|leave a comment|||RSS 2.0 for this post | trackback|
|Lowering Our Standards or Becoming More Reasonable?|
Mar. 19th, 2008 at 9:49 am
Reading Jeff Bennion’s post on Jospeh Smith and the Apocalyptic I noticed he mentioned building a year’s supply. This caused me to remember a conversation I recently had.
My bishop made a casual mention that he was concerned that the members of the ward didn’t have a two year supply of food ready. I chuckled and mentioned in a lighthearted way that while the bar for missionaries has been raised, the bar for food storage is now down to three months. He looked at me like I was a crazy person. I get that look a lot for some reason.
Despite the damage I was clearly doing to his opinion of me I soldiered on. “In fact,” I said, “I’m pretty sure that I can’t recall anything more than a one year supply being preached from the pulpit in conference. It seems a bit harsh to hold the ward accountable for a two year supply when many members have never even heard of such a thing and a three month supply is what is being preached at general conference.”
My bishop responded that the true standard was clearly the more rigorous one and given that it hadn’t been repealed the lesser standards that are discussed now are simply a form of preparation for the higher standard.
I puzzled over this for a moment, mentioned that if a disaster hit such that everyone needed a two year supply of food then they’d also need plenty of ammo to defend it, and then we let the issue drop.
But I’m still bothered, so I’ll ask you, dear readers. Is the current standard secretly a two-year supply? Is it the year’s supply that I’ve heard about most of my life? Is it the three month supply that is all I hear about recently?
Personally I think a two-year supply is a pretty tough concept for the reason I mentioned above. If there is a massive disaster such that everyone needs to live off their food storage for two years you’re going to have bigger problems than food storage.
If you’re going to tell me that you need that food in case of loss of employment I’d say that you need to have money saved for that sort of rainy day, not food.
Personally I like the three month supply idea. It balances preparedness with practicality.