Conference Talks (cont.)

I just read the talk by Elder Cook titled "LDS Women Are Incredible!".  I was eager to re-read this since it caused so much stir among the bloggernacle.  I was really bothered by how hatefully critical many were of this talk, and have been of the church in general of the church's treatment of women.  Some of the comments on Times and Seasons were surprisingly critical of Elder Cook, accusing him of being condescending to the women of the church with this talk.  I have since come to a conclusion.  The reason so many of these critics are so angry is not because of oppression by the church leaders, per se, but rather because they don't understand the Lord's ways.  Their views, goals, and aspirations are based off of temporal values.  To them, the most important thing is the praise of being a leader or a respected individual in their field of profession.  Both aim to receive the praise of men and view the worldly pursuits as the most important thing a woman can attain in this life.  But, if they had an eternal perspective and that of the Lord's, they wouldn't get so angry. (Side note, I'm not oblivious that there has been some oppression historically in the church in how women were included in ward councils, but I'm not going to dwell on the past, I want to focus on the state of the church today).  Yes, it is nice getting some worldly praise at times because I am a doctor, or receiving the praise from patients for a job well done.  But, the most important praise I can receive is from God for how I am doing as a husband and father, and from my children for being a great daddy.  I would gladly give up my profession if it ever got in the way of my being a husband and father and I would let Lisa go teach dance or something else to earn the money.  I mean that sincerely.
To God, family is the most important organization, not government, corporations or other organizations. Since family is the most important, the Lord expects us to place equal value on the family.  It's hard for me to articulate well what I feel, but if it were up to me, both Lisa and I would stay home and raise the kids.  I would love if I didn't have to earn an income and we could both be 100% equal partners at home, but the reality we face is that we have to earn money to raise a family.  I don't fully understand why some of these critics desire so badly to be in the work force and away from the home, and to forfeit their parenting privilege to a nanny.  They are being blinded by the worldly desires and aspirations.  I'm not saying that women shouldn't be allowed to work.  I think they should have the right, and in fact, I personally believe that all women should have an education and receive a degree, but not necessarily as a "back up" plan in case her husband dies or she gets divorced.  While those are good reasons, I think that every woman should be educated so that they can be better contributors to society, so that they can be better mothers, better ward leaders, better critical thinkers, so that they can appreciate academic matters and analyze a situation much deeper than if they were uneducated. I know with my bachelors degree, the greatest thing I got out of it was not some marketable trade or piece of paper, but rather the ability to look at a problem or situation, break it down, analyze it, think logically and rationally and make a decision.  These are skills that are very difficult to develop without a college education.  Also, I love how well rounded I became from my college education.  I developed an appreciation for arts, different cultures, the sciences, the humanities, etc.  These are talents and virtues that would be priceless for anybody to possess.  So, to have mothers and wives with this would be a huge benefit to a people, society, nation, etc.  I remember seeing a study that showed the quickest way to lift a nation or people out of poverty was to educate the women.  Imagine how useless or left out Marissa or Lisa would be in our marriages if they couldn't help with the dental practice, do the payroll, engage in thoughtful, critical discussion regarding our job, the church etc.  I guess we have a unique situation in that being a small business owner allows us to include our wives.  But the point remains, that if Lisa and Marissa weren't educated, our kids wouldn't be exposed to their passions and desires for education and intelligence, our family decisions regarding expenses, recreation, religion, etc. would truly be one sided and not what the Lord intended.  But, since we are united in all of this, our kids will grow up having this example which will help them so much.  Also, I am really surprised and annoyed at how many people, even in the church, that have separate checking accounts for the the husband and wife.  I hear often the women who work say that they want their own checking account so that they can keep track of "their" (singular) money and so that they can buy "their" (singular) things.  Imagine if a husband took that approach and said that the money he earned was his own?  Uggg, it really irritates me.  In my opinion, any money that either spouse earns should go into the single family account and go to pay the family expenses first.  If, after paying the family expenses there is money left over, then the couple can decide where to spend the money.  Which, in my mind shouldn't be to "treat" the wife since she earned some money or to treat the husband for some job well done.  The wife, or husband, should always be treated equally with left over money regardless of whether or not they were the one to earn the money.  And, they should make the decision together as to where the money should go.  For us, sometimes that means treats for Lisa, like glitter toes or some new clothes, or treats for me like some hunting gear or a wakeboard.
Now, back to me saying that I wish we could both stay home, I also recognize that some women are better equipped than their spouses to earn money to raise their family.  In that situation, the husband and wife need to sit down and evaluate what is best for them.  BUT!!!!!! This is a very big but, that doesn't mean which partner can make more money (or if they need both to work to afford a certain lifestyle) because that is not important to the Lord.  Coming back to Mexico has reminded me clearly that as Americans our values are very different from the rest of the world when it comes to income.  We have all these things that we think we "need" in order to be happy, when in reality, we need very little in terms of physical possessions to be happy.  Think of the early Mormon pioneers, some of the families in Argentina, Mexico, even Grandma and Grandpa Calderwood.  They are/were able to raise families righteously and happily with a mere fraction of what we enjoy today.  And that is where, in my experience, some of the most hateful and angry criticism stems.  I have seen families, especially women, get super pissed at the counsel from the Brethren that the women should try and avoid working so as to remain in the home.  These same women who chose to work try to justify their purchasing expensive clothing for them and their children, having expensive recreation and vacations, etc.  I will have Lisa chime in and share the story of her mom and the young women in her ward recently when she was young womens president.  I feel that it best illustrates this situation.  Memo- have Susan write it down for us.
Also, with regards to women's position within the church, many of these critics will never be satisfied until the church allows women to hold the priesthood.  I have a few thoughts on this, first of all, anyone who has recently sat in on a ward council will clearly see that women hold an equal voice in the ward council.  They are not silenced by the men, but are treated as equals.  The same should happen in a home.  While the priesthood guides the flow of the conversation, nobodies opinion is better or worse and neither gender has more control.  And, if a husband does not approach his marriage this way, he is in violation of his priesthood authority.  If he ever quiets his wife or oppresses her because he "holds the priesthood" then he doesn't understand how the priesthood works or how God wants a marriage to function. Now, as for women not holding the priesthood, I don't think it's so much about equality, as it is these women (and men) who are critical want the women to have the praise of man, not of God.  There are some things about gender that will NEVER be equal.  No matter how hard we try, men will never be able to give birth or breast feed the children.  Oh, also, from what I can read in the scriptures, it has always been the way of the Lord.  Priesthood has been patriarchal.  But, that doesn't mean priesthood is the ultimate when it comes to decisions made.  That should be made in conjunction with women.
Anyway, I could go on and on about this, but the best way to summarize this is with Elder Cooks words, "These are very emotional, personal decisions, but there are two principles that we should always keep in mind.  First, no woman should ever feel the need to apologize or feel that her contribution is less significant because she is devoting her primary efforts to raising and nurturing children.  Nothing could more significant in our Father in Heaven's plan.  Second, we should all be careful not to be judgmental or assume that sisters are less valiant if the decision is made to work outside the home.  We rarely understand or fully appreciate people's circumstances.  Husbands and wives should prayerfully counsel together, understanding they are accountable to God for their decisions."