Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

If Mitt Romney Nominated, Then What For The Church And Members?

treehugger

By treehugger
in Miscellaneous

Recommended Posts

cdowis Grand Master

cdowis

Posted
Posted

Actually, it is exactly the same principle, in DH's example of coffee drinking. Why do you believe it's different? Do you believe that the United States should make it's laws based on LDS doctrine?

If you think SS marriage is in the same category ("exactly the same principle") as drinking coffee, we have no common ground for discussion. We live on very different planets, and communication is garbled if not impossible.

But I will make an attempt but I have no interest in discussing this with you ==>

I believe that certain laws controlling morality have a profound effect on the overall public good, that they are necessary. For example, prostitution.

Darren10 Grand Master

Darren10

Posted
Posted

Actually, it is exactly the same principle, in DH's example of coffee drinking. Why do you believe it's different? Do you believe that the United States should make it's laws based on LDS doctrine?

If I can jump in on this question for a bit. I think that the United States should base its laws on good, solid morality. Making laws, by its nature, means that certain moralities are considered and enforced upon the public. There is no better morality taught than that in the Judeo-Christian theology. We are very blessed as a nation to have had a Judeo-Christian foundation. Without which you and I would not have nearly as much freedom as we do right now and as we traditionally have had. The first colonies to have been successful which became part of the United States were not colonies established to gain the world's riches. All these colonies utterly failed in what is today the United States. The first American (United States) colonies established which succeeded were religious colonies. Namely, colonies set up with the idea of being free to worship. What a deeply blessed foundation to have. Not only is religious freedom perhaps the most pivotal freedom Americans enjoy today but more than any other group in world's history, Christians have shown the most perfect knowledge as to where freedom comes from. And that is God. It is god's will that man be free to choose how to best serve Him and all other freedoms hinge on that one blessing of religious liberty.

LDS morality stands side by side with the traditional Christian positions of morality. LDS standards are very high as it should since God's standards are very high. But, like freedom of religion, man should be free to choose the laws which govern its society. Banning coffee on a national level will perhaps never happen. Prohibition came and went after the people chose against it. As far as I'm concerned, it's a done deal. Would society be better off not drinking? Absolutely. Same goes for smoking. But, like alcohol, the people have chosen to keep tobacco legal and so it is with its legal regulations. As far as I'm concerned, you can take any LDS dcotrine and make it law so laong as it has the support of the people. And if they don't, then so be it. The people have spoken.

Libs Mentor

Libs

Posted
Posted

If you think SS marriage is in the same category ("exactly the same principle") as drinking coffee, we have no common ground for discussion. We live on very different planets, and communication is garbled if not impossible.

I don't believe it is in the same category, no, but it does involve the same basic principle...which is, at it's very base...man's agency.

But I will make an attempt but I have no interest in discussing this with you ==>

I'm sorry to hear that. I mean no offense...but, I do have some very strong opinions on this subject (as you seem to have, as well). I respect your right to your opinion, even though I may disagree with it.

I believe that certain laws controlling morality have a profound effect on the overall public good, that they are necessary. For example, prostitution.

Yes, I understand. A lot of people feel that way about moral issues...although, I think, in the last thirty-forty years, we have moved away from that to a large extent. Since many morality issues vary and are, in large part, a matter of opinion, I think it is better that we leave those decisions to individuals and their own conscience.

Libs Mentor

Libs

Posted
Posted
As far as I'm concerned, you can take any LDS dcotrine and make it law so laong as it has the support of the people. And if they don't, then so be it. The people have spoken.

To some degree, this is true, unless it becomes a matter of constitutional rights, then the courts would step in (and they have done this numerous times). But, it's a good thing, in that our rights and liberty are protected, even if we are in the minority.

Our laws should be based on the constitution, IMO, giving people as much freedom to choose, as we (practically) can.

Calm Grand Master

Calm

Posted
Posted

Now a question for you == prostitution, should it be illegal? Give it careful thought before answering. You don't want to contradict yourself.

You don't think there is something significantly different in receiving and paying money for sex and just participating in it because one desires it?
Bob Crockett Grand Master

Bob Crockett

Posted
Posted

Do you honestly expect me to believe you didn't know Democrats in general (not necessarily every individual Democrat, but Dems in general) have supported SSM for years? That Democrats support SSM is old news. That Harry Reid supports it is new news, but that isn't what the post was saying.

This is quite untrue. Nowhere did it appear in the party's plank in the past.

Hillary went on record in her quest for the primary against it.

Obama went on record in his first campaign against it.

Bill signed the DOMA. I don't have the vote counts but Wiki said it passed both houses with large majorities.

Before about three years ago, there may have been a few scattered Dems but very few.

Having said that, there are plenty of Republicans who have seem to support SSM, at least those who claim to be libertarians.

From today's perspective, the issue divides the parties. I'm sure that if you asked this question in the mid 90s when DOMA was passed, more Dems would have opposed DOMA than Republicans. But to actually claim the issue is a recent innovation.

cdowis Grand Master

cdowis

Posted
Posted

You don't think there is something significantly different in receiving and paying money for sex and just participating in it because one desires it?

Of course..... and.....?

Why should payment make it illegal anymore than purchasing a pack of gum or a car wash. We can require that they have a business license , if payment for services is the issue.

The issue is the protection of the institution of marriage and public morality. But, as I said, we have no common ground for discussion. We reside on different planets.

  • 2 years later...
Nofear Grand Master

Nofear

Posted
Posted

Holy thread resurrection!

 

That said, I'd probably vote for Romney again. The political divide is ornery and while I may not agree with all his policies his governance of a very blue state shows at least some willingness to "get along".

Calm Grand Master

Calm

Posted
Posted

IIRC, threads used to be locked automatically at 6 months….I liked that.

 

Too often people respond to posters who haven't been around for quite sometime…unlikely to get much of a response.  Plus one has to go reread the thread in order to remember what was being talked about.

 

Once is usually enough for a thread, imo.

Kenngo1969 Grand Master

Kenngo1969

Posted
Posted

Holy thread resurrection!

 

That's, "Holy thread resurrection, Batman!" to you, Robin. :D

BCSpace Grand Master

BCSpace

Posted
Posted

I agree with the message attributed Elder Bednar, as I see it, he is urging the members of the Church to attain strong testimonies. I have often felt that there will come a time when all we can have to confirm the correctness of our positions (regardless of the forum) is a testimony of Gospel.

On a different note, provided the statements from Elder Bednar to Sister Romney and at Dixie College are generally accurate, should Romney step down to spare the Church and those who cannot weather the storm?

 

Nothing untoward happened to the Church when he was the GOP nominee in 2012. On a different note, yes, yes indeed has the correctness of all my positions been confirmed.

 

8)

 

The Nehor Grand Master

The Nehor

Posted
Posted

IIRC, threads used to be locked automatically at 6 months….I liked that.

 

Too often people respond to posters who haven't been around for quite sometime…unlikely to get much of a response.  Plus one has to go reread the thread in order to remember what was being talked about.

 

Once is usually enough for a thread, imo.

Plus I am running out of thread necromancy images.

Stargazer Grand Master

Stargazer

Posted
Posted

If he is nominated then the voters will have to decide if they want to vote for him.

Hmmm. It does seem that simple, doesn't it?

Calm Grand Master

Calm

Posted
Posted

Plus I am running out of thread necromancy images.

Yes,that makes it complicated. It would be counterintuitive, hypocritical even to resurrect an image while condemning a thread resurrection.

Kenngo1969 Grand Master

Kenngo1969

Posted
Posted

What?  This isn't a thread about baptism for the dead? :huh:  Oh.  Sorry. :unknw:

Archived

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

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...