Sign in to follow this  
NeedleinA

Liberals in the Church

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

Speaking of liberals in the church, @mirkwood just endorsed Joe Biden. 

@Midwest LDS was there. He saw all of it. 

 

3 minutes ago, Midwest LDS said:

It's true right out in the open on Facebook too.

 

It's all about context people.  These two have pulled the classic leftist media move of cherry picking only the part of the conversation they want to "promote."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest MormonGator
3 minutes ago, mirkwood said:

 

 

It's all about context people.  These two have pulled the classic leftist media move of cherry picking only the part of the conversation they want to "promote."

It depends what the definition of "is" is, right Mr. President? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Scott
9 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

It seems spectacularly revisionist to try to characterize Faust as a “liberal” in the modern sense of the word.  The modern Democratic Party would have very little use for a man like that; he’d have been cancelled long ago.

James E. Faust died only 13 years ago.   Personally I'd still call that modern.  

You are right about the things he did earlier in life, but towards the end he supported many liberal values such as environmental protection, social equality, education, and a strong cental government.

As far as I know he never did support things like abortion.

Probably the closest definition to James E. Faust is a  "Kennedy Democrat".

One does not have to embrace all points of any on party to be a conservative or liberal.    James E Faust encouraged members to join and be active in the democratic party until his death.  In his words, the church needs people in both parties to make sure good people get elected.  

Edited by Scott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For myself, while I tend towards ideals that most would consider conservative, the truth is that I pretty much view politics as a distraction from what is most important: The Plan of Salvation. 
 

It’s why we are here in mortality. 
 

It seems to me that many of us spend so much time debating which political ideology has the greater merit that we forget that living and sharing the gospel of Jesus Christ has infinitely more merit than all other ideals. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, anatess2 said:

Ahhhhmm.... I wouldn't say that... your views on the Plan of Salvation, a foundational tenet of the restored gospel, is quite liberal* against the teachings of the Church.

 

*see my post on what liberal means above.

???

That's a pretty strong accusation...

I'm not sure I understand what you are referring to.

Most of what I get from the Plan of Salvation comes from 5 sources.  The Teachings of Joseph Smith (along with the D&C and Church History), Brigham Young (and the Journal of Discourses), Lorenzo Snow, Joseph F. Smith and Joseph Fielding Smith.  I also have Bruce R. McConkie, though most of his is just reiteration of what the others stated previously.

Furthermore, normally I have backed up much of what I've quoted from them (FAR MORE than almost anyone on this site, which makes for longer posts at times) as well as normally quote the official church's website in many things (and far more than most on this site as well) so, this is kind of a weird surprise that you seem to be slinging...

Trying to understand it in the context of what you define a liberal is, are you saying that I place individual belief over that of the teachings currently in the Church regarding the plan of salvation?

I tend to go more towards the foundations of what was taught, up until at least the end of the 20th century, and as far as I know, the church hasn't really changed what is taught on the Plan of salvation today...

What views are you saying are against the teachings of the Church???

Edited by JohnsonJones

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Scott said:

James E. Faust died only 13 years ago.   Personally I'd still call that modern.  

You are right about the things he did earlier in life, but towards the end he supported many liberal values such as environmental protection, social equality, education, and a strong cental government.

As far as I know he never did support things like abortion.

Probably the closest definition to James E. Faust is a  "Kennedy Democrat".

One does not have to embrace all points of any on party to be a conservative or liberal.    James E Faust encouraged members to join and be active in the democratic party until his death.  In his words, the church needs people in both parties to make sure good people get elected.  

Progressives often don’t (or refuse to) understand how quickly they’re shifting their core beliefs.

Remember, Obama was elected on a platform that opposed gay marriage; and it wasn’t until 2016 that the Dems abandoned the idea that abortion was tragic necessity and instead took a hard opposItion to the Hyde Amendment.

Edited by Just_A_Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Scott
46 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Remember, Obama was elected on a platform that opposed gay marriage; and it wasn’t until 2016 that the Dems abandoned the idea that abortion was tragic necessity and instead took a hard opposItion to the Hyde Amendment.

I agree, but it doesn't have to be that way.  All democrats are not the same.  Neither are all republicans.

It's not like every democrat has to agree with Obama 100% or every Republican has to agree with Trump 100%.   It might seem like that at times, but it doesn't happen to be that way.  

Edited by Scott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest MormonGator
53 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Progressives often don’t (or refuse to) understand how quickly they’re shifting their core beliefs.

 

Should the church just say "Republicans only" on the doorstep? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Scott said:

I agree, but it doesn't have to be that way.  All democrats are not the same.  Neither are all republicans.

It's not like every democrat has to agree with Obama 100% or every Republican has to agree with Trump 100%.   It might seem like that at times, but it doesn't happen to be that way.  

Naturally.  But there is a perception of what is and isn’t “mainstream” in any party or group of people; and where Dems are concerned that perception has been shifting leftwards at a dizzying rate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MormonGator said:

Should the church just say "Republicans only" on the doorstep? 

Thankfully, belonging to an ideologically consistent political party is not a litmus year for Church membership; or we’d all have been exed years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest MormonGator
20 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Thankfully, belonging to an ideologically consistent political party is not a litmus year for Church membership; or we’d all have been exed years ago.

I like my idea better. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/7/2020 at 10:51 PM, NeedleinA said:

Great talk given by Pres. Harold B. Lee entitled "The Iron Rod". Here is a video of part of that talk.
 

An excerpt:

 

Liberalism is evil, and a plague on society. Life would be much better for everyone if there were fewer liberals in the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Progressives often don’t (or refuse to) understand how quickly they’re shifting their core beliefs.

Remember, Obama was elected on a platform that opposed gay marriage; and it wasn’t until 2016 that the Dems abandoned the idea that abortion was tragic necessity and instead took a hard opposItion to the Hyde Amendment.

I think change is happening very quickly in many aspects of our society, both Liberal and Conservative.

In regards to Liberals, it pertains to Democrats and the Democrat party in the US.  It has been occurring since at least the 60s.  They started trying to appeal to a greater base (which is understandable, any political party wants a broader base) but in their case, it started more to change who their base was.  As that base changed, it also changed some of their approaches and ideas. 

Today many who would have original been part of the Communist party or other parties similar to it have instead joined the Democrat party.  They carry labels that identify them as separate from the mainstream democrats, but utilize the Democrat party to push their own agendas.  The reason seems to be that they realized they could not win in the US without being part of one of the two major parties, and thus melded into the Democrats to form a Far left and Liberal wing of the Democrats.  This (along with the base change of members) has made a shift of axis in the Democrats to be more left or further left, a change that seems to be accelerating.  There are still many Democrats that are NOT part of this, however, and lean far more towards the middle.

Many of these more traditional Democrats are more conservative than some Republicans.  You see change in the Republican party as well.  30 years ago, Trump could never have won the nomination, much less become President.  Republicans would not have stood for his immorality if they knew about it (in my opinion).  Today, Republicans have a split in their party as well, which has made it harder for them to win some contests.  You have some that have moved further to the Right and to the extremes, but at the same time you have those that have moved much further towards a liberal front that accepts things such as Big Budgets, Big spending, Gay Marriage, and a strong central federal government (something that used to be seen as a democrat idea, but is now in many ways also pushed by Republicans, just in different areas today than Democrats).

Change is happening very quickly, but I think it is happening in many areas of life in the US (and the world, but that is too broad of a topic currently).  It may be that this acceleration is the pre-cursor to the Millennial reign of our Lord, but with the speed it is accelerating it could mean very dark times are for us up ahead (or at least for those who are religious and stand by their religious values).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Scott said:

You are right about the things he did earlier in life, but towards the end he supported many liberal values such as environmental protection, social equality, education, and a strong cental government.

Gee, I guess I'm liberal.  I believe in all those things too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

Trying to understand it in the context of what you define a liberal is, are you saying that I place individual belief over that of the teachings currently in the Church regarding the plan of salvation?

You place individual interpretation over the interpretation of the modern prophets.

Wasn't it you (if I'm mistaken I apologize) that had a different understanding of the Plan of Salvation than what is presented in the temple rites?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Jedi_Nephite said:

Liberalism is evil, and a plague on society. Life would be much better for everyone if there were fewer liberals in the world.

My knee-jerk reaction is to agree with this, at least using modern US-based definitions of "liberalism" and "liberals". But I know it is not true. People like you and me tend to think that the opposite to "liberalism" is "honesty", because we see the deep corruption in leftist thought. But the corruption is on all sides, not just "theirs".

For an oversimplified example: Even if you dislike unions and see them as an obstacle to progress and honest work relationships, the fact remains that unions did not arise in a vacuum or because Satan's minions created them. Unions arose because people were being badly used and, in essence, extorted into working under deplorable conditions. In Zion, there will be no unions—because there will be no money-worshiping employers who value profit over human life or health.

If all the leftists went off and formed their own nation (or equivalently, if all the conservatives did so), we conservatives would find plenty of corruption still plaguing us. Our self-congratulations at having finally rid ourselves of those brain-dead leftists would last all of a few months before it became obvious that the profit-taking had begun in earnest. Though it's entirely likely in such a scenario that the leftist "liberal" nation would take a self-destructive path that would ultimately mean their demise, we might be shocked to find out how close on their heels our supposedly "conservative" nation would be.

Politics is not and never will be the permanent answer to the world's woes. Ultimately, repentance is the only answer. Without repentance, all is irretrievably lost, no matter which political affiliation you choose. With true repentance, all is hope, sunshine, and butterflies. Even for Democrats.

Edited by Vort

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Jedi_Nephite said:

Liberalism is evil, and a plague on society. Life would be much better for everyone if there were fewer liberals in the world.

You might want to get out more.  You are using the word Liberal in the same manner antifa uses the word Anti-Fascism.  IT HAS NO BEARING to the ACTUAL meaning of the word...  You are simply using Liberalism as a word salad to label "those people over there" (which is inapplicable to the entire world who has no clue who those people are over there).  Liberalism has a meaning.  For example - George Washington and the rest of the Founding Fathers were liberals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/9/2020 at 9:25 AM, Vort said:

I believe that God loved me enough to give me some painful and humbling experiences that gently, and occasionally not so gently, taught me how foolish I was. Clinging to the iron rod has been my salvation from the tempest that would otherwise certainly have carried me off. I preach with a mostly conservative and fundamentalist-sounding voice, not because I look down on others with disgust, but because I feel that same voice rescued me from a path that I'm very glad I have not walked.

Amen & Ditto to this.^^^

A visual that I personally enjoy:

Quote

Elder Daniel L. Johnson: "The key to understanding these verses is the phrase “clinging to the rod of iron.” I compare the word clinging to a “white knuckle” experience."

I've always felt particularly bad for this man (red arrow). He appears confused, paused, not walking in either direction. This is the moment where the real gut check is taking place. Will he decide to truly walk away or turn around and walk back to the tree. Similar to Vort's experience, I too was that man (red arrow) at times in my younger years. It was and continues to be the "conservative and fundamentalist-sounding voice" that rescued/rescues me and continues to help me to this day. Church Edginess is not the white knuckle experience I believe Elder Johnson was referring to. In addition, I feel that consistently flirting with the exceptions verses the rule is not white knuckling it either.

I'll add, the conservative and fundamentalist voice that helped me always came from a place of love, often topped off with a sincere hug.

yyyyyy.thumb.jpg.6eb62a9ccd5a7a7534dcc2cda24128ae.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Vort said:

If all the leftists went off and formed their own nation (or equivalently, if all the conservatives did so), we conservatives would find plenty of corruption still plaguing us. Our self-congratulations at having finally rid ourselves of those brain-dead leftists would last all of a few months before it became obvious that the profit-taking had begun in earnest. Though it's entirely likely in such a scenario that the leftist "liberal" nation would take a self-destructive path that would ultimately mean their demise, we might be shocked to find out how close on their heels the supposedly "conservative" nation would be.

This would be a really interesting race to run.  We'd need to agree to an endpoint that defines "failure of the state." I propose when citizens resort to cannibalism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Vort said:

If all the leftists went off and formed their own nation (or equivalently, if all the conservatives did so), we conservatives would find plenty of corruption still plaguing us. Our self-congratulations at having finally rid ourselves of those brain-dead leftists would last all of a few months before it became obvious that the profit-taking had begun in earnest. Though it's entirely likely in such a scenario that the leftist "liberal" nation would take a self-destructive path that would ultimately mean their demise, we might be shocked to find out how close on their heels the supposedly "conservative" nation would be.

Ahem...Are we forgetting Korea? That is precisely what they did.  And ROK is a highly socialized country anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Scott
1 hour ago, Vort said:

If all the leftists went off and formed their own nation (or equivalently, if all the conservatives did so), we conservatives would find plenty of corruption still plaguing us. Our self-congratulations at having finally rid ourselves of those brain-dead leftists would last all of a few months before it became obvious that the profit-taking had begun in earnest. Though it's entirely likely in such a scenario that the leftist "liberal" nation would take a self-destructive path that would ultimately mean their demise, we might be shocked to find out how close on their heels the supposedly "conservative" nation would be.

I agree and countries that are too conservative or too far left aren't pleasant places to live in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Scott said:

I agree, but it doesn't have to be that way.  All democrats are not the same.  Neither are all republicans.

It's not like every democrat has to agree with Obama 100% or every Republican has to agree with Trump 100%.   It might seem like that at times, but it doesn't happen to be that way.  

The problem is that while there may still be "Kennedy Democrats" around that Kennedy Democratic party no longer exists. Any such individuals who get elected are heavily pressured to toe the modern party line. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Scott said:

I agree and countries that are too conservative or too far left aren't pleasant places to live in.

I'm curious which countries you would define as being too conservative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Scott
Just now, laronius said:

I'm curious which countries you would define as being too conservative.

Saudi Arabia, Iran, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Scott
1 minute ago, laronius said:

The problem is that while there may still be "Kennedy Democrats" around that Kennedy Democratic party no longer exists. Any such individuals who get elected are heavily pressured to toe the modern party line. 

Yes.   That's why I don't like the two party system.   It's also why Jefferson warned us against political parties.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this