Tag: marriage

Being Equally Yoked in Gunslinger to the Galaxy

At its core, Gunslinger to the Galaxy is a space-opera story built around a deceptively simple question: what does it mean to be equally yoked when the universe is coming apart at the seams? Jane Kletchka isn’t just trying to save Earth; she’s trying to build a marriage, a family, and a vocation that all matter in an honest, eternal way. The story keeps circling back to this tension: how do you stay true to your gifts, your faith, and your partner when war, politics, and Immortal-sized crises keep demanding more?

Where the Idea Came From

When I wrote Gunslinger to the Galaxy, I was working part-time at a warehouse in Iowa and later grinding through a 40+ hour per week construction job in Utah. I wasn’t married yet, but it was something I definitely wanted in my life, and I poured that into my writing, forcing myself to write a few hundred words a day even when I was exhausted and everything around me felt like a dump.

That experience of trying to build something meaningful in the middle of chaos is baked into Jane and Sam’s story. At its heart, Gunslinger to the Galaxy is about two people trying to be a force for good while the universe keeps trying to knock them flat. I kept that theme close even through the difficult circumstances surrounding its writing—and, fittingly, around the time I finished the book, I also met the woman who would become my wife.

How Being Equally Yoked Shapes the Story

“Equally yoked” isn’t just a passing phrase in this book; it’s the backbone of Jane’s entire arc. From the early garden conversation with her mother—where Mom worries that Jane will end up standing in Sam’s shadow instead of using her own God-given talents as a xenolinguist—the story keeps pressing on a single pressure point: is this marriage helping both partners become what they’re meant to be, or is one being swallowed by the other’s path?

When the jumpgate network collapses and the Immortal civil war throws the galaxy into crisis, Jane has every excuse to curl up and let events happen to her. Instead, the story turns when she realizes she can’t just be “the gunslinger’s wife.” Drawing on Sam’s blunt insight about control and trauma, she chooses to use her training, her languages, and her brain to actually shape events—digging into logs, mapping networks, and turning her grief and fear into concrete action that can save lives and maybe bring Sam home. Being equally yoked here means more than just sharing a last name; it means each partner brings their full self to the fight, and the marriage becomes a shared mission instead of a sacrifice of one person’s calling to the other’s.

By the end, when Jane and Sam are sealed in the temple and begin building a family, the book circles back to that original fear: will motherhood and marriage erase Jane’s larger purpose? The answer is no—but not because the galaxy gets easier. Instead, the story shows her finding ways to balance remote work for the Andromedans and the Intergalactic Council with raising John Moses, weaving vocation, faith, and family into a single, hard-won whole. The adventure isn’t over; it’s just moved into a new phase where “equally yoked” means building a life that can withstand both warp drives and diapers.

What Being Equally Yoked Says About Us

In science fiction, we often see lone-wolf heroes or solitary saviors, but Gunslinger to the Galaxy takes a different path by centering a married-couple partnership in a space-opera setting. Under all the jumpgates and Immortals, this is a story about something very human: the fear that love will cost us our calling—or that our calling will cost us love. Most of us aren’t piloting starships, but we know what it feels like to worry that marriage, family, career, or faith will pull us in different directions until something breaks. Gunslinger to the Galaxy suggests a different model: the people we love most should help us become more ourselves, not less. Being equally yoked doesn’t mean never struggling or never disagreeing; it means pulling the same direction when the load gets heavy, and trusting that God can turn two flawed people into a team that does more good together than either could alone.

Why Being Equally Yoked Matters to Me

I wasn’t married when I wrote Gunslinger to the Galaxy, but it was definitely something I was looking forward to. I wrote it during a season of my life that was chaotic, exhausting, and frankly not very glamorous, but I pushed forward anyway, trusting that the kind of woman I hoped to marry someday would value that dedication. And sure enough, when I finally met her, one of the things that drew her to me was my hard work and dedication to my writing—a dedication that I have also channeled into our marriage and family life.

For me, Gunslinger to the Galaxy is a story about faith, marriage, and the stubborn belief that ordinary people can still choose to do the right thing together, even when it hurts. If this book resonates with you, I hope it’s because you see a bit of your own struggle to be “equally yoked” in a world that always seems on the brink—and you feel a little more hope that it’s worth the fight.

Where to Get the Book

Related Posts and Pages

Explore the series index for the Gunslinger Trilogy.

Return to the book page for Gunslinger to the Galaxy.

Is Gunslinger to the Galaxy for you?

See all of my books in series order.

Some (better) advice for the chronically single

So the Daily Wire recently put out an interesting article about the current trend of chronically single young adults who want to get married but have had zero luck, especially with today’s online dating scene. From what I can tell, online dating is like a post-apocalyptic wasteland right now—which is a huge problem, because ever since the pandemic, online dating has come to replace almost every other form of getting out there and finding prospective romantic partners.

So since I graduated from the online dating scene after a period of chronic singlehood, and am now happily married, I thought I was qualified to share some of my thoughts on the subjects in the comments on the article. And since I thought some of my readers here might find it interesting, I’ve decided to cross-post my comment. Here it is:

I was chronically single until I met my wife at age 34. We met online and got married just before the pandemic. Some thoughts:

1. It sucks to be rejected, but if marriage is really what you’re looking for, you’ve got to embrace the suck. You’ll never find “the one” if you’re trying to please everyone. Know what you’re looking for, and when you write up your dating profile, share the things about you that will drive everyone else away. My profile had an explicit declaration of faith, because that was what I was looking for–and I found my wife on the third or fourth match, in part because that declaration was explicit enough to drive everyone else away.

2. The only way to stop wasting time is to embrace Jordan Peterson’s 8th rule of life. You grew up in an online world where almost everything you saw was a lie. Embrace total honesty, no matter how much it hurts. On our second date, I asked my future wife what she wanted to do with her life. She embraced total honesty and told me she wanted to be a wife and a mother more than anything else, even though she had no idea how I would respond to that. We were married less than a year later.

3. Have enough faith to trust God’s timing. My wife and I were actually enrolled in the same college class a decade before we met online. If we had dated each other then, it wouldn’t have worked out. We both needed to grow a bit first (quite a bit, in my case). Everything in this world has been prepared in the wisdom of Him who knows all things. Do your part to bring your life in line with Him, and all things will work together for your good.

4. Stop making everything about yourself. Selfishness is the root cause of every divorce, which also makes it one of the biggest deterrents to marriage and relationships. You grew up in an age of unbridled narcissism, exploited by Big Tech and social media to leverage your loneliness for corporate profits. When you think you may have found the right one (and you’re not in a codependent or abusive relationship), make it all about them. He who seeks his life shall lose it, and he who loses his life, for God’s sake, shall find it. I will never forget the impression I received when I first held my daughter: “this is her story now, not yours.”

What’s really behind the “Mormon Church”‘s stance on the Respect for Marriage Act?

Earlier this year, the US Supreme Court overthrew Roe v. Wade in the Dobbs v. Jackson decision. This was a major legal and cultural earthquake. A big question that arose from this decision was how will this affect Obergefell v. Hodges, which codified same-sex marriage as legal back in 2015? Most of the conservative justices stated that Dobbs does not affect Obergefell, but Justice Thomas stated that he was willing to revisit that case.

In response, congress crafted the Respect for Marriage Act, which would require the federal government to redefine “marriage” in a way that would recognize same-sex marriage equally with traditional marriage. What does this mean for those who believe that marriage should be limited to a union between a man and a woman? As I understand it, those who espouse this view could be prosecuted for discrimination if this bill passes. There are some protections for religious institutions, but many conservatives believe that these are too weak, and that this law would put us on the slippery slope to churches losing their tax exempt status and possibly even being forced to perform same-sex marriages.

To everyone’s surprise, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints came out with an official statement in support of this legislation, or specifically, this “way forward.” There’s been a lot of noise in the press about this, most of which is either misinformed or outright misinformation, so here is the full statement:

The doctrine of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints related to marriage between a man and a woman is well known and will remain unchanged.

We are grateful for the continuing efforts of those who work to ensure the Respect for Marriage Act includes appropriate religious freedom protections while respecting the law and preserving the rights of our LGBTQ brothers and sisters.

We believe this approach is the way forward. As we work together to preserve the principles and practices of religious freedom together with the rights of LGBTQ individuals, much can be accomplished to heal relationships and foster greater understanding.

Some outlets, like the Washington Post (where democracy dies in darkness), are reporting that this statement represents a doctrinal shift for the church, and an embrace of same-sex marriage. However, a careful reading should demonstrate that this is fake news calculated to create a false narrative and manufacture consent for that false narrative. Sadly, this is typical of MSM rags like the Washington Post.

Other commentators argue that the restored church has “surrendered to the spirit of the age” and is siding with Utah Senator Mitt Romney, who is ready to sign the Respect for Marriage Act as it stands, instead of Utah Senator Mike Lee, who is pushing for an amendment to the bill that would strengthen the protections for religious freedom.

Frankly, I don’t see that. The church’s statement does not endorse any specific legislation, but “this [new] approach,” and expresses support for “the continuing efforts of those who work to ensure the Respect for Marriage Act includes appropriate religious freedom protections.” (emphasis added) Yes, the statement came out before the bill passed the house and Mike Lee put forward his amendments, but I don’t see anything to indicate that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is siding with Romney over Lee.

But has the restored church gone over to the spirit of the age? At best, it appears that the church is making a strategic retreat in the culture wars. It’s certainly a far cry from the Proposition 8 debate in the 00s, in which Californians ultimately voted to ban same-sex marriage. What a different world that was! With this most recent statement, it appears that the church has switched from defending the traditional definition of marriage to pushing instead for protections on religious freedom.

How are we supposed to square this with paragraph 9 of the Family Proclamation? That was the question that Greg Matsen asked on the most recent episode of the Cwic Media podcast. For reference, here is paragraph 9 in its entirety:

“We call upon responsible citizens and officers of government everywhere to promote those measures designed to maintain and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society.”

When you read the rest of the Family Proclamation, which is a line-by-line, point-by-point refutation of many of the radical gender theories currently taking over our society (which is remarkable, since the proclamation was issued in the 90s, long before any of these radical ideologies had hit the cultural mainstream), it certainly seems to be at odds with the church’s recent statement, which supports “preserving the rights of our LGBTQ brothers and sisters” and “the rights of LGBTQ individuals.”

But what if those two documents aren’t at odds at all? What if the best way to “preserve and maintain” traditional marriage in our current cultural climate is also to preserve LGBTQ rights? In other words, what if the church isn’t capitulating or retreating from the marriage issue, but making a strategic retreat in anticipation of a new front opening up in the culture wars—a battle which will make strange bedfellows of same-sex marriage proponents and the defenders of traditional marriage?

In an ideal world, the church would want to foster a society in which the laws of the land are in harmony with the laws of the restored gospel—in other words, a society that defines marriage as between a man and a woman. Obviously, we don’t live in that society (at least, not here in the United States). So what are our options instead?

On the one hand, we can accept that same-sex marriage is now the law of the land, and seek to promote laws that strengthen both the traditional family and the families of same-sex couples together. On the other hand, we can push for the libertarian approach of “getting the government out of the marriage business altogether,” removing the tax benefits and legal protections of marriage and making the state totally agnostic to marriage and families.

Which of those two paths is more likely to “maintain and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society”? Which of those paths is more likely to lead to a society where marriage is considered to be obsolete and unnecessary?

Which brings us to the next major front in the culture wars, which I believe is going to be between those who view marriage and family as a social goods, and those who view the family as a “system of oppression” and want to deconstruct and abolish it altogether. We got a sneak peak of this in 2020, when the Black Lives Matter movement posted the following statement on their website:

We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and ‘villages’ that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.

At the time, this statement created some controversy, and the organization ultimately took it down. If you search online for information about it, you get a bunch of articles “debunking” that BLM ever advocated destroying the traditional family. But the radical left’s modus operandi is first to hide and deny what they’re doing, then to accuse you of doing what they’re actually doing, then to ridicule you for pointing out what they’re doing, and finally to attack you for opposing it at all. We’re already well into the first phase of that process.

Black Lives Matter isn’t the only faction in the radical left that would love to destroy or abolish the nuclear family. Those who are pushing to normalize pedophilia would love to see such a cultural shift too. Same with those who are pushing the Cloward-Piven strategy of making us all more dependent on the state. Same with the Malthusian climate change alarmists who are pushing the depopulation agenda.

If this is the next big front in the culture wars, then conservatives might play right into the hand of the enemy by continuing to push a losing cultural battle for the traditional definition of marriage. After all, what better way to “get the government out of the marriage business” than to point out that we can’t even agree on the definition of marriage in the first place? And once the state becomes agnostic to marriage, we’re well on the slippery slope to a society that views the family itself as obsolete and unnecessary.

I would love to live in a society that recognizes the traditional definition of marriage as being between a man and a woman, and that vigorously promotes measures to maintain and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society. Unfortunately, at this point it’s going to take a generational struggle to get us to that society—perhaps even a multi-generational struggle—and we’re not going to win that struggle by fighting the last generation’s war.

So has the restored church capitulated on the issue of traditional marriage? Has it surrendered to the spirit of the age? Hardly. If anything, I think the brethren are just as far-sighted and inspired as they were when they gave us the Family Proclamation. Be prepared to make some very strange bedfellows in the coming years.