Stone holm Posted December 17, 2014 Posted December 17, 2014 The Church has reserved the right to speak out on moral issues. And, I believe it probably has a duty to speak out on moral issues. So shouldn't we as a people have a firm grasp on what does or does not constitute a moral issue? Do we as a people have such a grasp?
JLHPROF Posted December 17, 2014 Posted December 17, 2014 The Church has reserved the right to speak out on moral issues. And, I believe it probably has a duty to speak out on moral issues. So shouldn't we as a people have a firm grasp on what does or does not constitute a moral issue? Do we as a people have such a grasp? Because to everyone not following the standard God has revealed "moral/immoral" are subjective. We as Church members can't even agree on what God has revealed to be moral.
Hamba Tuhan Posted December 17, 2014 Posted December 17, 2014 (edited) From the First Presidency: The many and varied circumstances in which our Church members live … make it inadvisable for the Church to involve itself institutionally in every local community issue. These challenges are best responded to by members as they meet their obligations as citizens—preferably in concert with other like-minded individuals. Only the First Presidency and the Twelve can declare a particular issue to be a moral issue worthy of full institutional involvement. Absent such a declaration, Church members should exercise great care and caution to distinguish between what they may do as citizens in exercising their full constitutional rights and what the Church might do as an institution. Edited December 17, 2014 by Hamba Tuhan 4
Paddy Posted December 17, 2014 Posted December 17, 2014 Moral issues have different weights. What the leaders of the church deem an important moral issue in one area of the world has little or no relevance in other areas of the world. It is difficult for the church as an international institution to speak out on moral issues sometimes.
The Nehor Posted December 17, 2014 Posted December 17, 2014 The Church has reserved the right to speak out on moral issues. And, I believe it probably has a duty to speak out on moral issues. So shouldn't we as a people have a firm grasp on what does or does not constitute a moral issue? Do we as a people have such a grasp?Why would members need to know when something falls in that area when the apostles would need to know so they can speak out as needed?
Hamba Tuhan Posted December 17, 2014 Posted December 17, 2014 (edited) Why would members need to know when something falls in that area ... ? I could be wrong, but I suspect it's so that we're prepared to whinge when the prophets don't choose to speak out in support of our pet 'moral issues' or, worse, do speak out on issues we don't deem to be 'moral' or important. Edited December 17, 2014 by Hamba Tuhan
The Nehor Posted December 17, 2014 Posted December 17, 2014 I could be wrong, but I suspect it's so that we're prepared to whinge when the prophets don't choose to speak out in support of our pet 'moral issues' or, worse, do speak out on issues we don't deem to be 'moral' or important.So it is for devil-worshipping apostates. Then I shall not participate. Carry on you unholy minions of Lucifer.
strappinglad Posted December 17, 2014 Posted December 17, 2014 (edited) Long ,long ago in a land far, far away , the Lord outlined 10 moral issues for the Israelites. 1. you shall have no god. 2. you shall make an image maker and bow your head before it whenever you walk or drive. 3. you should take the name of God in vain so often that you can reduce it to 3 letters.( 2 different ones) 4. remember to ignore the Sabbath as commerce trumps God. 5. make sure to call your parents, but only if you have something to inherit. 6. kill only if your lawyer is really good. 7. commit adultery and any other sexual activity, again only if you have a good lawyer, and a pre-nup . 8. steal , but for heaven's sake , don't use a gun. 9. lie if needed, never ever on the record. 10.coveting, where would a materialist society be without that. Any other moral issues need to be rationalized out of existence? Edited December 17, 2014 by strappinglad
thesometimesaint Posted December 17, 2014 Posted December 17, 2014 Morality is what you do when you think no one is looking. 1
Ahab Posted December 17, 2014 Posted December 17, 2014 The Church has reserved the right to speak out on moral issues. And, I believe it probably has a duty to speak out on moral issues. So shouldn't we as a people have a firm grasp on what does or does not constitute a moral issue?Should we, or shouldn't we? Hmm. That issue is what I would consider a moral issue, as is every other issue involving what we should or should not do.Do we as a people have such a grasp?Who is this "we" you speak of? Some people do, and some don't, and the ones that do are the we that do.
Stone holm Posted December 18, 2014 Author Posted December 18, 2014 Very interesting comments, what I gather from these comments is that the reservation which the Church makes is basically meaningless. It could just as easily say we reserve the right to speak out on any political issue, given the fact that nobody knows what a moral issue is. Kind of like Justice Potters famous statement regarding pornography, "I know it when I see it." So is this our approach to morality in general? If so, is it any wonder that people are taking religion less and less seriously when it comes to important questions? I assume sex is a pretty safe topic to speak out on because it doesn't cost business any money.
Hamba Tuhan Posted December 18, 2014 Posted December 18, 2014 (edited) I assume sex is a pretty safe topic to speak out on because it doesn't cost business any money. Are you seriously suggesting that sex doesn't sell??? Edited December 18, 2014 by Hamba Tuhan
Paddy Posted December 18, 2014 Posted December 18, 2014 Very interesting comments, what I gather from these comments is that the reservation which the Church makes is basically meaningless. It could just as easily say we reserve the right to speak out on any political issue, given the fact that nobody knows what a moral issue is. Kind of like Justice Potters famous statement regarding pornography, "I know it when I see it." So is this our approach to morality in general? If so, is it any wonder that people are taking religion less and less seriously when it comes to important questions? I assume sex is a pretty safe topic to speak out on because it doesn't cost business any money.What moral issues should an international church speak out on? I suspect global moral issues like war, poverty, pride, material excess? At a local level they could speak out about marriage, freedom of religion, etc? I don't think it is an issue about finding issues to speak about. It is finding ones that matter most.
Stone holm Posted December 18, 2014 Author Posted December 18, 2014 Are you seriously suggesting that sex doesn't sell??? Oh, I am almost positive that it sells, and but opposing it any anything close to it doesn't cost businesses, as a result it sells politically as well.
Stone holm Posted December 18, 2014 Author Posted December 18, 2014 What moral issues should an international church speak out on? I suspect global moral issues like war, poverty, pride, material excess? At a local level they could speak out about marriage, freedom of religion, etc? I don't think it is an issue about finding issues to speak about. It is finding ones that matter most.Am not questioning you on this, but am wondering if you could elaborate on freedom of religion as a moral issue. Do you mean religious tolerance, in other words tolerance of the religious views of others, or the lack thereof, is a moral issue?
Paddy Posted December 18, 2014 Posted December 18, 2014 (edited) Am not questioning you on this, but am wondering if you could elaborate on freedom of religion as a moral issue. Do you mean religious tolerance, in other words tolerance of the religious views of others, or the lack thereof, is a moral issue?No I meant religious freedom. Freedom and rights are, at its core, a determination based on moral judgement. I am not sure tolerence is a moral issue in and of itself. But instead a result of a moral decision. Of course I could be totally off base here. !!Quentin Cook seemed to make the same connection. https://www.lds.org/ensign/2012/09/restoring-morality-and-religious-freedom?lang=eng Edited December 18, 2014 by Paddy
stemelbow Posted December 18, 2014 Posted December 18, 2014 Morality is what you do when you think no one is looking. uh oh. That makes morality relative.
Calm Posted December 18, 2014 Posted December 18, 2014 No, he means that is when the person's real moral standards are shown. In the nonhypocrite, they would be the same as when they know someone is watching.
pogi Posted December 18, 2014 Posted December 18, 2014 (edited) Morality is what you do when you think no one is looking. Yes, it's only immoral if you get caught I know what you mean, just having fun. Edited December 18, 2014 by pogi
pogi Posted December 18, 2014 Posted December 18, 2014 (edited) uh oh. That makes morality relative. If there is an absolute and objective morality, the way that we individually perceive it is relative. Edited December 18, 2014 by pogi 1
Robert F. Smith Posted December 18, 2014 Posted December 18, 2014 Very interesting comments, what I gather from these comments is that the reservation which the Church makes is basically meaningless. It could just as easily say we reserve the right to speak out on any political issue, given the fact that nobody knows what a moral issue is. Kind of like Justice Potters famous statement regarding pornography, "I know it when I see it." So is this our approach to morality in general? If so, is it any wonder that people are taking religion less and less seriously when it comes to important questions? I assume sex is a pretty safe topic to speak out on because it doesn't cost business any money.Actually the First Presidency general statement on such issues is coherent and responsible. Most Mormons do not live in the USA, and most do not speak English as their native language. It would be silly of LDS general authorities to yap like dogs about every single issue crossing their minds. Joseph Smith said that he taught good principles to the members and let them govern themselves. That is the wisest course. 2
Stone holm Posted December 19, 2014 Author Posted December 19, 2014 If there is an absolute and objective morality, the way that we individually perceive it is relative.Could you explain that a little more. Does culture affect morality? For example pedophilia seems to have been considered acceptable among the Ancient Greeks, does that mean it was moral behavior for them. Some people believe that anything other than monogamous marriages are immoral, is that a matter of perceptions?
pogi Posted December 19, 2014 Posted December 19, 2014 (edited) Could you explain that a little more. Does culture affect morality? For example pedophilia seems to have been considered acceptable among the Ancient Greeks, does that mean it was moral behavior for them. Some people believe that anything other than monogamous marriages are immoral, is that a matter of perceptions? Our perceptions of morality, like truth, is very much effected by culture, upbringing, etc. and we therefore all have different perceptions of morality. In other words, we are all given different portions of light and will be judged according to the light we have been given and not according to the absolute and objective morality. I cannot comment on specific cases whether they knew something was moral or not and chose to act contrary to their morality. I do believe those raised in cultures where the practiced cultural morality is vastly different then the absolute and objective morality will not be held to those same standards. For example, I believe that the head hunters of Borneo will not be held to the same standard of morality that I will be - but then again, that is just my belief and I cannot pretend to know what light they had and what light they acted contrary to. The same goes for the ancient Greeks. Edited December 19, 2014 by pogi
Stone holm Posted December 20, 2014 Author Posted December 20, 2014 Our perceptions of morality, like truth, is very much effected by culture, upbringing, etc. and we therefore all have different perceptions of morality. In other words, we are all given different portions of light and will be judged according to the light we have been given and not according to the absolute and objective morality. I cannot comment on specific cases whether they knew something was moral or not and chose to act contrary to their morality. I do believe those raised in cultures where the practiced cultural morality is vastly different then the absolute and objective morality will not be held to those same standards. For example, I believe that the head hunters of Borneo will not be held to the same standard of morality that I will be - but then again, that is just my belief and I cannot pretend to know what light they had and what light they acted contrary to. The same goes for the ancient Greeks.I wonder if the Ancient Greeks and the Head hunters think the same way about us.
Hamilton Porter Posted December 20, 2014 Posted December 20, 2014 Based on empirics, a moral issue is one that directly threatens the church's freedom or interest.Ssm: threatens church's tax status if someday the church is forced to perform gay weddings.Era: threatens the church's tax status if someday the church refuses to ordain women.Immigration: threatens the church's operational privileges in Mexico if their government sees us as inimical to their goals. Immigrant bashing may also disrupt church unity.
Recommended Posts