Twelth Article Of Faith

[jaxenro]

At what point would you consider this invalid? Is it always valid to obey, honor, and sustain the law or can laws become so far outside God's law that this is no longer vaild?

 

Websters defines sustain as "to give support or relief to" in this case my understanding is we agree to give support to when we sustain a law, person in a calling, or member. What do you do when the law you promise to sustain conflicts with deeply held religious beliefs and God's law as you understand it?

Edited March 15, 2014 by jaxenro

[Bikeemikey]

At what point would you consider this invalid? Is it always valid to obey, honor, and sustain the law or can laws become so far outside God's law that this is no longer vaild?

 

Websters defines sustain as "to give support or relief to" in this case my understanding is we agree to give support to when we sustain a law, person in a calling, or member. What do you do when the law you promise to sustain conflicts with deeply held religious beliefs and God's law as you understand it?

 

Perhaps you could provide some examples to help illustrate what you are meaning.

[jaxenro]

Let's try abortion. In my lifetime over 50 million children have been murdered with assembly line precision and in some instances my tax dollars have been used to pay for it. How does one give support to laws authorizing and paying for that?

[Bikeemikey]

Let's try abortion. In my lifetime over 50 million children have been murdered with assembly line precision and in some instances my tax dollars have been used to pay for it. How does one give support to laws authorizing and paying for that?

With great difficultly.

I think you have already raised an important distinction which is something being legally permitted and something being funded by tax payers money.

On the other side your church has been advantaged by hundreds of millions of dollars in taxes that have not had to be paid because we live in societies that value religious institutions. That money can be and has been used share our religious beliefs in society.

[cinepro]

First, it's tacky to start a discussion about something without actually telling us what we're discussing.  So here's the 12th Article of Faith:

 

We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.

 

 

Let's try abortion. In my lifetime over 50 million children have been murdered with assembly line precision and in some instances my tax dollars have been used to pay for it. How does one give support to laws authorizing and paying for that?

 

It doesn't say that you have to support the law, because we are entirely justified (and encouraged from the pulpit) to take action to help shape the laws of our countries and communities.  It simply means that we are a law-abiding people.

 

In the case of abortion, there isn't a lot to discuss, because it is simply another situation where something is legal but contradictory to the tenets of the Gospel and/or church. 

[BCSpace]

At what point would you consider this invalid? Is it always valid to obey, honor, and sustain the law or can laws become so far outside God's law that this is no longer vaild?

 

I would place that point at Mosiah 29:26-27.

[Wanderer7]

My own personal opinion is that when God's law and man's law contradict, I should obey God's law. Otherwise, I am bound to keep the law--although I may protest and seek to change it if I don't like it personally. 

I base at least the first point on scriptural precedence such as Daniel and associates.

[jaxenro]

"Tacky"

 

Cute - sorry I thought that was a given everyone here would know what it was. So are all scriptural references referenced but not quoted tacky?

 

"your church has been advantaged by hundreds of millions of dollars in taxes that have not had to be paid"

 

My Church? I am not a member of any Church at present. I have been opposed to abortion on non religous grounds when I was a Deist and before

Edited March 15, 2014 by jaxenro

[thesometimesaint]

Let's try abortion. In my lifetime over 50 million children have been murdered with assembly line precision and in some instances my tax dollars have been used to pay for it. How does one give support to laws authorizing and paying for that?

 

You are mistaken. Medical abortions in the US are not murder(The willful illegal taking of a human life). If you live in the US your tax dollars have not been used in abortions, except to save the life of the mother. rape, and incest. SEE Hyde Amendment. Actually the Church does support those laws allowing for the termination of a pregnancy due to save the life, health of the mother, in cases of rape, incest, or when competent medical authorities have determined the non-viability of the baby past birth.

[sheilauk]

There is "The Law", that process by which the Government regulates its citizens and its affairs and there are laws - the individual rules and regulations. I honour "the Law" but I don't agree with all laws passed and I reserve the right to object, campaign,lobby or otherwise engage in lawful means to change them. However unless I am prepared to pay the penalty I obey them. On abortion specifically - its lawful but it doesn't mean that I have to bto have one and that I can't try to dissuade someone from having one. I wouldn't take a job that meant I had to carry out one. But I'm still obeying honouring and sustaining "The Law".

[Bikeemikey]

"Tacky"

Cute - sorry I thought that was a given everyone here would know what it was. So are all scriptural references referenced but not quoted tacky?

"your church has been advantaged by hundreds of millions of dollars in taxes that have not had to be paid"

My Church? I am not a member of any Church at present. I have been opposed to abortion on non religous grounds when I was a Deist and before

Great. Last I checked the state could not compel you to get one.

I just figured you were part of a religion. My bad.

[jaxenro]

You are mistaken. Medical abortions in the US are not murder(The willful illegal taking of a human life). If you live in the US your tax dollars have not been used in abortions, except to save the life of the mother. rape, and incest. SEE Hyde Amendment. Actually the Church does support those laws allowing for the termination of a pregnancy due to save the life, health of the mother, in cases of rape, incest, or when competent medical authorities have determined the non-viability of the baby past birth.

[jaxenro]

You are mistaken. Medical abortions in the US are not murder(The willful illegal taking of a human life). If you live in the US your tax dollars have not been used in abortions, except to save the life of the mother. rape, and incest. SEE Hyde Amendment. Actually the Church does support those laws allowing for the termination of a pregnancy due to save the life, health of the mother, in cases of rape, incest, or when competent medical authorities have determined the non-viability of the baby past birth.

Semantics. Abortion is the wil full taking of a human life in a manner I don't think the government has the right to legalize. And there is precedent legally constituted governments have legalized the taking of a human life that later governments have retroactively declared illegal.

Two points on the Hyde amendment first the government gives a decent amount to planned parenthood who is supposed to segregate that money (wink, wink) from the money they use for abortions. Money is fungible once it goes into their budget it shifts. Second the Hyde amendment only covers federal money I am aware of several girls in Massachusetts I am acquainted with that received abortions covered by free taxpayer supported state paid insurance (Mass Heslth)

[jaxenro]

Probably should have picked something besides abortion, which carries its own baggage, and gay rights, which does as well.

I will think on another example

[jaxenro]

Ok no one will go to bat defending nazi Germany ( I hope ) so does or can there come a time when a government becomes so odious that actively seeking tonL overthrow it would make sense?

[Calm]

In other words, you will keep giving more and more extreme conditions until you get the answer that you want….

[thesometimesaint]

Semantics. Abortion is the wil full taking of a human life in a manner I don't think the government has the right to legalize. And there is precedent legally constituted governments have legalized the taking of a human life that later governments have retroactively declared illegal.

Two points on the Hyde amendment first the government gives a decent amount to planned parenthood who is supposed to segregate that money (wink, wink) from the money they use for abortions. Money is fungible once it goes into their budget it shifts. Second the Hyde amendment only covers federal money I am aware of several girls in Massachusetts I am acquainted with that received abortions covered by free taxpayer supported state paid insurance (Mass Heslth)

 

It is more than just semantics. Murder will get you a long time in jail while self defense will get you praise. In the US you can't be prosecuted under such a Ex Post Facto law.

 

Money isn't as fungible as you pretend. Accurate financial statements are required by law. Further lying on financial disclosure forms can result in heavy fines, and jail time.

 

So? State money is just that. Change the laws of your state if you don't like them. But be prepared for court action if you do.

 

Again the Church allows for abortions in cases of life/health of the mother, rape, incest, or upon the medical determination of non-viability of the baby on birth.

[thesometimesaint]

Ok no one will go to bat defending nazi Germany ( I hope ) so does or can there come a time when a government becomes so odious that actively seeking tonL overthrow it would make sense?

 

Let's not get too close to a Godwin's Rule violation. I was born after the fall of NAZI Germany, and would never consider defending it. I do believe that when peaceful change is prohibited. The unpeaceful type is encouraged. But here in the US we're a long way from that.

[K-2]

D&C 98: 4-7

4 And now, verily I say unto you concerning the laws of the land, it is my will that my people should observe to do all things whatsoever I command them.

5 And that law of the land which is constitutional, supporting that principle of freedom in maintaining rights and privileges, belongs to all mankind, and is justifiable before me.

6 Therefore, I, the Lord, justify you, and your brethren of my church, in befriending that law which is the constitutional law of the land;

7 And as pertaining to law of man, whatsoever is more or less than this, cometh of evil.