Here is another great quote from the CES fireside talk given by Merrill J. Bateman in 2006.
"The physical body is one of the great gifts of mortality. The scriptures teach that the body is not only important for this life but also for eternity. During mortality the body can be a temple of God in that it may house the Holy Spirit (see 1 Corinthians 6:19–20). Listening to the guidance of the Holy Spirit leads one to the celestial kingdom. The body is so important in the eternities that Christ gave His life to overcome physical as well as spiritual death. In so doing, He made possible a resurrection for everyone.
Joseph Smith said: “We came to this earth that we might have a body and present it pure before God in the celestial kingdom. The great principle of happiness consists in having a body.”
... The physical body is an instrument of the mind. President Boyd K. Packer taught this concept in a CES satellite broadcast three years ago. Many acts of love, kindness, and service require the physical body. These physical acts not only bless others but also oneself. A personage of spirit is able to do many things, but the physical body increases the range of activities that can be performed. In fact, President Joseph F. Smith, in his vision of the spirit world, learned that “the dead . . . looked upon the long absence of their spirits from their bodies as a bondage” (D&C 138:50). In other words, there will be actions we cannot take after death before the Resurrection, and we will look and yearn for the return of that physical body and the freedom that it brings."
Whenever I start to feel sad because my body doesn't work I think of the story in the Bible where the evil spirits possessed the pigs. Because they wanted a body so badly.
Mark 5: 9-13
9 And he asked him, What is thy name? And he answered, saying, My name is Legion: for we are many.
10 And he besought him much that he would not send them away out of the country.
11 Now there was there nigh unto the mountains a great herd of swine feeding.
12 And all the devils besought him, saying, Send us into the swine, that we may enter into them.
13 And forthwith Jesus gave them leave. And the unclean spirits went out, and entered into the swine: and the herd ran violently down a steep place into the sea, (they were about two thousand;) and were choked in the sea.
It reminds me of how blessed I am to have a body, regardless of whether it's broken and doesn't work properly. There are still things I can do to serve the Lord, and be an influence for good on others. At least that is my goal.
That's my two cents.
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
Saturday, August 28, 2010
Aches and Pains of Aging
This is one of the awesome quotes from the fireside transcript posted previously. If you haven't yet taken the time to read it, I strongly urge you to do so.
"As one experiences the downhill portion of later life, the inevitable aches and pains serve an important purpose. They help one put off King Benjamin’s “natural man [or woman]” as we learn to yield to the “enticings of the Holy Spirit” (Mosiah 3:19). The aches and pains of later life teach humility, the meaning of long-suffering, the importance of patience, and an appreciation for the qualities of kindness and love, and they help one learn moderation in all things. It’s interesting. These are the divine attributes. For the faithful, the slow deterioration of the body serves as a refining instrument for the spirit." - Elder Merrill J. Bateman, Presidency of the 70
I found this quote about why our bodies deteriorate as we age, to be quite insightful.
Anyway, I found the entire CES fireside to be very educational. This small quote is just one example of the many wonderful lessons taught in this talk. Please take the time to read the transcript in its entirety by clicking on the link in my previous post.
That's my two cents.
"As one experiences the downhill portion of later life, the inevitable aches and pains serve an important purpose. They help one put off King Benjamin’s “natural man [or woman]” as we learn to yield to the “enticings of the Holy Spirit” (Mosiah 3:19). The aches and pains of later life teach humility, the meaning of long-suffering, the importance of patience, and an appreciation for the qualities of kindness and love, and they help one learn moderation in all things. It’s interesting. These are the divine attributes. For the faithful, the slow deterioration of the body serves as a refining instrument for the spirit." - Elder Merrill J. Bateman, Presidency of the 70
I found this quote about why our bodies deteriorate as we age, to be quite insightful.
Anyway, I found the entire CES fireside to be very educational. This small quote is just one example of the many wonderful lessons taught in this talk. Please take the time to read the transcript in its entirety by clicking on the link in my previous post.
That's my two cents.
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Look Forward with An Eye of Faith
I watched an awesome CES fireside on my DVR last night. I wanted all of you to be able to be as enlightened as I was, so I’m posting the link to the transcript. I was going to just post the entire transcript on my blog but there are some graphs and visual aids that are embedded in the transcript that I want you to be able to see. Please take the time to read it. It will be worth your efforts. Click on the link below.
Elder Merrill J. Bateman CES fireside transcript March 2006
Elder Merrill J. Bateman CES fireside transcript March 2006
Monday, August 23, 2010
Birth Order
A study that I found very interesting considering that I am the firstborn child in my family. I actually did a paper on birth order when I was in college. I find psychology fascinating. Enjoy the article.
Sorry, kid, first-borns really are smarter
Birth order makes a difference when it comes to brains, personality, study finds
By Rachael Rettner
8/12/2010
-SAN DIEGO — Birth order within families has long sparked sibling rivalry, but it might also impact the child's personality and intelligence, a new study suggests. First-borns are typically smarter, while younger siblings get better grades and are more outgoing, the researchers say.
The findings weigh in on a long-standing debate: What effect if any does birth orderhave on a person's life? While numerous studies have been conducted, researchers have yet to draw any definitive conclusions.
The results lend support to some previous hypotheses — for instance, that the eldest sibling tends to have higher aptitude. But the study also contradicts other proposed ideas, for example, that first-borns tend to be more extroverted.
The findings shed light on the influence of sibling relationships, which often receives less attention compared with that of the mother-child or father-child relationship, said Tiffany L. Frank, a doctoral candidate at Adelphi University in Long Island, N.Y., who lead the study.
They also suggest some inherent differences between siblings exist, differences that might arise no matter what parents do. "While parents might want to treat each child equally, it's almost impossible," Frank said here at the 118th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association.
Most previous studies on the influence of birth order have looked at children from different families. For instance, some studies have looked at U.S. presidents, Nobel Laureates or NASA astronauts to see whether they are mostly first-born children or later born children.U.S. presidents and science Nobel Laureates were found to be overwhelmingly first-borns, as were 21 of the first 23 NASA astronauts.
However, these studies cannot take into account influences that arise from children being in the same family, such as the competition that might exist between siblings, Frank said.
In addition, most previous studies have asked subjects to think back to their childhood or adolescence, a method that might lead to inaccuracies if subjects misremember their past.
In the current study, Frank and her colleagues surveyed 90 pairs of siblings in high school. Subjects were asked to report their grades and rank themselves as compared with their siblings on intelligence, work ethic and academic performance. The researchers also obtained academic tests scores and grades to verify the students' own reports.
While the first-born tended to do better on measures of intelligence, the younger siblings had higher overall grade point averages.
..First-borns might score higher on tests because, at some point in their lives, they were only children who were the sole recipients of their parents' attention.
Younger siblings might earn better grades, because they received mentoring from first-borns who already had to tackle certain subjects, the researchers say. Also, later born children might feel extra pressure to be competitive, and might try to out-do their older siblings in the hopes of gaining extra attention from parents.
In a second experiment researchers looked at differences in personality between 76 pairs of siblings in high school. Subjects rated themselves on a series of statements designed to assess personality.
Later born siblings were found to be more extroverted (sociable, outgoing), sentimental, forgiving and open to new experiences than their older siblings. First-borns were found to be more perfectionistic than their younger siblings.
The youngsters might also be more open to new experiences, because they "see the obstacles that their older siblings have overcome and therefore feel more secure in challenging themselves," the researchers say.
Frank conducted the work with Hannah Turenshine and Stephen J. Sullivan of Lawrence High School in Cedarhurst, N.Y.
Sorry, kid, first-borns really are smarter
Birth order makes a difference when it comes to brains, personality, study finds
By Rachael Rettner
8/12/2010
-SAN DIEGO — Birth order within families has long sparked sibling rivalry, but it might also impact the child's personality and intelligence, a new study suggests. First-borns are typically smarter, while younger siblings get better grades and are more outgoing, the researchers say.
The findings weigh in on a long-standing debate: What effect if any does birth orderhave on a person's life? While numerous studies have been conducted, researchers have yet to draw any definitive conclusions.
The results lend support to some previous hypotheses — for instance, that the eldest sibling tends to have higher aptitude. But the study also contradicts other proposed ideas, for example, that first-borns tend to be more extroverted.
The findings shed light on the influence of sibling relationships, which often receives less attention compared with that of the mother-child or father-child relationship, said Tiffany L. Frank, a doctoral candidate at Adelphi University in Long Island, N.Y., who lead the study.
They also suggest some inherent differences between siblings exist, differences that might arise no matter what parents do. "While parents might want to treat each child equally, it's almost impossible," Frank said here at the 118th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association.
Most previous studies on the influence of birth order have looked at children from different families. For instance, some studies have looked at U.S. presidents, Nobel Laureates or NASA astronauts to see whether they are mostly first-born children or later born children.U.S. presidents and science Nobel Laureates were found to be overwhelmingly first-borns, as were 21 of the first 23 NASA astronauts.
However, these studies cannot take into account influences that arise from children being in the same family, such as the competition that might exist between siblings, Frank said.
In addition, most previous studies have asked subjects to think back to their childhood or adolescence, a method that might lead to inaccuracies if subjects misremember their past.
In the current study, Frank and her colleagues surveyed 90 pairs of siblings in high school. Subjects were asked to report their grades and rank themselves as compared with their siblings on intelligence, work ethic and academic performance. The researchers also obtained academic tests scores and grades to verify the students' own reports.
While the first-born tended to do better on measures of intelligence, the younger siblings had higher overall grade point averages.
..First-borns might score higher on tests because, at some point in their lives, they were only children who were the sole recipients of their parents' attention.
Younger siblings might earn better grades, because they received mentoring from first-borns who already had to tackle certain subjects, the researchers say. Also, later born children might feel extra pressure to be competitive, and might try to out-do their older siblings in the hopes of gaining extra attention from parents.
In a second experiment researchers looked at differences in personality between 76 pairs of siblings in high school. Subjects rated themselves on a series of statements designed to assess personality.
Later born siblings were found to be more extroverted (sociable, outgoing), sentimental, forgiving and open to new experiences than their older siblings. First-borns were found to be more perfectionistic than their younger siblings.
The youngsters might also be more open to new experiences, because they "see the obstacles that their older siblings have overcome and therefore feel more secure in challenging themselves," the researchers say.
Frank conducted the work with Hannah Turenshine and Stephen J. Sullivan of Lawrence High School in Cedarhurst, N.Y.
Sunday, August 22, 2010
Relief Society Lesson - Patience
Here are the notes for my lesson today:
Continue in Patience
Pres. Dieter F. Uchtdorf
April 2010 Gen. Conference
Patience—the ability to put our desires on hold for a time—is a precious and rare virtue.
Without patience, we cannot please God; we cannot become perfect.
Patience is a purifying process that refines understanding, deepens happiness, focuses action, and offers hope for peace.
Patience is not passive resignation, nor is it failing to act because of our fears. Patience means active waiting and enduring. It means staying with something and doing all that we can—working, hoping, and exercising faith; bearing hardship with fortitude, even when the desires of our hearts are delayed.
Patience is not simply enduring; it is enduring well!
Impatience, on the other hand, is a symptom of selfishness. It is a trait of the self-absorbed. It arises from the all-too-prevalent condition called “center of the universe” syndrome, which leads people to believe that the world revolves around them and that all others are just supporting cast in the grand theater of mortality in which only they have the starring role.
I know for sure that the promises of the Lord, if perhaps not always swift, are always certain.-Pres. Uchtdorf
Knowledge and understanding come at the price of patience.
Patience is a godly attribute that can heal souls, unlock treasures of knowledge and understanding, and transform ordinary men and women into saints and angels. Patience is truly a fruit of the Spirit.
Patience means staying with something until the end. It means delaying immediate gratification for future blessings. It means reining in anger and holding back the unkind word. It means resisting evil, even when it appears to be making others rich.
Patience means accepting that which cannot be changed and facing it with courage, grace, and faith. It means being “willing to submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon [us], even as a child doth submit to his father.” Ultimately, patience means being “firm and steadfast, and immovable in keeping the commandments of the Lord” every hour of every day, even when it is hard to do so.
Patience is a process of perfection.
Patience means to abide in faith, knowing that sometimes it is in the waiting rather than in the receiving that we grow the most.
*All of the above quotes are excerpts from Pres. Uchtdorf's talk.
Continue in Patience
Pres. Dieter F. Uchtdorf
April 2010 Gen. Conference
Patience—the ability to put our desires on hold for a time—is a precious and rare virtue.
Without patience, we cannot please God; we cannot become perfect.
Patience is a purifying process that refines understanding, deepens happiness, focuses action, and offers hope for peace.
Patience is not passive resignation, nor is it failing to act because of our fears. Patience means active waiting and enduring. It means staying with something and doing all that we can—working, hoping, and exercising faith; bearing hardship with fortitude, even when the desires of our hearts are delayed.
Patience is not simply enduring; it is enduring well!
Impatience, on the other hand, is a symptom of selfishness. It is a trait of the self-absorbed. It arises from the all-too-prevalent condition called “center of the universe” syndrome, which leads people to believe that the world revolves around them and that all others are just supporting cast in the grand theater of mortality in which only they have the starring role.
I know for sure that the promises of the Lord, if perhaps not always swift, are always certain.-Pres. Uchtdorf
Knowledge and understanding come at the price of patience.
Patience is a godly attribute that can heal souls, unlock treasures of knowledge and understanding, and transform ordinary men and women into saints and angels. Patience is truly a fruit of the Spirit.
Patience means staying with something until the end. It means delaying immediate gratification for future blessings. It means reining in anger and holding back the unkind word. It means resisting evil, even when it appears to be making others rich.
Patience means accepting that which cannot be changed and facing it with courage, grace, and faith. It means being “willing to submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon [us], even as a child doth submit to his father.” Ultimately, patience means being “firm and steadfast, and immovable in keeping the commandments of the Lord” every hour of every day, even when it is hard to do so.
Patience is a process of perfection.
Patience means to abide in faith, knowing that sometimes it is in the waiting rather than in the receiving that we grow the most.
*All of the above quotes are excerpts from Pres. Uchtdorf's talk.
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Exercise Your Right to Vote
There are a lot of people who don’t exercise their right to vote. I find this disgraceful. Apparently, they don’t care about our predecessors who fought so hard to give us the right to vote. And to keep our country a democracy, where the people vote to determine who will represent them in government. Yes, even with all the corruption in government and politics, we are still a democratic nation. We still have the right to vote.
It is my belief that we should do all we can to elect the best people and make our voices heard. I feel it is our civic duty, as a citizen of this great nation, to vote. To be honest with you, it quite irks me when people blow off their duty to vote. I have always taken voting very seriously. Yes, it does take quite a bit of time and effort to study up on the candidates and issues on the ballot. But, voting is a serious responsibility which should not be taken lightly.
I’ve heard it said that if you don’t vote for one of the “major candidates” that you are wasting your vote. That’s bunch of malarkey. The only time that your vote is wasted, is when you don’t vote.
I always study up on the candidates and issues and select who I think is the best option out of the field of candidates available. I do not select candidates based upon their popularity. In fact, in this last election a couple of days ago, I voted for a candidate who I knew was probably not going to make it to the general election. But, I felt he was the best choice. He ended up only receiving less than 12% of the votes.
Perhaps if everybody who felt that if they didn’t vote for one of the “major candidates” they were wasting their vote, actually voted for the best choice instead of the most popular, we might elect some of the more obscure candidates, who would do a better job. And better represent us and our beliefs.
Instead, those elected are usually those with the best television commercial, the most money, the most ties to influential people, etc. And that isn’t right. Look at our last presidential election. That is a perfect example. We now have Korihor, a.k.a. Obama in office because Oprah Winfrey and the media were able to pull the wool over enough people’s eyes to convince them to vote for a puppet who would follow their agenda. The media is very powerful and people are easily swayed.
While we are still a democracy, and have the right to vote, please exercise that right. We all need to do our civic duty and vote. Please don’t let all of the people who have died in defending this nation, and our rights, to have died in vain.
That’s my two cents.
It is my belief that we should do all we can to elect the best people and make our voices heard. I feel it is our civic duty, as a citizen of this great nation, to vote. To be honest with you, it quite irks me when people blow off their duty to vote. I have always taken voting very seriously. Yes, it does take quite a bit of time and effort to study up on the candidates and issues on the ballot. But, voting is a serious responsibility which should not be taken lightly.
I’ve heard it said that if you don’t vote for one of the “major candidates” that you are wasting your vote. That’s bunch of malarkey. The only time that your vote is wasted, is when you don’t vote.
I always study up on the candidates and issues and select who I think is the best option out of the field of candidates available. I do not select candidates based upon their popularity. In fact, in this last election a couple of days ago, I voted for a candidate who I knew was probably not going to make it to the general election. But, I felt he was the best choice. He ended up only receiving less than 12% of the votes.
Perhaps if everybody who felt that if they didn’t vote for one of the “major candidates” they were wasting their vote, actually voted for the best choice instead of the most popular, we might elect some of the more obscure candidates, who would do a better job. And better represent us and our beliefs.
Instead, those elected are usually those with the best television commercial, the most money, the most ties to influential people, etc. And that isn’t right. Look at our last presidential election. That is a perfect example. We now have Korihor, a.k.a. Obama in office because Oprah Winfrey and the media were able to pull the wool over enough people’s eyes to convince them to vote for a puppet who would follow their agenda. The media is very powerful and people are easily swayed.
While we are still a democracy, and have the right to vote, please exercise that right. We all need to do our civic duty and vote. Please don’t let all of the people who have died in defending this nation, and our rights, to have died in vain.
That’s my two cents.
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Monday, August 16, 2010
Flower Crazy Part Two
Our Asiatic lilies are in full bloom. They are gigantic and extremely fragrant. I don't think they are supposed to get this big. We must have done something right. As far as I know, they are only supposed to get to 3 feet tall, with five or six blooms per stalk. Some of ours are over 6 feet tall with upwards of 30 blooms.
Saturday, August 14, 2010
Friday, August 13, 2010
Cheesebag Judge Walker
I wasn't going to comment on this again because I've blogged about it several times. But, I received this in my e-mail yesterday and thought it was well written so I decided to post it. The injustice of this whole proposition eight situation makes my blood boil. It is certainly a sign of the evil and corruption of the people in government, and society for that matter.
Thursday, August 12, 2010
From: Maurine Proctor
Washington, D.C.
Breaking News: Judge Walker Rejects Prop 8 Stay Request
One outrageous thing after another continues to happen in the Prop 8 case in California.
This just in: Judge Vaughn Walker has denied the motion of Prop 8 proponents for a stay on his unbelievable ruling overturning Prop 8 until it can be reviewed by a higher court.
In other words, he has ruled that same-sex marriages can begin taking place in California August 18th unless the case is appealed to the 9th Circuit-and then in the same breath says that the Prop 8 proponents may not have legal standing to appeal because they were not directly affected by it.
He's trying to single-handedly implement same-sex marriage immediately-not only in the face of the seven million California citizens who voted for Prop 8, but by trying to undercut the ability for the Prop 8 proponents to appeal the case.
"As it appears at least doubtful that proponents will be able to proceed with their appeal without a state defendant, it remains unclear whether the Court of Appeals will be able to reach the merits of proponents' appeal," Walker wrote.
According to the LA Times Walker said there was no evidence that the sponsors of Prop. 8 "face the kind of injury" required to have standing to file an appeal.
"The uncertainty surrounding proponents' standing weighs heavily against the likelihood of their success," he wrote.
"In light of those concerns, proponents may have little choice but to attempt to convince either the governor or the attorney general to file an appeal to ensure jurisdiction."
Fat chance. Both Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and Attorney General Jerry Brown filed with the court against the stay-even though it was their duty to uphold the vote of the people.
In the name of cramming same-sex marriage down our throats, apparently a judge, a governor, and an attorney general will cross any acceptable lines of fair play and jurisprudence.
Court-watcher, Ed Whelan wrote in National Review if Prop 8 proponents "don't have standing to appeal, how did they have a right to intervene as defendants to present the defense of Prop 8? Why didn't Walker simply enter a stipulated judgment when the state defendants abandoned their duty to defend Prop 8? The obvious reason is that state law recognizes that a proposition's proponents have authority to defend the proposition, lest government officials subvert the ultimate power that the proposition process places in the people. That authority necessarily must confer standing to appeal an adverse decision.
"Walker's action screams for reversal by the Ninth Circuit. If that (alas, notoriously unreliable) court refuses to impose a stay pending appeal, then it will be up to the Supreme Court to, once again, put an end to Walker's lawlessness-this time, I would think, unanimously. (Yes, I think that even those justices who may be inclined to invent a federal constitutional right to same-sex marriage will be appalled by Walker's disregard of precedents, his absurdly biased "factfinding," and his effort to thwart meaningful appeal.)"
Following the defense of marriage debate is not only critical for those who care about the future of family in this nation, but it is also a study in political shenanigans. [End of article]
For one cheesebag judge to overthrow the votes of millions of people, is just plain wrong. I can't believe this is happening in this wonderful nation. And for the governor and those who are supposed to uphold the vote of the people to side with the cheesebag judge is sickening. What's a stinking foreigner doing as governor of California anyway? I guess I could say the same thing about our president of the United States of America. Actually, I think I already have. What is wrong with these people to elect cheesebags anyway? I suppose that's a rhetorical question.
I'm fed up with jerk faced idiotic cheesebags.
That's my two cents.
Thursday, August 12, 2010
From: Maurine Proctor
Washington, D.C.
Breaking News: Judge Walker Rejects Prop 8 Stay Request
One outrageous thing after another continues to happen in the Prop 8 case in California.
This just in: Judge Vaughn Walker has denied the motion of Prop 8 proponents for a stay on his unbelievable ruling overturning Prop 8 until it can be reviewed by a higher court.
In other words, he has ruled that same-sex marriages can begin taking place in California August 18th unless the case is appealed to the 9th Circuit-and then in the same breath says that the Prop 8 proponents may not have legal standing to appeal because they were not directly affected by it.
He's trying to single-handedly implement same-sex marriage immediately-not only in the face of the seven million California citizens who voted for Prop 8, but by trying to undercut the ability for the Prop 8 proponents to appeal the case.
"As it appears at least doubtful that proponents will be able to proceed with their appeal without a state defendant, it remains unclear whether the Court of Appeals will be able to reach the merits of proponents' appeal," Walker wrote.
According to the LA Times Walker said there was no evidence that the sponsors of Prop. 8 "face the kind of injury" required to have standing to file an appeal.
"The uncertainty surrounding proponents' standing weighs heavily against the likelihood of their success," he wrote.
"In light of those concerns, proponents may have little choice but to attempt to convince either the governor or the attorney general to file an appeal to ensure jurisdiction."
Fat chance. Both Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and Attorney General Jerry Brown filed with the court against the stay-even though it was their duty to uphold the vote of the people.
In the name of cramming same-sex marriage down our throats, apparently a judge, a governor, and an attorney general will cross any acceptable lines of fair play and jurisprudence.
Court-watcher, Ed Whelan wrote in National Review if Prop 8 proponents "don't have standing to appeal, how did they have a right to intervene as defendants to present the defense of Prop 8? Why didn't Walker simply enter a stipulated judgment when the state defendants abandoned their duty to defend Prop 8? The obvious reason is that state law recognizes that a proposition's proponents have authority to defend the proposition, lest government officials subvert the ultimate power that the proposition process places in the people. That authority necessarily must confer standing to appeal an adverse decision.
"Walker's action screams for reversal by the Ninth Circuit. If that (alas, notoriously unreliable) court refuses to impose a stay pending appeal, then it will be up to the Supreme Court to, once again, put an end to Walker's lawlessness-this time, I would think, unanimously. (Yes, I think that even those justices who may be inclined to invent a federal constitutional right to same-sex marriage will be appalled by Walker's disregard of precedents, his absurdly biased "factfinding," and his effort to thwart meaningful appeal.)"
Following the defense of marriage debate is not only critical for those who care about the future of family in this nation, but it is also a study in political shenanigans. [End of article]
For one cheesebag judge to overthrow the votes of millions of people, is just plain wrong. I can't believe this is happening in this wonderful nation. And for the governor and those who are supposed to uphold the vote of the people to side with the cheesebag judge is sickening. What's a stinking foreigner doing as governor of California anyway? I guess I could say the same thing about our president of the United States of America. Actually, I think I already have. What is wrong with these people to elect cheesebags anyway? I suppose that's a rhetorical question.
I'm fed up with jerk faced idiotic cheesebags.
That's my two cents.
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
So...
I was thinking about blogging this subject a couple of weeks ago but, decided I wouldn’t. But, I’m in a sour mood today so, I guess I will.
Far be it from me to profess to be an expert on grammar usage. But there is something that bothers me, that I’ve been hearing much more frequently lately. And that is, using the word, so, at the beginning of a paragraph/ new thought/ idea.
On rare occasion it may be grammatically correct, but to me it’s just annoying. And completely unnecessary. Especially when used repetitively.
Lest anyone be offended by this blog posting, let me clarify that English was my least favorite subject in school. And I avoided it like the plague, as much as possible. I’m sure my writing/speaking style annoys others sometimes. Contrary to popular belief, I’m not perfect. I don’t profess to be a grammar expert by any means. This is just something that annoys me.
Let me give you some examples.
So, yesterday I drove up to Seattle to go watch the Mariners game.
So, I went to the store last week and bought a new dress.
So, my friend was telling me about her trip to the Grand Canyon.
So, my dog was digging in the yard to bury his bone.
So, I was talking to my sister on the telephone…
You get the idea. To me, it makes we wonder what happened before the word, so. It seems to me like in these instances, so, is used to connect sentences, such as the word, therefore. In my opinion, the above examples would be more grammatically correct if the word, so, was left off the beginning of the sentence.
I suppose I get annoyed easily. But I’m hearing this much more frequently, and it bugs me.
That’s my two cents.
Far be it from me to profess to be an expert on grammar usage. But there is something that bothers me, that I’ve been hearing much more frequently lately. And that is, using the word, so, at the beginning of a paragraph/ new thought/ idea.
On rare occasion it may be grammatically correct, but to me it’s just annoying. And completely unnecessary. Especially when used repetitively.
Lest anyone be offended by this blog posting, let me clarify that English was my least favorite subject in school. And I avoided it like the plague, as much as possible. I’m sure my writing/speaking style annoys others sometimes. Contrary to popular belief, I’m not perfect. I don’t profess to be a grammar expert by any means. This is just something that annoys me.
Let me give you some examples.
So, yesterday I drove up to Seattle to go watch the Mariners game.
So, I went to the store last week and bought a new dress.
So, my friend was telling me about her trip to the Grand Canyon.
So, my dog was digging in the yard to bury his bone.
So, I was talking to my sister on the telephone…
You get the idea. To me, it makes we wonder what happened before the word, so. It seems to me like in these instances, so, is used to connect sentences, such as the word, therefore. In my opinion, the above examples would be more grammatically correct if the word, so, was left off the beginning of the sentence.
I suppose I get annoyed easily. But I’m hearing this much more frequently, and it bugs me.
That’s my two cents.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)