The idea of God is illogical to me, but so is the idea of everything just happening by chance. It's tough to make sense of it all, I say whatever makes you happy whether it be god or science or even scientology, is alright with me.
Here is a kernel of the tolerance and humility that originally was attached to the term "liberal", which I think stood in a polar opposite meaning to "controlling".
For Trout's sake, I won't do an essay right here on how controlling pro-governance progressivism has become under outright fascist direction. And despite the limitations of space in here, I actually do realize that a government that is actually in the service of its people/masters can do a whole lot of great things, which is why some close to me accurately paint me as a socialist. The crux of it all is who is serving who.
And I'm also aware that to some, the idea of "God" connotes with all the evils of a busybody big-bro jackbooted Thug of infinite proportions, far worse than a mere government, deserving absolute contempt. So, for some, I can understand why any rational explanation of things that can give us some breathing space has intense personal meaning roughly equivalent to what religion does for others.
What I'd like to say, in defense of the LDS, is that there is some wiggle room for people even like me to hold their own opinions, or even do scientific research, or even get involved in politics. I know a lot of the more simple believers don't see how to juggle apparent conflicts arising from incomplete understanding, and that is why we have institutions like churches and religions where various values can be shared by those who are more like-minded. I repose great faith in a God who can relate to a lot more of us than we can, and love more people than we can imagine, more or less on equal terms, despite some the hot issues we morons like to use against one another.
And, for the record, I knew Henry E. Eyring very well, and we had some differences of opinion. I worked directly for him for about twelve years. His son Edward M. Eyring "Ted" was once my bishop, and a friend of several in my family. Several of my brothers got doctorate degrees under his direction. When you speak of the Eyring family you are speaking of cosmopolitan and refined gentlemen of the highest magnitude of social grace. I've never heard them make a single assine retort displaying disrespect for anyone.
With about twenty other folks in his researcfh group, I was invited to his home in his last days of life, when he knew it was a matter of a month or two. He took the occasion to address our differences of belief directly, in terms others would not fully understand. He knew I was an idiot who didn't care about my own interests a whit. I was all about the value of ideas, and always willing to make statements bordering on idiocy to make a point.
Looking straight at me he, he said "I'm a scoundrel". For those of you who just can't follow a simple sentence, he was referring to himself. . . . but there was no self-disrespect in his point. He always knew what he needed to do, and why he did it. His point was meant for me, to the effect that I had a failing in not knowing those things. And to make his point clear, while everyone was protesting his claim, he said "I always knew what was in my own interest." Meaning, as I would render it, he was nobody's fool.
I dunno, maybe one day I'll take that instruction/lecture/advice to heart and stop being everybody's fool.
But for sure, I knew him as a particularly intelligent and gifted, and honorable man. So he fudged on his grant money and kept some Chinese and Korean scientists on a very stretched out payroll because he just believed they could make a contribution.
And a secretary, and one lab rat moron, with multiple sclerosis.
