The Word of Wisdom

As a Mormon I follow the Word of Wisdom. At the highest level, the Word of Wisdom is a code of health that Mormons believe is divinely inspired. Most often, however, the Word of Wisdom is thought of as a series of restrictions that include restrictions on Alcohol, tabacoo, tea and coffee. There are a number of interesting perspectives on the Word of Wisdom that I have been thinking about.
First, the language of the revelation does not specifically proscribe coffee and tea, instead the revelation states that "hot drinks are not for the body or belly." Of course, this includes tea and coffee. But, does this extend to hot chocolate? Is it the heat of the drink that is not for the belly or the make up of tea or coffee?
Second, meat. The Word of Wisdom states, "And it is pleasing unto me that they should not be used, only in times of winter, or of cold, or famine." Does this mean meat should not be used only in the times of winter or does it mean that meat should not be used, but only in times of winter? The comma between "be used" and "only" is operative, and I wonder when it was added. Of course, by reference to D&C 49:18 we are told "And whoso ^aforbiddeth to ^babstain from ^cmeats, that man should not eat the same, is not ordained of God." Hence, I think meat is OK, as long as it used sparingly.
Third, I wonder what the Word of Wisdom would be like if it was revealed today? What would it say about fast food? Processed food? Little Debbie's? Or, high fructose corn syrup? Would it mention soda or caffeine? Would mention exercise for our sedentary life style? If you read the Word of Wisdom as a whole, and consider it as an owner's manual for our bodies by the Creator of our bodies, then it is easy to see how we should take of ourselves today. After all, we shouldn't have to be commanded in all things to see the benefits of living healthy.

Party politics

The republican national committee chairman, Michael Steele, recently stated that Mitt Romney lost the GOP primary stating that "It was the base that rejected Mitt because it had issues with Mormonism." (article) It's sad that an intelligent and capable leader (with an ample dose of conservative policies) did not win the primary because of his religion, especially when he likely would have fared better against Obama than McCain did. His grasp of economic issues alone would have been a boost for the GOP party. Being a moderate (AKA a democrat in republican clothing or republocrate?) I'm not as annoyed with how the primary turned out as I am with two things:

1. that Steele felt he had to issue an apology, and
2. that primary elections often don't promote winnable candidates.

First, everyone knows Mitt lost the primary because of his religion. It doesn't take a genius to realize this. Yet, Steele issued the following fluffy statement through the GOP spokeswoman: "Chairman Steele regrets the way his comments have been interpreted. Chairman Steele believes Mitt Romney is a respected and influential voice in the Republican Party and looks to his leadership and ideas to help move our party and our nation in the right direction." In other words, Steele is sorry that the truth hurts a respected voice in the party. Can we get out of 1st grade here? Oh yeah, this is politics, so we can't.
Second, primary voting often elevates the candidate that has paid their party dues rather than the candidate that can beat the other side. This is not just a GOP issue. Look at John Kerry, for example, Gore beat Bush in the popular vote and then when Bush was being assailed for his actions, Kerry comes along and gets spanked by a less popular Bushy. McCain, whom I greatly respect for his gumption, moderation, and values, could not and did not match up with the youthful, intelligent and charismatic Obama. I don't see why parties can't figure out the candidate that has the best chance of winning the election over a party favorite? Wouldn't it be better for conservatives to have a less beloved conservative in the White House than a democrate? And vice versa, wouldn't it be better for liberals to do the same. I think democrates got it right with Obama, Hillary had too much bagagge (she was a woman and more importantly she is/was Bill Clinton's woman) to woo voters from the right or the middle like Obama did.

Here are some follow up comments.

Public prayers and such

The other day I read this interesting article by Paul Rolly of the Salt Lake Tribune called Prayers, lies and public spectacles. I've always been curious as to why so many Mormons team up politically with the same fundamentalists that end up bashing us from the pulpit. Focus on the family is great example. They team up with us Mormons on a number of political and moral issues, yet they pull an interview from their website with Glenn Beck (Mormon), because it appears to "legitimizing Mormonism" (article). Some of these groups consider us a cult. I frankly don't get it.
I also find it interesting that many Mormons favor a government that favors religious practices such as prayers, despite that fact that Mormons are constantly being left out of such religious practices as noted in Rolly's article.
There was an interesting supreme court case that stopped the use of prayers being said over the PA system at a high school football game (article). I think many Mormons would support such a prayer. Indeed, until recently I would have. However, in this particular case one of the kids who filed suit was Mormon and not only felt left out, he was quite uncomfortable with the practice. His mom actually testified that she teaches religion at home and the school should focus on teaching her kids about the world. Amen! The kid received threats and intimidation from school officials during the court proceedings. Yes, while we may favor a state that is imbued with our religion, we must remember that elsewhere it is not. Our history should teach us what it was like to be a religious minority and we should strive to not inflict that on others.
Furthermore, the Savior has instructed us to enter into our closet when we pray, and shut the door and pray to our Father in secret. He also warns about the man who prays in public to be seen of men. I don't see how these kind of prayers can be seen in secret nor do I see that they are said to be seen of men.
I strongly favor separation of church and state. Not for the states benefit, but for the benefit of the church.