A couple of Amy's "friends" decided they needed to get involved and "support" Lessa in making her decision to relinquish her baby. I won't mention their names here, but I am certainly tempted to. Normally, I would refrain from public criticism of an individual, but the involvement of one of them in particular deserves to be recorded and published.
This woman, who claims to be an active Latter-day Saint has no relationship to Lessa other than as a friend. She has no stewardship, she has no priesthood authority, and yet she saw fit to "counsel" Lessa in direct opposition to the counsel of Lessa's mother and myself, who are her parents and have, by LDS reasoning, stewardship and, until I renounced my membership in the church, I had the alleged priesthood authority. Amy and I were "entitled" to revelation regarding our daughter. Our unnamed friend was not.
This woman conceived her first child out of wedlock. Did she subsequently marry the child's father? No. Did she relinquish this child? No, she decided to parent him. Today she says she "didn't know" adoption was an option. I don't know what to make of this claim. First, I have to ask, and I have asked her this on many occasions, if she had it to do over again, would she give her son away? She hasn't answered, but the inference is pretty clear. I have to feel sorry for her son.
Second, the LDS Church has been in the adoption business since the 1920's when LDS Social Services was first formed. The adoption option has been around, and pushed, for decades. Since Roe v. Wade in 1973 (before this woman was out of diapers), adoption has been actively marketed as the alternative to abortion by religious denominations and adoption agencies all across the country. How is it that this woman wasn't aware that adoption was an option? I can only see two possibilities: 1. She didn't look very hard, and she is so naive and dull that she missed it. 2. She was living on another planet.
Either way, how is she qualified to offer advice to Lessa here?
A few years later, she had another "oops" and ended up pregnant again. A different father. This time she married the guy, and they subsequently had another child. To hear her tell the story, her husband is a total jerk, and she only stays married to him for his financial support. (In fact, she says she only married him so they could buy a house together.) His financial support doesn't seem to be a whole lot, since she is also a Food Stamp Queen, with a masters degree in gaming the system.
I have to wonder if she isn't trying to vicariously "correct" her own mistakes and regrets through "encouraging" Lessa to do what she did not. Her personal life history and life management skills do not provide qualifications for her to counsel anyone.
I'm not going to go into detail on her lack of education or the absence of critical reasoning skills, other than to say that I have not seen any evidence of critical thinking. And I see no evidence that she even attempted to have a solid basis for her opinion other than her own failures. She certainly doesn't have the training to be a skilled counselor, and I doubt that she has any aptitude. Her opinion is just that, and opinion.
To recap, this woman:
She may "feel" that what she did was right. Based on her track record, I don't think that counts for much. Or perhaps she would like to put her version of the "facts" on the table that would establish any kind of moral or ethical value to support her actions other than blindly following the counsel of 15 bigots who think they have the authority to change God's will.
This woman, who claims to be an active Latter-day Saint has no relationship to Lessa other than as a friend. She has no stewardship, she has no priesthood authority, and yet she saw fit to "counsel" Lessa in direct opposition to the counsel of Lessa's mother and myself, who are her parents and have, by LDS reasoning, stewardship and, until I renounced my membership in the church, I had the alleged priesthood authority. Amy and I were "entitled" to revelation regarding our daughter. Our unnamed friend was not.
This woman conceived her first child out of wedlock. Did she subsequently marry the child's father? No. Did she relinquish this child? No, she decided to parent him. Today she says she "didn't know" adoption was an option. I don't know what to make of this claim. First, I have to ask, and I have asked her this on many occasions, if she had it to do over again, would she give her son away? She hasn't answered, but the inference is pretty clear. I have to feel sorry for her son.
Second, the LDS Church has been in the adoption business since the 1920's when LDS Social Services was first formed. The adoption option has been around, and pushed, for decades. Since Roe v. Wade in 1973 (before this woman was out of diapers), adoption has been actively marketed as the alternative to abortion by religious denominations and adoption agencies all across the country. How is it that this woman wasn't aware that adoption was an option? I can only see two possibilities: 1. She didn't look very hard, and she is so naive and dull that she missed it. 2. She was living on another planet.
Either way, how is she qualified to offer advice to Lessa here?
A few years later, she had another "oops" and ended up pregnant again. A different father. This time she married the guy, and they subsequently had another child. To hear her tell the story, her husband is a total jerk, and she only stays married to him for his financial support. (In fact, she says she only married him so they could buy a house together.) His financial support doesn't seem to be a whole lot, since she is also a Food Stamp Queen, with a masters degree in gaming the system.
I have to wonder if she isn't trying to vicariously "correct" her own mistakes and regrets through "encouraging" Lessa to do what she did not. Her personal life history and life management skills do not provide qualifications for her to counsel anyone.
I'm not going to go into detail on her lack of education or the absence of critical reasoning skills, other than to say that I have not seen any evidence of critical thinking. And I see no evidence that she even attempted to have a solid basis for her opinion other than her own failures. She certainly doesn't have the training to be a skilled counselor, and I doubt that she has any aptitude. Her opinion is just that, and opinion.
To recap, this woman:
- Had no ecclesiastical authority to offer counsel and no entitlement to revelation
- Has no personal experience that qualifies her to offer counsel
- Has no training that qualifies her to offer counsel
- Offered counsel that supported a decision directly in opposition to parental counsel, in violation of the fifth commandment, and which contributed to contention and controversy in a family other than her own.
- Enabled Lessa to make a decision in the same manner she made her decisions -- without doing the due diligence to determine what all of the options were and what the potential risks and benefits were.
She may "feel" that what she did was right. Based on her track record, I don't think that counts for much. Or perhaps she would like to put her version of the "facts" on the table that would establish any kind of moral or ethical value to support her actions other than blindly following the counsel of 15 bigots who think they have the authority to change God's will.
Comments