Monday, December 29, 2008
Friday, December 26, 2008
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
Christmas Letter To The Masses
My first inclination for the Christmas letter was to say please refer to the blog archive for a summary of my year but in the spirit of Christmas I shall summarize for all those that only have five minutes.
Friday, December 19, 2008
SAM HALL THE GREAT
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
The Way To My Heart
This is just a sampling of the wonderful ways my friends blessed my life last week. I had botox injections (in my arm...do I look like I need botox elsewhere?) and have been laying low. All these folks have learned a secret, I heart food and DP. :) Adriana made me my own Lemonade cake, KT brought DP and flowers. Pete introduced me to other desserts from the cheesecake factory other than cheesecake (I was surprised as anyone else). Heather and B are excellent cooks and I heart SH and SJ! Good work on getting me ready M&M. Thank you all! ;)
Christmas Under The Lights
Sunday, December 14, 2008
Grateful Gourd: Isn't It About Time
Now some of you might be asking yourselves why I am now writing a grateful post when Thanksgiving has come and gone. The so-called "grateful" train took off a few weeks ago Jess while you were golfing; get with the program. I have three responses to the obvious confusion and questioning.
1. Last time I checked the blog author is me so therefore I can run on my own schedule.
2. Mike(y) and I didn't open the Grateful Gourd until December.
3. My 177th post had to be special so I was waiting patiently; and given it is the 177th post it is lengthy but well worth the read!
The Grateful Gourd!
Heather Majors randomly emailed one evening and asked to stop by, we obviously accepted. She presented us with a ceramic green gourd and a stack of paper slips; explaining that we should write things we are grateful for as the month progressed and at the end of the month share with one another our thoughts. We gave it the awesome name!
I found myself somewhat addicted to the grateful gourd, it really did seem that everyday I was finding new things to be grateful for and got a slight thrill each time I tucked my thought into the gourd. I found myself emerged with things to write on the little slips of paper each day. I have decided everyone should have one, a grateful gourd that is. Mikey was a little harder of a sale but when the fateful day of the Grateful Gourd reading came Mike followed through like a base hit in the bottom of the ninth to score the winning run; in a word she was clutch.
I made Sloppy Dan's (for those that have had the privilege you can be jealous right now or if you haven't come see me and if you are lucky I will whip up a batch) and sweet potatoes (we are from Idaho after all), and even got Sparkling Cider to toast our gratitude.
It was amazing to read and look back on what we were grateful for. Some were serious things, others comical, others only Mike and I would understand, but all had the same tone: Thanksgiving!
Below are just a few of our random slips of gratitude; but there will be more to come as we've decided that the Grateful Gourd will reside year round at Park Blvd.
We Thank Thee O God For A Prophet
The Days when Max Hall was NOT the BYU QB
Funny emails from my girls
Yes on Prop 8
Adam's email 11/30
JB&MP are so skinny their clothes don't fit!
Silver bullets (our Hondas)
Heather Majors
My Gomer
Our testimonies
Costco tortillas
H&M (the people)
A roommate who forces me to write out thankful slips for the grateful gourd
The smell of wet grass at the golf course
Sloppy Dan's
The temple
DVR baby
Adam (The Inca warrior)
Jed's email
Sachi's gorilla hugs
The Top 5 (mine and Mike's!)
Being polished as silver
Rob Daines
Gchats
Gustavo, Gustavo, Gustavo!
Last but definitely not least in our home: Dr. Pepper BABY!
Jess Berry Quote of The Day
Jeffrey R. Holland
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Jess Berry Quote of The Day
"Given the reality, however, of having "to look as young as you can, for as long as you can, so you can pay the rent," says former Designing Women star Annie Potts, who has had Botox, it seems fewer and fewer actresses will be able to avoid the needle. "I don't know why people want to make a controversy about Botox- it's a basic thing, like getting a manicure, or getting your hair dyed." Dr. Sebagh says. "It's on the grooming checklist. It is part of the game.""
Botox Confessions, People Magazine
Friday, December 5, 2008
Jess Berry Quote of The Day
Neal A. Maxwell
Thursday, December 4, 2008
Little ladies’ man pens dating primer
My Favorite part of the interview:
Q: You say that boys should be careful around pretty girls. What do you have against pretty girls?
A: Well, pretty girls … all they care about is their looks. She doesn't care about a boy liking her, or how a boy feels about her. It's just, "Oh, do I look nice?" Regular girls can be pretty, too. Plus, a regular girl has other things on her mind and is fun to be around.
See Full article here:
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/28038281/?GT1=43001
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
Jess Berry Quote of The Day
Tuesday, December 2, 2008
A Man to Emulate: Joseph B. Wirthlin
See the full article here:
http://newsroom.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/news-releases-stories/elder-joseph-b-wirthlin-a-life-full-of-adventure-and-joy-that-surpasses-understanding
Sunday, November 30, 2008
Finding Joy in The Journey
Send that note to the friend you’ve been neglecting; give your child a hug; give your parents a hug; say “I love you” more; always express your thanks. Never let a problem to be solved become more important than a person to be loved. Friends move away, children grow up, loved ones pass on. It’s so easy to take others for granted, until that day when they’re gone from our lives and we are left with feelings of “what if” and “if only.” Said author Harriet Beecher Stowe, “The bitterest tears shed over graves are for words left unsaid and deeds left undone.”4
President Thomas S. Monson
Jess Berry Quote of The Day
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Reija's Take on Harems
Specifically, let's talk about scriptural references to men with harems.
First up. King Ahaseurus. (I might be making that spelling up. The husband of Esther.) He had a harem. He had a queen too, but also then a harem. He would keep women in the harem and then take them out and if he didn't like them he killed them. Then he tried to kill all of the Jews. Now we think, well he was a good guy, he chose and then didn't kill Esther. But let us not be deceived. Clearly the man had some issues.
Next up we've got Solomon. Now everything started out great with Solomon, but in the end he ditched it all. Temple. Wisdom. Etc. And went after gold and lots of concubines and wasted his final hours in riotous living, forfeiting some blessings and leaving his kingdom in dwindling states of being. We forget sometimes the end of Solomon, caught up in his original glory.
Lastly we've got King Noah. He's in the BoM, and his life ends with him burning.
All I'm saying is this: Men with harems cannot be trusted to make clear decisions.
Amen Reija!
Friday, November 21, 2008
Ode From Meredith
Haiku For HC: Farewell For Now
She's chasing eternity
Best of luck to her.
(Haiku By: Mer)
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Jess Berry Quote of the Day!
Opera: Elixir of Love
Mer comfortably herself in her natural habitat. ;)
Monday, November 17, 2008
HAPPY BIRTHDAY JB (THE GREATER)!!!
Adam, JB, Adam, JB
Saturday, November 8, 2008
The Brookester Turns Into a NY Fan!
The JD Wants to Join the JB Club
Adriana and Adriana (The Lesser)
Friday, November 7, 2008
Sunday, November 2, 2008
Saturday, November 1, 2008
Best Halloween Costume EVER
Friday, October 31, 2008
"High-Fives" Do NOT Equal Salutations
- During a sporting events and your team makes a great play.
- You play a practical joke on a sibling with another sibling.
- Playing flag football and someone makes a touchdown (this might call for a "ten" if it was a great play).
- Playing "Too Slow Joe" with a toddler.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Prop 8 Yes
Another friend voicing his position!
On election night, when other states tune-in to see the results of Proposition 8, how will they see California? How will California regard marriage and how will California define the family? What will the purpose of marriage be in California and to whom will California extend the “right” and privilege to marry?
First, who has the “right” to marry? To answer this question, we must differentiate a “right” from a “right” for which we must qualify. For example, everyone has the “right” and opportunity to become a lawyer. However, one must qualify to be a lawyer. There are standards, qualifications, and hurdles. It is the only way the integrity of the profession can be protected. Now, we must acknowledge that some people in our society, because of no fault or failure of their own, do not have the physical, mental, or emotional capability of completing law school, passing the bar examination, and receiving the necessary credentials. Is the requisite of completing law school and passing the bar exam then bigotry? Does it create inequality? Is it unfair? For some of these people, it is their lifelong dream and passion to be a lawyer. The formal certification would bring them great happiness and give meaning to their life, yet we are still enforcing difficult and challenging requirements that prevent them from attaining their desire. Are these standards discriminatory? Is this unnecessary? Is this wrong? Are we hung up on the definition of a word that has no real impact? Are we taking away “rights?” Are we limiting “liberties?” Are we keeping good people from achieving the “happiness” only some can obtain? We also know the system isn’t perfect as many in the profession already fall short of performing as competent and honest lawyers. So, why not qualify everyone who wants to be lawyer? What difference will it really make? Quickly, we see the red flags and understand the consequences of such an idea. The definition DOES matter and the qualification must be ensured.
Similarly, everyone has the “right,” “freedom,” and opportunity to marry. However, one must also qualify to marry. There is a standard, a qualification, and a hurdle. It is the only way the integrity of the institution can be protected. A constitutional amendment limiting the union of marriage between one man and one woman does not take away that “right” or “freedom” from anybody. No “inequality” or “injustice” is created. If one is predisposed to same sex-attraction, we are not taking away his “right” to marry. We are simply limiting and reserving marriage to only those who properly qualify to marry. The integrity of marriage must be upheld and strengthened! We know not all heterosexual marriages and parents uphold the integrity of the commitment they’ve made, but the answer lies not in qualifying all and any, but in further strengthening the institution as it is (and demanding more and better from those already married).
Next, the “right” to marry must be given only when marrying a member of the opposite sex because of marriage’s unique purpose. Marriage is to provide an opportunity for a man and a woman to support and love each other and their children. To the child, marriage provides a stable foundation for support and love. Marriage unites the three core dimensions of parenthood – biological, social, and legal into one pro-child form. The unique characteristics of both mothers and fathers are crucial to the emotional, physical, and mental development of a child. Many would like to focus the Proposition 8 debate on the “rights” and “freedoms” of independent adults to practice marriage in the way they desire. However, we must focus the debate on the “rights” and “freedoms” of dependent children. We DO NOT have the “right” to tell one child they get two moms, another child they get two dads, and another child they get a mom and a dad. Every child has the “right” to a mom and dad! From the child’s point of view, Proposition 8 could not be more “fair,” more “necessary,” or more “right.” Proposition 8 is what will guarantee “equality for all.” Homosexual couples are extremely capable, intelligent, and caring. But, gender matters! Children have a need for both a mother and a father – the sexes are not interchangeable. Whatever a father can do a second mother CANNOT do. Whatever a mother can do, a second father CANNOT do. “Parents” DO NOT equal any two capable, loving adults. “Parents” equal a mom and a dad. We CANNOT equate that which is not equal.
Finally, we have inherited (and are fighting to maintain) the “right” to ‘life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.’ These "inalienable rights" often define what it means to be an American. However, we forget these freedoms are NOT without limitations. We must make and enforce laws to protect and preserve citizens from bringing undue harm upon themselves and/or others to protect the very “freedoms” and “rights” we enjoy. In that light, we must protect the “inalienable right” given to a child to have both a mom and a dad. And, we must protect the institution of marriage and uphold the most important and fundamental societal unit -- the family.
On election night, other states will see the results of Proposition 8 and California will say what our former President and Governor once said: “We will be as a city upon a hill!” California will be the example. California will stand up for marriage. California will support the family. California will give children both a mom and a dad. California will vote YES on Proposition 8!
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Why One Friend is Voting Yes on Prop 8
Why would society even control and regulate a relationship? Why would we let the government intervene into such a personal aspect in our lives? It is because society has a deep vested interest in marriage. It channels the sexual attraction between man and woman, which could lead to procreation, in a socially desirable way; that of a family unit where they are bound to provide and protect for the offspring which result from their sexual union. It was not created as a contract between two people to devote themselves to each other, rather society has created the institution of marriage so that a man and a woman set aside their personal objectives and goals to produce a family which they protect and are bound to the offspring that they create.
Society has a vested interest in marriage because it is in that union between man and woman in which children are created and brought into the world and we should be very concerned about how the children in this world are raised, taught, and cared for. The UN charter on children's rights states that all children have a right to be raised by the parents who brought them into the world; Marriage ensures that this is the case and holds parents responsible for how their children are raised and taught.
The genderless marriage paradigm is radically different in its aims and teachings and the two cannot exist concomitantly, for it would define marriage as a union between two people lacking the power of mutual procreation, thus stripping marriage of its function of regulating how we are bringing children into the world and forming their identity. The adoption of a marriage paradigm in which its primary concern is the two married partners is one I cannot support.
I love my gay friends and family. It is horrible how much persecution and discrimination homosexuals have suffered. I do agree that one benefit of allowing same-sex couples to marry would be a reduction in this persecution and discrimination. I believe that homosexual and heterosexual couples should be afforded the same rights as everyone. I empathize and understand that it is a rational and reasonable thing for same-sex couples to want the status that marriage affords. I believe, though, that the costs of redefining marriage are too great. I fear a society in which people think marriage is a way to pursue happiness, fulfillment, and selfish pursuits and dodge their parental and spousal obligations; Sadly this is already too often the case, but if we break the link between marriage and procreation this second best scenario will be institutionalized.
“The man-woman marriage institution is:
1. Society’s best and perhaps only effective means to secure the right of a child to know and be raised by her biological parents (with exceptions justified only when they are in the best interests of the child).
2. The most effective means yet developed to maximize the private welfare provided to children.
3. The indispensable foundation for that child-rearing mode that correlates with the optimal outcomes deemed crucial for a child’s, and therefore society’s, well-being.
4. Society’s primary and most effective means of bridging the male-female divide.
5. Society’s only means of transforming a male into husband-father and female into wife-mother, statuses and identities particularly beneficial to society.”
(from Stewart, Monte Neil, Marriage Facts, Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, [Vol. 31 No. 1] pp. 321-322, http://www.marriagelawfoun
Finally, I know that marriage is sacred, ordained of God, and gives to fathers and mothers, not rights, freedoms, and privileges as some would believe that marriage accords, but rather the solemn and powerful responsibility of “rear[ing] their children in love and righteousness, to provide for their physical and spiritual needs, to teach them to love and serve one another, to observe the commandments of God and to be law-abiding citizens wherever they live. Husbands and wives—mothers and fathers—will be held accountable before God for the discharge of these obligations.”
(from The Proclamation to the World, by Gordon B. Hinckley as part of his message at the General Relief Society Meeting held September 23, 1995, http://www.lds.org/library
Sunday, October 26, 2008
North Face Twins: Practically KT
North Face Ninjas!
Someone (namely me) forgot that Ninjas hold their fingers together....my bad! ;)
Friday, October 24, 2008
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
My Position
Of the many ways humans can relate to one other, the physical, emotional and even spiritual intimacy between a man and a woman privately and publicly committed to each other is the most sacred of all.
I used the word 'sacred' because I am spiritual. If you are not religious, try 'special' or 'separate' instead. I heard somewhere that 'sacred' in Hebrew means something like 'separate' anyway.
I don't have any studies or conclusive clinical studies to support this statement, I just feel the truth of it in my heart. I can't think of too many possible amendments or changes to this statement that don't result in something that feels a little less true. I'm sure it has something to do with biology. I'm sure it has something to do with physiology. I'm sure it has something to do with how our species is perpetuated. I'm sure it has something to do with feelings and tenderness and hopefully love. But each of these factors on their own surely contribute, but do not entirely account for this truth to me.
That said, I believe in, value and revere friendship in all its kinds and degrees. I believe in, value and revere companionship in all its kinds and degrees. I believe in, value, and revere commitment in all its kinds and degrees. But this greater truth readily and easily coexists with, and is even the culmination of, all these beliefs and values for me.
It's my belief that marriage as an institution reflects, affirms, and reinforces this truth. I believe that people fail marriage, I don't believe that marriage fails people.
The Opposition
I came across this quote in my non-comprehensive research on the subject of gay rights:
"For the lesbian and gay movement, then, cultural goals include (but are not limited to) challenging dominant constructions of masculinity and femininity, homophobia, and the primacy of the gendered heterosexual nuclear family (heteronormativity). Political goals include changing laws and policies in order to gain new rights, benefits, and protections from harm."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_rights#cite_note-1
Insofar as this quote correctly characterizes opposition to Proposition 8, I support Proposition 8. I believe that gender, masculinity and femininity are important and essential to individuals, family and society. As to what 'dominant constructions of masculinity and femininity' refer to, I am not sure. I readily concede that there exist many cultural norms concerning masculinity and femininity that are unimportant at best and extremely damaging at worst. But at the end of the day, every person alive is the product of one man masculine enough and one woman feminine enough to get together, however briefly or committed to each other. (Indeed, anyone who is such a product deserves our individual and collective respect as a member of the human family. If people ever start resulting from some other way, I will revise my opinion accordingly, but until then, gender is critical to society in my view.)
Consequently, I am against homophobia, insomuch as it entails the devaluing or diminishing of anyone's humanity anywhere. I also do support anyone in their right to an aversion to unwelcome sexual advances.
I am in support of the primacy of the gendered heterosexual nuclear family.
The phrase, "new rights" did not escape me, and I think the relaxing of the concept of marriage in this case is an instance of an attempt to gain a right heretofore nonexistent. I also support any law that protects all people from harm. This is all I will say concerning the opposition to Proposition 8.
Most concerning to me is the implicit notion that the opposition hopes for no less than for society to assign the same sanctity to same-gender sex as to opposite-gender sex, which to me is offensive.
Whether or not this quote is overstating the intent of the opposition to Proposition 8 is another matter, but I suspect it is not. But I do respectfully and strongly disagree with the opposition to Proposition 8 (including many of you whom I care about) on these terms.
Kimball Bighorse
30 August 2008
Monday, October 20, 2008
Yes on Prop 8
An Editorial from a friend:
YES ON 8
Don’t be fooled – Proposition 8 is not about equality or rights. Why not? Because homosexual couples already can have access to all the rights married couples have. Read it yourself:
“California Family Code: Section 297.5. (a) Registered domestic partners shall have the same rights, protections, and benefits, and shall be subject to the same responsibilities, obligations, and duties under law, whether they derive from statutes, administrative regulations, court rules, government policies, common law, or any other provisions or sources of law, as are granted to and imposed upon spouses.”
Proposition 8 is about how we as a society choose to define marriage, and I believe that marriage should be about children. Admittedly, not every heterosexual couple chooses to have children themselves; but if marriage were just about two people loving each other, then why do we prevent siblings and cousins from marrying? I will vote YES on Proposition 8 and prevent same-sex marriage, not to deny anyone of rights (which they already have), but to define marriage in a way that will leave intact the foundational unit of human society.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Josh The Mighty Hunter! Spoils of The Morning!
Although, he looks a little worn out! :)