I have worked as a letter carrier since November 1992.

Since then, we’ve had four government shutdowns at the federal level.

Despite that, all work I’ve performed and all annual and sick leave I’ve taken has been paid to me in a timely manner.  That is to say, every two weeks. 

You see, the United States Postal Service is off-budget, meaning its spending and receipts are “walled off” from the rest of the budget.  You pay my salary when you mail a letter or send a package through the USPS.  Taxes pay no part of a postal employee’s salary, nor have they since 1982.

But many federal workers aren’t so lucky.  When government shutdowns occur, they don’t get paid.  Some of them are furloughed, meaning that they stay home and don’t get paid until the shutdown ends.  Others are forced to work-and don’t get paid-until the shutdown ends.   And these are people who impact our lives in very direct ways. They screen our luggage at airports.  They make sure planes don’t crash into each other.  They inspect our food so that it doesn’t poison us.  They process our tax returns.  They patrol our borders.   They protect our nation-I’m referring here to the Coast Guard. 

And it doesn’t help matters when members of the Trump Administration show callous disregard for their plight.  Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross stated that for the life of him, he couldn’t understand why an unpaid fed just couldn’t walk into a bank and get a loan.  Well, Mr. Ross, not everyone is worth $700 million like you are!  Or the suggestion by White House economic adviser Kevin Hassett that furloughed employees are better off sitting at home because they aren’t using vacation time.  Many of you watched on the news reports of unpaid feds using their free time to line up at food banks or apply for unemployment benefits/food stamps.  Can someone explain to me how forcing a federal employee to seek assistance is a family value?  I mean, I thought we, as Latter-day Saints, were supposed to be opposed to able-bodied adults living off the government dole.

Unfortunately, there are those who feel that working for the government and being on welfare are one and the same.  The Daily Caller (https://dailycaller.com/2019/01/14/smoke-out-resistance/) quotes a senior Trump Administration official as stating the following in regard to federal employees:  For federal agencies which were on shutdown, “lock the doors, sell the furniture, and cut them down.”

“For the sake of our nation, I hope [the shutdown] lasts a very long time, till the government is changed and can never return to its previous form.”  “On an average day. . 80 percent [of government employees] feel no pressure to produce results.  If they don’t feel like doing what they are told, they don’t.”  “They do nothing that warrants punishment and nothing of external value.  That is their workday:  errands for the sake of errands. . .”  (in order words, all we do is make-work stuff) “Due to the lack of funding, many federal agencies are now operating more effectively from the top down on a fraction of their workforce, with only select essential personnel serving national security tasks.”  (I guess this applies to unpaid employees who worked during the shutdown, such as members of the Border Patrol and the Coast Guard)  “The goal in government is to do nothing.”  “We do not want most employees to return, because we are working better without them.”  “Sure, we empathize with families making tough financial decisions, like mine, and just like private citizens who have to find other work and bring competitive value every day, while paying more than a third of their salary in federal taxes.”  How touching.  And stated with all the charm of a freight train.

Conservative hostility toward public servants is hardly new.  Following the postal strike of 1970, which brought postal employees into the middle class and off government assistance-yes, most letter carriers of that era qualified for food stamps-it seems that the air traffic controllers talked of striking as well.  According to the April 2, 1970 diary entry of H.R. Haldeman, President Richard Nixon had some choice words for them, “The air controllers problem goes on, and the plan now is to fire a bunch of them, especially after postal settlement, to prove government employees can’t win by striking.  Theory is that the mailman is a family friend, so you can’t hurt him, but no one knows the air traffic man.  Also they make a lot more money, hence invoke a lot less public sympathy.”  And Tricky Dick was proven right.  When Ronald Reagan fired striking air traffic controllers in 1981, whose union ironically endorsed him, over sixty percent of Americans agreed with his action, whereas over eighty percent sympathized with letter carriers during the postal strike.  Easier to fire people when you don’t know them.

Recently I heard a radio talk show host complain about how much teachers make in California.  He said that the average total compensation for them is roughly $85,000 a year, which is $20,000 more that what teachers make in other states.  Keep in mind that “total compensation” includes health care premiums, life insurance, Medicare, pension payments, etc., so the job is not as high-paying as he made it out to be.  And his point was that unions represent teachers in the Golden State, so that is why they are living high off the hog.  Allow me to retort, which I have done before on his talk show.  California is an expensive state to live in, so wouldn’t you want a teacher to be able to live on his or her salary and sustain a family?  And his complaint was simply this.  Teachers in California, for the most part, make enough to live on, support a family, and enjoy a sizable pension when they retire.  What’s wrong with that?

From the federal government down to the municipal level, we read on a regular basis negative comment after negative comment made about public sector workers which mimic the comments stated above.  We are overpaid, lazy, insubordinate, unnecessary, unwanted.  Federal employees are tired of being labeled as parasites, sucking taxpayer money out and John/Molly Q Taxpayer getting nothing of value in return?  The notion that government functions better when taxes are cut so low so as to cover a skeleton crew to do the work is a fantasy.  Ask travelers stuck in lines at our airports due to lack of screeners, or immigration judges overwhelmed by too many cases which take too much time to be adjudicated, if at all, or border patrol agents who lack the technology or staffing to properly do their jobs.    And the people who perform government work should be paid well for what they do.  And we should never be ashamed of being a public servant or think for one minute that we don’t deserve our pay and benefits.  We do valuable work, and most Americans agree.  It shouldn’t take a government shutdown for people to appreciate what public servants do when the work isn’t being done.

Eric Ellis is the California State Association of Letter Carriers District 4 Officer

“I, the Lord, will forgive whom I will forgive, but of you it is required to forgive all men.”  D&C 64:10.  I begin with this because it is the second half that I wish to speak about at this time.  My thoughts today are on the needs to forgive all men.  Not the point of forgiving others, but the need to forgive yourself.  President Hunter spoke about the importance of forgiving yourself just as much as forgiving your neighbor.

            Recently, I was pondering deeply on various things, and there has been for a long time I have not been able to forgive myself for things that I have done in the past.  I was thinking about various recent conference talks about the importance of forgiving yourself as part of the Atonement, and I found a need to say to myself that I forgive myself of my errors that I have repented of.

            After having done this, I have found that there has been a great burden lifted from me.  I was able to finally forgive myself of things, and I have never felt better about it.  We are constantly thinking of the importance of forgiving others, and the need to do so, but as stated in many talks and articles, there is an importance to find forgiveness in ourselves also.

            To truly obtain the fullness of the Atonement, one must not only forgive others of their faults and follies, but also to forgive yourself of the sins and missteps you make.  The importance of learning from your mistakes and working on not making them again is important and a key part of bettering yourself.

If you have ever had this longing point of stress, harm, feeling low, and you feel that you have repented, or that there is just something that seems to be hanging on you, and you can’t quite put your finger on it; I encourage you to look inside and ask yourself “Have I forgiven me for these things?”  If the answer is ‘no’, or uncertain; I say take it from me, forgive yourself.  It will make you feel better like you have never felt before.

“I, the Lord, will forgive whom I will forgive, but of you it is required to forgive all men.”  D&C 64:10.  I begin with this because it is the second half that I wish to speak about at this time.  My thoughts today are on the needs to forgive all men.  Not the point of forgiving others, but the need to forgive yourself.  President Hunter spoke about the importance of forgiving yourself just as much as forgiving your neighbor.

            Recently, I was pondering deeply on various things, and there has been for a long time I have not been able to forgive myself for things that I have done in the past.  I was thinking about various recent conference talks about the importance of forgiving yourself as part of the Atonement, and I found a need to say to myself that I forgive myself of my errors that I have repented of.

            After having done this, I have found that there has been a great burden lifted from me.  I was able to finally forgive myself of things, and I have never felt better about it.  We are constantly thinking of the importance of forgiving others, and the need to do so, but as stated in many talks and articles, there is an importance to find forgiveness in ourselves also.

            To truly obtain the fullness of the Atonement, one must not only forgive others of their faults and follies, but also to forgive yourself of the sins and missteps you make.  The importance of learning from your mistakes and working on not making them again is important and a key part of bettering yourself.

If you have ever had this longing point of stress, harm, feeling low, and you feel that you have repented, or that there is just something that seems to be hanging on you, and you can’t quite put your finger on it; I encourage you to look inside and ask yourself “Have I forgiven me for these things?”  If the answer is ‘no’, or uncertain; I say take it from me, forgive yourself.  It will make you feel better like you have never felt before.

Why are so many young people committing suicide? What is it about today's society that seems to abet this act of anger and despair?

Some thoughts about gun safety and how we choose to interpret the Second Amendment

I don't own guns. I have very limited experience with them. I am not an expert in Constitutional Law. However, I have read up on this subject and discussed matters with family members, some of whom are gun enthusiasts. I also have a nephew who is in law enforcement in California. A relative of my sister-in-law works for the Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms agency of the Federal Government. So, as something of an outsider, I nevertheless feel compelled to share my personal observations about this.

I personally do not worry if someone owns guns, anymore than I am concerned that the same person owns knives, bows and arrows, swords, chain saws, or a welding torch. My issues with guns include "strict constructionist" interpretations of the US Constitution, the responsibility entailed by gun ownership, and people's attitudes towards safety and security. I will address these issues separately.

People are free to interpret the Constitution how they want, but the courts decide how these interpretations translate into the rule of law. While some have suggested that the Second Amendment was crafted to enable slave patrol militias in the South, this author suggests otherwise. I believe it was designed to empower state militias, and that these have been superseded by the National Guard. As people who have experienced crime and violence will readily concede, however, one would hate to not have a means of protecting one's loved ones and person when the National Guard, or the police, aren't there. I agree with Jason Johnson that the process of acquiring a gun should require rigorous licensing and training, more so, perhaps, than getting a driver's license. What these opinions suggest is that the Second Amendment doesn't spell out what the "right to bear arms" entails. As Johnson has observed, in his conversation with Collon Noir, an NRA supporter, the NRA is really a trade organization, not a guarantor of constitutional protections. It's interpretation is as tortuous as that of any ardent regulator. I am personally glad that our Constitution lends itself to amendment, and judicial review. For me, strict constructionists are like those who cling to scriptural inerrancy, in the face of abundant textual scholarship and archaeological revelations. I believe that Latter-Day Saints, who believe in progressive revelation and an open scriptural canon, should not treat the US Constitution as sacrosanct and infallible. The versatility of the Constitution is precisely why it has weathered attacks against it over the centuries. Some have suggested amendments to alleviate congressional inertia. I believe now that the Equal Rights Amendment should have been adopted. There are conduct and competency issues in the executive branch, which seem to be inadequately addressed by current law. It is notable that no president has been successfully removed from office, except in case of assassination or voluntary resignation.

When I consider gun ownership, I am reminded about my intermediate school shop teacher. While I wasn't the best student, I do remember his message about using tools properly, as they were intended. I still shrink from using screwdrivers as chisels or ice picks, for example. The rules applied both to preventing abuse to the tools, and to personal safety. I am also reminded of the example of my late father, who was in the First Infantry during World War II. He certainly knew about weaponry, and used it to take human life. While he had a service revolver, none of us was allowed to handle it unsupervised. I never played with it, as some children have with their own parents' weapons. He kept it in a safe place, so none of my siblings would get to it. I had toy guns, but I was not allowed to point them at another person. I believe if every parent kept weapons inaccessible to children, and taught them not to point even toy guns at other children, it would make a world of difference.

I served a mission to Switzerland, where every able-bodied male between about 19-34 is required to do active duty for a few weeks out of the year, and is required to pass a marksmanship test. There are shooting ranges in just about every town. Basic training is for 18 weeks and soldiers keep their weapons at home and equipment at home, though not ammunition, according to Wikipedia. Switzerland has very little crime, compared to the United States. However, ownership of weapons there is not necessarily what preserves the peace. I believe it derives from a strong sense of community values, and peer pressure. The Swiss are very aware of what goes on in their communities, and are quick to reprimand those in violation of even minor ordinances. While their confederation means that national laws are not always uniformly enforced by the respective cantons, their heritage of independence does not translate into disrespect for order and conformity. I am sure our gun homicide rate mystifies them.

As I said, I don't mind if someone owns guns, or other weapons. I just think guns, like any dangerous tool, or equipment, should be treated with proper respect. It is an awesome responsibility to carry a gun, because it is designed for protection and, if necessary, the wounding, or killing, of another person, or creature. Those who have served in the military, in law enforcement, or hunted, should know what that responsibility entails. It is not to be treated lightly. How someone can carry a loaded weapon about his or her person when judgment is impaired by alcohol or drugs disturbs me. I am appalled when people brag about their willingness to kill someone, under the flimsiest of pretexts. Those who have had to take life do not brag about it. As Lt. Col. Dave Grossman has pointed out in On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society, normal human beings are not bloodthirsty or homicidal by nature. They must be drilled to kill. A friend of mine who served in Vietnam said his first "kill" was very traumatic. Like most combat soldiers, though, he got used to it. If one has to use a gun, or some other weapon, one must be sure that it is in working order, that one knows how to aim and fire, and must not be hesitant, if the situation requires it, to use it against other sentient beings. How many, indeed, are ready to assume that charge? I would guess there aren't nearly as many as those who actually own guns.

The final issue with me is the sense of safety that many believe owning a gun conveys. If one knows how to properly store and maintain a gun, fine. As before, familiarity with the use of one's tools usually equates with their safe handling. So, if a gun is going to provide protection, one should practice with it regularly. I have bought tools and camping gear, and only used them once or never. I like the idea of having them, but unlike insurance, they provide little security if they are neglected, and I don't use them. Once one has acquired a gun, one is committed to its use, and to constant vigilance, unless one intends to use it only for display purposes. One cannot assume it is unloaded, unless it is taken apart. One cannot assume the safety is on, without checking it. Having a gun, and being prepared to use it, still does not guarantee protection. I do not think anything in life guarantees safety for the body. I believe this is what Nephi means when he refers to "carnal security" in 2 Nephi 28:21 or trusting in "the arm of flesh" in 2 Nephi 4:34. Guns do not protect our spirits, if we are caught up in the pride of our hearts, or our own transgressive wills.

I am also not one to ignore public health and safety warnings, and expect God to protect me, if I refuse wise counsel. Even as one with the priesthood, if I do not take advantage of all the marvelous tools and services available to me, I cannot expect to be protected by angels, nor sheltered from harm. Not all of us are ham radio operators, or have EMT training. That doesn't preclude me from understanding about emergency preparedness, and becoming familiar with the skill sets of my neighbors, or how to contact them when the need arises. That doesn't excuse me from planning what to do if there is a break-in, or if my life is threatened, or someone else is endangered. That doesn't excuse me from consulting with local law enforcement and participating in neighborhood watch. I may not own a gun, but knowing those who do, and being able to trust their competency with one, will ease my mind a bit. I assume that law enforcement officers know how to handle guns. Just knowing someone has a gun, however, is not the same as knowing whether or not he or she is prepared to use it.

When people speak of arming the populace, without a reporting mechanism to determine whether or not that populace knows how to use guns responsibly and safely, it doesn't relieve my anxiety. Just giving guns to people is no more effective against crime and violence than giving money to beggars is in fighting poverty. If people speak of taking ownership of guns, rather than just having guns, then I am assured they are acting in the public interest, and not just marketing firearms.

As a response to a pervasive discussion about "white culture" and white supremacy, the LDS church issued a pair of statements condemning the behavior of groups and individuals advocating hate. There first statement asserted prior counsel from the President of the Church and advocated for Christ-like love. Somehow, this statement was taken out of context by the very degenerates it sought to address. As a result, they issued a follow-up statement clarifying the condemnation of race-based hate, but also including this phrase:  

Church members who promote or pursue a “white culture” or white supremacy agenda are not in harmony with the teachings of the Church. 

In these critical last election days, here is a blog to share with Utahns (and anyone else) leaning towards Trump but still not comfortable with him or who plan to vote for a third party candidate. Written primarily for Utah's Republican / conservative leaning audience, blog topics topics include:

• Precedent among the Founding Fathers for voting for your political enemies to prevent somebody truly unfit being elected to office.
• What the three primary areas of responsibility are for the presidency and how Trump fails in every one and how Clinton excels in every one, even above all third party candidates.
• How Brexit shocked and damaged the U.K. and how it could happen in the U.S. with Trump should voter turnout for Clinton not occur.

More relevant content will be posted in the coming days. The link to the blog is below. Please share through all your social media channels!

http://utahblue2016.blogspot.com/

(the name of the pseudonymous author of the blog, Bloglius, is a play on the pseudonym Publius as used by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay in writing the Federalist papers)

Life teachs you to live with authenticity and always to be true to yourself. I couldn't remain as a Mormon member due to the fact that I am a mature gay man. I paid dearly when I came out of the closet. My point is I am a strong Democrat. I hold three different citizenships (Chilean-born-, American and Canadian). I lived in Utah, for 8 years, under the infamous Ronald Reagan administration. I saw first hand how people, sadly many members of the church, treated Democrats when passing every house to ask to join the Democrat party. These people cried when visiting us as they couldn't believe the treatment they got by their own brothers and sisters. Today, I am a strong "Democratico", Democrat and/or Liberal as it names in Canada. I hope that my vote will never allow Republicans to be in office. Thank You! Max.

Some years ago, I read Lewis Hyde's The Gift: Imagination and the Erotic Life of Property (1983), which got me to thinking about the nature of hospitality. When one reads the Bible and other narratives of antiquity, one is struck about the importance of hospitality in the past, and how wicked it was to abuse one's guests. In our day, it seems like hospitality is understood more in terms of ingratitude, rather than in terms of one's obligation of being a good host. While I, like most, decry those who bite the hands who feed them, I feel that we have downplayed the moral obligation to help the less fortunate. I will be following up on the hospitality concept later. Right now, I would like to share a parable, or allegory, regarding what I perceive to be the root of humanity's discontent: our inability to recognize, or appreciate, one another's gifts. Please see this also in the context of Pioneer Day and the global refugee crisis.

The Story of the Gifts

Once there was a family.  They were given everything they needed by the Lord of All.  They had bodies, they had a wealth of resources to sustain themselves.  They would have to work to use these resources properly, so they would be fed, clothed and sheltered.  But if they didn’t work, their bodies became sick from disuse.  They also became sick or hungry if they overly consumed resources, or didn’t clean up after themselves, or didn’t try to replenish the supply.  Somehow, that wasn’t enough for some, so they went elsewhere.  A brother who stayed behind decided that he wasn’t getting enough recognition, so he killed his brother and claimed his property.  He was sent away, but went around to the others and persuaded them that it was better to take than receive.  So, whereas people received their gifts for free before, they started resorting to force and deception.  People found all sorts of excuses to fight.  They felt they were disrespected.  They didn’t like how property was divided up.  They felt they were more deserving of ownership than the actual owners.  They felt that their beliefs were more important than someone else’s.  They thought they were simply better than the others.  So much better, in fact, that they decided some ought to be owned by them.  If they didn’t own them, they should at least serve their putative masters for the rest of their lives.

So, war became a strategy. It became the most important activity for a lot of people.  When they weren’t fighting wars, they were daily devising ways to keep people away from the gifts to which they were formerly entitled.  Soon, there were big gaps between what people owned, and what they didn’t.  Some had more than they could ever possibly use in their lifetimes.  Others never had quite enough.  Some became sick because they overate and exercised too little.  Others were sick because they didn’t have enough to eat, or to wear, or because they didn’t have adequate shelter.  People forgot that they used to all have just what they needed.  So, they thought that those better off deserved to be, that they were more favored by the gods.  Those who were poor, they thought, were that way because they were too weak, unambitious, inferior, poor managers.  The gods had accursed them.  If others brought up that this was unfair, they were condemned as being too weak or overly indulgent.

After fighting for a long, long time, people rediscovered faith.  They thought it would be better to help the less fortunate, to be less proud, to remember who gave them the gifts to begin with.  People became so convinced that this was a good idea, they decided that everyone needed to believe this.  If they didn’t, it was back to the battlefield. If people were robbed, maimed or killed, that was just an unfortunate consequence. The higher purpose was to convert people to the Truth.  

If other people did not understand the Truth because they spoke another language, or had a wholly different culture, that didn’t matter.  They deserved destruction if they didn’t convert. Fortunately, the conquerors didn’t destroy everybody.  After they ran out of heathen and infidels to convert on land, they went across the ocean and discovered people who had moved away long ago, who had so forgotten the ways of the Lord of All that they were sacrificing men, women and children to other gods.  The other people had done away with this practice long ago.  So, they converted them to the higher way of living.  It became easier to accept this, because they didn’t do away with human sacrifice altogether.  Instead of sacrificing members of their families to their gods, they sacrificed them to bondage, prostitution, backbreaking toil in behalf of their masters, addictions, and mortal combat in behalf of the state.

Over time, it became harder and harder for the powerful to be satisfied with what they owned.  Sometimes, the less powerful gained ground.  They now would be paid for their work, they began to own property, they began to have enough to eat, a roof over their heads. They even began to live longer.  The powerful began to be concerned.

What was always difficult for the powerful to understand is how someone who was less powerful could be beautiful, talented and even smart.  The powerful liked owning things.  They were frustrated that they couldn’t always own bodies, just people’s time.  If they did own bodies, they couldn’t own talents, beauty or minds.  So, in their dissatisfaction, they thought that if some couldn’t be owned, they might as well be eliminated.  It was no longer a question of converting or enslaving them.  It was becoming easier, after all, to get rid of people with greater and greater efficiency.

People got so good at destroying great numbers of their fellow men that they decided they couldn’t afford to live like this.  War was becoming too successful.  War didn’t go away, however.  It was just waged on a smaller scale.  Slavery didn’t go away, either.  It was practiced on a wide scale by landlords, pimps, and sweatshop owners who found ways to convince their employees that they owned them.  The powerful also found ways to enrich themselves at the expense of the poor, convincing them if they just worked harder, they could be rich, too.  They gave the poor loans, which they found very difficult, if not impossible, to pay back.  But the poor thought this was generous, because they now had goods and services on credit.  Occasionally, a poor person would win at lotteries or at gambling ventures, which seemed to prove that the wealthy cared about the poor.  Poor people sometimes became famous entertainers or athletes, so this was proof the system worked.  The powerful also promised that if they just acquired more, it would be easier to share their surplus with the needy.

As the needy grew more and more needful, it became harder and harder for the powerful to convince them to be contented with their lot.  When the needy started to rebel, the powerful convinced them that strangers were their enemy.  When they finally decided that strangers weren’t to blame, the powerful convinced the needy that there were some among them receiving more than their fair share.  This, too, worked for a long time.  Finally, the needy started to demand more of the largesse of the powerful.  The powerful had seductive storytellers and entertainers, craven rulers, all sorts of inane media distractions, mind-numbing food and drugs, and mighty armies at their disposal.  The needy had their anger, their faith, and their vast numbers.  It was time for a showdown.

The Lord of All had intervened many times in their history, to stave off the total destruction of the descendants of the first family.  Since people now had the means to totally destroy themselves, He paid them a call.  There was still a lot of destruction, but at least a lot of people were spared.  Some had been powerful.  Most had been needy.  After so much was lost, people decided once again that some things just weren’t worth owning.  They saw once again that the original gifts, such as having a body, having a life, having a family, having a home, food to eat, a roof over the head, a place to lay one’s head, responsible work to do, service to perform, were quite valuable indeed.