Legislating Morality

[wenglund]

wengland:

You are free to not pay your taxes, but you are not free from the consequences of not paying your taxes.

Even so, I am not sure what this has to do with my point.

And the difference between an individual giving charity to help alleviate those problems and the people collectively forming a government to help alleviate those problems is what?

Not that this matters to the point I made earlier or to the topic of this thread, but there are many differences, both from the standpoint of the giver as well as the receiver, not the least of which is the private/public and personal/impersonal distinctions, with all their ramifications, as well as deferred/assumed responsibility difference.

If you doubt this, compare how you and others tend to feel when paying taxes as opposed to how you may feel when paying tithes and offerings or when personally serving your neighbors.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[thesometimesaint]

wengland:

I feel it a pleasure and a responsibility to pay both my tithing and taxes. I get further pleasure from helping my neighbors teach their children in the schools my taxes go to build/support. Even though my kids are long grown up and have families of their own.

Edited October 14, 2012 by thesometimesaint

[wenglund]

wengland: I feel it a pleasure and a responsibility to pay both my tithing and taxes. I get further pleasure from helping my neighbors teach their children in the schools my taxes go to build/support. Even though my kids are long grown up and have families of their own.

Good for you. I am not sure how common it is for people to feel pleasure paying taxes, particularly if some of those tax dollars are going towards things one deems morally objectionable, like abortions and the like, or are spent wastefully. But to each their own.

All I know is that while I feel a responsibility to pay my taxes, I tend not to derive anything close to the kind of edification and godly progression from paying taxes as I get from personally caring for and blessing a sick friend, comforting a family member in time of grief, serving elderly parents in their times of need, or donating to and working at the food bank, or helping a neighbor clean out their basement after a flood, etc. etc. And, I believe there is good reason for this.

The same is true for those on the receiving end. To me, I tend to appreciate far more, and not take as much for granted, and be moved in godly ways by neighbors and friends who check up on and care for my aged and disable mother, and who shovel the snow from her walks, and visit her and bring smiles to her face, than I do when she receives her social security check and her medicare benefits, and this even though from a monetary standpoint, the latter may be far greater than the former.

But, again, this is somewhat beside the point I was making, and it is tangential to the topic of this thread.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Bikeemikey]

Good for you. I am not sure how common it is for people to feel pleasure paying taxes, particularly if some of those tax dollars are going towards things one deems morally objectionable, like abortions and the like, or are spent wastefully. But to each their own.

All I know is that while I feel a responsibility to pay my taxes, I tend not to derive anything close to the kind of edification and godly progression from paying taxes as I get from personally caring for and blessing a sick friend, comforting a family member in time of grief, serving elderly parents in their times of need, or donating to and working at the food bank, or helping a neighbor clean out their basement after a flood, etc. etc. And, I believe there is good reason for this.

The same is true for those on the receiving end. To me, I tend to appreciate far more, and not take as much for granted, and be moved in godly ways by neighbors and friends who check up on and care for my aged and disable mother, and who shovel the snow from her walks, and visit her and bring smiles to her face, than I do when she receives her social security check and her medicare benefits, and this even though from a monetary standpoint, the latter may be far greater than the former.

But, again, this is somewhat beside the point I was making, and it is tangential to the topic of this thread.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Read a few studies on this subject. Countries with higher taxes (and more welfare programs, govt education, public health etc) feel better about paying taxes, more trusting of their govts, and less divided as nations.

The USA consistently ranks low on trust of govt, sense of pride from tax payment, and are extremely divided as a nation (politically).

Do the reading - you will find the evidence against you on this topic.

[Calm]

Is it cause and effect or just that those who trust don't fight it or encourage the government to develop program's, etc.

[wenglund]

Read a few studies on this subject. Countries with higher taxes (and more welfare programs, govt education, public health etc) feel better about paying taxes...

CFR--not that it matters much to my earlier point or my tangential point.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[DavidB]

Well.let's get back on track.

One thought on Satans plan was that he would destroy the agency of man, whether he would force everyone to act a certain way or what have you. I heard an Apostle state that agency is the freedom to choose the right.

When we legislate morality how are we not enacting Satans plan? For example laws prohibiting prostitution?

[Walden]

CFR--not that it matters much to my earlier point or my tangential point.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Here are a few studies that might be of interest.....

http://articles.marketwatch.com/2009-05-15/commentary/30782446_1_happiness-social-services-taxes

http://www.iza.org/conference_files/SUMS2012/siegloch_s5105.pdf

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/08/progressive-tax-rates_n_953885.html

[thesometimesaint]

DavidB:

In a free society such as ours it is mostly has to do with informed consent, and the ability to make contracts. Satan wanted to destroy our Agency. We quite literally couldn't make a different decision.

If all men were angels no government would be necessary. If all men were devils no government would be possible.

[wenglund]

Here are a few studies that might be of interest.....

http://articles.mark...-services-taxes

http://www.iza.org/c...gloch_s5105.pdf

http://www.huffingto...s_n_953885.html

I appreciate you posting the links, but I don't have time or the interest to sift through all the irrelevant data looking for the stat I specifically requested. All I need is a link to, or better yet a quoted citation from, a study that says something along the lines of people who pay more taxes enjoy paying taxes more so than low tax payers and/or their enjoyment in paying taxes is as much or more than what people like me get from paying tithes and offerings.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited October 15, 2012 by wenglund

[Walden]

I appreciate you posting the links, but I don't have time or the interest to sift through all the irrelevant data looking for the stat I specifically requested. All I need is a link to, or better yet a quoted citation from, a study that says something along the lines of people who pay more taxes enjoy paying taxes more so than low tax payers and/or their enjoyment in paying taxes is as much or more than what people like me get from paying tithes and offerings.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Initially, you requested a CFR that demonstrated that "Countries with higher taxes (and more welfare programs, govt education, public health etc) feel better about paying taxes", and now you're not only asking for a CFR, but now you are asking for us to interpret the data from the CFR and present you with the conclusions for your continually shifting, narrowing premise? I call CFR abuse!

Also, I personally believe that charitable giving is no better than taxes if it is a moral obligation in one’s religion. In fact, it is worse if the consequence of refusing to be charitable is eternal damnation whereas the consequence of refusing to pay taxes is merely finite imprisonment.

[DavidB]

Wade, walden, et al;

Please take the political discussions elsewhere.

[wenglund]

Initially, you requested a CFR that demonstrated that "Countries with higher taxes (and more welfare programs, govt education, public health etc) feel better about paying taxes", and now you're not only asking for a CFR, but now you are asking for us to interpret the data from the CFR and present you with the conclusions for your continually shifting, narrowing premise? I call CFR abuse!

Very funny. LOL

Actually, while my CFR was specific to what you quoted above, the first study you posted was about general happiness (I didn't read past the first sentence). For that general study on happiness to satisfy my CFR would necessitate me interpreting the data and coming to my own conclusion, which mistakenly puts the onus on me rather than the person to whom I issued the CFR. So you got it exactly backward--speaking of abuse.

Also, my request to you (which you mis-characterized as "continually shifting, narrowing premise) took into consideration the larger context of the tangential discussion in which the CFR was issued, and had the intent of putting the CFR into proper perspective. So, I wasn't shifting the premise, but rather I was putting it back into context.

Also, I personally believe that charitable giving is no better than taxes if it is a moral obligation in one’s religion. In fact, it is worse if the consequence of refusing to be charitable is eternal damnation whereas the consequence of refusing to pay taxes is merely finite imprisonment.

That is just it. Charitable donations and service to others, at least in my religion, aren't just moral obligations. Even more so, as previously indicated, these things are the essence of pure religion, and are key elements in progressing unto Christ and a fullness of love. Doing these things for the right reasons and with the right attitude and spirit, have an edifying and developmental effect on our souls, The same is far from being true for paying taxes. Agreed?

Besides, there is more to the difference between taxes and tithes that may rightly impact one's disposition toward (or lack thereof) paying each than what I briefly mentioned, and were it not to take us further down the tangent of this thread, I would be happy to discuss them. Hopefully, though, what I have mentioned will suffice for appeasing the momentary distraction and help to get us back on topic.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited October 16, 2012 by wenglund

[thesometimesaint]

One thing is certain not paying your tithing and/or taxes can result in much less pursuit of happiness.

[wenglund]

Wade, walden, et al;

Please take the political discussions elsewhere.

It wasn't a political discussion. It was a comparative discussion of the differences in sentiments and personal growth between paying taxes and tithes. However, it was tangential to the topic of this thread, and I have thus far made repeated attempts to end the tangent, and I will respectfully and more assuredly do so now.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[DavidB]

Was thinking on this topic more.

Someone either in this thread or another mentioned no "viable option" to not paying taxes, similarly one could say there is no viable optionto not following God, if you know Gods laws; as both law and God have consequences for misdeeds.

However there is two great differences:

1. First, ignorance of the law is a defense with God (I believe in Alma one can find this) but not with man. With man everyone is presumed to know the law because the law is on file for the public to review.

2. Second, with God there is forgiveness and forgetting - without first satisfying punishment (well not personally that is); while we LDS do not subcscribe to death bed repentance, we can not deny that a life long rapscalion who, with sincere heart is baptized by proper authority, who then dies the same day, is forgiven for his life of sin. With man, there is essentially no forgiveness or forgetting - even when a defendant is pardon many times the pardon will not exempt the former defendant unless and only if the pardon was issued due to complete finding of innocence.

While man and God have a form of compulsion - punishment for misdeeds - with God there is much more than "He who breaks the must go back to the house pain."

[Bikeemikey]

Ok name one country were socialsim has worked? Ready go.

This is about the use of govt or private charities to help in discharging our moral duties regarding the least well off.

I dont think the debate should be about socialism or not socialism, it is about different ways of societies discharging a common moral obligation to look after those least well off. For some communities that is govt adminsitration, for some it is private charities. Govts adminstration tends to reduce the number of people living in poverty. That was the point of my post. Such govts. also spend a lot of money on the problem. So, while it is true that it costs more for Govt to run welfare, it also has a higher success rates in reducing the people living in poverty.

Almost all of Northern Europe has succesful highly welfare govts, as do New Zealand and Australia.

However, you don't need to look any further than China. In the last decade China has limited over 175 million people out of poverty. In the next two decades they will have lifted an estimated 500 million people out of poverty and provided education and healthcare to over 1 billion people. The middle class in China will be 1.5 times the size of the entire US population by 2035 and three times the size by 2100.

That does not mean that I agree with their govt. policies and practices, but as an instiution targeting the enhanced access of education and health, and the eradication of poverty they are exceptional.

Edited October 15, 2012 by Bikeemikey

[Bikeemikey]

Delete Double post

Edited October 15, 2012 by Bikeemikey

[Bikeemikey]

Was thinking on this topic more.

Someone either in this thread or another mentioned no "viable option" to not paying taxes, similarly one could say there is no viable optionto not following God, if you know Gods laws; as both law and God have consequences for misdeeds.

Part of the question is wheter or not Govt should allow people to follow non-viable options because they want to.

1. First, ignorance of the law is a defense with God (I believe in Alma one can find this) but not with man. With man everyone is presumed to know the law because the law is on file for the public to review.

Ignorance of the law is a defense. If you didn't know something was wrong you get a less severe punishment (it just so happens you normally have to have an issue with mental health or something to meet this requirement. That is because the laws Govt. generally administer have to do with morals considered "god given" or "natural", that is to not harm people or violate their consent.

[Walden]

That is just it. Charitable donations and service to others, at least in my religion, aren't just a moral obligations. Even more so, as previously indicated, these things are the essence of pure religion, and are key elements in progressing unto Christ and a fullness of love. Doing these things for the right reasons and with the right attitude and spirit, have an edifying and developmental effect on our souls, The same is far from being true for paying taxes. Agreed?

Well we seem to agree that "charitable donations and service" within the LDS religion are not just "moral obligations." If it was purely a "morality" concern, one could argue that there would be no need to ban members from the temple if they fail to pay their full share of tithing. Thus, tithing is more than a moral concern, it is in fact a kind of "poll tax" in which members cannot access certain privileges unless they pay their fair share.

While I agree that charitable giving and service to others are the essence of true religion, does the requirement to pay tithing in the LDS church come from a place of charity, or one of a more self-serving desire to access the temple and increase one's chances of paradisaical glory? Likewise, in my experiences in the LDS church, service was generally performed out of an obligation intrinsic to a lay ministry, and less from a genuine desire for simple charity. For if simple charity were the goal, wouldn't my hours at the local, non-LDS soup kitchen count as much as the hours that I put into the latest Elders quorum service project, or would I be frowned upon in church for not pulling my weight in the EQ? If the goal was simply charity, couldn't I just take my 10% and give it directly to charity, instead of funneling it through the church as tithing?

In the end, I don't see much difference between the OP's premise that "certain taxes or government programs are akin to satans plan because it takes away the choice of the person taxed to decide for themself to support a program that is intended to benefit the poor, widowed, etc." and the law of tithing. In either scenario, one does not have input into how the monies are spent and one can be punished for not paying their fair share.

[DavidB]

Ignorance of the law is a defense. If you didn't know something was wrong you get a less severe punishment (it just so happens you normally have to have an issue with mental health or something to meet this requirement. That is because the laws Govt. generally administer have to do with morals considered "god given" or "natural", that is to not harm people or violate their consent.

In the BoM we learn that if you do not know that something was wrong your can not be punished for doing what is otherwise wrong. This would suggest that ignorance is a complete defense rather than a mitigating factor.

However, with the laws of man, ignorance is not a defense (unless insane), ignorance of a law is not a defense, nor is ignorance a written mitigating factor. A judge or jury might (most likely illegally) take into consideration "knowledge" of the law in determining a sentence, but for all intents and purposes "ignorance" of the law is not a defense.

[Bikeemikey]

In the BoM we learn that if you do not know that something was wrong your can not be punished for doing what is otherwise wrong. This would suggest that ignorance is a complete defense rather than a mitigating factor.

However, with the laws of man, ignorance is not a defense (unless insane), ignorance of a law is not a defense, nor is ignorance a written mitigating factor. A judge or jury might (most likely illegally) take into consideration "knowledge" of the law in determining a sentence, but for all intents and purposes "ignorance" of the law is not a defense.

Based on the BOM and teachings that the light of Christ is given to everyman to know right and wrong I think you might be overplaying the relationship of ignorance and morality.

We may be ignorant of Christ specifically, based on the teachings in the BOM we can not be ignorant of the nature of right and wrong, a blessing of the light of Christ. Refer Moroni 7:16-19

So while we can have a pass based on ignorance of things like tradition etc, I think you might be over stating the case that such ignorance will be a defense for immoral conduct, or that it is even possible for one to be ignorantly immoral.

Also please CFR your original claim in this post: "In the BoM we learn that if you do not know that something was wrong your can not be punished for doing what is otherwise wrong." I have provided the reference for my position from the BOM, I think you are going to have a hard time showing that BOM references to ignorance relate to anything other than traditions inherited from ones fathers, and it is certainly not the case that such ignorance is a defense against immoral conduct.

Moroni 7: 16-19

16 For behold, the Spirit of Christ is given to every man, that he may know good from evil; wherefore, I show unto you the way to judge; for every thing which inviteth to do good, and to persuade to believe in Christ, is sent forth by the power and gift of Christ; wherefore ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of God.

17 But whatsoever thing persuadeth men to do evil, and believe not in Christ, and deny him, and serve not God, then ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of the devil; for after this manner doth the devil work, for he persuadeth no man to do good, no, not one; neither do his angels; neither do they who subject themselves unto him.

18 And now, my brethren, seeing that ye know the light by which ye may judge, which light is the light of Christ, see that ye do not judge wrongfully; for with that same judgment which ye judge ye shall also be judged.

19 Wherefore, I beseech of you, brethren, that ye should search diligently in the light of Christ that ye may know good from evil; and if ye will lay hold upon every good thing, and condemn it not, ye certainly will be a child of Christ.

[DavidB]

Alma 29:5, which puts at odd Alma and Moroni.

Edited October 15, 2012 by DavidB

[Calm]

Well.let's get back on track.

One thought on Satans plan was that he would destroy the agency of man, whether he would force everyone to act a certain way or what have you. I heard an Apostle state that agency is the freedom to choose the right.

When we legislate morality how are we not enacting Satans plan? For example laws prohibiting prostitution?

We still have the choice to obey the law or not, whether it's God's Law or man's law.

[Bikeemikey]

Alma 29:5, which puts at odd Alma and Moroni.

We obviously understand this verse very differently.

I think that this verse is saying that all men know good from evil, if they didnt they would be blameless, but as they do know they are not blameless.

Here is the breakdown as I see it:

Complete Verse:

5 Yea, and I know that good and evil have come before all men; he that knoweth not good from evil is ^ablameless; but he that^bknoweth good and evil, to him it is given according to his desires, whether he desireth good or evil, life or death, joy or remorse of ^cconscience.

Yea, and I know that good and evil have come before all men; He is saying "All men know good from evil". This is consistent with Moroni.

he that knoweth not good from evil is ^ablameless; If we don't know good from evil we are blameless, but as all "men" know good from evil this doesn't matter, the only people who are blameless before God would be Children (Mosiah 3:21 & Moroni 8:

but he that^bknoweth good and evil, to him it is given according to his desires, whether he desireth good or evil, life or death, joy or remorse of ^cconscience. We have established that all people who know good and evil and are therefore granted according to their deisres.

Here is the full Mosiah Verse:

21 And behold, when that time cometh, none shall be found^ablameless before God, except it be little children, only through repentance and faith on the name of the Lord God Omnipotent.

Here is the full Moroni verse:

Listen to the words of Christ, your Redeemer, your Lord and your God. Behold, I came into the world not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance; the ^bwhole need no physician, but they that are sick; wherefore, little ^cchildren are ^dwhole, for they are not capable of committing ^esin; wherefore the curse of ^fAdam is taken from them in me, that it hath no power over them; and the law of ^gcircumcision is done away in me.

Edited October 15, 2012 by Bikeemikey