Jump to content

Poll: Republicans Fine With A Mormon President- Democrats Not So Much


CQUIRK

Recommended Posts

The article is very unclear whether this is a national poll or a Utah poll. I would think that the results would be completely skewed if this is just a Utah poll since most Mormons in Utah are Republican.

Link to comment

Not surprising as it is impossible not to be conservative politically if one believes and practices LDS doctrine.

I'd say it was impossible to be a good Saint and not be a libertarian (notice: no capital "L").

Joseph Smith said, "I teach them correct principles and they govern themselves." That is the libertarian's creed: no coercion desired nor needed.

Lehi

Link to comment

Not surprising as it is impossible not to be conservative politically if one believes and practices LDS doctrine.

So in order to be a faithful LDS person, we need to vote Republican?

A faithful LDS person will believe and practice the doctrine. For example, a faithful LDS person will be opposed to Socialism which LDS doctrine is specifically against. (see D&C Institute Manual Enrichment Section L regarding the Law of Consecration). Other issues raised by LDS doctrine are war, homosexual marriage, abortion, feminism, etc. LDS doctrines on these subject match conservatism and so yes, voting preference is informed by religion and vice versa and the poll merely shows it. Conservatives today heavily favor certain parties and liberals heavily favor others. Jesus himself predicted this kind of split in Matthew 10.

Link to comment
I'd say it was impossible to be a good Saint and not be a libertarian (notice: no capital "L").

Notice that I've not mentioned any political parties whatsoever in any of my posts.

Joseph Smith said, "I teach them correct principles and they govern themselves." That is the libertarian's creed: no coercion desired nor needed.

Libertarianism (capitalized because it's the beginning of a sentence), is attractive at first glance. But looking at JS's statement one realizes that "governing themselves" does not inform us of the underlying doctrines that were taught as correct principles. So the conclusion is that, without coercion, we should be doing it properly according to the correct principles we were taught, and that means following the doctrines of the Church and using them as a model.

I certainly wouldn't go so far as a certain BoM people, who brought a certain teacher of false doctrine before their leaders and they kicked him out of the land. That would be contrary to JS's teaching. ;)

Link to comment

A faithful LDS person will believe and practice the doctrine. For example, a faithful LDS person will be opposed to Socialism which LDS doctrine is specifically against. (see D&C Institute Manual Enrichment Section L regarding the Law of Consecration). Other issues raised by LDS doctrine are war, homosexual marriage, abortion, feminism, etc. LDS doctrines on these subject match conservatism and so yes, voting preference is informed by religion and vice versa and the poll merely shows it. Conservatives today heavily favor certain parties and liberals heavily favor others. Jesus himself predicted this kind of split in Matthew 10.

People vote their values. As Mormons are predominately republican, its seems rather obvious that Republican values are more in tune with Mormon values.

However, the mistake you make is to assume that that Mormon values are derived from Mormon doctrine, rather than from Mormon culture. One can always pick and choose verses from the bible/book of Mormon to rationalize why they are liberal/conservative. Liberal verses ... love thy neighbor ... resonate with liberals. Conservative verses ... sodomy is an abomination ... resonate with conservatives.

Bear in mind that your church is led by a group of (1)wealthy, (2)white, (3)men, (4) most of whom are in their 80s. Its not surprising then considering the influence that the brethren yield that Mormon culture would be conservative. If, by contrast, Mormons were led by a charismatic 30 something leader ala Joseph Smith, Mormon culture would likely be far more liberal.

Link to comment
People vote their values. As Mormons are predominately republican, its seems rather obvious that Republican values are more in tune with Mormon values.

My point exactly.

However, the mistake you make is to assume that that Mormon values are derived from Mormon doctrine, rather than from Mormon culture.

This is not true. For example, LDS doctrine is expressly against socialism, abortion, and homosexual marriage. Those are just a few, and the most glaring, of many examples where LDS values are derived from doctrine.

One can always pick and choose verses from the bible/book of Mormon to rationalize why they are liberal/conservative.

One can. But Mormons don't have this problem because the doctrine is often spelled out in black and white.

Bear in mind that your church is led by a group of (1)wealthy, (2)white, (3)men, (4) most of whom are in their 80s. Its not surprising then considering the influence that the brethren yield that Mormon culture would be conservative. If, by contrast, Mormons were led by a charismatic 30 something leader ala Joseph Smith, Mormon culture would likely be far more liberal.

Only in the classical sense, classical liberalism being today's conservatism. From LDS doctrine in the aforementioned source for example:

“This procedure [of providing deeds] preserved in every man the right of private ownership and management of his property. Indeed, the fundamental principle of the system was the private ownership of property. Each man owned his portion, or inheritance, or stewardship, with an absolute title, which, at his option, he could alienate [transfer], keep and operate, or otherwise treat as his own. The Church did not own all of the property, and life under the united order was not, and never will be, a communal life, as the Prophet Joseph himself said.

.....................

“They had all things common.” The phrase “they had all things common” ( Acts 4:32 ; see also Acts 2:44 ; 3 Nephi 26:19 ; 4 Nephi 1:3 ) is used to characterize those who lived the law of consecration in ancient times. Some have speculated that the term common suggests a type of communalism or “Christian Communism.” This interpretation is in error. The Prophet Joseph Smith taught the true nature of having all things common: “I preached on the stand about one hour on the 2nd chapter of Acts , designing to show the folly of common stock [holding property in common]. In Nauvoo every one is steward over his own [property].” ( History of the Church, 6:37–38.)

Each stewardship is considered private property (see Reading L-4 ), and the residues and surpluses consecrated for the storehouse became the “common property of the whole church” ( D&C 82:18 ). It is referred to as the “common property” because the covenant members of the order had access to it, according to their just “wants” and “needs,” including the need to improve their stewardship (see D&C 82:17–18 ).

The word equal is frequently used in the revelations in the Doctrine and Covenants: “In . . . temporal things you shall be equal” ( D&C 70:14 ); “for if ye are not equal in earthly things ye cannot be equal in obtaining heavenly things” ( D&C 78:6 ); “appoint unto this people their portions, every man equal according to his family, according to his circumstances and his wants and needs” ( D&C 51:3 ). The Lord gave His definition of the term equal: “And you are to be equal, or in other words, you are to have equal claims on the properties, for the benefit of managing the concerns of your stewardships, every man according to his wants and his needs, inasmuch as his wants are just” ( D&C 82:17 ).

So economically, JS matches today's conservatism very well and so the Church essentially has always been conservative (or classically liberal) on this issue.

Regarding other issues, do you honestly think JS would have accepted homosexual marriage and abortion as a general method of birth control? I certainly don't.

Link to comment

BCSpace:

Tell us exactly what is the Lords position on Socialism. BTW "Am I my brothers' keeper". Further If you cut out every time the Bible talks about how to treat the poor. You have enough space for Rushs' daily hillbilly heroin drug use.

Tell us exactly how "Bomb Bomb Iran" McCain, and all except Rand Paul on the Republican presidential primary circuit, is how God sees war.

Tell us exactly what is Gods position on abortion. I doubt it is the Republican one.

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2011/12/27/395239/the-gops-10-most-extreme-attacks-on-a-womans-right-to-choose-an-abortion/

Tell us exactly what God has said about how men are supposed to treat women. Some how I doubt it was the Republican idea that women are to submit to the husbands demands..

Funny that you should mention voting with the Republicans denying voting rights across this county.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/national-affairs/ag-holder-to-gop-dont-block-the-vote-20111214

Link to comment
I’m just extremely wary of certain members of the Church who imply that in order to be a good Mormon,

What you must do is govern yourself based on the correct principles taught. Therefore, if one supports that which the Church doctrinally opposes, then how can one be a good Mormon?

we must support only Republican or extremely conservative candidates for office

What is extreme and what other type candidates are more in line with LDS doctrine and how so? I'm certainly not claiming certain candidates to be perfect, but I do claim there is a certain political philosophy that is far closer than all the rest. The way to find this out is to simply compare positions with doctrine and that is a very useful and informative exercise.

- especially in light of the Church’s repeated statements about being politically neutral.

Sure, the Church must not support any candidates or parties in particular. So? What are the correct principles and is one following them? That is the real question.

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Similar Content

    • By Anijen
      In reading some of the posts involving crimes [sexual assault], allegations, [Kavanaugh, President Russel Topic], or even controversial subjects such as Climate Change, Book of Mormon Geography, etc.. I have thought to myself there are a lot of faith based concepts juxtaposed up to scientific method and actual evidence. I'd like to discuss both and how it might affect our concept of that topic and what we take away.
      Personal belief systems can take root at a very early age, sometimes as a part of our cultural or ethnic identity. As a result, they are almost impossible to remove without eroding the soil of substance that gives one both a sense of identity and purpose. However, also true, as a consequence, most will not surrender a deeply held personal belief for fear it could lead to their spiritual loss or death. There is nothing wrong with personal beliefs. I, for one, am deeply faithful and active in church. Each person finds meaning and purpose in their own way and that is how it should be. There is a difference between faith and scientific method and reason. Personal faith is not a problem unless it gets in the way of objective forensic investigation and examination.
      For example; using faith based reasoning (let's say using the Bible to prove a point), the premise of an argument and the conclusion are a matter of personal belief and subsequently often considered above criticism. Those who question the premises of such beliefs, religious and otherwise dogmatic, are labeled heretics or worse. I have been called an apostate for not subscribing to a heartland theory, a racist for objecting to a safe-place policy, a climate denier for even questioning global warming (which I know there is climate change, my interests is, is it really all just man made?), a racist and a bigot for disagreeing about kneeling as a protest, a chauvinist pig for thinking men and woman are different and we should use the appropriate public bathrooms.  
      In faith and personal belief, there is little room for critical thinking and no place for doubt. As a consequence, the nature of faith runs contrary to knowledge building. My faith tells me men and women are both children of God and are different from each other, science also tells me there is a biological difference too. We still have debates to how we should act and even appropriate ways to speak. For example is refusing to bake a cake with a message one does not believe in compelling speech?
      Questions, questions, questions... When is testify via faith and testify via science appropriate and acceptable and when is it not?
    • By bcuzbcuz
      This evening, the returns are in. The "Sweden Democrats", Sweden's neo-nazi party, have won 13% of the federal election vote. Roughly 85% of the population have voted. The nine major parties have collected only enough votes to, almost exactly down the middle, split power between the right coalition and the left coalition.. And guess who gets to sit in the middle of the balance, the neo-nazis.
      All of you who said that socialism would lead to ruin, were right.
      Both left and right coalitions have said they'll have nothing to do with the SD's but time will tell. Me, I'm a pessimist. It can only get worse. The end of times is upon us.
    • By volgadon
      http://mormonliberals.org/marriner-eccles/
      A very good friend of mine wrote a fascinating piece on Mariner Eccles, one of the more influential Mormons in the 20th century, and sadly much-neglected now.
      The bit about Mariner and Reed Smoot during the depression is particularly revealing of the political and economic dynamics at play in the church.
    • By CQUIRK
      Here.
      IMO, these people are no better then the Westboro Baptist Church; both are vile, slanderous, and will go to the extreme to "further" their agenda.
×
×
  • Create New...