liz3564 wrote:You're not being a hypocrite. You're a father who loves his son. Period. Enjoy your family, go out for a nice family lunch somewhere afterwards, and eat plenty of good Texas Mexican food for me! :)
Hang in there! You'll be in my thoughts and prayers.
:)
Thanks. Actually we're going to Martin's Place. Total dump, but the food is wonderful.
Who Knows wrote:I disagree. Doing "whatever makes the son happy" shouldn't be your gauge. Like I said yesterday, we often do things for our kids that don't 'make them happy', but we know that it's best for them in the long run. Making them clean their rooms, brush their teeth, pick up their toys, give them shots when they're sick, take them to the dentist, etc. - none of that makes them happy - but we realize that we're teaching them valuable lessons that they will hopefully utilize and appreciate later on in life.
So - I believe you shouldn't do what makes the son happy right now - but what will be best for him in the long run.
And who's to say that Runtu's decision to baptize his son isn't the right decision for his son in the long run? That is a call that Runtu and his wife, as parents, have to make
We're dealing with a two parent household. When you parent in a two parent household, in order for effective parenting to happen, you have to have a united front. The parents can disagree, but it shouldn't happen in front of the kids. There should be unity and support in the decisions. All of the examples you gave above were examples of items that both you and your wife feel are important for your kids, and rightly so.
Runtu made the decision he made weighing all of the factors so that there would be family support. He made a judgment call on the best situation for his son. I respect that.
To be honest I think all those in these sorts of situations are picking, what in their mind, is the lesser of two "evils". (Not saying anything is evil here).
Does one lie in a TRI to bring peace to one's child who is getting married? Or hurt the family and remain true to their beliefs?
Does one pretend to believe to keep family unity or live authentically?
Does one admit one's disbelief even though it may destroy a relationship?
I mean these sorts of situations are beyond difficult and I do not think there is a "right" answer or a "good" answer.
We all do the best we can and make decisions in the way we feel they will bring the most good toward our loved ones.
What is BAFFLING to me is that no believers seem to have a problem with a non-believer, someone who doesn't even believe in the priesthood, or believe in the church, or believe the ordinance is anything other than "man" made, performing a priesthood ordinance.
My experience in the church (until this point), suggests this would not be allowed at all. I know of situations where fathers could not bless their babies because they were not as active as they should have been, a father not allowed to ordain his son because he wasn't a full tithe payer, a father not allowed to baptise his son because of a WoW issue.... but here we have a total disbeliever who is good to go? I'm just amazed at this!
Happy for Runtu but just amazed! :-)
~dancer~
Last edited by Bing [Bot] on Sun May 20, 2007 7:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"The search for reality is the most dangerous of all undertakings for it destroys the world in which you live." Nisargadatta Maharaj
truth dancer wrote:To be honest I think all those in these sorts of situations are picking, what in their mind, is the lesser of two "evils". (Not saying anything is evil here).
Does one lie in a TRI to bring peace to one's child who is getting married? Or hurt the family and remain true to their beliefs?
Does one pretend to believe to keep family unity or live authentically?
Does one admit one's disbelief even though it may destroy a relationship?
I mean these sorts of situations are beyond difficult and I do not think there is a "right" answer or a "good" answer.
We all do the best we can and make decisions in the way we feel they will bring the most good toward our loved ones.
What is BAFFLING to me is that no believers seem to have a problem with a non-believer, someone who doesn't even believe in the priesthood, or believe in the church, or believe the ordinance is anything other than "man" made, performing a priesthood ordinance.
My experience in the church (until this point), suggests this would not be allowed at all. I know of situations where fathers can bless their babies because they were not as active as they should have been, a father not allowed to ordain his son because he wasn't a full tithe payer, a father not allowed to baptise his son because of a WoW issue.... but here we have a total disbeliever who is good to go? I'm just amazed at this!
Happy for Runtu but just amazed! :-)
~dancer~
Thanks, TD. It's been a tough decision, and I hope I'm doing the right thing. As I said, I was really surprised that the bishop said it was OK. Knowing my bishop, I think he believes it's more important to keep the family together than to nitpick. Kind of my approach, as well, I guess.
Who Knows wrote:I disagree. Doing "whatever makes the son happy" shouldn't be your gauge. Like I said yesterday, we often do things for our kids that don't 'make them happy', but we know that it's best for them in the long run. Making them clean their rooms, brush their teeth, pick up their toys, give them shots when they're sick, take them to the dentist, etc. - none of that makes them happy - but we realize that we're teaching them valuable lessons that they will hopefully utilize and appreciate later on in life.
So - I believe you shouldn't do what makes the son happy right now - but what will be best for him in the long run.
And who's to say that Runtu's decision to baptize his son isn't the right decision for his son in the long run? That is a call that Runtu and his wife, as parents, have to make
We're dealing with a two parent household. When you parent in a two parent household, in order for effective parenting to happen, you have to have a united front. The parents can disagree, but it shouldn't happen in front of the kids. There should be unity and support in the decisions. All of the examples you gave above were examples of items that both you and your wife feel are important for your kids, and rightly so.
Runtu made the decision he made weighing all of the factors so that there would be family support. He made a judgment call on the best situation for his son. I respect that.
I was merely responding to what you said here: "If that is what's going to make your son happy, then it's the right thing." I disagree.
WK: "Joseph Smith asserted that the Book of Mormon peoples were the original inhabitants of the americas"
Will Schryver: "No, he didn’t." 3/19/08
Still waiting for Will to back this up...
I assume that your son will be baptized whether you perform the "ordinance" or not. It does'New Testament sound like you are going to convince your wife that this should not be happening at all. If this is the case and you have made the choice to personally perform the baptism, I do not see any harm in that.
I'm lucky in the fact that my wife was right behind me in leaving the church. We are on the same page when it comes to things like this. I can not imagine how difficult it is for people in your situation.
I admire you for maintaining peace in your marriage and family. In the end it makes no difference what the people here think, including me, so please forget everything I just said.
My apologies for the duplicate post. I know it looks like im trying to pad my stats but it was not intentional.
by the way, watching that piece on Martins made my mouth water!
Everything went OK yesterday. I still wonder if I did the right thing, but it's done. Part of me thinks I sold my son's future to keep the peace in our house, but then I can be really tough on myself. At least Martin's was wonderful, as expected.
by the way, I just missed sacrament meeting. I was supposed to go, but I go separately from my wife and daughter, and when it was time for me to go I was wasting time reading posts here and on some other boards (MAD plus a non-church related board concerning my hobby of violinmaking), and eventually I left the computer and took a shower and such, but finally accepted that I'd get to SM maybe during the last talk and then turn right around and come home, so I just didn't bother. I'm not sure if my wife will be irked or not.
I think I'll go out and mow the lawn instead. We were out and about all day yesterday and I didn't get a chance to do it.
Mormonism ceased being a compelling topic for me when I finally came to terms with its transformation from a personality cult into a combination of a real estate company, a SuperPac, and Westboro Baptist Church. - Kishkumen
Glad to hear it went well. And glad to hear the food was good, too.
I've spent my Sunday at a street fair---the big one in Park Slope is on the street I live on, so couldn't avoid it if I tried---and talking to my mother on the phone, *sigh*. No return to Utah possible without that baggage, I'm afraid. And it's not even Mormon baggage!
From the Ernest L. Wilkinson Diaries: "ELW dreams he's spattered w/ grease. Hundreds steal his greasy pants."