I still disagree with his positions too much to actually vote for him, but a personal connection.  The republicans are kinda like my girlfriend and her mom.  Yeah, maybe Perry and Bachman are a homophobic idiots, and maybe Cain and Gingrich both need to learn to control their libidos, and get things clear with their wives (no matter how many they’ve had up to that point), but at least they’re not, well...  You know...  How do I say this nicely...?   ...not MORMON.

Mitt, I feel yer pain...

Mark has a lifelong testimony of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (the Mormon Church). Mark also has other sites and blogs, including MarkHansenMusic.com and his Dutch Oven blog.

The Utah State Legislature vs. The Disabled

--Or--

Why I lose sleep every January and February

A while ago, I got into a bit of a “discussion” on facebook.  It all began when my friend started a thread on his wall.  It got me a bit frustrated, but I debated whether or not I should respond, because it was started by a good friend.  In the end, I did.  I said, “Rhetoric like this is what makes me lose sleep every winter when the Utah state legislature meets.”  He asked me to clarify that.  I did, and others joined in.

What followed was a discussion that I’ve had a number of times when I get on this topic with the conservatives that are so plentiful out here in Utah.  It goes basically like this.

• They:  The government shouldn’t be responsible for taking care of people, they should take care of themselves!
• Me:  So, you’re saying that the government shouldn’t help us pay Jacob’s medical bills?  You mean we should pay what would amount to literally over $7,000 a month ourselves?
• They:  You pay that much?
• Me: No, but we would have to if we didn’t have help from government programs. Jacob’s life literally depends on government programs.
• They: Well, of course, the government should help people like you, they just shouldn’t help people who are leeching off welfare.
• Me: But when the representatives in the legislature talk, they don’t make any distinctions.  They just talk about cutting funding.  That makes me lose sleep.
• They: Well, conservatives wouldn’t cut funding for the disabled.  Some government programs are necessary.
• Me:  Whatever you say...

So, today, I got this email from a group that sits in on legislative committee meetings and reports on them to those in the disability community.  It said:

“The Social Services Appropriations Joint Sub-Committee voted on a base budget this morning  that eliminates or reduces programs that impact people receiving services through DSPD (Division of Services for People with Disabilities)...”  The letter went on to enumerate the items in the DSPD budget that were being cut and gutted.

Hmmmm...

Fortunately, this is just a subcommittee meeting, and there is much lobbying that can (and in my opinion must) be done to prevent that.

There are a few arguments that I’ve had on the ‘net where I would sincerely wish I would lose.  This, unfortunately, is one of them.  I’d gladly wish that I were wrong if it would help me sleep better.





Mark has a lifelong testimony of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (the Mormon Church). Mark also has other sites and blogs, including MarkHansenMusic.com and his Dutch Oven blog.

Gabrielle Giffords, Jared Loughner, Sarah Palin, and Barak Obama

My thoughts on the Arizona shooting and its aftermath:

   1. It was a senseless tragedy, perpetrated in a senseless way, by a senseless man.
   2. I can’t think of a single thing I’ve heard Sarah Palin say that didn’t make me cringe.  HOWEVER - this shooting is not her fault.
   3. The only thing I can think of that Jason Chaffetz has said that I’ve agreed with was his praise for Gabrielle Giffords.  This shooting isn’t his fault, either.
   4. Who’s fault is it?  Jared Loughner (assuming he’s convicted).
   5. Is Jared Loughner crazy?  I think ANYONE that points a gun at another human and shoots is, on some level, crazy.  There is a lot of craziness in the world. 
   6. All the pundits on the right and (mostly) on the left that are blaming this tragedy on the other side are grandstanding and should shut up.
   7. All of the pundits who are saying we should all tone our rhetoric down a notch are smart and should be listened to.
   8. All of the pundits who are saying that we should tone down our rhetoric, while also pointing the accusing finger at their opponents, are idiots and should be ignored.
   9. The American political system has always been based (for good or ill) on compromise and working together.  In recent years, the viciousness of the rhetoric, and the selfish need for the spotlight has gotten so intense that compromise seems impossible. When the shouting gets too loud to hear the talking, bad things happen.  Let’s not repeat the 1860’s.
  10. Gun Control does not work.  If someone wants a gun, they can acquire one, regardless of the legality or their mental state.
  11. An armed populace does not work.  Bystanders drawing weapons and returning fire could have changed a single man’s rampage into a full-fledged shootout. In a crowded parking lot, imagine the bloodbath that could have caused.
  12. Obama is not a perfect leader.  Still, I liked what he said at the funeral.  Especially the part where he said, “I want our democracy to be as good as Christina imagined it.  I want America to be as good as she imagined it.  All of us -– we should do everything we can to make sure this country lives up to our children’s expectations.”
  13. I also like how he made the whole speech about the victims and the heroes, not so much about politics.

When I originally created the Mo’Boy Doctrine, it was designed to be invoked when people got all bent out of shape over things that didn’t matter.  However, this incident, and the political crisis that it has pointed out, matter, and matter a lot.  Still, the best chance our country has rests in our abilitiy to not get bent out of shape.  So, I invoke the doctrine anyway. 

Let’s all take a deep breath, and work together for a change.





Mark has a lifelong testimony of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (the Mormon Church). Mark also has other sites and blogs, including MarkHansenMusic.com and his Dutch Oven blog.

What of Free Speech?

The curious case of Pastor Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church

One of my favorite bits of all in The Hitchiker’s Guide to the Galaxy is the Babel Fish. It’s this leechy little thing you stick in your ear and it instantly translates anything said to you in any form of language.  The bit goes on to wax philosophical and historical, but finally ends with this quote: “...Meanwhile, the poor Babel Fish, by effectively removing all barriers to communication, has caused more and bloodier wars than anything else in the history of creation.”

See, we always assume that open communication and freedom of speech are good things.  That as long as we are all sharing our thoughts in open dialog, our society can grow.

But, as Pastor Phelps of the Westboro Baptist Church, Pastor Jones of the Dove World Outreach Center and Douglas Adams have all demonstrated, not all speech is enlightening or ennobling.

Should there be limits on what you can say and when you can say it?  That’s been debated and argued for a long time.  There are some laws that govern what you can say or print.  These laws are referred to as the laws of Libel and Slander.

Voltaire said, “I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.”

The curious case of Pastor Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church, however, raises up some really interesting thoughts.  For example:  One of the reasons why so many people are so upset at both pastors is that most people disagree with them.  These small, minority religious groups are making a loud statement that most people don't like.  How many pastors, preachers, and prophets are out there saying, “Love your neighbor as yourself”?  Millions.  So, that’s not news!  Because we all agree.  If they started saying, “Kill your neighbor”, then we would be upset.  This, then, flies in the face of the value expressed by Voltaire.  Rather than defending their rights to the death, in spite of disagreement, we’re clamoring for them to be silenced, BECAUSE we disagree with them.  Even though most of us think they're idiots (myself included).

Another hopefully interesting observation: In our current political climate, both the right and the left are busy defining themselves by being the opposite of their opponents.  The right is the right because they're against what the left is for, and vice versa.

So far, it’s been generally the right wing that has been the most vocal about “preserving the rights in the Constitution”.  It’s also been the right wing that tends to be the most vocal about “respecting the military and the soldiers and veterans within it”.  It’s also those on the right that have been the most vocal about the “incorrectness of the homosexual lifestyle”, especially in the military.

So, here’s an issue where all of the conflicting points involved are essentially based in current conservative values.  It’s the right vs the right vs the right.  That makes it a little challenging for the conservatives.  Who to back?  This also brings up the same conundrum for the left.  Which side to choose?  Where to stand?  I wonder where the ACLU will land on this one!

A third observation, from a Mormon perspective:  A while ago, the left in Utah, and the ACLU in particular were up in arms because the church attempted to prevent anti-Mormon protesters from shouting down Mormon wedding groups that would gather for taking pictures on the temple lawn in downtown Salt Lake City.  Free speech was the word of the day. If the courts decide that it’s inappropriate and illegal to disrupt a private funeral service, will it then also be illegal to disrupt a private wedding celebration?

My own feeling is that we should be free to express our opinions.  We should also be held accountable for the results of the things we say.  So, in theory, I’m opposed to letting people disrupt the private moments of other people’s lives in order to further their own political agendas.  I also think that this concept should be applied universally regardless of the political leanings of those doing the expressing, or those being disrupted.





Mark has a lifelong testimony of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (the Mormon Church). Mark also has other sites and blogs, including MarkHansenMusic.com and his Dutch Oven blog.

Mark's Other Blog Posts: Baking Dutch Oven Bread, Joyful Noises, A Call for Playtesters: LDS Scripture Game

Some Mixed (and kinda mixed-up) Thoughts on Immigration

I must confess to being quite confused on the issue of illegal immigration.  There’s a lot of rhetoric going around, and most of it confuses real issues and problems.  It’s starting to boil over here in Utah.  Many people are pressuring legislators to act, and pressuring the church to make a stand.  Others are publishing lists of violators, and saying public prayers in Spanish.  A lot of anger flying around.  Here are some thoughts, based entirely on my own experiences.

Draw your own conclusion

1 - The Church’s Stand

The Church today issued a statement of its stand on immigration, prior to the Governor’s big summit meeting about the issue.  It was, as expected, pretty much a non-statement of neutrality.  Not only is that not surprising, it’s prudent, in my opinion.

A long time ago, when I lived in West Jordan, I was called as a stake missionary, and assigned to work in the local Spanish-speaking ward.  I met and worked with a lot of wonderful people there.  At one point, as a part of that calling, I attended a big conference in the chapel at temple square.  The theme of the conference was all about ministering and teaching to the hispanic population in the valley.  The conference was conducted by some mid-level general authority, and I can remember him saying (even though he made it clear that it was his own opinion) that he found it interesting that many people were immigrating to the state, and then finding the Gospel and being baptised. 

That struck me as well.  Much of the rhetoric focuses on the immigrants that come into the state and commit crimes and drain our social resources.  It doesn’t mention those that come in, and become productive and valued members of our communities.

2 - English

The other day, while I was up at the hospital with my son, a lady came in to clean out our room and empty our garbage cans.  It was clear to me after we exchanged a few words that she spoke Spanish and only a very little English.  I started conversing with her in Spanish, which I enjoy doing a lot.  It turned up in the conversation that she’s been living in Utah for 20 years, and had raised her family here.

OK, this is one of my gripes.  I can understand someone struggling with living in a new country, and having to learn a new language.  I did it, myself, when I did my mission in Honduras.  I can understand the frustrations of navigating foreign bureaucracies in a foreign language when you first arrive.  I’ve been there, done that.  It’s not easy, it’s not fun.

But after 20 years, you should be able to speak the language of the land where you live.

3 - Viva La Raza

I think that much of the problems that immigrants face when dealing with the majority population are made worse by the choices of the immigrants themselves.  As an example, I remember seeing a protest demonstration in downtown Salt Lake City a few years ago.  Local Latinos had gathered to express their frustrations.  Yes, they, too, are frustrated.

The gathering was peaceful, and essentially respectful.  But I noticed that they were all flying and waving Mexican flags.  Now I don’t have any problem with the Mexican flag, nor with people expressing their heritage.  But if you want to send the message that you want to be a part of the country, wouldn’t it have been a stronger statement to fly American flags?  If you want to assimilate, if you believe in the “great melting pot”, then join us.  Become American.  Not just in citizenship, but in your own personal demonstrations of your loyalty. 

4 - If It Ain’t Broke... Oh, wait...

I, personally, don’t have a lot of problems with Mexicans living and working in Utah.  I know that the issue has caused a lot of problems, but I’ve not had any problems with it myself.  I’d like to see a way established that it could all happen legally.  I would like to be seen as a friendly, welcoming country, even if that welcoming needs to be regulated to some extent.

I don’t know the answers.  Clearly what we’ve got going on right now isn’t working.  If we want to keep people out illegally, then we’re not doing a very good job of it.  If we want to welcome them in, that’s not working very functionally, either.  I do applaud the governor for his reaction to the “blacklist” mentioned earlier.  I also applaud the summit.  I hope that some good comes from it.





Mark has a lifelong testimony of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (the Mormon Church). Mark also has other sites and blogs, including MarkHansenMusic.com and his Dutch Oven blog.

Mark's Other Blog Posts: name post, name post,

When it's OK to Burn a Flag

I had a very patriotic moment tonight. At the close of Brendon's scout camp, some of the older scouts retired a couple of old and faded flags.

The flags were treated like fallen comrades, and the ceremony was much like a funeral. I had tears in my eyes as the color guard displayed each flag and we all stood and recited the pledge.

Then we all stood saluting as the color guard teams gently lowered the flags into the fire.  As they burned, I thought of the message of Paul to Timothy about fighting the good fight.

Then  all of the boys walked past the flags, paying respects, and I got to hug my son for the first time in a week, and hear about his adventures.



Location : Nina Loop, Garden City, UT 84028,

You're All Unique!

So, I decided to read over the lesson manual for my priesthood lesson next week.  I do a bit better as a teacher if I do that than I do if I just pick it up that morning...

This next lesson is all about "Our Heavenly Family".  It's basically about our life in the pre-existence.  An interesting part of it is that a big part of the lesson is all about how we developed as individuals even before our birth here on earth. 

Any parent knows that even though there are many similarities between their children, they are also very different, right from the start.  Parenting strategies that worked so well on the first child are total blow-up catastrophes on the second and third.  Things that were easy issues with one child are a constant struggle with another.

It all comes down to a big, nasty, dirty word:  FREEWILL.  That's right.  We all wanted it, we all chose it.  Now we have to deal with it.

And the actual problem with it is not so much that I have it, but that YOU have it, too.  I can deal with my own freewill, and the mistakes and successes that come from that.  But see, if EVERYONE goes out and starts exercising their own freewill, then suddenly we have to deal with (I'm sorry, I have to say it) DIVERSITY.  UNIQUENESS.  INDIVIDUALITY.

Ok, I hope you can see through my sarcasm.

I hate to admit it, but we Mormons have a history of "not playing well with others".  That's partly our fault, partly the fault of murdering mobs in Missouri and Illinois, and the result of a host of issues in between and since then.  For much of our history we tried to isolate ourselves.  We settled a land that nobody else wanted just so people would leave us alone.

Now we're in a world where isolation doesn't work any more.  We have to interact with others.  We have to be "in the world, but not of the world."  We have to live our standards, while respecting the rights of others to "worship how, where, or what they may."

That also applies internally.  We also have to face the ugly truth that freewill allows us to have diverse opinions even among ourselves, the members of the Church.  We weren't born alike, we don't think alike, and we've all had different lives that have led us to different personal places.

It turns out that all this individuality and diversity was a part of the plan from the beginning.  God wants us to work together.  Part of our task in achieving our godlike potential is in learning how to love and serve people who are different from us, people who reject us.  Our Heavenly Father has to deal with loving and caring about billions and billions of children, many of whom don't even believe He exists.  Many others fight among themselves, even to the point of killing each other, because they think He wants them to.

We have a long, long way to go.




Mark has a lifelong testimony of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (the Mormon Church). Mark also has other sites and blogs, including MarkHansenMusic.com and his Dutch Oven blog.


Mark's Other Blog Posts: Use Google to Find Backlinks!, Dutch Oven Cocoa Bread

Godwin's Law!

A friend of mine posted this on his Facebook page. It was so appropriate to how I feel, I had to add it here.



Mark has a lifelong testimony of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (the Mormon Church). Mark also has other sites and blogs, including MarkHansenMusic.com and his Dutch Oven blog.

Mo'Boy Strikes Again!

OK, it's been a while...

...But it's time to dust of the Mo'Boy Doctrine again.

Here's the story. At an elementary school, the PTA showed a video clip where various stars (half of whom I didn't even recognize - a sign of old age) pledged to be of service to their neighborhoods, their country, and the world. While most of them said things like they pledge to turn out the lights they're not using and to not bring home their groceries in plastic bags, or to get to know their neighbors and be kind and nice people, there were a few that pledged to support stem cell research and one who specifically pledged "to serve Barak Obama".

Now the Utah Eagle Forum is up in arms about it. Such horror. Left-wing propaganda being shown to our impressionable children.

Once again, it's time for us to not get so bent out of shape.

First of all, for the record, out of "the horse's mouth" so to speak: Here is the video in question:




Now, having watched it, I, personally have a few thoughts.

1--The principal should have previewed it before showing it. Whoever is in authority, and responsible (a classroom teacher, the principal, etc...) should preview EVERYTHING they show. They should then decide if it's appropriate or not, and then stand by their decision.

2--I think this video is pretty innocuous, myself. Most of the people said pledges that I think everyone should take to heart: caring for neighbors, not being so wasteful, etc...

3--However, I do think it probably shouldn't have been shown. I pledge allegiance to the flag, and to the republic for which it stands. In extension, I believe that every American should show a certain amount of support for the president, at least the office. I refuse to pledge allegiance to any one mortal man. I voted for Obama. I voted against Bush. They have both made policy judgments that I have agreed with and disagreed with. I do have a certain amount of respect for both of them.

So, my point is, the guy pledging to serve Barak Obama was over the line for me. That's just me, though.

4--Parting shot: I wonder, if the video had been of Glenn Beck and other conservative talk show hosts pledging their support for conservative causes (even moderate ones), would the Eagle Forum have complained about the "overt politicizing of our children"?

Anyway...

I pledge to serve my country in the way I see best, no matter who leads it. And that includes exercising my own personal rights to speak out in my blog and in the halls of my state legislature and any other forum that I can.

In the meantime, let's all try and work together, and make a nicer place, like the vast majority of the pledgers in the video said.



Mark has a lifelong testimony of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (the Mormon Church). Mark also has other sites and blogs, including MarkHansenMusic.com and his Dutch Oven blog.


Mark's Other Blog Posts: Dutch Oven Bread - Ciabatta

Socialism? Mormonism?

I'm getting bombarded by lots of emails, facebook postings, etc. decrying the evils of socialism. They are warning me of the downfall of this great nation and end of the constitution.

That may well be. I'm not fully convinced, but I'm not decided yet, either.

What worries me is some of the rhetoric being thrown around by a lot of the church members I'm hearing. They're all supported by this quote, or that wise and pithy saying.

I know I'm going to catch &@%$ for saying this, but I think that every Mormon should take a moment, open up their Book of Mormon, and their other scriptures, and read these verses:

Alma 30:17 The gospel of Self-Sufficiency, as taught by Korihor. That's right. The BAD guy.

Moses 7:18 In Zion, there are no poor.

And here's the really scary one: How about reading the entire book of 4th Nephi? I put particular emphasis on verses 3, and 25 (well, really 24-26).

Now, if you want to, you can all post angry comments, and tell me how that's not what those verses mean, and that's not what's happening in today's world, and you may even be right. Honestly, I think there are serious problems with socialism, capitalism, and communism. All I'm asking is that before you scream about welfare states, and before you vote to cut funding for the poor and the disabled and the elderly (they don't really need it anyway), read those verses. And then read them again.

Then you can come back and flame me.


Mark has a lifelong testimony of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (the Mormon Church). Mark also has other sites and blogs, including MarkHansenMusic.com and his Dutch Oven blog.



Mark's Other Blog Posts: New Song! "The Third Time"

Zelaya and Micheletti, The Fight of the Decade?

Since I was a missionary in Honduras many many years ago, I've been watching the current crisis between "former president" Manuel Zelaya and "interim president" Roberto Micheletti in Honduras. I put those titles in quotes for a reason. Zelaya is the "former president" because, right or wrong, he's not in power. He can't even get back into the country. I also think calling Micheletti an "interim" president is also a bit laughable. Will he give up power when elections happen? Meantime, both men are claiming that the other is a criminal and a traitor, and now talks in Costa Rica have broken down.

I've been following the follies of Zelaya and Micheletti mostly on the BBC, and usually, I find them to be pretty fair in their reporting. I can't seem to find any real sense in any of it. Zelaya wanted to ammend the constitution to give him another run at the presidency. That seems fair. Let him try it. If it's really that big of a deal, he'd have been voted down. The referrendum was supposedly non-binding anyway. Judging from the mixed reactions in the public, I'd say he probably didn't have a lot of popular support.

But instead of letting him just fall flat, his "successor" decided to have him arrested at gunpoint and deported. Seems to me that he's really the one who's messing with the constitution, here. But then, especially in central america, constitutionality has often been decided by which end of the gun barrel you were on.

Here's my take: This seems to be a lot of petty bickering between two guys who want to be in charge.

These two guys are really coming across like a couple of snotty-nosed kids trying to kick each other out of the sandbox. It's not even like the mess in southern africa a while back, where one guy was clearly evil and the other guy was good, but defeated. Zelaya and Micheletti both need to stop and look around and see what the world is seeing.

But one guy who's really showing what an idiot he can be is Hugo Chavez. He's criticizing Obama for not intervening strongly.

What?

Did I just hear that right?

Chavez is mad because the US isn't meddling in Central American sovreignty enough?

That's what I thought I just said. It just doesn't sound right.

I love the Honduran people, and I'm sorry they're going through such a mess. Between this and Mitch (the hurricane), they've had a tough decade. I'm honestly not sure that this is something that the US SHOULD get involved in, though. I guess it's one of those situations where we're &^$%*&$ if we do, and (^%*&*#^@ if we don't. (Don't try to figure out what those words are. I just hit random keys with the shift key held down)

MRKH
Mark Hansen
http://markhansenmusic.com

Finding Your Legislator

It's funny. We have a presidential election and EVERYBODY shows up to vote.

We have a municipal election and nobody knows it even happened. We seem to pay a little more attention at the state level, but not much. How many of us even know the name of our state legislators? Every person in Utah has two: One in the House and one in the Senate.

It's funny because, in a very real way, the state legislators have a much bigger impact on my life than the President of the United States. Their biggest task of all, in addition to occasionally passing or not passing a state law, is to figure out how they're gonna spend my tax dollars in my state. That will impact me a lot more directly than most federal programs.

I've learned, over the years, that this is a very important issue, and something that we should take very seriously.

So, after quite a while of digging through the 'net last election, trying desperately to find out which districts we're in, and who were the candidates, and what did they stand for, etc... It's a real joy to find a tool like this one!

You simply type in your address. It finds it on Google Maps, draws in your congressional district boundaries, and then shows you your legislators with their phone numbers and links to websites and email addresses. So simple!

So, if you want to tell them to vote to not cut the services to the disabled, like I suggested last time, or if you want to tell them to vote any other way on any other issue you think is important, there you have it.

If any of you have other good online resources for following and influencing the state legislators, just let me know and I'll post it here!



MRKH
Mark Hansen
http://markhansenmusic.com

Sometimes, Politics Scares Me

There have been times when I get political here, and I'll probably never change that. There are times, though, that I kinda keep my mouth shut. Sometimes, I just get feeling a bit smothered by all the debate and argument. And sometimes the debate and argument swirl around suppositions. People say that if someone gets elected than this will happen, or that if we spend our tax money here or there than the economy will soar or tank.

But we really don't know, do we? It's all speculation? Sometimes we're right and sometimes we're wrong.

Well, now it's not so much political as it is personal. And I don't really know what's going to happen. I'm just afraid. Very afraid.

First, please watch this video:

Video Courtesy of KSL.com

If the state budget passes as currently proposed, it is very likely that my son, Jacob, will be disqualified from receiving services from the state DSPD (Division of Services for People with Disabilities). That means that he would also be disqualified from receiving Medicaid, and almost all of his medical expenses would then fall on our insurance and our shoulders.

So that you understand, let me show you some examples. His daily formula and monthly medicines cost about 7 grand a month. So, after our deductible, our split of the 80/20 would be about $1400. Considering that this insurance costs us about $900 a month, and that would include a $500 out-of-pocket deductible, we're paying some pretty hefty costs in medical expenses monthly.

And, keep in mind that the amount quoted above doesn't include doctor's visits, nor specialists visits, nor physical therapy, nor equipment like wheelchairs, nor his yearly week-long stay up at Primary Children's.

Here are just 16 of the 72 cuts being considered:

1. Eliminate Medicaid optional eligibility categories
2. Reduce Medicaid spend down eligibility level
3. Reduce children’s dental coverage
4. End the Traumatic Brain Injury Waiver
5. End the Physical Disabilities Waiver
6. End Disability Services
7. Reduce local Substance Abuse treatment
8. Reduce local Mental Health funding
9. Eliminate Children’s Center Mental Health Grant
10. Eliminate Autism Preschool
11. Close State hospital beds
12. Eliminate general fund for Nursing Home Alternatives
13. Eliminate coverage for Breast and Cervical Cancer Clients
14. Eliminate Meals on Wheels for 8200 people at risk for malnutrition
15. Eliminate meals at Senior Centers for at risk seniors
16. Provider rate reductions for all levels of health care and human services providers

I'm not asking you to compromise your own political beliefs, but if you could find it in your heart to call your state legislator and tell him that you know a really cute kid who needs to have DSPD funded, I'd sure appreciate it. To find your state house representative, go to http://www.le.state.ut.us/house/DistrictInfo/newMaps/State.htm and click on your district. Keep clicking deeper until you find your house rep.

Thanks so much for your consideration.


MRKH
Mark Hansen
http://markhansenmusic.com