Reader comments
Do LDS patriots shun protest?
142 comments | Read story
- Page:
- < Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
Raymond Takashi Swenson | 4:16 p.m. Oct. 8, 2007
Regardless of why America invaded Iraq, to pull out now would make things far
worse. Iraq could fall into a chaotic state that would force the Kurds to
declare independence, which Turkey would see as a threat and a possible reason
to invade. The Shiites and Sunnis would be forced to take sides in a war, even
though most don't want it.
Iran would have a heyday, manipulating things to create a puppet state that would not threaten Iran and its very public nuclear weapon program. US troops in both Afghanistan and Iraq, and ships in the Persian Gulf, are ready to attack Iran if it gets belligerent with nukes. If we pull, Iran will consider any US threat to its nuke program a bluff. It will be in position to threaten France and Germany with nuclear missiles.
The US will be a hundred times less safe if we pull out.
Millions of Iraqis who helped the US would become refugees seeking asylum in the US, and we would be duty bound to resettle them, doubling the number of Muslims in the US overnight. If you are worried about the impact of immigration, you should oppose pulling out of Iraq.
Iran would have a heyday, manipulating things to create a puppet state that would not threaten Iran and its very public nuclear weapon program. US troops in both Afghanistan and Iraq, and ships in the Persian Gulf, are ready to attack Iran if it gets belligerent with nukes. If we pull, Iran will consider any US threat to its nuke program a bluff. It will be in position to threaten France and Germany with nuclear missiles.
The US will be a hundred times less safe if we pull out.
Millions of Iraqis who helped the US would become refugees seeking asylum in the US, and we would be duty bound to resettle them, doubling the number of Muslims in the US overnight. If you are worried about the impact of immigration, you should oppose pulling out of Iraq.
Greg | 4:45 p.m. Oct. 8, 2007
I didn't like playing a shell game with Sodom anyway. I'm glad we took
him out, we should have done it before he killed so many of his own people. I am
proud that I supported the war and still do, win or lose - that is more than the
anti-Iraq protesters can say, they can only feel good if we lose.
Comments continue below
Texas Ute | 6:07 p.m. Oct. 8, 2007
When are all you zealots going to realize God has nothing to do with any of
this. Get a life in the real world.
kathrin | 6:27 p.m. Oct. 8, 2007
IRAQ DID NOT ATTACK THE USA....never has and therefor we had no right and no
justification as DC :98 would give us under very specific circumstances to
destroy that nation.
Any Mormon who is in favor of that war is an apostate. It is as simple as that ....the scriptures are not a buffet, brothers and sisters. Live them or do not claim to be a Latter Day Saint. There are other churches that will allow you to entertain the conceit that you can be Christian and PRO WAR , join them if you take issue with that noble commandment to "renounce war and proclaim peace."
Any Mormon who is in favor of that war is an apostate. It is as simple as that ....the scriptures are not a buffet, brothers and sisters. Live them or do not claim to be a Latter Day Saint. There are other churches that will allow you to entertain the conceit that you can be Christian and PRO WAR , join them if you take issue with that noble commandment to "renounce war and proclaim peace."
kathrin | 6:36 p.m. Oct. 8, 2007
One more thing ....to renounce war and proclaim peace is a modern day revelation
( you know that continuous revelation thing we Mormons believe in ) and
therefore overrides any Book of Mormon , or Old Testamentt example that would
indicate that preemptive wars are ok. And if you do not believe this then I
should like to meet you at the altar with your sacrificial bleating lambs, after
you get back from stoning the adultress of course.
E. Howard | 6:54 p.m. Oct. 8, 2007
Patriotism has little to do with the war in Iraq. The execrable nature of party
politics has everything to do with it, unfortunately, most LDS have come to
believe that the republican party = the party of god. They follow it without
question.
I thank all those who have as sycophants followed the bush/cheney junta, you have guaranteed that the queen of babylon, hillary clinton will be the next president. She will have a loyal congress and house. Brilliant work folks.
Our course is set, we, like the old ussr, will collapse under the weight of our own incompetence, and increasing ridiculousness.
We have perhaps one chance left, RON PAUL. Please wake up.
Semper Fi,
E. Howard USMC(ret.)
I thank all those who have as sycophants followed the bush/cheney junta, you have guaranteed that the queen of babylon, hillary clinton will be the next president. She will have a loyal congress and house. Brilliant work folks.
Our course is set, we, like the old ussr, will collapse under the weight of our own incompetence, and increasing ridiculousness.
We have perhaps one chance left, RON PAUL. Please wake up.
Semper Fi,
E. Howard USMC(ret.)
I don't think... | 7:11 p.m. Oct. 8, 2007
the church will go out its way to shun its members from speaking their
minds....If I recalled right, some students at BYU were allowed to protest when
Cheney was speaking there. Also during trouble maker Rocky Anderson's anti
Bush speech months ago, I bet you there were lots of members of the church at
the rally.
Thomas | 8:25 p.m. Oct. 8, 2007
Kathrin: Funny that you'd lecture us about taking a "buffet"
approach to scripture, and then take D&C 98 so spectacularly out of context.
That section was given specifically in the context of the Missouri Mormon
troubles. (Right before Joseph Smith changed his mind and decided to go to war
with Missouri after all, which didn't go well.)
By your standard, taken from D&C 98 -- that only wars specifically authorized by the Lord, through revelation, are permissible -- then anyone who supported, among others, the Mexican War and the World Wars (none of which seem to have had any recorded divine permission slip) was "apostate."
That would include Brigham Young (who sent the Mormon Battalion to support the U.S. in the Mexican War) and a fair number of recent Apostles, including Neal Maxwell, who served in World War II.
I think you need to rethink who's the closest to being an "apostate" here.
Reasonable people can disagree about the justice and wisdom of the Iraq war -- which is a good reason to leave the argument to the political forum. Trying to make Mormonism -- historically, a pretty fierce faith -- into Quakerism, is objectively silly. It doesn't fit.
By your standard, taken from D&C 98 -- that only wars specifically authorized by the Lord, through revelation, are permissible -- then anyone who supported, among others, the Mexican War and the World Wars (none of which seem to have had any recorded divine permission slip) was "apostate."
That would include Brigham Young (who sent the Mormon Battalion to support the U.S. in the Mexican War) and a fair number of recent Apostles, including Neal Maxwell, who served in World War II.
I think you need to rethink who's the closest to being an "apostate" here.
Reasonable people can disagree about the justice and wisdom of the Iraq war -- which is a good reason to leave the argument to the political forum. Trying to make Mormonism -- historically, a pretty fierce faith -- into Quakerism, is objectively silly. It doesn't fit.
lds | 8:33 p.m. Oct. 8, 2007
im a patriot, a democrat, and a mormon. i oppose the war in iraq and the bush
admin. OBAMA 08!!!!
Mark B | 8:50 p.m. Oct. 8, 2007
Thomas, you asked so nicely for an explanation that I feel obliged. Before
beginning, though, let's keep some things in mind: We can't put God in
a box. I may not like war, but if He commands it, I have to go along. He can do
what he wants. Also, just because something is justified once, that doesn't
mean that future similar things are automatically OK. Let's hope we never
have a repeat of Joshua, commanded to "ethnically cleanse" his
peoples' new land of Canaanites.
Now as to Moroni in Alma. The main problem here is that no "international boundaries" are crossed. Let's say that the US/Canada border is a hotspot, like Kashmir. Let's say that it's discovered that there's an army with Canadian sympathies operating in Maine. When they are discovered, they make a run for the border, but are intercepted, confronted and subdued before they can hook up with the Cannucks across the border. Is that preemptive war? No, it's an internal peacekeeping action in which Canada (the Lamanites) are not involved. There are references in which preemptive war is specifically rejected, but they're hard to find. I've heard NO ONE say God commanded war in Iraq.
Now as to Moroni in Alma. The main problem here is that no "international boundaries" are crossed. Let's say that the US/Canada border is a hotspot, like Kashmir. Let's say that it's discovered that there's an army with Canadian sympathies operating in Maine. When they are discovered, they make a run for the border, but are intercepted, confronted and subdued before they can hook up with the Cannucks across the border. Is that preemptive war? No, it's an internal peacekeeping action in which Canada (the Lamanites) are not involved. There are references in which preemptive war is specifically rejected, but they're hard to find. I've heard NO ONE say God commanded war in Iraq.
Dave | 9:16 p.m. Oct. 8, 2007
I'm a patriot, a rebublican, and a Mormon. I oppose the war in Iraq. Ron
Paul 08!!!!
1.2 million Iraqi's killed since the start of the war. How many were terrorists? These are Holocaust type numbers.
We cannot promote democracry through the barrel of a gun, but through persuasion, as Ron Paul says.
1.2 million Iraqi's killed since the start of the war. How many were terrorists? These are Holocaust type numbers.
We cannot promote democracry through the barrel of a gun, but through persuasion, as Ron Paul says.
Night Owl | 11:36 p.m. Oct. 8, 2007
Albert C. Montoya said:
"In respecful disagreement with Professor Birch, the danger for Mormons does not lie with confusing theology with nationalistic rhetoric and confusing civil protests with unpatriotic activity. The danger for Mormons, or anyone else for that matter, lies in their ignorance of and refusal to look at the facts of the cause of this war in Iraq. There is a large body of evidence and the testimony of an army of WTC eye and ear witnesses, physicists, building demolition experts and many other professionals and scholars verifying that 9/11 was not what the official commission report says it was."
So you believe in conspiracy theories.
Just another one of those inside job wannabees.
Those were planes loaded with passengers that slammed the WTC and the pentagon. If not, what happened to the passengers?
People will come up with any excuse to create their own reality. Rather than see what is actually going on in the world.
Bush will be out of office soon. Under his house is a 17 trillion gallon oil tank. That is where Halliburton is storing the Iraqi oil.
There. Thought I would start my own conspiracy to fit in. lol.
"In respecful disagreement with Professor Birch, the danger for Mormons does not lie with confusing theology with nationalistic rhetoric and confusing civil protests with unpatriotic activity. The danger for Mormons, or anyone else for that matter, lies in their ignorance of and refusal to look at the facts of the cause of this war in Iraq. There is a large body of evidence and the testimony of an army of WTC eye and ear witnesses, physicists, building demolition experts and many other professionals and scholars verifying that 9/11 was not what the official commission report says it was."
So you believe in conspiracy theories.
Just another one of those inside job wannabees.
Those were planes loaded with passengers that slammed the WTC and the pentagon. If not, what happened to the passengers?
People will come up with any excuse to create their own reality. Rather than see what is actually going on in the world.
Bush will be out of office soon. Under his house is a 17 trillion gallon oil tank. That is where Halliburton is storing the Iraqi oil.
There. Thought I would start my own conspiracy to fit in. lol.
Rick | 11:37 p.m. Oct. 8, 2007
If Great Britain had declared war on Hitler before September 1939, it would have
been considered pre-emptive, but would have been one of the wisest moves in the
history of mankind, and might have saved 30 or 40 million lives. Even when they
did declare war after the German invasion of Poland, it could be called
pre-emptive. Had Britain been invaded yet? Why should the British fight when
their island was still untouched?
Those who are thinking clearly have recited the facts: the whole world knew Saddam had WMD because he had used them previously. All he had to do was allow the UN to verify that they did/didn't exist. 17 UN resolutions and a 8-10 years is plenty of patience. If the UN wants even an ounce of credibility, it must be able to say enough is enough. Bush finally had to say it for them.
I don't think we'll win the war on terrorism just by killing terrorists. Their madrassas will produce new ones faster than we can kill them. Bush is trying to give young Arabs something to live for (political and economic freedom) instead of something to die for.
Those who are thinking clearly have recited the facts: the whole world knew Saddam had WMD because he had used them previously. All he had to do was allow the UN to verify that they did/didn't exist. 17 UN resolutions and a 8-10 years is plenty of patience. If the UN wants even an ounce of credibility, it must be able to say enough is enough. Bush finally had to say it for them.
I don't think we'll win the war on terrorism just by killing terrorists. Their madrassas will produce new ones faster than we can kill them. Bush is trying to give young Arabs something to live for (political and economic freedom) instead of something to die for.
Night Owl | 11:43 p.m. Oct. 8, 2007
Dave said:
"I'm a patriot, a rebublican, and a Mormon. I oppose the war in Iraq. Ron Paul 08!!!!
1.2 million Iraqi's killed since the start of the war. How many were terrorists? These are Holocaust type numbers...."
Sorry, you are off by a few million. About six million Jews were killed during WW2.
"I'm a patriot, a rebublican, and a Mormon. I oppose the war in Iraq. Ron Paul 08!!!!
1.2 million Iraqi's killed since the start of the war. How many were terrorists? These are Holocaust type numbers...."
Sorry, you are off by a few million. About six million Jews were killed during WW2.
Night Owl | 11:47 p.m. Oct. 8, 2007
Matt said:
" "PRE-EMPTIVE" WAR IS IMMORAL. BUSH & CHENEY PLANNED TO GO INTO IRAQ FROM THE BEGINNING AND WOULD USE WHATEVER EXCUSE THEY COULD FIND. BUSH ADMITS IRAQ DID NOT HAVE WMD'S AND THERE WAS NO CONNECTION TO 9/11 (TYPE "BUSH ADMITS" INTO YOUTUBE). DEMOCRATS ARE NO BETTER. WAKEUP!!!!"
Yawn
Youtube is full of wisdom. I can always look to that to cure the world's ills.
And what are Bush and Cheney going to gain after they are outr of office?
" "PRE-EMPTIVE" WAR IS IMMORAL. BUSH & CHENEY PLANNED TO GO INTO IRAQ FROM THE BEGINNING AND WOULD USE WHATEVER EXCUSE THEY COULD FIND. BUSH ADMITS IRAQ DID NOT HAVE WMD'S AND THERE WAS NO CONNECTION TO 9/11 (TYPE "BUSH ADMITS" INTO YOUTUBE). DEMOCRATS ARE NO BETTER. WAKEUP!!!!"
Yawn
Youtube is full of wisdom. I can always look to that to cure the world's ills.
And what are Bush and Cheney going to gain after they are outr of office?
Salinda | 12:03 a.m. Oct. 9, 2007
Its interesting that in most of this commentary scripture has been quoted,
arguments made on government deception, and whether or not LDS have a position
on the war. Why is it that no one here has given the viewpoint of the soldiers?
I have several family and friends fighting. Most of them see what the media
neglects to tell us. Many who have been there say that this war IS necessary,
& that the news is only depicting the negative. Many Iraqis will come to the
soldiers and thank them for their support. I have heard heartbreaking stories of
opression, abuse, torture, that the soldiers see every day. Its no wonder my
husband feels his job is unfinished. To these people we are hope. Hope for
better. Who are WE to say this is/isnt a good cause. They see children following
the army trucks begging for water, or for even something as simple as a ball.
People love them. Most of the soldiers I am around know what truly goes on there
and have VOLUNTEERED to go/return. Many soldiers say we show hope, and pulling
out now dishonours the lives lost. Maybe we should ask them before we pull them?
Paul | 7:06 a.m. Oct. 9, 2007
1.2 million Iraqis killed since the start of the war? I don't know where
you get your statistics, but those numbers are beyond inflated. There was a
recent "study", and I use that term loosely, which claimed that
600,000 Iraqis had died in the conflict, but once they revealed their
methodology, the study was quickly discredited.
More reputable studies place the number in the 100,000 to 200,000 range and the vast majority of those deaths are either self-inflicted (ethnic clashes) or from groups like Al-Qaeda and other evil Muslim factions that seem to think that killing civilians is fair game.
More reputable studies place the number in the 100,000 to 200,000 range and the vast majority of those deaths are either self-inflicted (ethnic clashes) or from groups like Al-Qaeda and other evil Muslim factions that seem to think that killing civilians is fair game.
Mormon Bubba | 8:41 a.m. Oct. 9, 2007
Did Iraq attack us on 9/11?
Funny, I thought it was a group of 19 Saudis!
Remember, the Saudis who have lots of oil, are our friends.
Why did we attack Iraq?
Funny, I thought it was a group of 19 Saudis!
Remember, the Saudis who have lots of oil, are our friends.
Why did we attack Iraq?
Ariane | 10:00 a.m. Oct. 9, 2007
Professor Birch, I am a Mormon but in my faith I do not confuse my religion with
my political beliefs. I am not cowed into supporting a war I don't believe
in. I don't believe that we should engage in wars that are for political
gain. Our country is in jeopardy, but it should be strengthened from the inside,
not by taking on the problems of other countries. However, I have beloved
friends and neighbors who are fighting in Iraq, some have served more than one
tour of duty. I believe they are brave and doing their duty and I believe that
most of them are doing good and productive things in that war torn country.
Although I do not believe this war is based on moral principles, I feel the need
to stand in support of our troops and do what I can to enable their safe return
to their families. That is my "deep rooted" patriotism.
Further, Professor Birch, in re-reading your quote of President Hinckley, I don't recall him actually saying that he supported the war or the Bush administration.
Further, Professor Birch, in re-reading your quote of President Hinckley, I don't recall him actually saying that he supported the war or the Bush administration.
Dave | 11:13 a.m. Oct. 9, 2007
The 1.2 million deaths was determined by ORB, the British polling agency, which
is a full member of the British Polling Council and abides by its rules. The
stastitics can easly be found by Googling "ORB poll deaths in Iraq".
RE: Ariane | 1:14 p.m. Oct. 9, 2007
How can you imply one can support the troops but not the war? The military
personnel of this nation cannot succeed in any conflict or war if individuals
have this mentality. If someone was saying "I support the war but I
don't support are troops" most people would think it was warped and
wrong. Can you image in the Book of Mormon if the people of Nephi told Captain
Moroni: �We support your soldiers but we are totally
against this war thing with the Lamanites�. Every war that
has ever been fought has been for some type of gain (e.g. land, freedom, oil,
ideology, political, PEACE).
Another amazing thing is how you are able to separate your religious beliefs and values from your political ones�.I guess you have your own version of separation of church and state going on in your head.
If your flawed logic somehow makes you feel better about yourself--more power to you but it is wrong and most veterans like me would tell you the same thing.
Another amazing thing is how you are able to separate your religious beliefs and values from your political ones�.I guess you have your own version of separation of church and state going on in your head.
If your flawed logic somehow makes you feel better about yourself--more power to you but it is wrong and most veterans like me would tell you the same thing.
Tobin | 1:45 p.m. Oct. 9, 2007
I, too, am a peace-loving republican (and LDS member), but I hope we can have
the common sense to unite together in our present dilemma to take out these
terrorists as quick as possible and have our troops come home. Maybe everyone
can go home, ponder this, and end this discussion.
kathrin | 9:49 p.m. Oct. 9, 2007
Re: Thomas......DC:98 out of context ? Not quite.....why don't you go
ahead and study some church history? Here I'll give you a little start-
the rest is up to you.
The Church�s position on war� , President Harold B. Lee of the First Presidency and Elder Boyd K. Packer of the Council of the Twelve were the featured speakers at a memorial service honoring Latter-day Saints who have lost their lives in Vietnam or who are being held prisoners of war.
The purpose of this service is not to glorify war, but, from the Lord�s own declaration, to set forth clearly the position of the Church with regard to war.
. We are here to help lift the eyes of those who mourn from the valley of despair to the light upon the mountain peaks of hope, to endeavor to answer questions about war.
In our generation the true Christian�s position on war is clearly set forth by a declaration in which the Lord says, �Therefore, renounce war and proclaim peace. �� (D&C 98:116.)
The Church�s position on war� , President Harold B. Lee of the First Presidency and Elder Boyd K. Packer of the Council of the Twelve were the featured speakers at a memorial service honoring Latter-day Saints who have lost their lives in Vietnam or who are being held prisoners of war.
The purpose of this service is not to glorify war, but, from the Lord�s own declaration, to set forth clearly the position of the Church with regard to war.
. We are here to help lift the eyes of those who mourn from the valley of despair to the light upon the mountain peaks of hope, to endeavor to answer questions about war.
In our generation the true Christian�s position on war is clearly set forth by a declaration in which the Lord says, �Therefore, renounce war and proclaim peace. �� (D&C 98:116.)
kathrin | 9:56 p.m. Oct. 9, 2007
Re: Thomas.....
What is the position of the Church with respect to war? A declaration of the First Presidency given during World War II is still applicable in our time. The statement said: �� the Church is and must be against war. The Church itself cannot wage war unless and until the Lord shall issue new commands. It cannot regard war as a righteous means of settling international disputes; these should and could be settled�the nations agreeing�by peaceful negotiations and adjustments.�
Again...there was no need to destroy Iraq, and there still is no moral or religious justification for the way the USA has dealt with Iraq.
As to WWII, Thomas, why don't you read some of Reuben J.Clarks remarks on that war. As to the particpation of church leaders in WWII...there was a draft...going into the military was mandatory by law. The members had to obey according to our believe.
What is the position of the Church with respect to war? A declaration of the First Presidency given during World War II is still applicable in our time. The statement said: �� the Church is and must be against war. The Church itself cannot wage war unless and until the Lord shall issue new commands. It cannot regard war as a righteous means of settling international disputes; these should and could be settled�the nations agreeing�by peaceful negotiations and adjustments.�
Again...there was no need to destroy Iraq, and there still is no moral or religious justification for the way the USA has dealt with Iraq.
As to WWII, Thomas, why don't you read some of Reuben J.Clarks remarks on that war. As to the particpation of church leaders in WWII...there was a draft...going into the military was mandatory by law. The members had to obey according to our believe.
re Thomas | 10:04 p.m. Oct. 9, 2007
Joseph F. Smith: For years it has been held that peace comes only by preparation
for war; the present conflict should prove that peace comes only by preparing
for peace, through training the people in righteousness and justice, and
selecting rulers who respect the righteous will of the people.
Heber J. Grant, J. Reuben Clark & David O. McKay: [T]he Church is and must be against war....It cannot regard war as a righteous means of settling international disputes; these should and could be settled--the nations agreeing--by peaceful negotiation and adjustment.
George Albert Smith, J. Reuben Clark & David O. McKay: By building a huge armed establishment, we shall belie our protestations of peace and peaceful intent and force other nations to a like course of militarism...
Marion G.Romney: When I was in the military service during the First World War, we were told that we were �making the world safe for democracy�; we were fighting a war to end all wars. When my eldest son was in the military during the Second World War, he was told that he was preserving the cause of liberty and freedom. The same rationale has continued for the past several decades.
Heber J. Grant, J. Reuben Clark & David O. McKay: [T]he Church is and must be against war....It cannot regard war as a righteous means of settling international disputes; these should and could be settled--the nations agreeing--by peaceful negotiation and adjustment.
George Albert Smith, J. Reuben Clark & David O. McKay: By building a huge armed establishment, we shall belie our protestations of peace and peaceful intent and force other nations to a like course of militarism...
Marion G.Romney: When I was in the military service during the First World War, we were told that we were �making the world safe for democracy�; we were fighting a war to end all wars. When my eldest son was in the military during the Second World War, he was told that he was preserving the cause of liberty and freedom. The same rationale has continued for the past several decades.
re Thomas | 10:06 p.m. Oct. 9, 2007
Spencer W. Kimball: We are a warlike people...When enemies rise up, we commit
vast resources to the fabrication of gods of stone and steel--ships, planes,
missiles, fortifications--and depend on them for protection and deliverance.
When threatened, we become anti-enemy instead of pro-kingdom of God; we train a
man in the art of war and call him a patriot, thus, in the manner of
Satan's counterfeit of true patriotism, perverting the Savior's
teaching: "Love your enemies..."
Spencer W. Kimball: Father, we are concerned with the political world of today and that nations seem to need only the lighting of a match to bring war and desolation and destruction. Bless, we pray thee, the leaders of nations, that they may rule wisely and righteously and give thy people freedom to worship thee in truth and righteousness. Stay the powers, our Father, that would bring us to the brink of annihilation.
Spencer W. Kimball: Father, we are concerned with the political world of today and that nations seem to need only the lighting of a match to bring war and desolation and destruction. Bless, we pray thee, the leaders of nations, that they may rule wisely and righteously and give thy people freedom to worship thee in truth and righteousness. Stay the powers, our Father, that would bring us to the brink of annihilation.
E. Howard | 10:32 p.m. Oct. 9, 2007
Rick,
There is a problem with your analogy. Which is that Hitler was Britain's ultimate blowback. It was the ruinous sanctions and food embargo imposed by, principally, Britain that lead to the rise of Hitler in the first place. Just as it was the CIA's toppling of Mossadegh, in 1953, that lead to the rise of the Ayatollahs in Iran. They, just as we, have reapt the fruit of our own foolishness.
Furthermore, it was not Iraq that attacked the US on 9/11, but Al Qaida. Iraq had neither the means nor the will to attack the US. Even if they had WMDs, that alone does not make them a threat.
Tobin, I am sorry but common sense has left this land. God help us, for we cannot seem to help ourselves.
If patriotism means support for the government and its policies, then I am not a patriot. I served in the Marine Corps, and swore an oath to defend the Constitution from enemies foreign and domestic. The government as presently constituted, and as it now functions is a domestic enemy of Freedom.
For Law and Liberty!
Semper Fidelis
There is a problem with your analogy. Which is that Hitler was Britain's ultimate blowback. It was the ruinous sanctions and food embargo imposed by, principally, Britain that lead to the rise of Hitler in the first place. Just as it was the CIA's toppling of Mossadegh, in 1953, that lead to the rise of the Ayatollahs in Iran. They, just as we, have reapt the fruit of our own foolishness.
Furthermore, it was not Iraq that attacked the US on 9/11, but Al Qaida. Iraq had neither the means nor the will to attack the US. Even if they had WMDs, that alone does not make them a threat.
Tobin, I am sorry but common sense has left this land. God help us, for we cannot seem to help ourselves.
If patriotism means support for the government and its policies, then I am not a patriot. I served in the Marine Corps, and swore an oath to defend the Constitution from enemies foreign and domestic. The government as presently constituted, and as it now functions is a domestic enemy of Freedom.
For Law and Liberty!
Semper Fidelis
puzzled | 10:24 a.m. Oct. 10, 2007
Kathrin, You may one day be God, but may I respectfully suggest that you leave
the judgement to him until that day. In essence, you have said that all who do
not interpret spiritual things as you do are apostates. I think not, but then I
am not God either.
Jayson | 11:20 a.m. Oct. 10, 2007
Why would I shun a war that has given millions of my brothers and sisters a
chance at greater freedom in their lives??
This feeling has nothing to do with my patriotism. It has everything to do with my belief in the plan of salvation and free agency.....
This feeling has nothing to do with my patriotism. It has everything to do with my belief in the plan of salvation and free agency.....
Thomas | 12:04 p.m. Oct. 10, 2007
Kathrin, I'm very familiar with J. Reuben Clark's writings on war and
peace during World War II.
You may not be aware that President Clark, and other Church leaders during that time, were strongly anti-Roosevelt and anti-New Deal. Like the 1930s Old Right isolationists whose views they espoused, their skepticism towards World War II was influenced by ideas that would not sound very respectable today. Those ideas involved suspicions of "international banking" that tended to blend seamlessly into anti-Semitism. President Clark was neck-deep into this ideology, even to the point of distributing copies of the anti-Semitic forgery "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" to his friends. The truth was that he just didn't think the Nazis, with whom he negotiated as a business representative (while simultaneously serving as a member of the First Presidency) were all that bad.
Thus, when most of America was viewing World War II as a crusade against a truly evil enemy, influential LDS leaders stood with the isolationists in viewing it as just another conflict ginned up by "international bankers" to boost their profits. This skepticism toward the "Good War" spilled over to influence subsequent LDS leaders' attitudes toward American arms generally.
You may not be aware that President Clark, and other Church leaders during that time, were strongly anti-Roosevelt and anti-New Deal. Like the 1930s Old Right isolationists whose views they espoused, their skepticism towards World War II was influenced by ideas that would not sound very respectable today. Those ideas involved suspicions of "international banking" that tended to blend seamlessly into anti-Semitism. President Clark was neck-deep into this ideology, even to the point of distributing copies of the anti-Semitic forgery "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" to his friends. The truth was that he just didn't think the Nazis, with whom he negotiated as a business representative (while simultaneously serving as a member of the First Presidency) were all that bad.
Thus, when most of America was viewing World War II as a crusade against a truly evil enemy, influential LDS leaders stood with the isolationists in viewing it as just another conflict ginned up by "international bankers" to boost their profits. This skepticism toward the "Good War" spilled over to influence subsequent LDS leaders' attitudes toward American arms generally.
Thomas | 12:38 p.m. Oct. 10, 2007
Anyway, Kathrin et al., the bottom line is this: The Church is not a pacifist
Church. It permits defensive war. "Renounce war and proclaim peace"
clearly does not mean that Church members who support (or voluntarily
participate in) wars that the Lord has not expressly boomed out permission for
from the heavens are "apostates."
Thomas Monson volunteered for the Navy during World War II. Several other current and recent Apostles served, though I can't confirm whether they volunteered or were drafted. (I suspect Elder Maxwell was drafted, but James E. Faust and Boyd K. Packer were combat pilots, who were generally all volunteers.) Ezra Taft Benson volunteered for World War I. Brigham Young initiated the raising of the Mormon Battalion to fight Mexico. Apostates all, according to you.
Certainly the world can use more voices for peace, but don't make the LDS Church something it's not. "Renounce war and proclaim peace" doesn't stand for the outright pacifism you're trying to force into its meaning.
Thomas Monson volunteered for the Navy during World War II. Several other current and recent Apostles served, though I can't confirm whether they volunteered or were drafted. (I suspect Elder Maxwell was drafted, but James E. Faust and Boyd K. Packer were combat pilots, who were generally all volunteers.) Ezra Taft Benson volunteered for World War I. Brigham Young initiated the raising of the Mormon Battalion to fight Mexico. Apostates all, according to you.
Certainly the world can use more voices for peace, but don't make the LDS Church something it's not. "Renounce war and proclaim peace" doesn't stand for the outright pacifism you're trying to force into its meaning.
george | 7:56 p.m. Oct. 10, 2007
Birch taken out of context???
Since when do Birchers' have context.
Kathrin is correct. Even President Hinckley apologized in General Conference when Mr Bush started the Iraq war.
There is nothing defensive about a war in which one invades another country and then trys to keep it under submission for their own gain.
Since when do Birchers' have context.
Kathrin is correct. Even President Hinckley apologized in General Conference when Mr Bush started the Iraq war.
There is nothing defensive about a war in which one invades another country and then trys to keep it under submission for their own gain.
kathrin | 8:18 p.m. Oct. 10, 2007
Re Thomas:The bottom line is ...unless God orders us directly to go to war we
are to show some FAITH and are not to engage in bloodshed.
As to the General Authorities who decided to join in warfare ..that is between them and their creator. Christ is supposed to be the one we have a personal relationship with and whom we are supposed to follow and not some other flawed human being. There are after all plenty of examples in our scriptures of great prophets who have made very poor decisions. I also am not in the position to say that they are or were apostates. Did they try to change the churches official stand of pro-peace to pro-war? But I can say that those who do not agree with the the commandment "renounce war and proclaim peace" and try to persuade others that this is not what we ought to persue are indeed apostate.
As to the General Authorities who decided to join in warfare ..that is between them and their creator. Christ is supposed to be the one we have a personal relationship with and whom we are supposed to follow and not some other flawed human being. There are after all plenty of examples in our scriptures of great prophets who have made very poor decisions. I also am not in the position to say that they are or were apostates. Did they try to change the churches official stand of pro-peace to pro-war? But I can say that those who do not agree with the the commandment "renounce war and proclaim peace" and try to persuade others that this is not what we ought to persue are indeed apostate.
Thomas | 11:24 a.m. Oct. 11, 2007
George:
I respect your argument, but I disagree. The Iraq war qualifies as a defensive war.
After World War II, the victorious Allies resolved to set up a mechanism to deter aggression. They set up the United Nations. Its foundational principle was the doctrine of "collective security" -- that an attack by an aggressor on one nation would be considered an attack on all, and would be responded to as such.
When Iraq conquered Kuwait in 1991, it was a classic example of the kind of aggression the United Nations was founded to defend against. Authorization was duly given for UN member states to use all necessary force to evict Iraq from Kuwait and do whatever else was necessary to restore peace to the region. As an exercise of "collective security," the resulting war qualified as "defensive," even with respect to the nations not directly attacked.
Iraq was badly beaten, and sued for a cease-fire. That cease-fire carried certain conditions. When Iraq violated those conditions, the hostilities suspended by the cease-fire were reinstated. As a continuation of a defensive war, the present war in Iraq is also defensive in nature.
I respect your argument, but I disagree. The Iraq war qualifies as a defensive war.
After World War II, the victorious Allies resolved to set up a mechanism to deter aggression. They set up the United Nations. Its foundational principle was the doctrine of "collective security" -- that an attack by an aggressor on one nation would be considered an attack on all, and would be responded to as such.
When Iraq conquered Kuwait in 1991, it was a classic example of the kind of aggression the United Nations was founded to defend against. Authorization was duly given for UN member states to use all necessary force to evict Iraq from Kuwait and do whatever else was necessary to restore peace to the region. As an exercise of "collective security," the resulting war qualified as "defensive," even with respect to the nations not directly attacked.
Iraq was badly beaten, and sued for a cease-fire. That cease-fire carried certain conditions. When Iraq violated those conditions, the hostilities suspended by the cease-fire were reinstated. As a continuation of a defensive war, the present war in Iraq is also defensive in nature.
Thomas | 11:44 a.m. Oct. 11, 2007
Kathrin, we'll have to agree to disagree. I believe you badly misinterpret
D&C 98, and are on dangerous ground in effectively accusing a present member
of the First Presidency (along with several apostles and Brigham Young himself)
of apostasy for taking a different interpretation of that passage.
D&C 98 was directed to the Saints, not to the world generally. It was given to dissuade Missouri Mormons from engaging in extrajudicial violence against their oppressors. It gave as an "ensample" the principle that operated in ancient theocratic Israel, namely, that if Israel were attacked, it should take the grievance to the Lord, who, if the cause were just, would authorize a holy war and intervene personally.
However, no such theocracy operates in the world today. Absent that special circumstance, the operative doctrine is the "just war" doctrine set forth at Alma 43:47 -- "Ye shall defend your families even unto bloodshed." The civil authorities -- the "magistrate" who "beareth not the sword in vain" -- are responsible for defending the nation over which they have stewardship, by force if necessary.
In short, the Church is certainly "pro-peace," but it is not pacifist. There is a difference. Defensive war is permissible.
D&C 98 was directed to the Saints, not to the world generally. It was given to dissuade Missouri Mormons from engaging in extrajudicial violence against their oppressors. It gave as an "ensample" the principle that operated in ancient theocratic Israel, namely, that if Israel were attacked, it should take the grievance to the Lord, who, if the cause were just, would authorize a holy war and intervene personally.
However, no such theocracy operates in the world today. Absent that special circumstance, the operative doctrine is the "just war" doctrine set forth at Alma 43:47 -- "Ye shall defend your families even unto bloodshed." The civil authorities -- the "magistrate" who "beareth not the sword in vain" -- are responsible for defending the nation over which they have stewardship, by force if necessary.
In short, the Church is certainly "pro-peace," but it is not pacifist. There is a difference. Defensive war is permissible.
Tobin | 12:28 p.m. Oct. 11, 2007
I have yet to see a person against the war on terrorism with a specific plan of
how to end the war. All they say is, "Get 'em out!" What kind
of a strategy is that? I want to hear a real plan.
george | 1:54 p.m. Oct. 11, 2007
Tobin - what war on terrorism???
This is is not a war on terrorism it is a war for oil.
and Thomas - sorry the current war is a War initiated without UN sanction. True Mr Bush justifies it as a continuation of another war.
but reality - no weapons of mass destruction - a leader that was fine when to US advantage and a terrible dictator yes.
This is is not a war on terrorism it is a war for oil.
and Thomas - sorry the current war is a War initiated without UN sanction. True Mr Bush justifies it as a continuation of another war.
but reality - no weapons of mass destruction - a leader that was fine when to US advantage and a terrible dictator yes.
Thomas | 4:38 p.m. Oct. 11, 2007
George:
Says you. I say otherwise, and some really smart international lawyers agree with me. Of course, since there isn't any international Supreme Court or other body with the authority to give a binding interpretation of a UN resolution whose meaning is disputed, I guess your interpretation is as good as mine.
Of course, that also means my interpretation is as good as yours.
Frankly, after 9/11, I would have had no problem with the conquest of any Middle Eastern country that harbored or supported even a single anti-American terrorist, whether or not that particular terrorist was one of the group that got lucky on September 11. I look at all terrorist organizations as a kind of transnational alliance that is waging war against the U.S. It follows that support for that alliance (or any of its members) ought to be treated as support for its overall goals -- so that any country that supported any of the alliance's members ought to be treated as if it supported them all.
Says you. I say otherwise, and some really smart international lawyers agree with me. Of course, since there isn't any international Supreme Court or other body with the authority to give a binding interpretation of a UN resolution whose meaning is disputed, I guess your interpretation is as good as mine.
Of course, that also means my interpretation is as good as yours.
Frankly, after 9/11, I would have had no problem with the conquest of any Middle Eastern country that harbored or supported even a single anti-American terrorist, whether or not that particular terrorist was one of the group that got lucky on September 11. I look at all terrorist organizations as a kind of transnational alliance that is waging war against the U.S. It follows that support for that alliance (or any of its members) ought to be treated as support for its overall goals -- so that any country that supported any of the alliance's members ought to be treated as if it supported them all.
Black Elk | 5:03 p.m. Oct. 14, 2007
The first peace, which is the most important, is that which comes from within
the souls of men when they realize their relationship, their oneness, with the
universe and all its powers, and when they realize that at the center of the
universe dwells Wakan-Tanka, and that this center is really everywhere, it is
within each of us. This is the real peace, and the others are but reflections of
this. The second peace is that which is made between two individuals, and the
third is that which is made between two nations. But above all you should
understand that there can never be peace between nations until there is first
known that true peace which is within the souls of men. -Black Elk
Bob Mullins - Logan Utah | 6:18 p.m. Feb. 16, 2008
Isa. 51: 20
20 Thy sons have fainted, they lie at the head of all the streets, as a awild bull in a net: they are full of the fury of the Lord, the rebuke of thy God.
Rev. 11: 8
8 And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.
2 Ne. 8: 20
20 Thy sons have fainted, save these two; they lie at the head of all the streets; as a wild bull in a net, they are full of the fury of the Lord, the rebuke of thy God.
Well, at least there are someone who knows how to use their priesthood, and are full of the fury of the Lord, and the rebuke of thy God.
20 Thy sons have fainted, they lie at the head of all the streets, as a awild bull in a net: they are full of the fury of the Lord, the rebuke of thy God.
Rev. 11: 8
8 And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.
2 Ne. 8: 20
20 Thy sons have fainted, save these two; they lie at the head of all the streets; as a wild bull in a net, they are full of the fury of the Lord, the rebuke of thy God.
Well, at least there are someone who knows how to use their priesthood, and are full of the fury of the Lord, and the rebuke of thy God.
american? | 9:22 a.m. June 21, 2008
I am a soldier in the United States Military. I am formerly a member of the
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. And I am TIRED of those who do
Not know, and who CANNOT SEE, voicing their ignorant opinions of a war they do
Not understand.
Defend even unto bloodshed? Is that was Christ did? are we more human that christ was? Maybe our families are simply more valuable than christ and the ones he loved were. right?
Let me ask you this. If you were Misinformed, and were doing something that harmed another person, would you rather be Killed in Open War? or educated and INFORMED of a More Healthy way of Living?
Apathy is NOT AN EXCUSE!! if no one has YET uncovered a way to END WAR and bloodshed then LET THAT BE YOU!
OR If you are Too Emotionally unevolved, and can not overcome this destructive Nature of "Survival of the fittest," Then Label yourself a PAWN to those Who would seek to control you without your knowing. THAT is TRUTH.
Americans, mormons, christians, Muslims, Athiests, it doesn't matter. no one has more of a right to life than another. Freedom **IS** Free.
Defend even unto bloodshed? Is that was Christ did? are we more human that christ was? Maybe our families are simply more valuable than christ and the ones he loved were. right?
Let me ask you this. If you were Misinformed, and were doing something that harmed another person, would you rather be Killed in Open War? or educated and INFORMED of a More Healthy way of Living?
Apathy is NOT AN EXCUSE!! if no one has YET uncovered a way to END WAR and bloodshed then LET THAT BE YOU!
OR If you are Too Emotionally unevolved, and can not overcome this destructive Nature of "Survival of the fittest," Then Label yourself a PAWN to those Who would seek to control you without your knowing. THAT is TRUTH.
Americans, mormons, christians, Muslims, Athiests, it doesn't matter. no one has more of a right to life than another. Freedom **IS** Free.
- Page:
- < Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining
E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.
- Charles Gibson to retire 3:46 p.m.
- Bishop Burton: These are good times 3:38 p.m.
- Holiday television program listings 3:30 p.m.
- Obama aunt anguished by separation 3:16 p.m.
- Police release holiday safety video 3:15 p.m.
- GM CEO Henderson resigns 3:15 p.m.
- Stocks climb after econ reports 3:14 p.m.
- Sweet treats 3:10 p.m.
- McCoy to resign from Utah Senate 3:00 p.m.
- Deseret News Ms. Volleyball 2009 2:30 p.m.
- 2 citations issued at Y.-U. game
- BYU says Hall incident resolved
- Max Hall: a fixture in rivalry lore
- Mitchell called intelligent, controlling
- Hall reprimanded by MWC
- 'Grandfamilies' a growing trend
- Utes won't respond to Hall
- Daughter: Mitchell fed me my pet
- Hall's pain reflects self-betrayal
- MWC '09 season in review
- Hall mouths off about hate of Utah
900 - Cougars beat Utes in overtime482
- Hall reprimanded by MWC399
- Max Hall issues apology386
- Hall's pain reflects self-betrayal338
- Utes won't respond to Hall271
- BYU says Hall incident resolved204
- 2 citations issued at Y.-U. game141
- BYU is champion of the state141
- Man trapped in Nutty Putty cave dies125
Associated Press writer Michael Liedtke has complied a gift list of...
My husband was teaching his 6th-grade class in Salt Lake last year when...
Latest comments
U's all conference lb missed a tackle that cost U the game. I bet he has...
Considering that Corroon has not held statewide office and hasn't decided to...
Get over it! It is amazing how much media this has recieved--yet hardly...
Let it go already! One has to wonder why Ute fans are so sensitive and...
We have only one gay Senator, the closeted Sen Chris Buttars-R
Having been a member for over 40 years, this version of translation...
GOP and independent conservatives have run against Matheson since he started...
How many football games did U win saturday> Two less than the number of...
"Arpaio told the panel that his office is an "equal opportunity law...
I spent 9 months in the US Army near the Pakistan border dodging bullets and...
Advertisements
During Desert Storm, Saddam sent most of his airplanes to Iran, hoping to preserve them. He was able to hide mobile SCUD missile rocket launchers the size of 18-wheelers in the desert, most of which we never found. To the extent he had chemical weapons on hand in 2003, he likely used the same techniques to hide them.
The vast majority of Iraqis are glad we liberated them. We did not "impose" democracy, we enabled it, just as the US did in Japan and Germany after WW II. The rate of soldier casualties in Iraq is comparable to the SOLDIER casualties in the US from traffic accidents and training accidents, for no good reason! The Army and Marines can sustain that rate of casualties indefinitely. The only thing running out is the American attention span. Don't let bin Laden's troops win!