Posts

Showing posts from November, 2015

Bigoted but not a bigot

I'm sure many people wonder why I write so much about religion and sexuality (specifically the intersection of the two).  There are many reasons. The most significant is that it is a personal issue for me.  I grew up in a religious home where my sexuality was taboo.  I was taught from a young age that to feel the way I do about other males is inherently wrong.  I have overcome these feelings of self-loathing and I feel that I have a much healthier outlook on myself and on life, but I would be naive to assume that there are no lasting scars from my many years as a homophobe.

I see so many people object to being called bigots.  I really do, and here's an article I read that I believe does a very good job addressing just that phenomenon.  I was bigoted when I was a Mormon.  I believed, as the church taught, that homosexuality and gay marriage were sinful.  I opposed marriage equality.  I believed it was ridiculous that people were trying to marry someone of the same sex.  But I …

Exclusive club

On Thursday,  November 5, 2015 (yesterday), the LDS church updated its handbook of instruction.  This is a manual that is intended for local lay leadership of the church (bishops and stake presidents) to provide general instruction on how the church should be run.  Among the changes were two points that discriminate against homosexual couples.  The first is that "Are in a same-gender marriage" was added to the list of offenses which qualify as "apostasy" (see an image of that quote here).  The second is that children living with parents who are in a same-sex relationship (whether married or not, whether natural born or adopted children) are not allowed to be given a name and a blessing in the church (an ordinance performed on infants) nor to be baptized and become members of the church.  Once they reach the age of 18, if they move out of their parents' house and disavow their parents' relationship, with the permission of the President of the church, they ma…

Job creators

When discussing socioeconomic principals, I often hear employers called "job creators".  I'd like to dispel that myth.  Consider Bob.  Bob is the CEO of Widgets Inc.  His company makes widgets to sell to widget users.  Every employee that he has can make 100 widgets per day.  How many people will Bob employ to make widgets for him?  Simplifying all other variables, Bob will find an equilibrium price for widgets and try to sell the number of widgets needed to bring the cost to the equilibrium price.  Let's suppose this number is 5,000 widgets per day.  This way, he will guarantee maximum profits.  If he makes fewer than 5,000 widgets per day, he will miss out on possible sales.  If he makes more than that, the price will drop too low and his profit on each one will diminish and possibly even turn into a deficit.  So he chooses to hire 50 employees and make 5,000 widgets per day.

So, we say Bob is a "job creator" because he is hiring 50 people to make widgets…