Mormon President Of The "Free" World? Would It Be Paradise?

[Paddy]

In Australia the resources to help people at a church level are minimal. We do not have a strong welfare functional arm or stores like a bishops storehouse. That does not mean that we are not interested in helping people. I think Australian are quite generous have a general culture of "helping out your mate".

In our ward a sister was severely beaten by her husband and kicked out of her home with a young son in tow. She was left with nothing. The bishop took her in for a few days and then found her a small apartment, bought her some white goods and furniture and the members donated. Initially the Bishop got advice and permission from the Stake President and was told not to pay for the apartment rent/bond or the furnishings. The Bishop went ahead anyway and got in trouble for it. I think this was the bravest and most righteous things I have seen a Bishop ever do. He is a good man.

I am not really surprised that the Church has not provided direct relief for many members affect by the floods. And knowing what it is like in Australia I believe ozpoof. It doesn't mean I like it. In fact in many ways I am disappointed that there is not more known about the relief efforts done by the Church.

Paddy

[ozpoof]

I am sure your opinion of the US is as factually based as your opinion that the church sent no aid to New Zealand during the earthquake crisis.

Let us for a moment deal in the realpolitik..... I realize as a small country, your part in the area of world affairs is kept as a bit part player. If the world were a chess game, your nation based on its strategic importance and the impact it has upon the world economy would be that of well, an observer in a lawnchair outside the building on a hill with binoculars. As such, from such a distant and strategic vantage point, one might miss certain contexts going on inside the building. Things like the Cold War and the movement of power, the activity of two super powers (one of which expelled a great deal of its power and reserves protecting Europe, though, like I said, from your nations vantage point, it seems a distant threat. Errors, mistakes, wrong decisions, all of these play a part in that chess game. The US by its nature until WWII was mostly isolationist with very few incursions abroad. Post WWII at the behest of the west it certainly did become much more active. And yes, actions in various countries did indeed create the rise of horrible people. The one sided accusation though shows a certain myopia to the opponent in the chess match. The Soviet Union which imprisoned entire nations, while also installing dictators. My youth in Germany was impacted by the Baader Meinhof Gang. Dilattante terrorists who found easy refuge in East Germany, the IRA in Northern Ireland which did not come to the peace tables until the money dried up, not from Boston and New York, but from the former Soviet Union.

I would like to know the number of oil wells that were saved in Bosnia/Herzogovinia where the US entered unilaterally while Mulsims were being massacred? There are many more such areas where the UN simply did nothing while the US did something.

But from your hillside, far away from the movement, power, and international game of chess during the cold war, it is easy to condemn mistakes made, to question motivations, to even denigrate people.

I have played rugby with a group of Samoans. Great people, I loved the game, as such I am not a small man in stature. You remind of the unfortunate clueless spectator, doesn't know the rules, isn't sure what the outcome is, has not really sacrificed to put himself in shape for the game, and has never ever picked up the ball run with it. But who somehow seems to think he can coach a team. The Samoans just smiled and shook their head.

Enjoy your corner of the world, it is a nice and beautiful place. Great for making films like Xena, or Hercules, or Lord of the Rings. Something to be proud of really. You don't have to thank us for making such a possibility for you, Lord of the Rings is all the thanks we need. Good on ya mate!

I NEVER said the church sent no aid to NZ. Someone else on this forum who doesn't know NZ is not part of Australia said that. So the locations for the productions you mention were not in my country at all.

That brings to light a problem you players in the "international game of chess" seem to have. A complete lack of understanding of geography and how the rest of the world suffers when you play your silly games. That can be excused since American schools seem to ignore the rest of the world and focus on US history and geography. Your condescending tone is less forgivable.

I don't consider placing puppets in control of nations to make them US-friendly while spouting to the world about democracy can be excused as an "error" or "wrong decision". It's outright deception, criminal, and murderous. I believe the church and most reasonable people consider lying, murder, and theft to be worthy of denigration, no matter how big or small the player is. Perhaps more nations would be US-friendly if you stayed out of their politics.

Yes, the US was isolationist until WW2 (well the end of WW2) after the rest of the allies had been fighting the Nazis for years. The US still seems to enter into conflict when their interests are threatened. There is an oil pipeline (AMBO) through the Balkans is there not?

For many of the peoples in the world, the US is just a terrorist state that currently holds an imaginary higher ground because they claim their actions promote and spread democracy. History shows the US only allows democracy when the leaders in power are US puppets. Even my country was bullied into dumping a Prime Minister who wanted to kick the US out of a secret base they set up here. That showed the US has no friends, only interests. History also shows the US is prepared to prop up butcherous regimes if they get oil and other business deals. No higher ground at all.

Australia has helped YOU in your recent wars - Vietnam, Korea, Afghanistan. This makes us LESS safe and more prone to terrorist attack. The US has created the terrorist threat, and now wants to remove the rights and freedoms of many people around the world in order to fight it. Thanks for nothing.

[ozpoof]

Not only that if people were paying their tithing they were likely not homeless. Now if they became homeless after the disaster, I'm not sure what Ozzie expects the church to do. There are a lot of homeless people following a disaster and that's why shelters are set up and there are programs set up to meet immediate needs. In many areas church buildings have been opened up to shelter the displaced. Tithing is not like paying into insurance where you get money back when disaster hits. It is an act of faith in following the commandment of the Lord. I doubt that the true tithe payers are complaining about this as Oz reports.

My parents - full tithepayers and more, had their home rendered uninhabitable. Australians in general don't expect anything from Mormons, however, when church members are in need, I believe the church you belong to and pay tithing to should be there to help, and NOT tell people to go ask other church's for help. Wheres the respect for members and for other churches?

Deborah, there are some promises made by the church in order to get people to pay tithing. If tithing was purely an act of faith there would be no reason to spruik the blessings to be expected. Having said that, even if my parents were not full tithe payers, that shouldn't matter They are members of a church that sends its people to other churches to get help when they really need it. That's shameful. It's not about money. People from The Salvation Army went door to door just talking to people, asking them how they were, giving a photocopied sheet of information about how to get help, talked about PSTD. The only time the LDS church sends people door to door is when they are looking for new tithepayers.

Please, since you quite clearly believe every Mormon family I speak to are liars, and don't believe anything I say, and don't believe the church can ever do anything wrong ever, I see no reason for you to respond to anything I say. You have nothing to back up what you say. You aren't here. You just assume church is right 100% all the time since Joseph Smith. OK, we know where you stand. People with issues with the church are always at fault, are offended or aren't faithful. It's the standard spiel and we've heard it ad nauseum.

[ozpoof]

So are you from Australia or New Zealand? If it is Australia, well, I guess thanks for Mel Gibson maybe? Too bad you lose out on the Xena and Hercules stuff. Oh well.

Gibson was born in NY state. His father has the same problems with homophobia, antisemitism, racism, and misogyny.

[Deborah]

So you're telling me the Mormon families I talk to, and my parents, are all lying, and they have received help? Please. That's offensive.

I did not say they were lying. I said we don't know the whole story. Until we know the whole story you and everyone else should hold judgement. There can be other factors involved, that you and your friends no nothing about.

However, you are prepared to accept the worse about the church so you won't give the benefit of the doubt but jump on any little bit of information you have to condemn the church.

I never said church leaders are infallible. But I do know sometimes logistics and government regulation are involved that hamper help the church would send. And that is why unless you know the other side of the story you should stop your automatic condemnation.

And yes the church has been involved in efforts in Australia:

flooding

[Deborah]

there are some promises made by the church in order to get people to pay tithing.

Actually promises about tithing are from God, not the church. Here is the promise in D&C 64:23 "Behold, now it is called today until the coming of the Son of Man, and verily it is a day of sacrifice, and a day for the tithing of my people; for he that is tithed shall not be burned at his coming."

Yes, we are also promised that the windows of heaven will be opened but that doesn't necessarily mean we'll get reimbursed if something happens. Blessings come in all forms.

[thesometimesaint]

http://www.sltrib.com/faith/ci_13462585

[Calm]

http://www.sltrib.co...ith/ci_13462585

From this link:

Their instructions are clear: Find a need, get the community involved, and ensure the project can be sustained. Perhaps most important, the Mormons need to join with a local government or religious group in almost any effort.

"We'll partner with whomever it makes sense, especially different religious organizations," says Matthew Heaps, manager of the LDS clean-water initiative at church headquarters. "We love the idea of joining other faiths to combat some of these social problems."

[Sleeper Cell]

CFR your assertion that the church funnels money through other religious groups. I can't see how you can since the US church does not show its accounts. Please provide statements from church accounts that show exactly how much funds the LDS church gives to the poor and needy, as well as those impacted by disasters. It's easier to prove a positive than what you're asking me to do.

If the church gave anything to disaster relief they would be crowing about it in the Australasian liftout of the Ensign. They mentioned that some members helped clean up. That's NOT "The" Church, and under your own standards is hearsay anyway.

The LDS church has had zero presence on the ground in the area where the floods hit. I can tell you that for a fact since the area where I live was the hardest hit. The Catholics haven't either. Help came from the Salvation Army, Tzu Chi Buddhists, a Muslim charity, and a few local independent Christian Churches. Could you provide me with the evidence that the Church gave these groups funding to distribute?

Responding to my CFR with one of your own does not exempt you from answering my CFR. You have still failed to provide any evidence to support your accusation that the church provided absolutely no aid of any kind. Instead, you attempt to shift the onus to me and the church by challenging me to disprove your accusation.

In fact, by insisting that the only evidence you will accept are statements from a source that you know is not open to you or the general public (the church’s internal account books), you are essentially admitting that you really don’t know whether or not the church provided any indirect disaster aid.

In the face of your repeated refusal to answer my CFR, I am under no obligation to respond to yours, especially since yours appears to be merely a tactic to dodge my CFR. In addition, it is not a good faith CFR, since you proclaim that you will not accept any evidence unless it comes directly from confidential internal church accounting records.

Incidentally, I previously stated that had you limited your accusation to “direct aid” I would have accepted your hearsay evidence as an answer to my CFR.

Had you said that the LDS church gave not one cent directly to the victims, your response (that the church did not give any aid to the Mormons you talked to) might have some (limited) merit. In that case, I would have accepted your limited hearsay evidence as an answer to my CFR. But that is not what you said. You said that the church didn’t give any aid, whatsoever. Even if it were true that the church did not contribute one cent directly to disaster victims, you have provided absolutely no evidence that the church did not funnel contributions through other disaster relief organizations.

I did not reject your eyewitness evidence because it was hearsay. I rejected it because neither you nor your informants claim to have any knowledge about that which is disputed -- namely, what went on behind the scenes.

Once again, CFR, that the LDS Church gave not one cent to disaster relief or recovery in Australia. Alternately, please limit your accusation to “direct aid” rather than stick with your allegation that the church provided “no aid.“

It's easier to prove a positive than what you're asking me to do.

Perhaps that is a good reason to refrain from making broad accusations, unless you can prove them.

Even if the Church funneled money through these groups, they did not visit ANY of the LDS 7 families effected in my neighbourhood to see how they had come through. I can't see how you think this is OK.

Since this appears to be the first time you have alleged that the church did not visit any of the LDS families in your neighborhood, I can’t think how you can say that I think this is OK.

As a matter of fact, I do not think it is OK. I do not think that the church thinks it is OK either. I also think that disasters are times of considerable chaos, confusion, personal stress, and poor communications, and I think that even trained disaster responders make mistakes.

BTW, I also think that you know absolutely nothing about disaster management. What is even more troubling is that you seem to be unwilling to learn from those of us who do.

Bearing false witness? Calling me a liar isn't helping. Glass houses.

You have made an unsubstantiated accusation. You have refused to provide supporting evidence, nor have you modified your accusation to conform to the evidence you have presented.

[wcdrotar]

That opinion is offensive to me as well. I also hate unsubstatiated accusations, refusing to support evidence. Provide evidence (ie your interpretation of scripture verses).