re: sergio | 10:00 a.m. May 28, 2011 There are IMO enough
legislators who feel proscribing the beliefs of a shrinking majority is the best
way to govern.
"Mormon political power is restrained." In light of the prop 8 dust
up this is an entirely false statement - flat out false.
With Free Agency being a cornerstone of Mormon theology, why doesn't the Church
encourage members to vote for politicians who support Free Agency? Must we
(voters) be commanded in all things by politicans, or are we free to choose
re: Stenar | 6:25 p.m. May 27, 2011 We all know nothing good comes
out of the shadows. If the influence were good; wouldn't policy from
50 E North Temple have nothing to hide and be out in the open?
Sergio, Utah's doin' just fine. We have a stronger economy than most states, a
lower than average unemployment rate, and we always do well with our tax
dollars. You can thumb your nose at us, but with an over-all view, we're doing
better than most. No white horse mormon needed, thank you.
To those who believe that it will be those either in Congress or a President
that will save the Constitution are partially right. The Church of Jesus Christ
of Latter Day Saints as a whole will do that. Alt is right in that the LDS
Church did not approve of the ERA Amendment and so it was defeated. To some but
not as many as he thinks this has been disarming. More members supported the
LDS Church leadership on Proposistion 8 because of its stance with the Family
Proclamation. Though many condemn us for that stance, many support us as well.
Even with only 2% of the vote in California but with the greatest organization
of manpower we were able to get many to vote against it. Our political power
rests with the membership alone.For those who say we need to have
classes on the Constitution should really step back and see what Elder Dalhin H.
Oaks has stated not only in General Conference but to legal graduates. It is
already being taught you just to sit back and listen to the members of the First
Presidency and the Quroum of the Twelve to hear it.
Perhaps Mr. Oman needs to move to Utah, where the Mormon church runs state
politics, so that he may have better insight as to church influence. And for
the others who are waiting for the White Horse Mormon to save our constitution
and country, well it sure hasn't worked all that well on the smaller state scale
(utah). So why do you thing it is a better model at the national level. I think
it is just politics all gumed up with religious thinking. Good luck.
The LDS church is anything but restrained. When the state legislature scampers
up to Temple Square to get permission on changes to the alcohol laws it
demonstrates very clearly who owns Utah politics.
As far as I have been able to discern, the "Constitution hanging by a
thread" is not an acceptable LDS doctrine. The brethern may have discussed
it, but it is not doctrine. The fact that that moment has come does indicate our
time was acknowledged way back then. We are in church to spiritually be
uplifted. If that happens, we can then be strong when the need arises. Yes, we
can gather in groups and work toward a "common" goal, but what that
might be would probably be destroyed by our political differences. I prefer
discussing those things that have been sanctioned by the prophets, trusting that
the spirit will touch my soul when difficult questions come to light and
learning to love my fellowman in spite of our differences. There is a
difference between supporting traditional marriage and supporting
non-discrimination for all people.
I find it interesting that the Author did not mention the Church's opposition to
the ERA (Equal Rights Amendment) The Church actively opposed it and history will
show that, rightly or wrongly, they played a significant role in its defeat.
That opposition bacame public and to this day has been a problem for many in the
People feel like they have camaraderie at church because they feel as though
their beliefs are shared with other members. Burst that little bubble with a
political pin and things go to the swine really quick. Especially when people
justify their political beliefs with their interpretation of scripture.
Haha. Good one.
@Cougarblue"I could see discussing the history of how we became
a country, the Declaration of Independence and the history behind the
Constitutional Convention, but now the politics of running the
government."I agree, the more... general statements are fine.
It's when getting into details where you'd end up with conservatives vs
libertarians vs liberals vs the patience of people who don't care about
politics and finds everyone else annoying when they're arguing about it.
the LDS church should tend to its church buisness and stay out of politics and
that also includes any religous group
Render unto Caesar....
I did some research for NeilT: Canada did not have a constitution until 1982 and
Brazil until 1888. Obviously the constitution mentioned is the United States of
America's. If the leadership wants this discussed in church, then we'll know
about it. Teaching of the Constitution is part of the state core curriculum.
Does anybody posting here realize the LDS Church is an international church with
more foreign members (who do not ascribe to our particular constitution) than
domestic members?I bring this up because the Church seems to be interested
in projecting consistent messages and curriculum across national boundaries.
Therefore it is a 'non-starter' to imagine the Church incorporating study of the
US Constitution in its meetings or teaching materials.
Which countries constitution should we teach, Canada's, Brazil's, or the United
States? Just wondering. I wonder how members in Canada would feel about this.
Maybe they believe they have an inspired constitution. I am grateful
the church took a moderate position on immigration. Demonizing and villifying
people for fleeing an impoverished country is not consistent with my belief
system. And since when did we start punishing children for the actions of their
parents? There is a man in Draper whose wife was brought here as infant by her
mother. Technically she is here illegaly. There are some members who would
deport her in a heartbeat. Tear her from the arms of her family just to satisfy
their need for justice. When it comes to immigration those on the far right
have lost their humanity. If you think I am exaggerating just listen carefully
to the rhetoric. I truly believe there are some in the church who are motivated
by fear and ignorance. That is my humble opinion. Feel free to disagree.
After all isn't that what makes America great. The freedom to criticize our
government and express our opinions withoutr fear of retaliation.
I could see discussing the history of how we became a country, the Declaration
of Independence and the history behind the Constitutional Convention, but now
the politics of running the government. It could be a series of firesides for a
stake. How will the Elders save the constitution? By running for
office and remembering the purpose of government and not forgetting personal
integrity. Remembering what this nation went through to become a great nation.
And last of all remembering that God set up this Nation and brought forth great
men to accomplish it.
The Church is an international church with more foreign members (who do not
ascribe to our particular constitution) than domestic members.The future
LDS church will be full of communists, socialists, and many other
"ists" that many domestic members do not understand or want to
acknowledge. I bring this up simply because it is a 'non-starter' to
imagine the LDS church ever incorporating any study of the US Constitution in
its meetings or teaching materials.
If the time comes that the Brethren think it is necessary and appropriate to
discuss the Constitution at Church meetings, it will be done. Until then, we
all need to just know that these are inspired men and that our Constitution was
inspired by God. We need to prayerfully study the Constitution, political
candidates and issues on our own. The fact that the vast majority of us tend to
generally agree on most issues, should say something.
tomsmartforyou -- you do realize that the church does not endorse any political
candidate or party because if it did so, it would risk losing its non-profit
status, which would also mean that its members would not be able to write off
their tithing as a tax deduction? This is the same for any church. Taking
positions on particular issues is allowed, however.To The Rock, by
teaching the constitution, whose interpretation do you propose should be taught?
The US Supreme Court's, which is the ultimate "legal" interpretator?
Or some particular group of conservatives who may or may not agree with the
ultimate interpretator from time to time? I think this would be a nightmare.
The church would have to create a lesson plan on what to teach, which would mean
the church would have to give its interpretation of what the words in the
I would love any opportunity to have a constitutional discussion. However, I
think that in church is neither the time or the place. In our ward we have
occasionally had discussions of a political nature and they never seem to lead
to anything uplifting.
I found it interesting to study politics in Hancock County in the 1840's and
find that whoever ran for Governor of Illinois needed to win Hancock County.
Candidates didn't like that, but tried to do it anyway, because the Mormon's
tended to vote as a block. They are accused of being "blind" and
doing the same thing today in large measure. What their critics fail to realize
is that members view issues similarly so why would they vote differently from
one another?The Church is very careful to not endorse any political
party and emphasizes the need for voters to carefully (and prayerfully) select
the best candidates for whom to vote. The fact the majority of members are
conservative just happens to be where the chips fall. The only time
headquarters takes a position is when they consider something to be a moral
issue, like Prop 8 and the MX Missile debate, which is rare. When the LDS
position is endorsed by the membership it somehow creates nervousness and
uncertainty among nonmembers, unnecessarily.I'd expect churches to
take a position on moral issues, which several different ones did on both Prop 8
and Illegal Immigration.
Most LDS church political power is expressed behind the scenes, influencing
people and groups quietly, out of sight, not in the bright light of day.
@JNA"I do not think that a discussion of the Constitution is
appropriate in Church."Then you better not read Doctrine and
Covenants 101:80. For that matter, you probably should steer clear of Ezra Taft
Agreed JNA, my son taught priesthood in his ward recently and the subject went
off into politics, and it went quickly into, shall we say, a discussion that was
not at all uplifting.I do like the idea mentioned by the rock, to begin to
examine and understand the original intent of the constitution lest we all drift
further off center.Just not on a Sunday setting when most of us are
wanting/needing something positive and uplifting.
@The RockI see your point, I truly do. In my opinion, and it is only
my opinion. I do not think that a discussion of the Constituition is appropriate
in Church. I know in my Ward there are staunch conservatives, Staunch liberals,
and moderates. It would be my concern that there would be heated debate, which
is good, but not in Church where so much relies on the Spirit. I would like to
say that it could be done, but I just don't have the faith that these types of
discussion could happen in a spiritual setting.
It is undeniable that the constitution now hangs by a thread. If the Elders of
the church are to bear it off to safety the LDS church will have to become a lot
more politically active.In as much as it is LDS doctrine that the
constitution is inspired of God it would be entirely appropriate to begin by
teaching the constitution in some way in the church, perhaps on the fifth
Sunday. Standardized lessons that teach principles with scriptural backing
rather than politics.I see other Christian groups doing far more.