Evolution

It has to be here. As a Mormon biologist, I cannot ignore both the existence and perception of evolution.

First of all, I find it somewhat annoying that Biologists almost literally worship Darwin for his contribution of evolution.  I also find it annoying that very few non scientists have taken the time or thought to realize that evolution is much bigger than human evolution and the long existing controversies associated with it.

At Cornell, in every biology class we talked about evolution at some point in addition to taking a 3 credit evolution class.  In my high school in Utah we'd barely addressed the concept so I was surprised when I was told evolution is fact.  As in, has been completely proven.  In science, we hesitate long and hard before labeling any theory as 'fact' because we know that there is still more we don't know that could disprove that theory.  Evolution has been labeled a fact, as have most of Charles Darwin's ideas from On the Origin of Species.  Now, for those of you who were not inundated with biological knowledge, On the Origin of Species does not address human evolution specifically.  It talks about the nature of populations, the variation between individuals for example as well as stable population size and available resources.  The variation is the key--he hypothesized it would be heritable and the best suited variations to the environment would be the most likely to carry on.  Natural Selection, Darwin said, was the driving force.  Now, all his theories have been rigorously studied.  Species have variation and change over time: fact.  I've seen it myself in flies over a period of months.  It happens.

Now, how to fit that into my previous framework that "God created man in His own image."  I'd already come to accept that the Big Bang probably happened and I'd never had a problem with that being potentially the way God had created the universe.  I don't know enough about astrophysics to argue it either way.  But since we don't believe in The Bible being completely literal, I don't see a problem with acknowledging the popular scientific theory.  Likewise why not have evolution be the hand of God guiding the formation of man.  I mean, is it really less believable than that He gathered dirt in His hands and blew life into it? And then proceeded to take a rib from Adam to create woman?  In the 1909 statement, which the church has paraphrased over the years and even reprinted in 2002, all it says is that man is created in the image of God.  Truthfully, the origin of man from apes (which is actually incorrect--the correct wording would be that apes and man share a common primate ancestor) is less controversial to me than the concept of evolution itself.  As we evolve (and people evolve over time, there has been a noticeable change in height for example) we would be changing the image of God, albeit only slightly.   Eventually, man will be quite different from what we are today.  I used to try and cop out with the concept that the 2nd Coming will happen long before those changes occur, but now I'm just accepting that whether or not that is the case, it's okay.  I cannot deny the changes in humans over known history.

For those of you to whom these ideas make you uncomfortable:  feel comfortable knowing that scientists have yet to identify the common ancestor of apes and man.  If you want to believe God magically created us, there is no proof to deny that.  But it might eventually happen and what then?  Your choices are 1. don't believe science because you're afraid or 2. have a crisis of your faith because The Bible and religious cultures around the world have told you it could not be and it is.  All I can say for sure is that I believe God created man and that evolution is a fact.  Put it together however you want.  

Lifelong conversion

The topic of lifelong conversion was broached yesterday with an attitude of flippancy.  Just do it.  Be converted. Read the scriptures and pray and you will have no issues.  (Okay, am I the only one noticing we say virtually the same thing every week as part of every lesson).  I have issues.

Does conversion mean just believing in basic principles or everything?  Can I have a lifelong conversion even though I had a boyfriend when I was 15 and still today at 24 don't see anything wrong with that? Because that sort of makes me a "buffet Mormon."  I chose not believe some teachings in For the Strength of Youth.  

We are supposed to be "converted unto the Lord".  The church website describes it as a process to becoming a better person.  A change of heart.  What about when you were raised to be this way?  When did this process start and what am I changing from?  And really, does drinking beer or coffee constitute you as a bad person?  Most people are inherently good and will make good decisions provided they don't have a serious conflict with the decision and their own best interests.  So, how does a convert change?  My mother is a convert and the only change she made in her life besides gaining a testimony was to move to Utah and give up her partially completed law degree in favor of having kids.  

That same link discusses the 4th Article of Faith.  The ordinances of baptism and confirmation are important to eternal salvation, but faith and repentance contributed far more to my conversion because it all happened in my mind and heart.  I barely remember my baptism.  I do remember that at around that age I could easily distinguish between making 'right' and 'wrong' choices so I understand that age of accountability aspect of baptism.  But the choice to get baptized did not necessarily indicate I was converted.  With the cultural pressure and expectations it wasn't even a choice.  

In science, an experiment showing any type of change must have a control experiment that parallels the actual experiment in every way but without what you think is causing a change.  For example, if you are administering a drug that you think will have a desired effect, you must have people/mice that take a placebo pill/water instead.  In this type of set up, you can easily see the change wrought by the drug.  I wish I could have one of those It's a Wonderful Life moments where you see how different your world could be.  A contrast difference really shows change.

Am I converted?  I have faith, I try to repent of my bad decisions and change my bad habits.  I want to follow Jesus Christ's example.  That is what conversion means to me, to be as good as I can and not apologize for the rest.  I don't think I have to focus on every tiny thing any general authority has ever said.  I want to be a good person, a person who stands up for herself and opens herself to others.  I want to reach out to those who are struggling and be a comfort to anyone who needs it.  While I am unable to focus every day on how I need to be the 'perfect Mormon girl,' I can focus on being a solid person who cares for others.

Heaven

After the first two posts, I suppose it might sound surprising but I love my beliefs.  I never feel more peaceful and happy than when I'm in one of our beautiful temples or at church (although I'm often more in my own head than listening to people).  In thinking very seriously about what I like about Mormonism and my testimony, I concluded that maybe it is about the after life.  I see lots of perfectly happy people every day who are not Mormons and so I have no illusion that Mormonism is the only way that a person can be happy.  So it really is about the temple and how that connects with death and post death.

I really appreciate that I don't have to believe in a black and white heaven and hell with an awful gray purgatory in between.  I love the idea that there are three levels of heaven and if you're the best you can live with God in the celestial kingdom.  No one really goes to hell, or outer darkness as we call it.  I, personally, would be happy to live in the telestial kingdom that is supposed to be a beautiful idyllic Earth.  I also really love that I'm not going alone, that Adam goes with me.  And that I'm connected to my parents and my kids somehow.

The temple is very open and white inside and when I'm there I feel light and unburdened.  It seems like we're super secretive about what happens there, but I think a lot of that is because its a long explanation about somewhat foreign sounding things and there is one thing we're not supposed to talk about that people are afraid they'll come to close to. Once your twelve you can go and do ordinances for the dead: baptism and confirmation.  When you're an adult you can go and receive the next couple levels of ordinances  including the sealing ordinance that seals you to your spouse (our version of marriage) and then do them for the dead.  The others are difficult to explain and so I wont try it here.  I know it seems like we're obsessed with the dead, but there is something logical to me that everyone should get an opportunity to go to heaven.  If we didn't provide those services for everyone ever the whole concept of needing ordinances to go to heaven wouldn't work for me.

I'm happy here on Earth and I don't need to have this knowledge to be happy.  But, the whole idea of the three degrees of glory (as we call them) really resonates with me.  I believe.

To my baby and little Victoria

Picture of European parliament member Licia Ronzulli with her seven month old.

I really love this picture, it feels so empowering.  It's not a thing to bring your children to these kind of formal events, but Licia Ronzulli has enough respect and authority to bring her little Victoria without any opposition.  In this picture she is voting to improve women's employment's rights.

I work 40 hours a week and I have quickly realized since my own son was born that men and women have completely different approaches to the balance of work and children.  I am fortunate enough to have a flexible job that allows me to choose my own hours and I choose them to be from the very early morning, allowing me to get home by 1 pm.  I understand The Proclamation to the Family when it says men and women's roles are different because even though my husband is an amazing father who can do anything I can do for my baby, take care of him by himself for just as long, we have fundamentally different approaches.  I can't imagine only seeing my baby at night, but most men who work do that.  My baby goes to sleep at 7 pm (literally screams and fusses uncontrollably if you try to put him to bed later...), I would barely see him if I worked until 5 pm.

Here is the reality:  I was raised in a religion that does not support women working.  I took that and decided that even though I didn't like children, I would probably want them some day and I wanted to be there for them as much as possible.  I was pre-med at Cornell, one of the best programs in the country, and I knew that it would be too hard for me personally to live through med school and residency and being a doctor, on call and obligated to a hospital and patients and to also have a family.  I chose to go to grad school, in part, because even though scientists are crazy obsessed people, they pick their hours.  I have a friend who works in her lab from 8 pm until the early morning hours because that's when she feels the most productive.  The big key in a lab is progress, getting your projects done and analyzing your results.  Eventually writing papers and getting them published.  Once I realized how flexible it could be, I knew it was where I wanted to pursue science.

That sounds cheesy, like what I wrote in my personal statement in the application (note: definitely not what I wrote in my personal statement) but it is the honest truth.  I chose science first because of its stability and second so I could have a family life.  I love being at work and I love going home to play with my baby, I can get the best of both and it makes for a pretty great life.