Here are three different pictures that I have recently taken of Isaac and they all have to do with food, so I thought that I would put them together. We do have two sons, but apparently, no pictures of Austin right now.
We were getting ready to go somewhere and we told Isaac that he could bring his drink. Apparently, he had one with water, one with his juice, and one (empty) for milk. Needless to say, we did not let him bring them both.
Another time, we sat down for dinner and Jensine put out some pineapple. Isaac grabbed the plate and said, "Isaac plate." He LOVES fruit, but we thought that that was a little too much.
Kinser Family Blog
Welcome to an inside look into the lives of Aaron & Jensine Kinser, as well as their children Isaac, Austin, Cameron, and Annika.
2008/11/22
Un-Bowl-ievable
At the Law School, I am a mentor for the International LLM Program. (LLM is a degree that foreigners, mostly, who have a law degree in their home country, pursue in the US). A couple times a year, the Program hosts social events to allow international students to hang out with the locals. Last night, we had free bowling on campus with pizza. So, we went with Isaac and Austin. While all of the Chinese and Korean ladies fawned over Austin and took pictures with him, Isaac learned to bowl. We helped him a few times with his 6-pound ball, but after a while, he decided that he could do it himself. Here is a video of that:
Yes, Isaac was wearing socks in the video; they did not have bowling shoes his size (shocking!!!). I was very impressed that he tried to not cross the line. After he wanted to chase his ball down the first time, I told him that they wouldn't let him any pizza if he crossed the line. Apparently, it worked. We used bumper lanes, but I think Isaac bowled around a 50. Not too bad for a almost-2-year old.
Mmmmm.....PIZZA!!!
Isaac and his ball.
Waiting (and waiting and waiting) for the ball to reach the pins!
2008/11/14
Bus Ridin' and Colon -Oscopyin'
To say that Isaac loves cars would be an understatement. He LOVES cars, trucks, bikes, motorcycles, planes, boats, helicopters, trains, buses, and tractors. As we drive around the city, he sits in the back and notes the vehicles that we see. "Big truck, yeah. School bus, yeah. Yellow school bus, yeah." He says "yeah" at the end of almost all sentences. Ever since we road the free shuttle bus to the Minnesota State Fair, every time he sees a bus, he says, "Bus, ride it!" Ridin' the bus!!!
So, on Wednesday, he went with me and road the bus to school. Jensine came and picked him up when my class started. He had fun, although I think that he wanted to do more on the bus; like run around. At any rate, he had a lot of fun.
Ready to learn.
On a completely different note, Isaac had a colonoscopy yesterday. For over half a year, Isaac has had what appeared to be hemorrhoids on his butt whenever he had a poopy diaper. We tried a stool softener at the recommendation of the doctor, but it did not go away. So, we scheduled a colonoscopy. Isaac with his hospital pajamas and, of course, a giant 'Queen (Lightning McQueen).
It was at a local children's hospital and Isaac did really well. Amazingly, he also did really well with the all-liquid diet the day before; it helps that he LOVES juice perhaps even more than cars. It was a very short procedure. After the surgery, he was at the hospital for maybe an hour. The doctor said that nothing seems to be wrong and that the bump seems to be just a flap of skin. They took a few small samples to biopsy, but Isaac seems to be fine.
The best form of recovery.
Is Austin going to make sure Isaac doesn't run away?
So, on Wednesday, he went with me and road the bus to school. Jensine came and picked him up when my class started. He had fun, although I think that he wanted to do more on the bus; like run around. At any rate, he had a lot of fun.
Ready to learn.
On a completely different note, Isaac had a colonoscopy yesterday. For over half a year, Isaac has had what appeared to be hemorrhoids on his butt whenever he had a poopy diaper. We tried a stool softener at the recommendation of the doctor, but it did not go away. So, we scheduled a colonoscopy. Isaac with his hospital pajamas and, of course, a giant 'Queen (Lightning McQueen).
It was at a local children's hospital and Isaac did really well. Amazingly, he also did really well with the all-liquid diet the day before; it helps that he LOVES juice perhaps even more than cars. It was a very short procedure. After the surgery, he was at the hospital for maybe an hour. The doctor said that nothing seems to be wrong and that the bump seems to be just a flap of skin. They took a few small samples to biopsy, but Isaac seems to be fine.
The best form of recovery.
Is Austin going to make sure Isaac doesn't run away?
2008/11/07
One Last Thought (or Thoughts) on Proposition 8
I know that I promised not to talk too much politics, but I just thought that I would discuss a few issues which I have seen in news articles that might be of interest to many people. Having a background in law, there are probably a number of issues that I can explain better than most (though many of my classmates would clearly disagree).
I. "The Mormons should lose their tax exempt status because they violated the separation of church and state."
This is actually two completely separate issues that have almost nothing to do with each other. Anyone who makes this argument has absolutely no knowledge of the Constitution or the legal process of the United States.
A. Tax Exemption
Tax exemption has nothing to do with the Constitution. The 16th Amendment allows the federal government to institute an income tax, but it is entirely up to Congress to decide how that tax is to operate. They accomplished this through the extremely dense tax code (my abridged version for individuals is like 1500 pages in size 10 font). Through section 501 of the tax code, certain non-profit organizations, including churches are exempted from paying taxes. This includes most unions, charities, environmental groups, and other such organizations. They are prohibited from supporting or opposing candidates, but not issues. There are also other limitations, but these are unrelated to Proposition 8.
These organizations are not prohibited from endorsing issues. This makes sense, otherwise an organization that supports the homeless would be prevented from asking the city to build a homeless shelter and the Sierra club would be prevented from petitioning for land preserves.
The fact that churches are given an exemption has nothing to do with religion, it has to do with the fact that they are a non-profit organization. If, because they endorsed an issue, the LDS church was to lose its tax exempt status for supporting the amendment, so would the CA Teachers' Union (which was the biggest contributor against the measure) and every gay rights non profit in the country who openly opposed it. The only way that the government could punish the LDS church would be to prevent all churches from tax exemption. No Congress would face the wrath of this country by trying such an action as Mormons, Jews, Catholics (including the more liberal Hispanic groups), Southern Baptists, Jehovah's Witnesses, Black Evangelicals, and even Reverend Wright's Trinity United Church of Christ would likely complain to Congress. That would be Congressional suicide.
B. Separation of Church and State
Separation of church and state is an entirely different matter. This is a constitutional matter. Despite popular, ignorant belief, the language "separation of church and state" is not Constitutional language, but is a phrase used by the Supreme Court and others to address the limitations in the first amendment. The First Amendment to the US Constitution reads:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;..."
This includes the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause, each which limits the actions of government. The Free Exercise Clause prohibits Congress from taking any action which unduly limits the ability of American citizens to practice their faith (both of these clauses have been applied to local and state governments through the operation of the 14th Amendment's due process clause; trust me, don't even bother trying to figure out how). There are limitations to the practice of that religion, including prohibiting Polygamy, but most religious practice is unaffected. This clause, however, has nothing to do with Proposition 8.
Those who argue that the LDS Church's actions violate the Establishment clause have several problems. First of all, neither Congress, nor the state did anything. It was the people that chose to pass a law and there is nothing prohibiting the people from passing a law based on personal conviction. I could likewise pass environmental laws, gun registration laws, estate tax laws, or any type of law because of religious or secular conviction. This was a vote of the people who were influenced by any number of things to support this proposition.
Secondly, if some argue that this vote should be invalidated because many who voted for it believed homosexuality to be a sin, would that mean that any law that is passed should be examined to find out why and which (anonymous) voters supported it? If it was religious conviction, the law is unconstitutional? That would be absurd beyond belief. Finally, it should be noted that the church itself did not donate any money to the cause. The $22 million or so that was donated came from church members.
II. Gay Rights Groups are Taking This to Court to Challenge the Constitutionality of the Amendment
At first glance, this seems absurd. It seems impossible for a Constitutional Amendment to be unconstitutional, but there may be an argument. First of all, if the California Constitution mandates equal protection under the law, plenty of left-leaning judges (sorry to any left-leaning individuals) are willing to make gays a protected group and ensure that all laws treat them fairly. I don't think that defining marriage violates the law because state-supported marriage is not for the couples. The only reason that the state supports marriage is because it ensures future generations. I will not further argue why traditional marriage should be the only legally authorized marriage, but suffice it to say there are arguments on both sides. So, if prohibiting gay marriage violates equal protection, Proposition 8 would violate the state Constitution. We will see what this happens.
That is all I will say for not, unless someone has more questions.
2008/11/06
Today's Milestones
So, I just thought that I would point out a milestone that each of our boys just hit tonight (or at least, we first noticed tonight).
Austin:
Austin started "gliding" tonight. He has been standing up to things the last little while, but tonight he walked along the coffee table, almost the entire way around our rectangle table. If he keeps this up, he could be an early walker like Isaac.
Isaac:
Isaac said the family prayer tonight without any help. Okay, so it wasn't much of a prayer, but it was clear what he was trying to say. We asked him whose turn it was (it's almost always Daddy's turn) and he said "Isaac." I asked him if he wanted his momma to help, and before she could help, he began saying his own prayer. It went as follows (with what he didn't say in red):
Heavenly Father,
Thank you for this day.
Thank you for Austin.
In the name of Jesus Christ.
Amen.
Very simple, but very cute. It was really adorable. That is all for now.
Austin:
Austin started "gliding" tonight. He has been standing up to things the last little while, but tonight he walked along the coffee table, almost the entire way around our rectangle table. If he keeps this up, he could be an early walker like Isaac.
Isaac:
Isaac said the family prayer tonight without any help. Okay, so it wasn't much of a prayer, but it was clear what he was trying to say. We asked him whose turn it was (it's almost always Daddy's turn) and he said "Isaac." I asked him if he wanted his momma to help, and before she could help, he began saying his own prayer. It went as follows (with what he didn't say in red):
Heavenly Father,
Thank you for this day.
Thank you for Austin.
In the name of Jesus Christ.
Amen.
Very simple, but very cute. It was really adorable. That is all for now.
2008/11/03
On Prophets, Politics, and Proposition 8
I have decided to try and keep my blog as "light" as possible and to avoid discussion of things that are too divisive or argumentative. That being said, I feel that I have an obligation to make my views on this matter known.
I should preface this post by saying that if you are not a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, you need not read further; this post is not directed at you. Rather, this is directed at any who are members who believe the the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is the only true church on the face of the earth and that its president, currently Thomas S. Monson, is the prophet, seer, and revelator of the Lord.
I. Why Am I Writing This?
During election years, there is a great deal of debate and discussion on a variety of matters and people both inside and outside of the church find themselves divided on what and who is best for this country. This is good. We should develop our own political views and seek to vote for those laws and candidates that we believe are best for the country. The church maintains its neutrality on candidates and parties and encourages us to each develop our own ideas. The church remains neutral on most political issues, as well. Military size, tax rates, land use, college tuition, tort reform, economic growth, size of government, corporate reform, health care, military involvement, the war on terror, criminal sentencing, interpretation of the Constitution, appointment of judges, etc. The list goes on and on with issues on which members of the church can disagree.
A majority of church members, at least in the United States, lean to the right, but that does not mean that a righteous and faithful member of the church cannot be a Democrat. It just so happens that on one issue, in particular, the church picks a side, and comes down with the Republicans. That issue is same-sex marriage. That is not to say that the church supports Republicans or that it opposes Democrats, except on that issue.
I think that it is important to recognize that on all but a select few issues, the members of the church can believe whatever they wish. That is their right and duty as citizens of the United States. On same-sex marriage, however, the church is unambiguously and emphatically opposed to movements which seek to normalize and condone the marriage between members of the same-sex.
If we believe that the prophet is God's mouthpiece on the earth today, then how can we honestly believe that the church is wrong on this issue? If you think the prophet is wrong, then how can the church be true? It is imperative that we not let any personal, political convictions that we may have come before our faith. When the prophet of the Lord speaks, we should listen. I am a conservative Republican who believes in the individual right to bear arms. Yet, if the Lord were to instruct the prophet that the church should fight for legislation that seeks to take away a citizen's right to keep and bear arms, I would wholeheartedly support the church and remain a conservative Republican on most matters, but not gun ownership. I believe that every member should have strong political views, and even stronger faith. If our political views and faith ever conflict, our political and personal views should yield. If they do not, we should question the strength and conviction of our faith.
I have seen a number of members that I know join Facebook groups or otherwise express that their views are different than those of the church; that they oppose Proposition 8 or await the day when the church will stop its unfair discrimination of same-sex relationships. While I support their right to express their views and try not to be judgmental, I am concerned that many in my generation are too swayed by political and social trends and are mistakenly letting their political views dictate their faith instead of allowing their faith to dictate the few political views that it should.
II. Blacks, Priesthood, and Same-Sex Marriage
Some members of the church believe that the church will eventually change its position on same-sex marriage, like it did with blacks holding the priesthood. Assuming that is true (but believing it not to be), why should we assume to have a better understanding of timing than the Lord? There are, however, several distinctions between these two issues that are important to keep in mind:
During his earthly mission, Christ did no preach to the Gentiles, those not of Jewish blood. His mission was to the children of Israel. Before his ascension, Christ instructed his apostles to go to all the world, yet it was not until some time later, that Peter received the instruction to go unto the Gentiles and preach the gospel. The promise was that everyone would receive the gospel, but that did not mean immediately.
This was much like blacks and the priesthood. Joseph Smith said, "the curse is not yet taken off the sons of Canaan." (Joseph Smith Jr., Messenger and Advocate Vol. II, No. 7, April 1836 , p. 290; History of the Church, Vol. 2, Ch. 30, pp. 436-40.) This quote demonstrates a temporary nature of the church's prevention of blacks obtaining the priesthood and participating in the ordinance of the gospel. Before 1978, prophets of the church had been pleading with the Lord to allow blacks to receive the priesthood. In the Lord's infinite wisdom and for reasons that we do not yet know, the Lord waited until he did to allow blacks the full blessings of the priesthood. It should also be pointed out that being black was not a sin, but was evidence of the remainder of the sin of someone else. Brigham Young also said, "That the time will come when they will have the privilege of all we have the privilege of and more." (Brigham Young, Speech given in Joint Session of the Utah Legislature, February 5, 1952, in Fred Collier, The Teachings of President Brigham Young. Salt Lake City, Collier's Publishing, 1987, 43).
Now, consider the issue of same-sex relationships and marriage. In 1995, the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles released the "The Family: A Proclamation to the World." This document says, among other things, that "marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God and that the family is central to the Creator’s plan for the eternal destiny of His children." It further declares that "the sacred powers of procreation are to be employed only between man and woman, lawfully wedded as husband and wife." This proclamation is clear and direct and further establishes the church's position that marriage is an essential part of God's plan, but this is only marriage between a man and a woman.
There is no evidence to suggest that God's eternal plan for his children is anything less than eternal. Marriage is a focal point of that plan and the church seeks to maintain the sacredness and sanctity of that institution. The language used by the church with regards to blacks and priesthood is inherently different than that used in discussing marriage. Blacks were temporarily prohibited from full participation in the gospel. God's ordination of marriage between man and woman is eternal and will not change with the societal winds of change!
III. California and Proposition 8
Given that the church remains almost entirely neutral on politics, we should not take it lightly that the church is so strongly supporting Proposition 8 in California. In a letter to members of the church in California, the First Presidency declared said: "We ask that you do all you can to support the proposed constitutional amendment by donating of your means and time to assure that marriage in California is legally defined as being between a man and a woman. Our best efforts are required to preserve the sacred institution of marriage." Speaking on behalf of the church, Elder Dallin H. Oaks said, "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints must take a stand on doctrine and principle. This is more than a social issue — ultimately it may be a test of our most basic religious freedoms to teach what we know our Father in Heaven wants us to teach." (see the remainder of this interview here.)
If we have a temple recommend and have declared to our Bishop and Stake President that we believe that Thomas S. Monson is the prophet, seer, and revelator of the Lord, we should act in accordance with that declaration. If we are unwilling to allow the Lord's prophet to dictate some aspects of our life, how strong is our faith that he really speaks with the Lord.
Our faith must not be a matter of convenience. There are those who believe that the church is acting in a bigoted way. So be it. If this church is the true church, which I believe it is, so what? This church has survived persecution, death, and eviction from states, yet the church continues to grow. We members are the strength of this church and we must be willing to fight for what is right. Despite popular belief in this country, there are absolutes. There is right and there is wrong.
We should be willing to die for the gospel. It is part of the law of consecration. Yet, if we are not willing to suffer harassment at those who encourage and condone immoral behavior, how will we ever have the faith to stand when "persecutions may rage, mobs may combine, armies may assemble, calumny may defame."
The church is taking a stand on Proposition 8 and same-sex marriage in general, and we must either side with the church or join those that oppose it. Tomorrow is the time for California members to choose and it will not be long before those of us elsewhere will have to make the same decision. We should make the decision now!
I should preface this post by saying that if you are not a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, you need not read further; this post is not directed at you. Rather, this is directed at any who are members who believe the the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is the only true church on the face of the earth and that its president, currently Thomas S. Monson, is the prophet, seer, and revelator of the Lord.
I. Why Am I Writing This?
During election years, there is a great deal of debate and discussion on a variety of matters and people both inside and outside of the church find themselves divided on what and who is best for this country. This is good. We should develop our own political views and seek to vote for those laws and candidates that we believe are best for the country. The church maintains its neutrality on candidates and parties and encourages us to each develop our own ideas. The church remains neutral on most political issues, as well. Military size, tax rates, land use, college tuition, tort reform, economic growth, size of government, corporate reform, health care, military involvement, the war on terror, criminal sentencing, interpretation of the Constitution, appointment of judges, etc. The list goes on and on with issues on which members of the church can disagree.
A majority of church members, at least in the United States, lean to the right, but that does not mean that a righteous and faithful member of the church cannot be a Democrat. It just so happens that on one issue, in particular, the church picks a side, and comes down with the Republicans. That issue is same-sex marriage. That is not to say that the church supports Republicans or that it opposes Democrats, except on that issue.
I think that it is important to recognize that on all but a select few issues, the members of the church can believe whatever they wish. That is their right and duty as citizens of the United States. On same-sex marriage, however, the church is unambiguously and emphatically opposed to movements which seek to normalize and condone the marriage between members of the same-sex.
If we believe that the prophet is God's mouthpiece on the earth today, then how can we honestly believe that the church is wrong on this issue? If you think the prophet is wrong, then how can the church be true? It is imperative that we not let any personal, political convictions that we may have come before our faith. When the prophet of the Lord speaks, we should listen. I am a conservative Republican who believes in the individual right to bear arms. Yet, if the Lord were to instruct the prophet that the church should fight for legislation that seeks to take away a citizen's right to keep and bear arms, I would wholeheartedly support the church and remain a conservative Republican on most matters, but not gun ownership. I believe that every member should have strong political views, and even stronger faith. If our political views and faith ever conflict, our political and personal views should yield. If they do not, we should question the strength and conviction of our faith.
I have seen a number of members that I know join Facebook groups or otherwise express that their views are different than those of the church; that they oppose Proposition 8 or await the day when the church will stop its unfair discrimination of same-sex relationships. While I support their right to express their views and try not to be judgmental, I am concerned that many in my generation are too swayed by political and social trends and are mistakenly letting their political views dictate their faith instead of allowing their faith to dictate the few political views that it should.
II. Blacks, Priesthood, and Same-Sex Marriage
Some members of the church believe that the church will eventually change its position on same-sex marriage, like it did with blacks holding the priesthood. Assuming that is true (but believing it not to be), why should we assume to have a better understanding of timing than the Lord? There are, however, several distinctions between these two issues that are important to keep in mind:
During his earthly mission, Christ did no preach to the Gentiles, those not of Jewish blood. His mission was to the children of Israel. Before his ascension, Christ instructed his apostles to go to all the world, yet it was not until some time later, that Peter received the instruction to go unto the Gentiles and preach the gospel. The promise was that everyone would receive the gospel, but that did not mean immediately.
This was much like blacks and the priesthood. Joseph Smith said, "the curse is not yet taken off the sons of Canaan." (Joseph Smith Jr., Messenger and Advocate Vol. II, No. 7, April 1836 , p. 290; History of the Church, Vol. 2, Ch. 30, pp. 436-40.) This quote demonstrates a temporary nature of the church's prevention of blacks obtaining the priesthood and participating in the ordinance of the gospel. Before 1978, prophets of the church had been pleading with the Lord to allow blacks to receive the priesthood. In the Lord's infinite wisdom and for reasons that we do not yet know, the Lord waited until he did to allow blacks the full blessings of the priesthood. It should also be pointed out that being black was not a sin, but was evidence of the remainder of the sin of someone else. Brigham Young also said, "That the time will come when they will have the privilege of all we have the privilege of and more." (Brigham Young, Speech given in Joint Session of the Utah Legislature, February 5, 1952, in Fred Collier, The Teachings of President Brigham Young. Salt Lake City, Collier's Publishing, 1987, 43).
Now, consider the issue of same-sex relationships and marriage. In 1995, the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles released the "The Family: A Proclamation to the World." This document says, among other things, that "marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God and that the family is central to the Creator’s plan for the eternal destiny of His children." It further declares that "the sacred powers of procreation are to be employed only between man and woman, lawfully wedded as husband and wife." This proclamation is clear and direct and further establishes the church's position that marriage is an essential part of God's plan, but this is only marriage between a man and a woman.
There is no evidence to suggest that God's eternal plan for his children is anything less than eternal. Marriage is a focal point of that plan and the church seeks to maintain the sacredness and sanctity of that institution. The language used by the church with regards to blacks and priesthood is inherently different than that used in discussing marriage. Blacks were temporarily prohibited from full participation in the gospel. God's ordination of marriage between man and woman is eternal and will not change with the societal winds of change!
III. California and Proposition 8
Given that the church remains almost entirely neutral on politics, we should not take it lightly that the church is so strongly supporting Proposition 8 in California. In a letter to members of the church in California, the First Presidency declared said: "We ask that you do all you can to support the proposed constitutional amendment by donating of your means and time to assure that marriage in California is legally defined as being between a man and a woman. Our best efforts are required to preserve the sacred institution of marriage." Speaking on behalf of the church, Elder Dallin H. Oaks said, "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints must take a stand on doctrine and principle. This is more than a social issue — ultimately it may be a test of our most basic religious freedoms to teach what we know our Father in Heaven wants us to teach." (see the remainder of this interview here.)
If we have a temple recommend and have declared to our Bishop and Stake President that we believe that Thomas S. Monson is the prophet, seer, and revelator of the Lord, we should act in accordance with that declaration. If we are unwilling to allow the Lord's prophet to dictate some aspects of our life, how strong is our faith that he really speaks with the Lord.
Our faith must not be a matter of convenience. There are those who believe that the church is acting in a bigoted way. So be it. If this church is the true church, which I believe it is, so what? This church has survived persecution, death, and eviction from states, yet the church continues to grow. We members are the strength of this church and we must be willing to fight for what is right. Despite popular belief in this country, there are absolutes. There is right and there is wrong.
We should be willing to die for the gospel. It is part of the law of consecration. Yet, if we are not willing to suffer harassment at those who encourage and condone immoral behavior, how will we ever have the faith to stand when "persecutions may rage, mobs may combine, armies may assemble, calumny may defame."
The church is taking a stand on Proposition 8 and same-sex marriage in general, and we must either side with the church or join those that oppose it. Tomorrow is the time for California members to choose and it will not be long before those of us elsewhere will have to make the same decision. We should make the decision now!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)