Note: These would bake fine in the solar oven if you only wanted a dozen or less. Otherwise, my new convection oven bakes 48 at once! Ah the joy.
Friday, October 10, 2008
Bagels anyone?
My sister, Callie, told me that making bagels was easy so we decided to try it. I had the dough ready and we formed them for the beginning of family night. Then we had a lesson while they baked and ate them when they were done. Callie was right. They weren't difficult and they were delicious. We made them smaller than regular bagels so they would be kid sized. We also made them half wheat so they were even sort of healthy. They are very versitle and can be eaten for breakfast (when you just can't eat a pancake), or lunch (in case you won't touch pb&j). We pre slice them and store them in the freezer. Last week we ate the last one and made another batch.
Note: These would bake fine in the solar oven if you only wanted a dozen or less. Otherwise, my new convection oven bakes 48 at once! Ah the joy.
Note: These would bake fine in the solar oven if you only wanted a dozen or less. Otherwise, my new convection oven bakes 48 at once! Ah the joy.
Thursday, October 2, 2008
I heart Mesa
Hey this is a fun site, check it out. They are currently doing a $25 giveaway so post a comment, you just might win!
http://iheartmesa.blogspot.com/
http://iheartmesa.blogspot.com/
Monday, September 29, 2008
Happy Birthday Dani!
Danica turned 12 last week. We celebrated by having birthday cake (her favorite, triple layer chocolate, from scratch), and taking her to get her own phone (finally!). She had saved enough money to meet our family requirment ($175 in the bank to cover the cancellation fee in case you can't make your monthly payment). So the phone was her birthday present, and really it was all she ever wanted. 
Danica is such a fun member of our family. She has so many talents. She plays the piano beautifully, and she is a great tumbler. But the thing that I love about Danica is that when she wants something she works so hard to achieve her goal. Whether it be practicing the same song until it is perfect, or doing extra jobs to earn money to get what she wants (she is an excellent saver, so focused). This year she started junior high and every day she can be found studying for hours in her room so that she can do well in her classes. I am so proud of her for working so hard. Last week, she joined the Beehive class in the young women's program and I am sure she will be achieving goals right and left!
We love you Dani!
Danica is such a fun member of our family. She has so many talents. She plays the piano beautifully, and she is a great tumbler. But the thing that I love about Danica is that when she wants something she works so hard to achieve her goal. Whether it be practicing the same song until it is perfect, or doing extra jobs to earn money to get what she wants (she is an excellent saver, so focused). This year she started junior high and every day she can be found studying for hours in her room so that she can do well in her classes. I am so proud of her for working so hard. Last week, she joined the Beehive class in the young women's program and I am sure she will be achieving goals right and left!We love you Dani!
Homecoming invitation acceptance
Chandler asked a girl to Homecoming by decorating her room with streamers and a poem and chocolate. Her reply was in this huge container of Tootsie Rolls. The word 'yes' was stuck inside one of the rolls. Yes, it was one of the last ones we looked in. Lucky for Chandler, he has several sisters willing to help. And everyone enjoyed all the Tootsie Rolls you can eat. (I am eating some right now, too).
Homecoming is this weekend, so exciting. Chandler's date is named Chanda, so go ahead and make up your own funny comment about them having almost the same name. This is a brave new world for us as this is Chandler's first school dance. In just over a year, Hanna will be dating too. Wish us luck.
Homecoming is this weekend, so exciting. Chandler's date is named Chanda, so go ahead and make up your own funny comment about them having almost the same name. This is a brave new world for us as this is Chandler's first school dance. In just over a year, Hanna will be dating too. Wish us luck.
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Proposition 102
I feel very strongly about protecting the definition of marriage to mean the union between one man and one woman. I understand that some people do not share this opinion, including people that I love and admire. So here are some of the important reasons why I support proposition 102. These words are not my own but they do represent my thoughts: (Sorry this is so long but it has many good points)
"Those who favor homosexual marriage contend that “tolerance” demands that they be given the same right to marry as heterosexual couples. But this appeal for “tolerance” advocates a very different meaning and outcome than that word has meant throughout most of American history and a different meaning than is found in the gospel of Jesus Christ. Tolerance as a gospel principle means love and forgiveness of one another, not “tolerating” transgression.
In today’s secular world, the idea of tolerance has come to mean something entirely different. Instead of love, it has come to mean condone – acceptance of wrongful behavior as the price of friendship. Jesus taught that we love and care for one another without condoning transgression. But today’s politically palatable definition insists that unless one accepts the sin he does not tolerate the sinner.
The Church (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) does not condone abusive treatment of others and encourages its members to treat all people with respect. However, speaking out against practices with which the Church disagrees on moral grounds – including same-sex marriage – does not constitute abuse or the frequently misused term “hate speech.” We can express genuine love and friendship for the homosexual family member or friend without accepting the practice of homosexuality or any re-definition of marriage.
Legalizing same-sex marriage will affect a wide spectrum of government activities and policies. Once a state government declares that same-sex unions are a civil right, those governments almost certainly will enforce a wide variety of other policies intended to ensure that there is no discrimination against same-sex couples. This may well place “church and state on a collision course.”
The prospect of same-sex marriage has already spawned legal collisions with the rights of free speech and of action based on religious beliefs. For example, advocates and government officials in certain states already are challenging the long-held right of religious adoption agencies to follow their religious beliefs and only place children in homes with both a mother and a father. As a result, Catholic Charities in Boston has stopped offering adoption services.
Other advocates of same-sex marriage are suggesting that tax exemptions and benefits be withdrawn from any religious organization that does not embrace same-sex unions. [17] Public accommodation laws are already being used as leverage in an attempt to force religious organizations to allow marriage celebrations or receptions in religious facilities that are otherwise open to the public. Accrediting organizations in some instances are asserting pressure on religious schools and universities to provide married housing for same-sex couples. Student religious organizations are being told by some universities that they may lose their campus recognition and benefits if they exclude same-sex couples from club membership. [18]
Many of these examples have already become the legal reality in several nations of the European Union, and the European Parliament has recommended that laws guaranteeing and protecting the rights of same-sex couples be made uniform across the EU. [19] Thus, if same-sex marriage becomes a recognized civil right, there will be substantial conflicts with religious freedom. And in some important areas, religious freedom may be diminished.
How Would Same-Sex Marriage Affect Society?
Possible restrictions on religious freedom are not the only societal implications of legalizing same-sex marriage. Perhaps the most common argument that proponents of same-sex marriage make is that it is essentially harmless and will not affect the institution of traditional heterosexual marriage in any way. “It won’t affect you, so why should you care?’ is the common refrain. While it may be true that allowing single-sex unions will not immediately and directly affect all existing marriages, the real question is how it will affect society as a whole over time, including the rising generation and future generations.
Aside from the very serious consequence of undermining and diluting the sacred nature of marriage between a man and a woman, there are many practical implications in the sphere of public policy that will be of deep concern to parents and society as a whole. These are critical to understanding the seriousness of the overall issue of same-sex marriage.
When a man and a woman marry with the intention of forming a new family, their success in that endeavor depends on their willingness to renounce the single-minded pursuit of self-fulfillment and to sacrifice their time and means to the nurturing and rearing of their children. Marriage is fundamentally an unselfish act: legally protected because only a male and female together can create new life, and because the rearing of children requires a life-long commitment, which marriage is intended to provide. Societal recognition of same-sex marriage cannot be justified simply on the grounds that it provides self-fulfillment to its partners, for it is not the purpose of government to provide legal protection to every possible way in which individuals may pursue fulfillment. By definition, all same-sex unions are infertile, and two individuals of the same gender, whatever their affections, can never form a marriage devoted to raising their own mutual offspring.
It is true that some same-sex couples will obtain guardianship over children –through prior heterosexual relationships, through adoption in the states where this is permitted, or by artificial insemination. Despite that, the all-important question of public policy must be: what environment is best for the child and for the rising generation? Traditional marriage provides a solid and well-established social identity to children. It increases the likelihood that they will be able to form a clear gender identity, with sexuality closely linked to both love and procreation. By contrast, the legalization of same-sex marriage likely will erode the social identity, gender development, and moral character of children. Is it really wise for society to pursue such a radical experiment without taking into account its long-term consequences for children?
As just one example of how children will be adversely affected, the establishment of same-sex marriage as a civil right will inevitably require mandatory changes in school curricula. When the state says that same-sex unions are equivalent to heterosexual marriages, the curriculum of public schools will have to support this claim. Beginning with elementary school, children will be taught that marriage can be defined as a relation between any two adults and that consensual sexual relations are morally neutral. Classroom instruction on sex education in secondary schools can be expected to equate homosexual intimacy with heterosexual relations. These developments will create serious clashes between the agenda of the secular school system and the right of parents to teach their children traditional standards of morality. "
So you see, Prop 102 is not about discrimination, it is about protecting our families, our children and our society. For more information about why we should protect marriage go to: http://newsroom.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/commentary/the-divine-institution-of-marriage
"Those who favor homosexual marriage contend that “tolerance” demands that they be given the same right to marry as heterosexual couples. But this appeal for “tolerance” advocates a very different meaning and outcome than that word has meant throughout most of American history and a different meaning than is found in the gospel of Jesus Christ. Tolerance as a gospel principle means love and forgiveness of one another, not “tolerating” transgression.
In today’s secular world, the idea of tolerance has come to mean something entirely different. Instead of love, it has come to mean condone – acceptance of wrongful behavior as the price of friendship. Jesus taught that we love and care for one another without condoning transgression. But today’s politically palatable definition insists that unless one accepts the sin he does not tolerate the sinner.
The Church (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) does not condone abusive treatment of others and encourages its members to treat all people with respect. However, speaking out against practices with which the Church disagrees on moral grounds – including same-sex marriage – does not constitute abuse or the frequently misused term “hate speech.” We can express genuine love and friendship for the homosexual family member or friend without accepting the practice of homosexuality or any re-definition of marriage.
Legalizing same-sex marriage will affect a wide spectrum of government activities and policies. Once a state government declares that same-sex unions are a civil right, those governments almost certainly will enforce a wide variety of other policies intended to ensure that there is no discrimination against same-sex couples. This may well place “church and state on a collision course.”
The prospect of same-sex marriage has already spawned legal collisions with the rights of free speech and of action based on religious beliefs. For example, advocates and government officials in certain states already are challenging the long-held right of religious adoption agencies to follow their religious beliefs and only place children in homes with both a mother and a father. As a result, Catholic Charities in Boston has stopped offering adoption services.
Other advocates of same-sex marriage are suggesting that tax exemptions and benefits be withdrawn from any religious organization that does not embrace same-sex unions. [17] Public accommodation laws are already being used as leverage in an attempt to force religious organizations to allow marriage celebrations or receptions in religious facilities that are otherwise open to the public. Accrediting organizations in some instances are asserting pressure on religious schools and universities to provide married housing for same-sex couples. Student religious organizations are being told by some universities that they may lose their campus recognition and benefits if they exclude same-sex couples from club membership. [18]
Many of these examples have already become the legal reality in several nations of the European Union, and the European Parliament has recommended that laws guaranteeing and protecting the rights of same-sex couples be made uniform across the EU. [19] Thus, if same-sex marriage becomes a recognized civil right, there will be substantial conflicts with religious freedom. And in some important areas, religious freedom may be diminished.
How Would Same-Sex Marriage Affect Society?
Possible restrictions on religious freedom are not the only societal implications of legalizing same-sex marriage. Perhaps the most common argument that proponents of same-sex marriage make is that it is essentially harmless and will not affect the institution of traditional heterosexual marriage in any way. “It won’t affect you, so why should you care?’ is the common refrain. While it may be true that allowing single-sex unions will not immediately and directly affect all existing marriages, the real question is how it will affect society as a whole over time, including the rising generation and future generations.
Aside from the very serious consequence of undermining and diluting the sacred nature of marriage between a man and a woman, there are many practical implications in the sphere of public policy that will be of deep concern to parents and society as a whole. These are critical to understanding the seriousness of the overall issue of same-sex marriage.
When a man and a woman marry with the intention of forming a new family, their success in that endeavor depends on their willingness to renounce the single-minded pursuit of self-fulfillment and to sacrifice their time and means to the nurturing and rearing of their children. Marriage is fundamentally an unselfish act: legally protected because only a male and female together can create new life, and because the rearing of children requires a life-long commitment, which marriage is intended to provide. Societal recognition of same-sex marriage cannot be justified simply on the grounds that it provides self-fulfillment to its partners, for it is not the purpose of government to provide legal protection to every possible way in which individuals may pursue fulfillment. By definition, all same-sex unions are infertile, and two individuals of the same gender, whatever their affections, can never form a marriage devoted to raising their own mutual offspring.
It is true that some same-sex couples will obtain guardianship over children –through prior heterosexual relationships, through adoption in the states where this is permitted, or by artificial insemination. Despite that, the all-important question of public policy must be: what environment is best for the child and for the rising generation? Traditional marriage provides a solid and well-established social identity to children. It increases the likelihood that they will be able to form a clear gender identity, with sexuality closely linked to both love and procreation. By contrast, the legalization of same-sex marriage likely will erode the social identity, gender development, and moral character of children. Is it really wise for society to pursue such a radical experiment without taking into account its long-term consequences for children?
As just one example of how children will be adversely affected, the establishment of same-sex marriage as a civil right will inevitably require mandatory changes in school curricula. When the state says that same-sex unions are equivalent to heterosexual marriages, the curriculum of public schools will have to support this claim. Beginning with elementary school, children will be taught that marriage can be defined as a relation between any two adults and that consensual sexual relations are morally neutral. Classroom instruction on sex education in secondary schools can be expected to equate homosexual intimacy with heterosexual relations. These developments will create serious clashes between the agenda of the secular school system and the right of parents to teach their children traditional standards of morality. "
So you see, Prop 102 is not about discrimination, it is about protecting our families, our children and our society. For more information about why we should protect marriage go to: http://newsroom.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/commentary/the-divine-institution-of-marriage
Monday, September 15, 2008
Labor Day 2008
I know this was a while ago but I just downloaded the pictures from my camera. Our friends, the Melzers, invited us over for a party on Labor Day. We had dinner and went swimming and just had a fun time. They are wonderful hosts!
This is a picture of Zan and Lucy.
Here is Jannalee and Zanya. No the weather was not cold, I was just cold because I am a wimp. Everyone else was in the pool.
Hanna and Danica
Chandler, so talented
Chandler throwing Andria over the bar that Ryan is holding
Lucy (or Elsa?) with Sam and Zan
Danica
Maranda
Andria and Lucy
Dan and Sam
Danica, Hanna and Chandler
This is a picture of Zan and Lucy.
Here is Jannalee and Zanya. No the weather was not cold, I was just cold because I am a wimp. Everyone else was in the pool.
Hanna and Danica
Chandler, so talented
Chandler throwing Andria over the bar that Ryan is holding
Lucy (or Elsa?) with Sam and Zan
Danica
Maranda
Andria and Lucy
Dan and Sam
Danica, Hanna and Chandler
Friday, September 12, 2008
Nothing new
Ok, so I have no pictures. This is because I am too lazy to upload the pictures from my camera, sort them, label them, and find some to post on my blog.
I am often jealous of women who have actual stuff to write about. I am wondering what it is that I do all day. Along this line, maybe someone can help me with a problem I have. I have my 20 year high school reunion next month (I know, I am far too young to have been out of high school for 20 years). Anyway, there is a memory book being made with a questionnaire for each graduate to fill out. The deadline is coming up to have this questionnaire filled out and I can't finish mine because there is a question: What have you been up to lately? Well. . . I have no idea. Can I just put: raising my children and running my home? Someone please help me out.
I am often jealous of women who have actual stuff to write about. I am wondering what it is that I do all day. Along this line, maybe someone can help me with a problem I have. I have my 20 year high school reunion next month (I know, I am far too young to have been out of high school for 20 years). Anyway, there is a memory book being made with a questionnaire for each graduate to fill out. The deadline is coming up to have this questionnaire filled out and I can't finish mine because there is a question: What have you been up to lately? Well. . . I have no idea. Can I just put: raising my children and running my home? Someone please help me out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
