I do not doubt that there are secret combinations on the political left designed to advance communist principles and abhorrent moral practices. In a past-life, I spent some time studying some of these and publishing my research on them. I know they exist and should be taken seriously.
I wonder, however, why more Latter-day Saints are not as quick to recognize the evil agendas and secret combinations that are routinely identified with and supported by the right of the political spectrum. Two quick examples:
(1) The vast military industrial complex. See http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=2354fccf2b7db010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD&locale=0&sourceId=9341fd758096b010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&hideNav=1. There can be no doubt that there are many interests that would love to see the United States in continual wars for their own gain. I find the influence these groups have concerning, especially in light of the large portion of the economy that is based on their trade. Aren't we specifically warned in the temple about who is behind the sale and purchase of the implements of war?
(2) Groups among the wealthy and powerful designed to obtain and keep riches. It was these groups that led to the downfall of Nephite society. See Ether 8:22; Helaman 6:17; Helaman 7:21.
Interestingly, as I listened to the modern prophets in general conference, I heard more references to unity, peace and materialism than I did to socialism, abortion and same-sex marriage (all of which I oppose).
Thus, I feel that evil is not limited to a single political party or ideology, and that Lucifer will attempt to use more than one avenue of attack in his effort to destroy the souls of men. Stated differently, I think that, although most members of political parties have only good motives, both political parties advance ideas contrary to the gospel that can be used in the service of nefarious ends. This does not surprise me; after all, both parties are the creations of men designed to obtain and maintain power over earthly kingdoms. I am just afraid of the incorrect principals that may be advanced by right wing political operatives as I am of those fostered by the left. It might just be, however, that it is the secret combinations that we know the least about, i.e. the ones that are really secret, that should cause the most concern.
I think this is one reason why the First Presidency has said that: "Principles compatible with the gospel may be found in various political parties" and that we should therefore "seek out and then uphold leaders who will act with integrity and are wise, good, and honest." First Presidency Letter, September 22, 2008. To me the emphasis here is on the seeking of good, righteous men -- not the adherence to a particular platform or party line -- because both parties may be simultaneously advancing some good and some bad principles. A "wise, good, and honest" man or women will do the right thing regardless of his particular party platform, just as a wicked man will do the wrong thing in spite of his.
When our emphasis is on the personality and not the party or the platform, we may find ourselves inclined to support someone who is not lock-step with our beliefs, but whom we believe will do the right things despite that fact. I recognize, of course, that a measure of the wisdom, goodness and honesty of an individual may be taken from the things that he supports and the company he keeps. Thus, a person's positions on the issues are relevant to the inquiry.
It seems to me, however, that far too may people -- especially Latter-day Saints -- look at the party first and then the person. This can lead to a poor decision if one does not first acknowledge that both parties have problems. It would be interesting to see whether an anti-abortion democrat of the caliber of James E. Faust would be elected in Utah today, or whether his party affiliation would automatically preclude him from serious consideration in the eyes of most of the people.
RZA
4 comments:
RZA
I agree it is not about party, and it is about the individual. However, the electoral process is imperfect and we do not have a utopian solution, as you seem to advocate, to pick and choose the perceived beliefs of one or the other candidates.
The reality is you have to take a stand--you must choose amongst imperfect alternatives that candidate or party that most closely fits with your overall philosophy.
The brethren do take even now and in the recent conference sessions a stand on moral issues such as same sex marriage, abortion, and government intrusion into our liberties. The First Presidency is currently actively encouraging the defeat of Prop 8 (definition of marriage) in California, just as they did in the 70s when they encouraged members to actively campaign against the passage of the ERA. Elder Faust, as a Democrat, would not have advocated those aforementioned issues in the manner in which they are identified with the Democrat party platform.
We can't throw our hands up in the air and just assume it is too difficult to have an impact on issues such as abortion--that is accepting one of Lucifer's chief deceptions which is to acquiesce, tolerate, then embrace the evil until is pervasive. This acceptance leads to discouragement and snuffs out hope, one of the three great virtues the Apostle Paul taught us to develop. Elder Uchtdorf spoke eloquently of this virtue during this conference. No, we must take a firm stand against evil and not lose hope or faith that we through diligent effort can overcome evil.
America did not start this war on terror. We were attacked with the result of 3,000 dead and we are fighting a defensive war on the enemy's soil. Again, we must recognize the reality of a dangerous world and not theorize that in the absence of strenth we can negotiate with regimes who would insanely kill every American if they could. We cannot equivicate and must take a stand against the madness that would destroy us. Captain Moroni or the Sons of Helaman did not shrink from the battles that had to be waged.
Yes, both parties have problems and are filled with imperfect people. However, rather than denigrating Utah it is interesting to note that in a population dominated by good Latter Day Saints, many of whom adhere to gospel standards, the overwhelming majority of those individuals will probably support McCain. What is the likelihood that many of the Saints in Utah will be influenced in their decision making process by gospel principles and sacred influences versus the vast majority of voters say in New Jersey or New York? Utah is often put-down, but what do Utahns know about sacred things that others do not know?
In summary, reality dictates that we must choose whom we elect amongst imperfect alternatives.
We must take a stand and fight for the righteous outcomes of the moral issues of our day. We must not use double talk sophistry to talk ourselves into "calling good evil and evil good" and tolerating that which is abhorrent Right versus wrong is not confusing to the spiritually enlightened.
As a society of Saints we must give great weight to the opinions of those who tend to be influenced by the Spirit to a greater degree than those who do not have the Spirit with them.
We must recognize that America is a land "choice above all lands" and that "Zion will be built upon the American continent. . . " (10th article of faith). We must preserve her, protect her, and elect those individuals who will most likely see this destiny as part of her greatness. We must elect leaders who believe in the promise of America
RMB
I think we are in agreement on most of this.
With respect to Utah, please don't interpret my comments as denigrating it or its people. Thus far, I've spent the majority of my life there, and would move back quickly given the right opportunities.
The point was that, in my perception, many Latter-day Saints march lock-step with the Republican party because of the very obvious shortcomings of the opposition. This is most evident in Utah, because of the demographics, but can be observed in my local ward in New Jersey and probably in Kennewick too. The fact is, however, that the Republican party has its own problem, which although are less obvious, may be just as dangerous. Thus, we agree that electing representatives should be about the individual -- not the party.
By the way, the First Presidency shares my concern about LDS automatically marching in lock-step with the Republican party. If you haven't read it in a while, you should look up the interview that Elder Marlin K. Jensen gave a few years ago to the Salt Lake Tribune at the direction of the First Presidency regarding the affiliation of members with political parties.
RZA
I agree we shouldn't march in lock step with a particular party. I don't think anyone would disagree with that and, quite frankly, my experience in Utah and elsewhere is different than yours. I find most members of the Church to be open-minded, independent, honest, and tolerant of other viewpoints probably due to our history of persecution in the early days of the Church. In my experience most active members of the Church focus on the individual and not the party. I also believe that as a whole the active members of the Church are sensitive to being directed by the Spirit. As I stated earlier the State of Utah will overwhelmingly support McCain. Why? I believe Utahns who are active Church members will focus on how they are individually being directed in their hearts and not due to their affiliation with a political party. Utah preferred Romney in the primary, but will choose McCain in the general not because they are republicans but because the choices are so stark. The Utah demographic is an allegience largely based on their membership in the Church not a political party perhaps, with a some exceptions, as Elder Jensen warned.
Dad
If the majority of Utahns support one candidate, then it is good for everyone to support the candidate because the majority of Utahns are members of the church. Is this an accurate characterization of RMB's position?
The leaders of the church exhort the members of the church to examine and weigh the candidates, to study the issues, to make an informed decision.
I find that the process of examination, which is the suggestion of the First Presidency, is largley missing from the political strongholds of either party. People default to one political party out of laziness and ease of conformity. This is true of liberals in Seattle just as much as it is true of conservatives in Utah.
The spirit of The First Presidency's admonition is best expressed in the first stanza of Robert Frost's poem on self-relection, "The Pasture," which states:
I'm going out to clean the pasture spring;/
I'll only stop to rake the leaves away/
(And wait to watch the water clear, I may):/
I sha'n't be gone long. You come too.
Post a Comment