Here’s a repost of an Epinions review I wrote in 2004. It appears here “as/is”. A whole lot has happened since 2004– to include Ed and Lois Smart’s divorce and Ed’s coming out as gay. I’m reposting the review for the sake of history, and because I think some people might find it interesting.
The first time I saw Ed and Lois Smart’s 2003 book Bringing Elizabeth Home: A Journey of Faith and Hope, I was tempted to purchase it. Their beautiful fourteen year old daughter Elizabeth was kidnapped from their Salt Lake City, Utah home on June 5, 2002. The Smarts’ other daughter, nine year old Mary Katherine, witnessed the abduction and alerted Ed and Lois Smart after Elizabeth and the kidnappers, later revealed to be Brian David Mitchell and Wanda Barzee, were gone.
I remembered how the summer of 2002 was a summer plagued by a rash of child abductions. A couple of those abductions had ended tragically– five year old Samantha Runnion was killed soon after she was taken, but not before she was brutally molested by her captor. Elizabeth Smart had, against all odds, survived her abduction, reuniting with her family in mid March 2003. And Elizabeth Smart’s story is a bizarre one indeed. Brian David Mitchell and Wanda Barzee were revealed to be believers of a fundamentalist branch of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. According to news reports, Brian David Mitchell meant to make Elizabeth one of his wives.
The Smart family fascinated me. On the front cover of Bringing Elizabeth Home: A Journey of Faith and Hope there is a lovely picture of Elizabeth and her parents, and on the back cover, the whole family of eight is pictured. The Smarts seem to espouse the epitome of the American Dream. Ed and Lois Smart are well off financially, and they have six beautiful children. I wanted to know what lingered beneath the surface of the Smart family’s attractive facade. Nevertheless, I had read negative reviews about Bringing Elizabeth Home: A Journey of Faith and Hope, so I passed up the book.
Then last week, my husband went out of town for a meeting and I found myself with some extra time to do some reading. It wasn’t long before I found myself purchasing Bringing Elizabeth Home: A Journey of Faith and Hope. I finished the book in a few days and am left with my own feelings of ambivalence about the Smart story. On one hand, Ed and Lois Smart are not professional writers and they were telling the heartwrenching story of their daughter’s abduction. On the other hand, Bringing Elizabeth Home: A Journey of Faith and Hope was ghost written by Laura Morton, who, according to information on the book jacket, has written a total of eighteen books, six of which were New York Times bestsellers. Unfortunately, I would have expected more from someone who has had such an auspicious career in writing.
While at times, I found Bringing Elizabeth Home: A Journey of Faith and Hope to be a warm, touching story, the writing is sometimes awkward and repetitive. Also, although the book is supposed to be written entirely from the Smarts’ point of view, the authors don’t seem to be very selective about their usage of pronouns. For instance, the chapters that are supposedly written by Ed or Lois as individuals read like personal narratives and employ the pronoun “I”. In other chapters, “we” is used, but so is “Ed and Lois”, as if the story is being told from a different point of view. It makes for awkward reading.
This book doesn’t shed a lot of light on the case, either. Bringing Elizabeth Home: A Journey of Faith and Hope doesn’t offer many more details than what was already printed in the news or portrayed in the television movie that was made about Elizabeth and broadcasted last fall. There are, however, a couple of interesting chapters about Ed and Lois Smart’s extended family. There’s also a lot written about Elizabeth’s love for playing her harp. Mary Katherine also plays the harp. I don’t know of any kids who play harp, so it was interesting to read about that. The book also offers some very nice pictures of the family. Again, however, it seems like I had already seen some of them in magazines.
The thing I liked the least about Bringing Elizabeth Home: A Journey of Faith and Hope was the “preachy” tone in the book. Yes, I understand that the Smarts’ faith had a lot to do with keeping them sane while Elizabeth was missing, but the book, particularly at the beginning, is very heavy on quoting scriptures from the Book of Mormon and the D&C (Doctrine and Covenants), which is another LDS document. If readers aren’t members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, they might not understand some of the significance of the quotes.
Speaking of quotes, the Smarts start most chapters off with one, and they are generally from LDS sources– either the Book of Mormon, or the D&C, or perhaps from a well known LDS leader like church president Gordon B. Hinckley. Again, it seems to me that the Smarts might have forgotten that they might have readers who have no understanding of the LDS Church. On the other hand, the inclusion of the LDS quotes may have been by design– to get more people to investigate the church. All one has to do is contact LDS missionaries and they can start learning about the church and possibly become a member. In any case, it seems to me that some folks might find all the LDS stuff included in this book off putting, particularly if they don’t believe in God or going to church. That said, I will also mention that before I picked up Bringing Elizabeth Home: A Journey of Faith and Hope, I figured I would be reading something about the Smarts’ faith, so this aspect of the book didn’t surprise me much.
The Smarts continually contend that they want to protect Elizabeth’s privacy, and I respect that. On the other hand, I do find it curious that they published Bringing Elizabeth Home: A Journey of Faith and Hope, if they truly wanted to protect Elizabeth’s privacy. They write that they were hoping to put some of the false information to rest. It seems to me that the Smarts’ book is really more about how Ed and Lois Smart dealt with Elizabeth’s absence than Elizabeth’s ordeal, and to the Smarts’ credit, they do seem to convey that idea in the book. However, they had to know that people would buy this book expecting to read about what really happened to Elizabeth. The Smarts include a few details, but those who want to buy Bringing Elizabeth Home should realize that they won’t get the whole scoop.
I don’t think that Bringing Elizabeth Home: A Journey of Faith and Hope is a terrible book. It’s just that it doesn’t reveal that much more than what the public already knows about the Smart case. The writing is not as strong as it should be and there’s some preaching in this book that might turn some people off. Nevertheless, the Smart case is fascinating and if you want to know everything that’s out there about the Smart family, you might find reading this book worthwhile. On the whole, however, I think that most people would probably do well to skip it.
As an Amazon Associate, I get a small commission from Amazon on sales made through my site.
This morning, as I was waking up and checking out Facebook, I saw that someone in the Duggar Family News group had shared a few screenshots of Jill Rodrigues and her family singing a song called “Come On Down to the Farm”. I had never heard of the song before, but the author of the post commented that it’s a song about how animals procreate, used as an object lesson as to why gay marriage and homosexuality, in general, ought to be forbidden. I was kind of struck by the photos of Jill and her brood. They were clearly happy, mouths agape as they played and sang the song with much gusto. Here are a few screenshots:
Since they seemed to be so enthusiastic about singing this number, I decided to look it up on YouTube. Below are the lyrics:
If you’d rather hear a slightly more professional version of the musical object lesson, check out this video with Rick Wingerter performing it.
Music can be a very powerful and effective teacher. It can be a lot easier to listen to a lesson delivered in a well-crafted and played song, especially if there’s fun involved. I’m not sure if the Rodrigues kids enjoyed playing this number, although they seem to have been well-trained to follow their mom’s lead. One thing I did notice as Jill was playing is that she sort of casts her eyes sideways at her daughter playing the fiddle. It could be because of the lighting or camera angle, but to me, she actually looks like she’s shooting her a warning glare. And then, at about the 5:30 mark in the video, the smallest girl kicks the family dog, who no doubt was in pain listening to the very enthusiastic, high volume squawking. I think the Rodrigues family is marginally better at playing instruments than singing.
As for the “musical object lesson” they’re teaching, I have a couple of observations. Now, I’ve actually spent a lot of time in barns and on farms. I’ve seen all kinds of interesting sexual behavior involving animals. I’ve seen geldings mount mares, even though they’ve been castrated and shouldn’t be interested in sex. I’ve seen male and female dogs humping each other or dogs that are the same sex as they are, mainly to establish dominance, even if they don’t have sex parts. And since animals lack a concept of marriage, and a lot of them are going to eventually be slaughtered and eaten, anyway, I’m not sure I would take object lessons from observing them on a farm. In any case, I don’t think I would take a lesson from farm animals about human sexuality. Animals aren’t capable of the same level of thinking that humans are… or, at least most humans. I’m kind of having my doubts about Jill Rodrigues.
I wonder what she thinks about people who are infertile? Should they not get married because they aren’t capable of making babies? Is marriage really only about having and raising children? And if people can’t have children, do they serve a purpose, in her view? She’s probably never thought about it… but then, she doesn’t seem to respect that not everyone believes in God, or even just her interpretation of God. In her simple world view, everyone on Earth should be following the Bible according to white Christians from the United States. Forget about any other religious books or traditions. Forget about other cultures and mores. We should just believe in the Christianity Jill and her ilk do. Seems very boring and limited to me. No thanks.
Lately, I’ve noticed I’ve been getting a lot of hits on my posts about Jill’s daughter, Nurie. Nurie, you may recall, is Jill’s eldest daughter. She is married to Nathan Keller, who is Anna Keller Duggar’s brother. That means Josh Duggar is Nurie’s brother-in-law. I remember that Jill Rodrigues was very excited that Nurie was marrying a Keller, and it seemed to be because that meant her family would have a link with the Duggars. I wonder how she feels about that now. I think Jill should sing a song about the evils of child pornography. That would be a more effective musical object lesson than a song about how “wrong” she thinks gay marriage and liberal views are. Moreover, as “unnatural” as Jill thinks homosexuality is, I would submit that viewing child pornography is even more so. Why isn’t she singing a song about her daughter’s brother-in-law’s perversions? If she did that, then I might be more impressed.
Nurie, by the way, is currently pregnant, and is due in the fall sometime. Her unborn baby is going to be a cousin to the Josh Duggar clan. I know this because Jill posted a video about it, probably a few minutes after Nurie conceived. And while I don’t follow her myself, Jill Rodrigues gets a lot of traffic in the Duggar Family News group. That’s really the only reason I know anything about her or her family.
Anyway… I think Jill is wrong about homosexuality and homosexuals. Having read so many tragic stories on the Recovery from Mormonism messageboard about people who have been affected by homosexuals trying to live like heterosexuals, I can’t agree that people should simply pair up with someone of the opposite sex if they aren’t attracted. For most people, marriage is difficult, particularly if there are children involved. I know there are a lot of people who have been taught by their religious customs that they must live a “straight” life, even if they aren’t straight. So they suppress those natural feelings they have, marry someone who doesn’t share their sexual orientation, and proceed to have a marriage that isn’t as loving as it could be.
Some people do marry for practical and business reasons, and I have no issue with that as long as both parties are aware and agree. But I also know that sometimes homosexuals marry heterosexuals because they’re afraid of offending God; they want a family; or they can’t face disappointing their families and the fallout that can come from that. They go through the motions of the marriage. Maybe they’ll be strong enough not to cheat, but they’ll never be truly satisfied. And the spouse might be wondering the whole time what he or she did “wrong”, when the spouse just isn’t that into them.
Some time ago, I wrote a post about Lois Smart. Lois Smart, you might know, is Elizabeth Smart’s mother. She has six children with her ex husband, Ed Smart, who was very visible on television when Elizabeth Smart was abducted from her home at age 14. On the surface, they looked like a picture perfect family. But all along, Ed was hiding a secret. He’s gay. And in the Mormon faith, a woman needs to be sealed to a temple worthy man to take her “through the veil” and into the Celestial Kingdom after they’re both dead. Imagine how Lois felt when she found out her husband of many years, the father of her children, was gay, and hiding that secret for so many years. As a believing Mormon, Lois is now left without a “temple worthy” husband.
While I personally don’t agree with Mormonism or its tenets, I can see how this revelation would be hard for Lois Smart. Because she presumably married her husband thinking they would be together forever. Now that Ed has come out, that dream may be dead. Now, Lois Smart could presumably remarry. She might find a temple worthy LDS man who will marry her and, with her connections, I have no doubt she could get a temple divorce without too much issue. Lois Smart is probably considered Mormon royalty of sorts. But her situation is just one of many facing religious people who don’t believe that people should be with those who interest and attract them.
I think it’s time that religious people evolved. Life is difficult enough as it is. People who are capable of consenting should be allowed to choose the right partner for themselves… or they should be free to choose NO partner, if that’s what makes them happy. Jill Rodrigues and her ilk should focus on their own lives and do away with the musical object lessons that do more harm than good… not to mention hurt the ears of anyone with an appreciation for music. One tip I would pass on to her is that singing and playing louder doesn’t equate to singing and playing better.
Moving on to the next musical object lesson.
This next bit is going to be shorter and a lot vaguer, mainly because I can’t get into specifics at this point in time. But this subject does kind of have to do with musical object lessons and getting meaning from songs. It’s particularly relevant in this situation, because object lessons in the forms of music and/or children’s literature are favorite props used by the people I vaguely allude to in this cryptic passage. Bear with me.
Over breakfast this morning, Bill and I were talking about a major decision he recently made that could possibly rock some worlds. At some point in the following weeks, things could get somewhat dramatic. On the other hand, it’s also possible that they won’t. We’re now at the stage at which we’re watching, waiting, and speculating about what could be coming in the very near future. It’s kind of like dropping a lit match in a forest. What happens next? Will the match quickly burn out and do no harm? Or will there be a raging and destructive forest fire? Time will tell. Either way, changes have already begun.
As we were talking, the song “Wrapped Around Your Finger” by The Police popped into my head. Here’s a video and the lyrics:
You consider me the young apprentice Caught between the Scylla and Charibdes Hypnotized by you if I should linger Staring at the ring around your finger
I have only come here seeking knowledge Things they would not teach me of in college I can see the destiny you sold turned into a shining band of gold
I’ll be wrapped around your finger I’ll be wrapped around your finger
Mephistopheles is not your name I know what you’re up to just the same I will listen hard to your tuition You will see it come to its fruition
I’ll be wrapped around your finger I’ll be wrapped around your finger
Devil and the deep blue sea behind me Vanish in the air you’ll never find me I will turn your face to alabaster When you’ll find your servant is your master
You’ll be wrapped around my finger You’ll be wrapped around my finger You’ll be wrapped around my finger
As Bill was talking about this big decision he made and his subsequent action, I was suddenly reminded of the bridge of “Wrapped Around Your Finger”:
Devil and the deep blue sea behind me Vanish in the air you’ll never find me I will turn your face to alabaster When you’ll find your servant is your master
The decision that Bill made a few days ago is a very long time in coming. There was a time when he really wanted to take action, but felt he couldn’t. He was restrained by doubts, fears, and worrying about potential consequences. Even today, he’s a little worried about the chain of events he’d set into motion and the possible fallout. But then I reminded him that the things that held him back in the past no longer apply. He’s not very accessible anymore… he’s not as vulnerable as he used to be… and pretty soon, someone is likely going to find out that their former servant(s) are now about to “own” them.
Even if that lit match in the forest burns out with no apparent consequences, I know that the reality is, things have forever changed. The roles have switched. The dynamics are different. I picture a face turning to alabaster– pale and frozen– when the realization hits them that they have seen their “tuition come to fruition”, as Sting puts it. Or… perhaps in less elegant terms…
I haven’t been writing much about Mormonism lately. I haven’t had a need to, since my husband’s daughters have become adults and their whackadoodle mother is no longer interfering in our lives. But today, I need to write about the “so called church” once more.
Regular readers may know that my husband, Bill, was once a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, otherwise known as “The Mormons”. When I met him twenty years ago, he still attended church and obeyed its tenets. At the time, he assured me he believed in the church with all his heart. As I got to know him better, it became very clear to me that Bill was going through the motions. His belief was basically a facade. He’d put it on in an attempt to keep his family together and his first marriage intact.
Bill and his ex wife converted to Mormonism in 1997, when Ex’s son was nine or ten years old and Bill’s two daughters were three and six. At the time, Bill believed the church might help fix his marriage, which had been fraught with problems from the beginning. At first, the church gave Bill a place to direct his attention besides his disastrous homelife. The church provided him with positive regard that comes from the initial “lovebombing” church members heap on potential new members. There were things to do, people to get to know, and places to spend what little free time Bill had in those days. Lovebombing usually wanes once a person is firmly entrenched. Like most everything else in the church, it’s basically a facade designed to influence people to join up and stay put. It’s not unlike the intoxicating lure narcissists use to get their supply. It wasn’t long before Bill noticed the lovebombing was ending, and shit was getting real.
Two years later, Bill and Ex separated, and by June 2000, they were divorced. Bill resigned from the church in 2006, and eventually lost contact with his daughters for years. They treated him with contempt for divorcing their mother and turning his back on “the one true church”. Some readers may recall that in November 2016, Bill’s younger daughter popped back on the radar when she showed up as a “person Bill might know” on Facebook. At the time, I was livid, because she had been so mean to him and assured him that she wanted nothing to do with him. But in the wake of that situation, Bill and his daughter started chatting, emailing, and Skyping. He still hasn’t seen her in person since 2004, but they now speak regularly. Older daughter is now 28 years old and still lives with her mother.
Last night, Bill Skyped with his younger daughter, who is now the mother of two very young children. Her husband, who grew up in a very Mormon family, is currently searching for a job. Like a whole lot of people, he’s interviewed at many places. He scored a job offer that turned out to be based on lies. The company that hired him couldn’t pay him, and expected him to do things other than what they hired him to do. So, though he’d moved his family to a new city for the job, that opportunity disappeared after just one day.
Meanwhile, he’s got a son who’s not quite two years old and a six week old daughter to support. He only graduated college a couple of months ago and doesn’t have enough experience to land a job that will pay enough to support his family. They’ve only just moved into an apartment, but now it looks like they’ll need to move again, since the city they just moved to doesn’t have the job opportunities they need to get her husband launched into a job that pays enough to support the family. Younger daughter found someone to take their apartment, but they’ll probably lose their security deposit. They really need that money.
In the course of their conversation, younger daughter described to Bill what it was like growing up with Ex, who basically kept everything chaotic. She would have done that whether or not they were LDS, but the church certainly kept things more complicated. Because along with having to keep up with family responsibilities, job requirements, and basic life stuff, they were also having to keep up with church crap, including tithing. Although the church promised that it would make life better, the reality was, it made things all the more complicated and expensive. Younger daughter found comfort in the church that she didn’t get from her family. But it’s come at a price.
Last night, I listened to Bill try to talk to his daughter. He’s still afraid to be totally straightforward with her, because he’s afraid of alienating her and doesn’t want to lose their newly established connection. She’s still a believer in the church, and even I will admit that there have been times when the church has been helpful to her. For instance, going on a LDS mission helped younger daughter escape her mother’s toxic household, the same way the military helped Bill escape it. But any help the church extends comes with strings attached.
Yes, the church has social welfare programs for its members, but members who use it are expected to “pay back” the church by doing time consuming work for no pay. And anyone who is taking help is expected to tithe on whatever money they do have. So here you have a church that is wealthy enough to pay for everything in cash, but won’t pay members to do necessary work like cleaning its churches. Imagine that… the church could hire custodians again– people whose job it is to see that the church is clean and might actually have an incentive to care about doing the work properly. They’d be earning an actual paycheck, rather than needing the church’s assistance and tithing on their welfare, or whatever. But instead of hiring people, they expect members to clean the meetinghouses for free as “service” to the church. People who need assistance are at the top of the list of those expected to work for free, even though they should be spending their time looking for work that pays.
Younger daughter says her husband can go work for Deseret Industries, a church owned business. But it won’t pay enough, and working there will no doubt come with expectations and commitments beyond simply earning a paycheck. While in the short term, working there would bring in much needed money, in the long run, it may turn into a situation that will keep them impoverished.
As Bill was telling me about this, I read an article in Deseret News about Ed Smart, father of Elizabeth Smart. At age 64, Ed Smart has come out as gay. He wrote a letter explaining things. He says he’s going to divorce his wife, Lois, and perhaps leave the LDS church, which he says doesn’t have a place for people who are LGBTQ. Ed Smart is the father of Elizabeth Smart, who has famously parlayed personal tragedy into a career.
In 2002, Elizabeth Smart, then 14 years old, was abducted from her home. She spent nine months being repeatedly raped and abused by her captors before she was finally found. Now 31 years old, married, and the mother of three, Elizabeth Smart is an activist. But when Elizabeth was missing, her dad, Ed, was front and center. For a time, he was a very visible representative of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. He and his wife, Lois, seemed to be perfect. They had six beautiful children, money, prestige, and a seemingly blessed life. I’m sure a lot of people looked at the Smart family and held them up as an example as to why Mormonism “works”. Some people may have even joined the church because of this attractive, high profile family. The Smarts certainly did their part in promoting the church, even though Elizabeth’s kidnapping might have even been directly related to Mormonism, given that her abductor used Mormon beliefs to justify his actions and get Elizabeth to be compliant.
A couple of years after Elizabeth was reunited with her family, Ed and Lois Smart wrote a book called Bringing Elizabeth Home. I read the book when it was first published. It was full of LDS church quotes which supposedly helped the Smart family get through their ordeal. A couple of years after I read that book, I purchased a DVD about the fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (FLDS) called Banking on Heaven. Ed Smart appears on that DVD basically excusing fundamentalist Mormons, reminding everyone that he is descended from polygamists. He was still selling Mormon bullshit to the masses, even as he privately realized that he was gay and that gay people have no place in Mormonism. Even then, he must have realized that he was promoting lies that ultimately would complicate lives for other people.
As I read about Ed Smart’s decision to come clean about his sexual orientation, it occurred to me that his wife, Lois, is now in a pickle. Because in the LDS church, a woman needs a man to take her to the highest echelon of Heaven, the Celestial Kingdom. To reach that level in the afterlife, Mormons have to be temple married, and women have to be married and “sealed” to men who are “worthy”. Marriage in the temple is supposed to be for eternity. Marriages that do not take place in the temple are only for “time” (meaning time on earth).
According to Mormon beliefs, Ed Smart isn’t worthy anymore. So where does that leave Lois, who presumably now must get a “temple divorce” and find some other guy to take her to the CK? At her age, finding a worthy LDS man who hasn’t already been married will be difficult. It would likely mean that after death, she’d be in a polygamist relationship, if the man was already married and sealed to another woman. Because, in the eyes of the LDS church, sealing is forever, unless one gets a temple divorce.
Resigning from the church or excommunication or even getting a divorce doesn’t necessarily cancel sealings. There has to be a temple worthy man waiting in the wings, ready to take on the responsibility of taking the woman to the Celestial Kingdom. If there isn’t one, a temple divorce won’t be granted. Although Bill never got one himself, I have heard and read stories of people who have. It’s not easy, particularly for women. A man can be sealed to as many women as they want, as long as his tithing is paid. A woman can only be sealed to one man, and he has to be temple worthy.
Even if the man quits the church, the church will ask the ex husband for dirt in the form of a letter asking if the wife has done anything that would make her ineligible to be sealed. And also, any children resulting from the marriage would also belong to whichever man to whom the wife is sealed, particularly if the ex husband left the church. An ex wife would also get a letter if her husband wanted to be sealed to another woman, but church officials seem to care less about what the woman says, even if she’s still a faithful member. Because again, men can be sealed to multiple women. I must state right here that I don’t actually believe any of this nonsense. What’s important is that church members do, and they go through incredible trauma because of it. I know that this issue can cause huge emotional wreckage to those who divorce and remarry, not just to the divorcing couple and their families, but also to the people they marry and their families.
Lois Smart probably won’t have any issues… or at least not the issues that less famous members would experience. She’s wealthy, attractive, well-known, and well-respected. I would not be surprised if she remarries and even gets sealed to someone else. But, I write about this to illustrate how complicated church shit can make things. Divorce is hard enough when there is no religious bullshit involved. If you’re a believer in Mormonism, you have a whole ‘nother set of commitments to deal with… and that complicates things a lot. Not only do you have to deal with the emotional pain of it and the expense, you also have to deal with the involvement of a lot of unrelated people… church leaders and members who are in your business and folks who want to make sure the proper procedures are followed so that Heavenly Father won’t be pissed off. It’s totally ridiculous, yet people tolerate it, and things are made much harder than they need to be.
As far as I know, Bill is still considered “sealed” to his ex wife, even though he’s resigned, she’s remarried, and her husband joined the church. The reason I think this is because, based on the experiences of others who have been divorced and resigned from the church, I know that when a previously sealed woman wants to be sealed to another man, the church typically sends the ex a letter asking them if there is any reason why the member shouldn’t be allowed to be sealed to someone else. LDS church folks are very good at tracking people down, so even though we’ve moved a bunch of times, I would expect them to be able to find Bill and send him the letter. He’s never gotten one, and I suspect that Ex uses the prospect of who will be sealed to her as a means of keeping her current husband in line. Of course, by now, maybe neither of them cares anymore. Maybe they both know it’s all a crock of shit and makes life harder than it needs to be. In fact, maybe Ex’s current husband even looks forward to being free of Ex in the afterlife. Who knows?
It’s likely that Mormonism no longer serves a purpose to Ex and she’s abandoned it. Meanwhile, her daughter is still mired in it… and it’s complicating things for her, because she’s been pressured to get married and have babies. She doesn’t have a job; her husband is newly graduated and doesn’t have a job. But they have themselves and two small children to take care of. Ex has also insinuated that maybe older daughter could also come out there and live with them, an idea that younger daughter has wisely vetoed. (Ex is a big fan of foisting needy family members on each other, or glomming on herself… again, making shit much more complicated than it ought to be.)
On the up side, this situation isn’t as dire as it could be. Younger daughter is 25 years old, not 18. She has some college education, although she hasn’t yet finished her degree. She’s bright enough to realize her mother is crazy and has reached out to more competent and “together” people for help. She has skills and talents that she can easily use, and she’s already proven that she’s resilient and competent. But she and her husband married and had a baby before either of them finished school. They now have a baby girl who has some health issues. Her husband is out of work and under tremendous pressure, and younger daughter, who hasn’t yet had a chance to graduate school or launch, can’t help him with creating a financial situation more conducive to having a family. Meanwhile, in addition to all of the stresses that come from having a young family and needing work, there are church commitments that must be considered as well. Younger daughter and her husband don’t have the status, money, and connections that Ed and Lois Smart have.
My head hurts as I consider all of this, and I’m not even LDS. To Bill’s credit, he did gently suggest to his daughter not to do what her mother is famous for doing; that is, she shouldn’t expect that Heavenly Father will work things out for her. She needs a plan. She needs to put on her own oxygen mask before considering the needs of the church. To younger daughter’s credit, she is clearly cognizant that her mother is nuts, and she’s ready to reject any “big ideas” her mother has for getting out of the situation she and her husband are in right now. She’s reached out to Bill, who is ready and willing to help her. But my lord, it seems to me that this situation could have been a lot less complicated without the church. I’m sure they’ll get through it… but it could have been easier if they’d just waited to finish school and launch careers before leaping into marriage and parenthood. And maybe they would have done that if religion hadn’t gotten in the way, reminding them of their “duty” to procreate and make more tithe paying members for the church.
I’m not quite an atheist myself. I think I have a belief in a higher power. However, as my good friend Dave once put it, “Having religion in your life is like driving with bugs on the windshield.” As I ponder the life choices inspired by religion that have led people to make decisions that needlessly complicate their lives, I think he may be right.
The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.