<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: From Patriarchy to Eternity</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mormonmatters.org/2010/02/03/from-patriarchy-to-eternity/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mormonmatters.org/2010/02/03/from-patriarchy-to-eternity/</link>
	<description>A weekly podcast exploring Mormon culture and current events.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 08:12:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: See Truth</title>
		<link>http://mormonmatters.org/2010/02/03/from-patriarchy-to-eternity/#comment-158791</link>
		<dc:creator>See Truth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Sep 2011 13:39:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mormonmatters.org/?p=9659#comment-158791</guid>
		<description>Spinning the meaning of words seems less of a problem when compared to believing in a magical sky-daddy and a scammer from Vermont.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Spinning the meaning of words seems less of a problem when compared to believing in a magical sky-daddy and a scammer from Vermont.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: GBSmith</title>
		<link>http://mormonmatters.org/2010/02/03/from-patriarchy-to-eternity/#comment-128253</link>
		<dc:creator>GBSmith</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 16:53:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mormonmatters.org/?p=9659#comment-128253</guid>
		<description>It seems a matter of semantics of preside and equality.  In practical terms something else needs to be considered.  Those insisting that their wife is equal eventhough they, the priesthood holder presides, will have to maintain that throughout their relationship every decision has been reached by concensus and compromise and neither party has felt themselves to be the loser.  If that is truly the case then they indeed are equal but as to one presiding or not, I&#039;m not so sure.  If no one person made the final decision then to me no one decided.  And that means no one presided.  There&#039;s this pioneer sense of presiding of the father leading his family in the wilderness while his wife supports and advises that I think is the more accepted norm but not by any stretch the reality.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It seems a matter of semantics of preside and equality.  In practical terms something else needs to be considered.  Those insisting that their wife is equal eventhough they, the priesthood holder presides, will have to maintain that throughout their relationship every decision has been reached by concensus and compromise and neither party has felt themselves to be the loser.  If that is truly the case then they indeed are equal but as to one presiding or not, I&#8217;m not so sure.  If no one person made the final decision then to me no one decided.  And that means no one presided.  There&#8217;s this pioneer sense of presiding of the father leading his family in the wilderness while his wife supports and advises that I think is the more accepted norm but not by any stretch the reality.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Heber13</title>
		<link>http://mormonmatters.org/2010/02/03/from-patriarchy-to-eternity/#comment-128247</link>
		<dc:creator>Heber13</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 15:52:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mormonmatters.org/?p=9659#comment-128247</guid>
		<description>#96 BiV: GUESS WHAT? You don’t preside in your home. By definition.

That&#039;s fine if I don&#039;t fit your definition of presiding. I&#039;m not hung up on who is presiding and who is not, or what title I have and what title others have, I just want our family to be happy.  I patterned my marriage after my parents, and I think others in the church live similarly, so I thought it is important to bring up this fact that many in the church choose to live this way, and so I don&#039;t agree with the Introduction article that states: Patriarchy by its very definition is not compatible with equality. 

If any patriarchy is leading to important differences in how men and women are progressing towards God, then it is being done wrong.

I just look at it as I preside because I have the priesthood, and preside in equality so my wife is never diminished or treated ANY less than I am because our eternal marriage is built on equality--not exact same responsibilities, but equality in worth and power and influence.

I don&#039;t see any other way to reconcile the teaching of Priesthood in the home and how many times in Priesthood meeting I am told over and over again that our wives are equals in every way.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>#96 BiV: GUESS WHAT? You don’t preside in your home. By definition.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s fine if I don&#8217;t fit your definition of presiding. I&#8217;m not hung up on who is presiding and who is not, or what title I have and what title others have, I just want our family to be happy.  I patterned my marriage after my parents, and I think others in the church live similarly, so I thought it is important to bring up this fact that many in the church choose to live this way, and so I don&#8217;t agree with the Introduction article that states: Patriarchy by its very definition is not compatible with equality. </p>
<p>If any patriarchy is leading to important differences in how men and women are progressing towards God, then it is being done wrong.</p>
<p>I just look at it as I preside because I have the priesthood, and preside in equality so my wife is never diminished or treated ANY less than I am because our eternal marriage is built on equality&#8211;not exact same responsibilities, but equality in worth and power and influence.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t see any other way to reconcile the teaching of Priesthood in the home and how many times in Priesthood meeting I am told over and over again that our wives are equals in every way.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Thomas</title>
		<link>http://mormonmatters.org/2010/02/03/from-patriarchy-to-eternity/#comment-128234</link>
		<dc:creator>Thomas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 03:51:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mormonmatters.org/?p=9659#comment-128234</guid>
		<description>#75:  &quot;Thomas—Perhaps I am oversimplifying your stance, but essentially you are saying either 1) The numerous scripture stories mean nothing...&quot;

Not oversimplifying by much.  That is close to exactly what I&#039;m saying.

The scripture stories in question don&#039;t mean &quot;nothing,&quot; but neither do I believe that they can safely be taken at face value, as they&#039;ve come down to us.  I keep coming back to this:  There are surely far more &quot;false positives&quot; of a person erroneously thinking God has given him a special dispensation to do what appears to be evil, then actual instances of Abrahamic tests.  So why on earth would God use a teaching tool that is so non-idiot-proof, piles up so many bodies, and (by giving religion a bad name) turned so many people away from God altogether?

My former bishop, in a Sunday School class, reported my current stake president (a magnificently intelligent man) as suggesting that God had the Krakatoa volcano blow up in the early 1800s (he meant Tambora) to cool down the global climate by a few degrees, so that harvests would fail in Vermont and cause the Smith family to move west to the neighborhood of the Nephite library.  Now, maybe God really did do that -- but if it were up to me (and I&#039;m no engineer), it would seem that there has got to be a more efficient, not to say kind, way of getting one family to move a hundred or so miles west than blowing several thousand people into the stratosphere, drowning tens of thousands more with tidal waves, and starving half of East Asia.  Just so with &quot;Abrahamic tests.&quot;  There has got to be a better way of teaching lessons of obedience to Deity, than to use (and thereby legitimate) a mechanism that any old jihadist with a boxcutter can use, too.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>#75:  &#8220;Thomas—Perhaps I am oversimplifying your stance, but essentially you are saying either 1) The numerous scripture stories mean nothing&#8230;&#8221;</p>
<p>Not oversimplifying by much.  That is close to exactly what I&#8217;m saying.</p>
<p>The scripture stories in question don&#8217;t mean &#8220;nothing,&#8221; but neither do I believe that they can safely be taken at face value, as they&#8217;ve come down to us.  I keep coming back to this:  There are surely far more &#8220;false positives&#8221; of a person erroneously thinking God has given him a special dispensation to do what appears to be evil, then actual instances of Abrahamic tests.  So why on earth would God use a teaching tool that is so non-idiot-proof, piles up so many bodies, and (by giving religion a bad name) turned so many people away from God altogether?</p>
<p>My former bishop, in a Sunday School class, reported my current stake president (a magnificently intelligent man) as suggesting that God had the Krakatoa volcano blow up in the early 1800s (he meant Tambora) to cool down the global climate by a few degrees, so that harvests would fail in Vermont and cause the Smith family to move west to the neighborhood of the Nephite library.  Now, maybe God really did do that &#8212; but if it were up to me (and I&#8217;m no engineer), it would seem that there has got to be a more efficient, not to say kind, way of getting one family to move a hundred or so miles west than blowing several thousand people into the stratosphere, drowning tens of thousands more with tidal waves, and starving half of East Asia.  Just so with &#8220;Abrahamic tests.&#8221;  There has got to be a better way of teaching lessons of obedience to Deity, than to use (and thereby legitimate) a mechanism that any old jihadist with a boxcutter can use, too.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bored in Vernal</title>
		<link>http://mormonmatters.org/2010/02/03/from-patriarchy-to-eternity/#comment-128230</link>
		<dc:creator>Bored in Vernal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 02:52:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mormonmatters.org/?p=9659#comment-128230</guid>
		<description>Heber said:
&lt;i&gt;I have had many instances where my SP told me to attend a meeting, and my wife said, “Absolutley not, you are needed at home.” Do you think I will tell my wife she doesn’t preside, so I will listen to the SP? Nope. Wife trumps SP every time.&lt;/i&gt;
and also:
&lt;i&gt;My wife has equal authority to receive revelation on whether she should marry me, or if we should have kids, or if I should take a job … equally as I do. My revelation doesn’t trump hers. Her and I reach a united decision, or we don’t.&lt;/i&gt;

Heber, I would like you to understand that this is because your marriage is based on an equality model.  Many of our marriages in the Church ARE based on an equality model.  But weirdly, we say that the man presides.  If your wife truly has as much power in the decision making process as you do, then, GUESS WHAT? You don&#039;t preside in your home.  By definition.  This is perfectly fine, in my opinion.  But I think it&#039;s strange for anyone to insist that is presiding.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Heber said:<br />
<i>I have had many instances where my SP told me to attend a meeting, and my wife said, “Absolutley not, you are needed at home.” Do you think I will tell my wife she doesn’t preside, so I will listen to the SP? Nope. Wife trumps SP every time.</i><br />
and also:<br />
<i>My wife has equal authority to receive revelation on whether she should marry me, or if we should have kids, or if I should take a job … equally as I do. My revelation doesn’t trump hers. Her and I reach a united decision, or we don’t.</i></p>
<p>Heber, I would like you to understand that this is because your marriage is based on an equality model.  Many of our marriages in the Church ARE based on an equality model.  But weirdly, we say that the man presides.  If your wife truly has as much power in the decision making process as you do, then, GUESS WHAT? You don&#8217;t preside in your home.  By definition.  This is perfectly fine, in my opinion.  But I think it&#8217;s strange for anyone to insist that is presiding.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Heber13</title>
		<link>http://mormonmatters.org/2010/02/03/from-patriarchy-to-eternity/#comment-128229</link>
		<dc:creator>Heber13</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 01:48:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mormonmatters.org/?p=9659#comment-128229</guid>
		<description>#93: There is no such thing as equality without equal access to authority.

What authority do you refer to?

Everyone has equal authority to revelation from God for themselves.

I think you are referring to authority to control people...which is of no consequence to God, but is pride.

My wife has equal authority to receive revelation on whether she should marry me, or if we should have kids, or if I should take a job ... equally as I do.  My revelation doesn&#039;t trump hers.  Her and I reach a united decision, or we don&#039;t.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>#93: There is no such thing as equality without equal access to authority.</p>
<p>What authority do you refer to?</p>
<p>Everyone has equal authority to revelation from God for themselves.</p>
<p>I think you are referring to authority to control people&#8230;which is of no consequence to God, but is pride.</p>
<p>My wife has equal authority to receive revelation on whether she should marry me, or if we should have kids, or if I should take a job &#8230; equally as I do.  My revelation doesn&#8217;t trump hers.  Her and I reach a united decision, or we don&#8217;t.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Heber13</title>
		<link>http://mormonmatters.org/2010/02/03/from-patriarchy-to-eternity/#comment-128228</link>
		<dc:creator>Heber13</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 01:37:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mormonmatters.org/?p=9659#comment-128228</guid>
		<description>#91  I get it, and understand that as a male priesthood holder I must tread lightly, I try as best I can to understand how it must make women feel.  And I am ashamed at how some don&#039;t understand God&#039;s principle of organization and they abuse it.  We live in an imperfect world with an imperfect church trying to figure things out.

But I think a couple base assumptions complicate the issue, and should be better explored.  I think perhaps the organization or government may not need to change and may not be flawed, but perhaps our culture or our individual perceptions create the problems, not the system.  If properly understood and practiced, it could never be a problem between men and women.  There should be no pride of leading or controlling, but only of love and achieving God&#039;s work, all in different capacities but with the same goal.

1. in #91 post you write: &quot;when push comes to shove, what he [the Bishop] says is reality&quot;
I completely disagree with this.  What he says may be inspired, but I must get personal revelation for what I must do.  We are judged individually and I take my free agency and accountability seriously. I will not disrespect my bishop, but what he says for me or the ward certainly is not MY reality, it is his. He&#039;s just a man, a man with keys, but a man.  I will repeat, the bishop, or SP, or apostle, or prophet can never control me. I do not give them that power.  I have had many instances where my SP told me to attend a meeting, and my wife said, &quot;Absolutley not, you are needed at home.&quot;  Do you think I will tell my wife she doesn&#039;t preside, so I will listen to the SP?  Nope. Wife trumps SP every time. But most of the time my wife respects my callings and supports me as I support her and keep my family needs first.

2. you also write: &quot;But nowhere in the church hierarchy is there any place for a woman, regardless of qualification, time served, testimony, etc.&quot;  
I understand, however, there is no place for me to aspire to be bishop based on qualifications either.  That is what is different from church positions and the professional work place. It is not a position or title of accomplishment or power to control people.  There are also positions as a man that I cannot have, regardless of characteristics either.

I fear the debate for some is that they are left out of certain titles or positions, and they don&#039;t think it is fair.  &quot;Everything should be equal to be fair&quot; is what I hear...and that just is not reality.  Equality is not fairness.  Being of one heart and one mind, despite our different situations and circumstances is what we are taught.

I go back to my base assumption...no position is of more worth than another. So why does one position matter over another?  We are all excluded from some position or another, that is life and something that helps us focus on the real important things...not what title we have, but what we do with whatever title we have.

Some people will never have children and never be called Mom or Dad.  I will never be called to serve in a Primary presidency, or Relief Society Presidency.  I firmly believe bishop is another position just like Primary president, different roles and responsibilities, but not of any more worth.  Stake RS or General Relief Society positions are of higher profile for women.  Like bishops or any other position, there is some authority over them, but all positions have that, up to the prophet.

I will never be bishop, SP or apostle, I do not think that makes me less of a person. Perhaps that is not because of gender, but for whatever reason, it is reality. And we must deal with it and move forward with what we can control.

Finally, if a bishop tells me what to do and is out of line, I don&#039;t have to listen to his authority.  Wives don&#039;t have to listen to their husbands either, unless their husbands hearken unto the voice of the Lord ... so there are all circumstances that vary and provide for unique situations.

I see no problems or issues with the government of the church in respecting or providing growth opportunity for all people, only with some people&#039;s perceptions or practice of it.  I sincerely hope I am not being insensitive about it. It is just my view.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>#91  I get it, and understand that as a male priesthood holder I must tread lightly, I try as best I can to understand how it must make women feel.  And I am ashamed at how some don&#8217;t understand God&#8217;s principle of organization and they abuse it.  We live in an imperfect world with an imperfect church trying to figure things out.</p>
<p>But I think a couple base assumptions complicate the issue, and should be better explored.  I think perhaps the organization or government may not need to change and may not be flawed, but perhaps our culture or our individual perceptions create the problems, not the system.  If properly understood and practiced, it could never be a problem between men and women.  There should be no pride of leading or controlling, but only of love and achieving God&#8217;s work, all in different capacities but with the same goal.</p>
<p>1. in #91 post you write: &#8220;when push comes to shove, what he [the Bishop] says is reality&#8221;<br />
I completely disagree with this.  What he says may be inspired, but I must get personal revelation for what I must do.  We are judged individually and I take my free agency and accountability seriously. I will not disrespect my bishop, but what he says for me or the ward certainly is not MY reality, it is his. He&#8217;s just a man, a man with keys, but a man.  I will repeat, the bishop, or SP, or apostle, or prophet can never control me. I do not give them that power.  I have had many instances where my SP told me to attend a meeting, and my wife said, &#8220;Absolutley not, you are needed at home.&#8221;  Do you think I will tell my wife she doesn&#8217;t preside, so I will listen to the SP?  Nope. Wife trumps SP every time. But most of the time my wife respects my callings and supports me as I support her and keep my family needs first.</p>
<p>2. you also write: &#8220;But nowhere in the church hierarchy is there any place for a woman, regardless of qualification, time served, testimony, etc.&#8221;<br />
I understand, however, there is no place for me to aspire to be bishop based on qualifications either.  That is what is different from church positions and the professional work place. It is not a position or title of accomplishment or power to control people.  There are also positions as a man that I cannot have, regardless of characteristics either.</p>
<p>I fear the debate for some is that they are left out of certain titles or positions, and they don&#8217;t think it is fair.  &#8220;Everything should be equal to be fair&#8221; is what I hear&#8230;and that just is not reality.  Equality is not fairness.  Being of one heart and one mind, despite our different situations and circumstances is what we are taught.</p>
<p>I go back to my base assumption&#8230;no position is of more worth than another. So why does one position matter over another?  We are all excluded from some position or another, that is life and something that helps us focus on the real important things&#8230;not what title we have, but what we do with whatever title we have.</p>
<p>Some people will never have children and never be called Mom or Dad.  I will never be called to serve in a Primary presidency, or Relief Society Presidency.  I firmly believe bishop is another position just like Primary president, different roles and responsibilities, but not of any more worth.  Stake RS or General Relief Society positions are of higher profile for women.  Like bishops or any other position, there is some authority over them, but all positions have that, up to the prophet.</p>
<p>I will never be bishop, SP or apostle, I do not think that makes me less of a person. Perhaps that is not because of gender, but for whatever reason, it is reality. And we must deal with it and move forward with what we can control.</p>
<p>Finally, if a bishop tells me what to do and is out of line, I don&#8217;t have to listen to his authority.  Wives don&#8217;t have to listen to their husbands either, unless their husbands hearken unto the voice of the Lord &#8230; so there are all circumstances that vary and provide for unique situations.</p>
<p>I see no problems or issues with the government of the church in respecting or providing growth opportunity for all people, only with some people&#8217;s perceptions or practice of it.  I sincerely hope I am not being insensitive about it. It is just my view.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ms. Jack Meyers</title>
		<link>http://mormonmatters.org/2010/02/03/from-patriarchy-to-eternity/#comment-128227</link>
		<dc:creator>Ms. Jack Meyers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 01:21:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mormonmatters.org/?p=9659#comment-128227</guid>
		<description>#90 &lt;strong&gt;Heber13&lt;/strong&gt; ~ &lt;em&gt;God is my boss, not the bishop.&lt;/em&gt;

Which one signs his name on your temple recommend? Which one takes away your temple recommend if you&#039;ve done something naughty? 

&lt;em&gt;My wife is my equal, not my subordinate.&lt;/em&gt;

Not if you preside over her she&#039;s not. 

There is no such thing as equality without equal access to authority.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>#90 <strong>Heber13</strong> ~ <em>God is my boss, not the bishop.</em></p>
<p>Which one signs his name on your temple recommend? Which one takes away your temple recommend if you&#8217;ve done something naughty? </p>
<p><em>My wife is my equal, not my subordinate.</em></p>
<p>Not if you preside over her she&#8217;s not. </p>
<p>There is no such thing as equality without equal access to authority.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ken S</title>
		<link>http://mormonmatters.org/2010/02/03/from-patriarchy-to-eternity/#comment-128222</link>
		<dc:creator>Ken S</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Feb 2010 21:15:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mormonmatters.org/?p=9659#comment-128222</guid>
		<description>The concept that is being overlooked here is the fact males and females are different spiritual species – they are as different as a Cat and a Dog. They have different roles and functions in this world and in the next; and, our co-equals with Eloheim.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The concept that is being overlooked here is the fact males and females are different spiritual species – they are as different as a Cat and a Dog. They have different roles and functions in this world and in the next; and, our co-equals with Eloheim.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike S</title>
		<link>http://mormonmatters.org/2010/02/03/from-patriarchy-to-eternity/#comment-128169</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike S</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Feb 2010 07:29:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mormonmatters.org/?p=9659#comment-128169</guid>
		<description>#90:

The Bishop may not be of &quot;greater worth&quot; than anyone else in the ward, but when push comes to shove, what he says is reality.  The LDS hierarchal model involves strict obedience to the person in the chain above you.  An area seventy is going to do exactly what an apostle asks him to do.  A stake president is going to do what an area seventy asks him to do.  A bishop is going to do exactly what the stake president tells him to do.  Even in something as inconsequential as whether Sacrament meeting is first in the block last in the block, regardless of what a bishop feels is right for his ward, he will do as asked by the stake president.  And if a YM or YW leader doesn&#039;t like the budget or approval for a particular activity, they will still end up doing what the bishop says.  

Now, granted, we have free agency.  We can choose to follow or to ignore what a bishop, stake president, or apostle asks us to do.  But nowhere in the church hierarchy is there any place for a woman, regardless of qualification, time served, testimony, etc.  It doesn&#039;t matter if a woman &quot;puts in her time&quot;, etc., she is excluded based on her sex alone.

I think this is what Ms Jack was getting at - not anything to do with &quot;greater worth&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>#90:</p>
<p>The Bishop may not be of &#8220;greater worth&#8221; than anyone else in the ward, but when push comes to shove, what he says is reality.  The LDS hierarchal model involves strict obedience to the person in the chain above you.  An area seventy is going to do exactly what an apostle asks him to do.  A stake president is going to do what an area seventy asks him to do.  A bishop is going to do exactly what the stake president tells him to do.  Even in something as inconsequential as whether Sacrament meeting is first in the block last in the block, regardless of what a bishop feels is right for his ward, he will do as asked by the stake president.  And if a YM or YW leader doesn&#8217;t like the budget or approval for a particular activity, they will still end up doing what the bishop says.  </p>
<p>Now, granted, we have free agency.  We can choose to follow or to ignore what a bishop, stake president, or apostle asks us to do.  But nowhere in the church hierarchy is there any place for a woman, regardless of qualification, time served, testimony, etc.  It doesn&#8217;t matter if a woman &#8220;puts in her time&#8221;, etc., she is excluded based on her sex alone.</p>
<p>I think this is what Ms Jack was getting at &#8211; not anything to do with &#8220;greater worth&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Heber13</title>
		<link>http://mormonmatters.org/2010/02/03/from-patriarchy-to-eternity/#comment-128168</link>
		<dc:creator>Heber13</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Feb 2010 06:36:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mormonmatters.org/?p=9659#comment-128168</guid>
		<description>Ms Jack,

I don&#039;t think referencing work situations is comparable to presiding in the church, because a boss with authority can fire you or pay you well and has that control over the work being done.

Please help me see how your argument applies to my example of the Bishop presiding over the ward.  I do not see the Bishop of greater worth than me.

God is my boss, not the bishop.  My wife is my equal, not my subordinate.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ms Jack,</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t think referencing work situations is comparable to presiding in the church, because a boss with authority can fire you or pay you well and has that control over the work being done.</p>
<p>Please help me see how your argument applies to my example of the Bishop presiding over the ward.  I do not see the Bishop of greater worth than me.</p>
<p>God is my boss, not the bishop.  My wife is my equal, not my subordinate.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Left Field</title>
		<link>http://mormonmatters.org/2010/02/03/from-patriarchy-to-eternity/#comment-128124</link>
		<dc:creator>Left Field</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Feb 2010 19:43:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mormonmatters.org/?p=9659#comment-128124</guid>
		<description>Well said, Jack.  That&#039;s pretty much exactly what I was trying to say.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well said, Jack.  That&#8217;s pretty much exactly what I was trying to say.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ms. Jack Meyers</title>
		<link>http://mormonmatters.org/2010/02/03/from-patriarchy-to-eternity/#comment-128095</link>
		<dc:creator>Ms. Jack Meyers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Feb 2010 07:55:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mormonmatters.org/?p=9659#comment-128095</guid>
		<description>I work in the archives for the library at my graduate school under the supervision of the director of the library. There is no question that my position is subordinate to his. I work at his discretion, he determines my pay scale, he chooses which collections I work on, and he has the authority to dismiss me from my job at will. 

I love my job. I&#039;m paid well, my boss lets me set my own hours and gives me a high degree of autonomy over my work, my workspace is comfortably furnished, and I enjoy what I do. My boss has regularly praised my work and assured me that I&#039;m a valuable part of the library&#039;s team. He&#039;s made it clear that he doesn&#039;t enjoy doing the type of work he&#039;s assigned me to and is extremely grateful that I&#039;m there; he&#039;s amazed that I enjoy it so much when he dislikes it. For the sake of argument, let&#039;s just say that my worth as the amateur archivist on the library team is equivalent to his worth as the director of the library. At the end of the day though, there&#039;s no question about it: I&#039;m subordinate to him. 

This situation is perfectly acceptable to me because the reason I&#039;m subordinate to him has everything to do with talent and experience and &lt;em&gt;nothing&lt;/em&gt; to do with gender. I&#039;m still working on my MA; I don&#039;t have a PhD or an MSLIS like he does. I&#039;m also about 20 years younger than him. If I continue to accumulate experience and degrees, someday, I can be what he is. 

When an organizational hierarchy is based on talent with the opportunity for all parties to progress according to their abilities, it doesn&#039;t say anything about the worth of the people occupying the lower rungs of the hierarchy. When an organizational hierarchy is based on arbitrary characteristics like sex or skin color with no chance for progression to the top, it &lt;em&gt;does&lt;/em&gt; say something about the worth of the subordinate parties. 

That&#039;s why LDS teachings on &quot;preside&quot; make women inferior to men. It doesn&#039;t matter how kind and gentle the male preside-ers are. Put all the lipstick on it that you want, it&#039;s still a pig.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I work in the archives for the library at my graduate school under the supervision of the director of the library. There is no question that my position is subordinate to his. I work at his discretion, he determines my pay scale, he chooses which collections I work on, and he has the authority to dismiss me from my job at will. </p>
<p>I love my job. I&#8217;m paid well, my boss lets me set my own hours and gives me a high degree of autonomy over my work, my workspace is comfortably furnished, and I enjoy what I do. My boss has regularly praised my work and assured me that I&#8217;m a valuable part of the library&#8217;s team. He&#8217;s made it clear that he doesn&#8217;t enjoy doing the type of work he&#8217;s assigned me to and is extremely grateful that I&#8217;m there; he&#8217;s amazed that I enjoy it so much when he dislikes it. For the sake of argument, let&#8217;s just say that my worth as the amateur archivist on the library team is equivalent to his worth as the director of the library. At the end of the day though, there&#8217;s no question about it: I&#8217;m subordinate to him. </p>
<p>This situation is perfectly acceptable to me because the reason I&#8217;m subordinate to him has everything to do with talent and experience and <em>nothing</em> to do with gender. I&#8217;m still working on my MA; I don&#8217;t have a PhD or an MSLIS like he does. I&#8217;m also about 20 years younger than him. If I continue to accumulate experience and degrees, someday, I can be what he is. </p>
<p>When an organizational hierarchy is based on talent with the opportunity for all parties to progress according to their abilities, it doesn&#8217;t say anything about the worth of the people occupying the lower rungs of the hierarchy. When an organizational hierarchy is based on arbitrary characteristics like sex or skin color with no chance for progression to the top, it <em>does</em> say something about the worth of the subordinate parties. </p>
<p>That&#8217;s why LDS teachings on &#8220;preside&#8221; make women inferior to men. It doesn&#8217;t matter how kind and gentle the male preside-ers are. Put all the lipstick on it that you want, it&#8217;s still a pig.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Heber13</title>
		<link>http://mormonmatters.org/2010/02/03/from-patriarchy-to-eternity/#comment-128088</link>
		<dc:creator>Heber13</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Feb 2010 00:05:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mormonmatters.org/?p=9659#comment-128088</guid>
		<description>&quot;Preside — To occupy or hold a position of authority, as over a meeting. To possess or exercise power or control.

If the LDS Church is to move to a stance of equal partnership within the family, they really have no choice but to lose the words “patriarchal” and “preside” with respect to the position a husband holds in the home&quot;

I think we confuse position and organization with value and worth.  There is no hierarchy for worth in the kingdom of heaven.

If we are trying to emulate that on earth, in our families and the church, we should all be equal of worth...even if there is organization.

1 Corinthians 12:15
If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? 

The hand or head is not better or of more worth than the foot, they just hold different positions in the body.  It is one body, with different parts.

The Bishop presides over the congregation or at meetings, but is not of any more worth than anyone else. If he thinks he is, amen to that priesthood.  I can be just as valuable as a good home teacher in serving and loving my neighbors than any position I hold.  The bishop does not have &quot;control&quot; over me any more than I let him have control over me.  He can teach me, he can command me...but my salvation and worth is between God and me, the bishop just holds a position in trying to organize the church. He has control in that &quot;thing&quot; not control over people.

My wife is just as much value in the body of our family as I am.  We are equal. I do hold the priesthood and preside in that position, not preside in worth or greatness or importance.  I do not preside in controlling her. If she does not want to listen to me it is no different than if I don&#039;t want to listen to her. Or if I cannot communicate lovingly to her so that we are one, we have a relationship problem regardless of what positions we hold in the family.  I may &quot;control&quot; a family council or a family home evening, but I do not &quot;control&quot; my wife or kids any more than the bishop controls me.  There is not one thing that we are unequal in the home about, apart from I can&#039;t have babies and she can&#039;t give priesthood blessings. Those are &quot;things&quot; not value or importance.  We make decisions together, we make decisions individually, we strive to grow as one...or we get caught up in titles and positions of who the church says can do certain things and let that divide us.

Organizational positions do not determine happiness, value, or worthiness. Learning to act within our positions righteously the way God wants us to does.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Preside — To occupy or hold a position of authority, as over a meeting. To possess or exercise power or control.</p>
<p>If the LDS Church is to move to a stance of equal partnership within the family, they really have no choice but to lose the words “patriarchal” and “preside” with respect to the position a husband holds in the home&#8221;</p>
<p>I think we confuse position and organization with value and worth.  There is no hierarchy for worth in the kingdom of heaven.</p>
<p>If we are trying to emulate that on earth, in our families and the church, we should all be equal of worth&#8230;even if there is organization.</p>
<p>1 Corinthians 12:15<br />
If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? </p>
<p>The hand or head is not better or of more worth than the foot, they just hold different positions in the body.  It is one body, with different parts.</p>
<p>The Bishop presides over the congregation or at meetings, but is not of any more worth than anyone else. If he thinks he is, amen to that priesthood.  I can be just as valuable as a good home teacher in serving and loving my neighbors than any position I hold.  The bishop does not have &#8220;control&#8221; over me any more than I let him have control over me.  He can teach me, he can command me&#8230;but my salvation and worth is between God and me, the bishop just holds a position in trying to organize the church. He has control in that &#8220;thing&#8221; not control over people.</p>
<p>My wife is just as much value in the body of our family as I am.  We are equal. I do hold the priesthood and preside in that position, not preside in worth or greatness or importance.  I do not preside in controlling her. If she does not want to listen to me it is no different than if I don&#8217;t want to listen to her. Or if I cannot communicate lovingly to her so that we are one, we have a relationship problem regardless of what positions we hold in the family.  I may &#8220;control&#8221; a family council or a family home evening, but I do not &#8220;control&#8221; my wife or kids any more than the bishop controls me.  There is not one thing that we are unequal in the home about, apart from I can&#8217;t have babies and she can&#8217;t give priesthood blessings. Those are &#8220;things&#8221; not value or importance.  We make decisions together, we make decisions individually, we strive to grow as one&#8230;or we get caught up in titles and positions of who the church says can do certain things and let that divide us.</p>
<p>Organizational positions do not determine happiness, value, or worthiness. Learning to act within our positions righteously the way God wants us to does.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: GBSmith</title>
		<link>http://mormonmatters.org/2010/02/03/from-patriarchy-to-eternity/#comment-128086</link>
		<dc:creator>GBSmith</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 22:57:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mormonmatters.org/?p=9659#comment-128086</guid>
		<description>I suppose we could go back to polygymy  when matriarchy ruled.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I suppose we could go back to polygymy  when matriarchy ruled.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Madame Curie</title>
		<link>http://mormonmatters.org/2010/02/03/from-patriarchy-to-eternity/#comment-128078</link>
		<dc:creator>Madame Curie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 20:09:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mormonmatters.org/?p=9659#comment-128078</guid>
		<description>&lt;b&gt;Down with the Patriarchy! Down! Down! Down!!&lt;/b&gt;

(Sorry, but someone had to say it).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><b>Down with the Patriarchy! Down! Down! Down!!</b></p>
<p>(Sorry, but someone had to say it).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bored in Vernal</title>
		<link>http://mormonmatters.org/2010/02/03/from-patriarchy-to-eternity/#comment-128073</link>
		<dc:creator>Bored in Vernal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 18:47:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mormonmatters.org/?p=9659#comment-128073</guid>
		<description>Zen, SR--Looks like both of you have personal experience with this.  This isn&#039;t the thread to discuss these things, but if either of you would like to submit a guest post, I think custody issues would be an important subject to talk about, especially if you relate it to Mormonism.  If interested, email me at bored.in.vernal at gmail.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Zen, SR&#8211;Looks like both of you have personal experience with this.  This isn&#8217;t the thread to discuss these things, but if either of you would like to submit a guest post, I think custody issues would be an important subject to talk about, especially if you relate it to Mormonism.  If interested, email me at bored.in.vernal at gmail.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Zen</title>
		<link>http://mormonmatters.org/2010/02/03/from-patriarchy-to-eternity/#comment-128068</link>
		<dc:creator>Zen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 17:24:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mormonmatters.org/?p=9659#comment-128068</guid>
		<description>SilverRain - if you are as biased as the links you gave, then this discussion is hopeless. For instance, many of the studies are cited put the statistics of alleged and proven in the same category. And when there is minimal danger of making a false claim, of course there are plenty of false claims. Even some of the recent false rape claims still call the woman, &quot;the victim&quot;. 

So let&#039;s look at this - you accuse the abusers of getting custody

I can only presume that you assume that abusers=men. I think the actual unskewed statistics would surprise you. Men are not a bit ahead of women when all child abuse is taken into account. The same for spousal abuse - women are every bit as bad as the men are. Or did you want to perpetuate the notion that women are the more virtuous gender? 

Yes, the lawyers talk long and hard about how unbiased it is, but the numbers are just not there. Fathers get custody around 10% of the time - judging from some census reports. But let&#039;s assume that is just wrong. Can you honestly tell me you know of more men than women that got custody? More fathers raising their kids than mothers? I don&#039;t know about where you live, but anywhere I have lived in the Western US, I know a lot of single mothers, and very few single fathers. And people are always quite shocked to hear I was able to get custody. Yes, anecdotal, I know. But I have a strong suspicion you don&#039;t know that many single dads with kids. And that most of the single parent homes in your school district are mothers, not fathers.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>SilverRain &#8211; if you are as biased as the links you gave, then this discussion is hopeless. For instance, many of the studies are cited put the statistics of alleged and proven in the same category. And when there is minimal danger of making a false claim, of course there are plenty of false claims. Even some of the recent false rape claims still call the woman, &#8220;the victim&#8221;. </p>
<p>So let&#8217;s look at this &#8211; you accuse the abusers of getting custody</p>
<p>I can only presume that you assume that abusers=men. I think the actual unskewed statistics would surprise you. Men are not a bit ahead of women when all child abuse is taken into account. The same for spousal abuse &#8211; women are every bit as bad as the men are. Or did you want to perpetuate the notion that women are the more virtuous gender? </p>
<p>Yes, the lawyers talk long and hard about how unbiased it is, but the numbers are just not there. Fathers get custody around 10% of the time &#8211; judging from some census reports. But let&#8217;s assume that is just wrong. Can you honestly tell me you know of more men than women that got custody? More fathers raising their kids than mothers? I don&#8217;t know about where you live, but anywhere I have lived in the Western US, I know a lot of single mothers, and very few single fathers. And people are always quite shocked to hear I was able to get custody. Yes, anecdotal, I know. But I have a strong suspicion you don&#8217;t know that many single dads with kids. And that most of the single parent homes in your school district are mothers, not fathers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bored in Vernal</title>
		<link>http://mormonmatters.org/2010/02/03/from-patriarchy-to-eternity/#comment-128061</link>
		<dc:creator>Bored in Vernal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 15:16:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mormonmatters.org/?p=9659#comment-128061</guid>
		<description>SilverRain, I rescued it, but the links are not all that relevant to this thread.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>SilverRain, I rescued it, but the links are not all that relevant to this thread.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SilverRain</title>
		<link>http://mormonmatters.org/2010/02/03/from-patriarchy-to-eternity/#comment-128056</link>
		<dc:creator>SilverRain</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 13:57:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mormonmatters.org/?p=9659#comment-128056</guid>
		<description>I left a reply, but it apparently had too many links. :D</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I left a reply, but it apparently had too many links. <img src='http://mormonmatters.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif' alt=':D' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Husbands and Wives Are Equal, but the Husband Is More Equal &#171; Course Correction</title>
		<link>http://mormonmatters.org/2010/02/03/from-patriarchy-to-eternity/#comment-128049</link>
		<dc:creator>Husbands and Wives Are Equal, but the Husband Is More Equal &#171; Course Correction</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 08:16:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mormonmatters.org/?p=9659#comment-128049</guid>
		<description>[...] closer reading of the Proclamation troubled me. Husbands and wife are equals, but the husband presides. How is that equal? The bishop presides over the ward. His counselors help but are not equal to him in authority. The [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] closer reading of the Proclamation troubled me. Husbands and wife are equals, but the husband presides. How is that equal? The bishop presides over the ward. His counselors help but are not equal to him in authority. The [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steven B</title>
		<link>http://mormonmatters.org/2010/02/03/from-patriarchy-to-eternity/#comment-128046</link>
		<dc:creator>Steven B</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 07:50:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mormonmatters.org/?p=9659#comment-128046</guid>
		<description>The reason that LDS members and leaders attempt to redefine the term patriarchy, is that we no longer believe in the inequality of the sexes, yet feel that we must defend the social norms of the Bronze Age simply because they are in the Bible, which we hold as sacred scripture. We&#039;ve discarded many notions of the Biblical nomadic tribes; perhaps patriarch will likewise go the way of divinely sanctioned genocide and the stoning of unruly children.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The reason that LDS members and leaders attempt to redefine the term patriarchy, is that we no longer believe in the inequality of the sexes, yet feel that we must defend the social norms of the Bronze Age simply because they are in the Bible, which we hold as sacred scripture. We&#8217;ve discarded many notions of the Biblical nomadic tribes; perhaps patriarch will likewise go the way of divinely sanctioned genocide and the stoning of unruly children.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Thomas</title>
		<link>http://mormonmatters.org/2010/02/03/from-patriarchy-to-eternity/#comment-128038</link>
		<dc:creator>Thomas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 03:50:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mormonmatters.org/?p=9659#comment-128038</guid>
		<description>#75:  &quot;I’m just saying that perhaps there is a reason we don’t understand that transcends superficial notions of equality and fairness, and that is something that must be taken into account, and that people can only come to a knowledge of personally, and can’t really “bear testimony” of to “prove” it to someone else. I’m just pointing out how little we really do know about heaven, and how it is possible that when some people stand at enmity to certain principles or certain things being set up in a certain way, they may be setting themselves up to be in a position contrary to something they don’t understand.&quot;

Yes.  On the other hand, perhaps there is &lt;i&gt;not&lt;/i&gt; any such &quot;reason we don&#039;t understand,&quot; and our initial judgment that something is unfair is the accurate one.  We&#039;re back choosing between our fallible understandings, and a fallible, changing body of religious doctrine.  If I had Perfect Knowledge as to which was more reliable, that would be one thing.  And if my aunt had...whiskers, she&#039;d be my uncle.

I&#039;m kinda on the fence re: &quot;patriarchy,&quot; if only because my perception is that a lot of the churches that are more egalitarian about women&#039;s roles in leadership rapidly become overfeminized in their culture.  That said, I&#039;d probably give this consideration less weight if I were plumbed different.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>#75:  &#8220;I’m just saying that perhaps there is a reason we don’t understand that transcends superficial notions of equality and fairness, and that is something that must be taken into account, and that people can only come to a knowledge of personally, and can’t really “bear testimony” of to “prove” it to someone else. I’m just pointing out how little we really do know about heaven, and how it is possible that when some people stand at enmity to certain principles or certain things being set up in a certain way, they may be setting themselves up to be in a position contrary to something they don’t understand.&#8221;</p>
<p>Yes.  On the other hand, perhaps there is <i>not</i> any such &#8220;reason we don&#8217;t understand,&#8221; and our initial judgment that something is unfair is the accurate one.  We&#8217;re back choosing between our fallible understandings, and a fallible, changing body of religious doctrine.  If I had Perfect Knowledge as to which was more reliable, that would be one thing.  And if my aunt had&#8230;whiskers, she&#8217;d be my uncle.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m kinda on the fence re: &#8220;patriarchy,&#8221; if only because my perception is that a lot of the churches that are more egalitarian about women&#8217;s roles in leadership rapidly become overfeminized in their culture.  That said, I&#8217;d probably give this consideration less weight if I were plumbed different.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: NeoDan</title>
		<link>http://mormonmatters.org/2010/02/03/from-patriarchy-to-eternity/#comment-128037</link>
		<dc:creator>NeoDan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 03:16:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mormonmatters.org/?p=9659#comment-128037</guid>
		<description>BIV, if and when you and your husband have your callings and elections sure and receive your Second Anointings (one of the official church terms for the ordinance) - whether in this life like a few do or in the next, as most will - you will then stand fully equal in EVERY sense possible. The Melchizedek Priesthood you already hold as an endowed woman will then be fully operational as a Queen and Priestess, co-equal in every way with the King and Priest standing at your side. He will not have or be able to do anything more than you can and viceversa.

This renders any question about equality irrelevent in the Big Picture. If there are any such issues in the meantime then it must result from either misunderstandings or faulty practices.

Next time you are in the Temple focus on the first 4 sentences of the Endowment. It&#039;s all there. Seek and ye SHALL find!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>BIV, if and when you and your husband have your callings and elections sure and receive your Second Anointings (one of the official church terms for the ordinance) &#8211; whether in this life like a few do or in the next, as most will &#8211; you will then stand fully equal in EVERY sense possible. The Melchizedek Priesthood you already hold as an endowed woman will then be fully operational as a Queen and Priestess, co-equal in every way with the King and Priest standing at your side. He will not have or be able to do anything more than you can and viceversa.</p>
<p>This renders any question about equality irrelevent in the Big Picture. If there are any such issues in the meantime then it must result from either misunderstandings or faulty practices.</p>
<p>Next time you are in the Temple focus on the first 4 sentences of the Endowment. It&#8217;s all there. Seek and ye SHALL find!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: FireTag</title>
		<link>http://mormonmatters.org/2010/02/03/from-patriarchy-to-eternity/#comment-128035</link>
		<dc:creator>FireTag</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 02:35:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mormonmatters.org/?p=9659#comment-128035</guid>
		<description>Thomas -- or is it Thor. LOL

ST -- To answer your question honestly, probably not. As the kid said to his mother, &quot;I already know how to be a better boy than I am.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thomas &#8212; or is it Thor. LOL</p>
<p>ST &#8212; To answer your question honestly, probably not. As the kid said to his mother, &#8220;I already know how to be a better boy than I am.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

