Friday, October 3, 2008


I wanted to forego the initial introductions and just delve into my first post, but...

...I can't.

Before I get into anything, I'd like to explain what you can expect here, what I hope you'll gain from this, and how much I hope you'll come back for more.

(hint: lots)

"The Liberal Mormon That Could" is not a title I came to lightly. Technically, I'm a "decline to state," a left-leaning-ex-Republican who belongs in a church known for being rather conservative. It can oftentimes feel like trying to fit that proverbial square peg in a round hole. This same church feels strongly about certain issues, and despite what may come across here, I am going to do my best to not reveal my personal stances on various sensitive subjects. You're going to have to guess what I think, because I won't be saying it here.

What I will do is question people's reasons for voting a certain way or believing a certain way. I don't believe it's a good idea to just follow the other sheep because they're sheep. God gave us brains and hearts for a reason--He intends for us to use them, and anymore, I'm afraid we're not.

I've run into too many otherwise smart people who fall into what I like to call "stupid traps." They believe in a certain doctrine--political, religious, or otherwise--and don't have anything to back themselves up with other than "because I'm [insert label here]." In their religious or political fervor, they'll allow anything to make sense when it just doesn't. The banner of faith in anything does not a good argument make. I don't mind if "faith" is the reason, but as a contention it's insufficient if you wish to rally those who don't belong in your choir.

I don't claim to be any sort of genius. I certainly have a lot to learn, but when I receive e-mails saturated with irritatingly false or illogical arguments for serious or "wrinkle" topics alike, I have to scream.

In the end, I don't care what you think or believe--I just care that you have something to back yourself up with, whatever it might be. I also hope that others will allow me the same privilege. I want and encourage discussion and self-reflection in not just any readers that happen to stop by (thank you), but for myself as well.

My posts won't all be serious, though. They won't all be regarding the religious or political topics du jour.

I mean, I have three kids. I've gotta take advantage of that.


Ralene said...

Yay! You finally got a blog here. I can't wait to see what The Liberal Mormon that Could has to say. That way I can tell you what I believe "b/c I'm a Christian". lol...j/k. You know I love a good debate.

Trisha said...

1.) The main purpose of sex is to procreate. Therefore, homosexuality is illogical.
2.) The purpose of marriage, in the traditional senses, is to provide a stable environment for a man and a women to procreate in and nurture their lineage. If people wish to do something other than this, perhaps they should create a new word for it.
3.) The government should not allow tax breaks for those who are married. It should be an individuals choice to be married, single, or homosexual. Providing tax breaks for those who are married is a mix of state and church and is discriminatory.

Lisa Jenkins said...

haha, a challenge :)

1) Do you have sex solely to procreate? With this argument, you would then also say that those who are unable to procreate due to infertility are engaging in something illogical.

Humans are an illogical group anyway. There are many things that are legal - smoking - and yet such things can be argued as illogical.

2) What say you about adopted children?

3) That could certainly be argued. However, not every couple marries in a church or are married by a church authority (pastor, priest, etc). Any schmuck can get online and get him or herself a license to marry others.

Hell, you can go to the county clerk and get married. The authority is given by two different entites: God and/or government - as you well know, I'm sure.

Society would have to come to some sort of understanding if this were to be the case.

But yes, interesting argument.