Should Latter-day Saints be Concerned about "Christian Nationalism?"

[jkwilliams]

31 minutes ago, smac97 said:

No.  Somethings are not voluntary in any meaningful sense of the word.

And not everything that is voluntary is of equal measure.

So charitable donation (defined as "a gift of cash or property made to a nonprofit organization to help it accomplish its goals, for which the donor receives nothing of value in return") is not a charitable donation if the donor thinks it will help him after he dies.  That makes the donation "tainted."

This just doesn't work.  Second-guessing by mindreading and imputing improper motives does not convert a charitable donation into something else.

That is my point.  Paying tithing is a matter of conscience, not compulsion.

Again, that is my point.  The Church does not, and cannot, in any meaningful or reasonable sense, "compel" anyone to pay tithing.

In contrast, the government can compel you to pay taxes.

Special pleading.

Yes, plenty of people feel obligated to donate to charity.  That sense of obligation does not equate to "compulsion."

Obviously.

But that's not what you said.  

And what you said was also factually correct.  Per the articles I cited, Latter-day Saints are more charitable than Americans on average, by a substantial measure, both as to money and time donated.

I get it.  You disparage tithing.  It doesn't count.  It's "less."  Because the Latter-day Saints are in your crosshairs.

Meanwhile, I suspect you don't go around second-guessing and disparaging others who donate to charitable causes they deem worthwhile.

The whiff of a double standard is coming off pretty strongly.

No.  

Antipathy trumps data, then.

Got it.

A reasonable point.  You were giving a lot to charitable causes.  But I suspect you didn't have an antagonistic gainsayer disparaging your efforts by claiming they didn't count, that they were "taint{ed}," that they were "less" because the Church was involved.

I was thinking the same thing.  Our critics are never going to be satisfied.  They will always be able to find fault.  To move the goalposts.

Antipathy and ridicule trump data.

Got it.

Thanks,

-Smac

Teancum is one of the kindest, gentlest people I know. The man does not have a mean-spirited bone in his body. There’s no need to demonize him like this.

[Calm]

Short version below if you want to skip…

I used to be roommother, help teachers in class, volunteer in the school library, and tutor kids most afternoons while my kids were in elementary.  Much more fun than staying at home twiddling my thumbs (I did my reading at night when I couldn’t sleep and did minimal cooking because my kids had a very limited diet (and their dad would just cook them Mac and Cheese or hot dogs if they refused to eat, so it was hopeless trying to expand the menu).  I was a very efficient cleaner in younger days, still am when I can actually move, lol. It is all in being organized and having a routine so you don’t have to think, just do.  Lots of free time once kids were in school. No way was I going to watch soaps or game shows. For my son in high school, I helped out twice a year all day for a week for textbooks return and checkout.  Felt great to help out and the teachers were so appreciative.  And kids are just fun.  Why I always volunteered for Primary until I couldn’t guarantee being there most of the time.

Most member moms I knew were highly involved at school unless they had a baby or two and even then, some managed it.  My daughter-in-law has been doing the same thing at her kids’ schools, so much around that they went ahead and hired her as teachers’ aid.  Tons of moms do that or help out with kids’ after school recreation programs, drama and music productions, etc.  A lot of Latter-day Saint women have backgrounds in teaching, so it is natural for them to volunteer at schools.  

My son is into tech and would do the filming of recitals and karate exhibitions and getting copies to all the parents and grandparents. Lots of dads go that route in my experience. Not as much time required, but there when needed most.  Others coach or help the coach.

Granted their kids are involved, so it may be partially self serving, but it wouldn’t be happening for any of the kids at all without those parents who volunteer. 

Then there are the moves the men help with (women do too as well as help clean houses and cook food quite a bit, just thinking where men might put in a number of hours consistently).  We lived in wards with lots of students and teachers, lots of turnover, so lots of opportunities to volunteer.  I highly doubt though the men who are more likely to have full time jobs would be able to put those kinds of hours in as reported in the survey, but women who are stay at home moms or part timers, just might be able to enough to drive up the numbers big time. 

I wonder if scouting volunteering counted as ward or community.  If community (since it would be counted as community for others), that could drive up hours for den mothers and scout masters and their assistants….but we would tend to think of that as volunteering for the ward, so might not think to add that.

I wonder if it includes service missionaries that are working in non church venues. I had a friend who was a nurse who did a medical service mission.  Plus how many hours of service do missionaries usually put in?  Missionaries help us put siding on our house and build our carport in Canada, iirc. They put the roof on our neighbor’s who saw them helping us (wasn’t a member).  They spent quite a bit of their time doing stuff like that. If it wasn’t the missionaries for the carport, it was the Elders Quorum. 

Missionaries would help with reading at schools my kids went to (some discontinued that when background checks were required).  Lots of teaching English classes. 

I volunteered with the family history center when living in Kansas 3 hrs every Wednesday evening. Since the vast majority of patrons weren’t members and helpers weren’t either, if asked, I might have said I was volunteering outside my ward because it sure felt that way. I never saw ward members in there.  They probably did their stuff on Sunday in family history classes or maybe they came during the day.  Because it was Church property, a member had to be ‘boss’. I knew the basics having taken a class at BYU and heard they were having to limit hours because they couldn’t cover every weeknight (except Monday of course), so I volunteered to be the one with the keys. Two much older rather Southern women worked with me, Evangelicals and I could tell they thought we were out there for thinking we could baptize and seal the dead, but they didn’t care as long as we were shelling out the money to get those records on microfilm/fiche (late 1980’s, just before everything went computer) and providing the machines to access the records free of charge.  It was weird me being the one in charge when they had been doing the work for decades and they were 20-30 years older than me. 

Edited August 4, 2022 by Calm

[smac97]

22 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

Teancum is one of the kindest, gentlest people I know. The man does not have a mean-spirited bone in his body. There’s no need to demonize him like this.

I am not demonizing him.  I am critiquing his arguments, evidence and reasoning.

Meanwhile, he is publicly disparaging the charitable contributions of some of the most charitable people in the world.  Pushing back on his unmerited and unfair disparagements is a pretty minor thing.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Teancum]

1 hour ago, smac97 said:

Antipathy and ridicule trump data.

if the shoe fits.....

[Calm]

Sorry, Chum, for the long post…waiting for meds to kick in and got lost in memory lane.

Short version…some stay at home moms may have more discretionary time once kids are school age (if they have husbands who help lots like I did) and why not devote to good causes rather than getting obsessive about the house.   Also, I have noticed moms tend to be highly involved in their kids’ extracurricular activities rather than just dropping off and picking up.  Runs the volunteer hours up. 

Edited August 4, 2022 by Calm

[SeekingUnderstanding]

10 minutes ago, Calm said:

Sorry, Chum, for the long post…waiting for meds to kick in and got lost in memory lane.

Short version…some stay at home moms may have more discretionary time once kids are school age (if they have husbands who help lots like I did) and why not devote to good causes rather than getting obsessive about the house.   Also, I have noticed moms tend to be highly involved in their kids’ extracurricular activities rather than just dropping off and picking up.  Runs the volunteer hours up. 

It would be interesting to do the comparison after controlling for whether one has kids at home (volunteering for them at school) as well as employment status (part time full time and stay at home). 

[Teancum]

15 hours ago, smac97 said:

 

So charitable donation (defined as "a gift of cash or property made to a nonprofit organization to help it accomplish its goals, for which the donor receives nothing of value in return")

I like think this is a better definition:

Definition of charity

 

1a: generosity and helpfulness especially toward the needy or sufferingalso : aid given to those in needreceived charity from the neighbors

b: an institution engaged in relief of the poorraised funds for several charities

c: public provision for the relief of the needytoo proud to accept charity

2: benevolent goodwill toward or love of humanityThe holidays are a time for charity and goodwill.

3a: a gift for public benevolent purposes

b: an institution (such as a hospital) founded by such a gift

4: lenient judgment of others

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/charity

15 hours ago, smac97 said:

 

 

is not a charitable donation if the donor thinks it will help him after he dies.  That makes the donation "tainted."

To give with the idea of a reward certainly taints it as charity and as an altruistic motive so yes. I would say it is tainted if that is the word you want to use.

15 hours ago, smac97 said:

This just doesn't work.  Second-guessing by mindreading and imputing improper motives does not convert a charitable donation into something else.

I am not mind reading at all.  It is clear that any active believing Latter day Saint there is a lot of pressure to tithe.  There are talks about it all the time.  There is the annual tithing settlement meeting.  If you want a temple recommend every two years you are asked by two authorities whether or not you tithe.  You can pout and poster all you want about how awful I am for impugning the motives of those who tithe as not as charitable as other less compelled contributions. But it seems pretty obvious to me that tithing is not as charitable as say donating generously to fast offering or the LDS humanitarian aid fund.

15 hours ago, smac97 said:

That is my point.  Paying tithing is a matter of conscience, not compulsion.

Well nobody is going to toss you into jail for not tithing.  But you are not a member in as good of standing as someone who tithes.  You cannot have a temple recommend.  You may not receive certain callings.  You may not advance in the priesthood.  These are all elements of compulsion in the LDS community.

15 hours ago, smac97 said:

Again, that is my point.  The Church does not, and cannot, in any meaningful or reasonable sense, "compel" anyone to pay tithing.

I do not agree.  See above.

15 hours ago, smac97 said:

In contrast, the government can compel you to pay taxes.

Of course. I did not say it was exactly the same.

15 hours ago, smac97 said:

Special pleading.

It was a good example.

15 hours ago, smac97 said:

Yes, plenty of people feel obligated to donate to charity.  That sense of obligation does not equate to "compulsion."

I don't jeopardize my standing in my community if I do not donate to Habitat for Humanity.  I can still attend the best Habitat events even if I do not donate.  Not su for a non tithe payer and the temple.

15 hours ago, smac97 said:

Obviously.

But that's not what you said.  

And what you said was also factually correct.  Per the articles I cited, Latter-day Saints are more charitable than Americans on average, by a substantial measure, both as to money and time donated.

I dispute the time outside of the church.  It does appear that Latter-day Saints do give a bit more $$ outside the church than the average American.

15 hours ago, smac97 said:

I get it.  You disparage tithing.  It doesn't count.  It's "less." 

Disparage?  Oh please.  Try to avoid the drama.

15 hours ago, smac97 said:

 

Because the Latter-day Saints are in your crosshairs.

More drama. 

 

15 hours ago, smac97 said:

Meanwhile, I suspect you don't go around second-guessing and disparaging others who donate to charitable causes they deem worthwhile.

The whiff of a double standard is coming off pretty strongly.

Of course not. Though I do wonder about some of my well to do clients who don't give much.  That bothers me a bit.  

But this is an LDS board. We talk about LDS things. So stop whining about this.  Latter-day Saints are not in my crosshairs.  How silly and over the top indignant you can get is rather entertaining. If a Latter-ay Saint wants to tithe and give all their donations to the Church good for them.  But tithing in particular is IMO less charitable for the reasons I have outlined already.

 

15 hours ago, smac97 said:

 

A reasonable point.  You were giving a lot to charitable causes.  But I suspect you didn't have an antagonistic gainsayer disparaging your efforts by claiming they didn't count, that they were "taint{ed}," that they were "less" because the Church was involved.

Did I have someone scrutinizing my LDS donations?  Nope.  By the way your hyproble is now becoming ludicrous. 

15 hours ago, smac97 said:

I was thinking the same thing.  Our critics are never going to be satisfied.  They will always be able to find fault.  To move the goalposts.

Antipathy and ridicule trump data.

Got it.

Thanks,

-Smac

And you as the apologist seem rarely able to concede any ground at all. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.  John Huntsman had not problem seeing his tithing as similar to club dues.  Is he an antagonistic disparaging gainsayer?

[jkwilliams]

8 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Is he an antagonistic disparaging gainsayer?

I kind of like that new label and might adopt it myself. You and me, my friend, fellow ADGs. 

[Hamba Tuhan]

10 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

I kind of like that new label and might adopt it myself.

I think it sounds a bit better if rearranged slightly: disparaging antagonistic gainsayer.

[jkwilliams]

1 minute ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I think it sounds a bit better if rearranged slightly: disparaging antagonistic gainsayer.

I've always liked "evil apostate."

[Teancum]

14 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

I kind of like that new label and might adopt it myself. You and me, my friend, fellow ADGs. 

We can start a club!

[jkwilliams]

1 minute ago, Teancum said:

We can start a club!

The Goal Post Movers' Club!

[rodheadlee]

On 8/2/2022 at 10:48 AM, jkwilliams said:

We're not talking about relaxing, opining, etc. We're talking about a school employee, in school uniform, at a school event, on school property, leading children in his charge in an activity (it could have just as easily been a postgame rally and fundraiser for the Democratic National Committee). I can't think of a definition by which that is "private" behavior. So, I will simply conclude you and I do not agree and will not agree. There must be restrictions on behavior of school leaders in their official capacities, and this is just a small step toward a further erosion of this principle.

I know, people are going to say I'm anti-religion, which is nonsense. I've never been in favor of school prayer or school-sanctioned religious activity. As I said, I suppose it comes from growing up LDS in a largely Jewish town, but even if that hadn't been the case, I believe in the long-held principle of separation of church and state, which doesn't just derive from a "stinking letter."

I know I'm late to the party. But was anyone forced to participate?

[SeekingUnderstanding]

Just now, rodheadlee said:

I know I'm late to the party. But was anyone forced to participate?

At gunpoint? To try and get more playing time? What metric are you using?

[rodheadlee]

25 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

At gunpoint? To try and get more playing time? What metric are you using?

Was the prayer session voluntary or not?

[CA Steve]

1 hour ago, rodheadlee said:

Was the prayer session voluntary or not?

For years I coached my son's parks and rec basketball teams. Two of my boys were interested in playing at the HS level. When we attended the sign up meeting for the BB team the coach explained how his program which was woefully underfunded. It was and he was way under paid but that meant a lot of fundraising events which required volunteers, events which meant a lot of volunteer time spent by the parents involved. Besides the very talented kids, the other kids who made the team were the ones whose parents "volunteered".

[rodheadlee]

35 minutes ago, CA Steve said:

For years I coached my son's parks and rec basketball teams. Two of my boys were interested in playing at the HS level. When we attended the sign up meeting for the BB team the coach explained how his program which was woefully underfunded. It was and he was way under paid but that meant a lot of fundraising events which required volunteers, events which meant a lot of volunteer time spent by the parents involved. Besides the very talented kids, the other kids who made the team were the ones whose parents "volunteered".

So you're saying that the kids that prayed wouldn't be allowed on the team if they didn't pray? Is that what you're trying to say?

[The Nehor]

6 minutes ago, rodheadlee said:

So you're saying that the kids that prayed wouldn't be allowed on the team if they didn't pray? Is that what you're trying to say?

More likely they would be socially excluded by other players for being different and team cohesion suffers and they are cut from the team for that reason. Even just the social exclusion has a a coercive effect.

[rodheadlee]

21 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

More likely they would be socially excluded by other players for being different and team cohesion suffers and they are cut from the team for that reason. Even just the social exclusion has a a coercive effect.

Yeah I guess that could be true. My brother got denied a business permit because he didn't have a TR.

I hated high school because I was socially ostracized and it had nothing to do with religion.

Edited August 6, 2022 by rodheadlee

[pogi]

5 minutes ago, theguy said:

Latter-Day Saints should be LEADING THE WAY in christian nationalism! How else would we vanquish the anti-christ???

The anti-Christ being…???

Christian nationalism is contrary to the restored gospel of Jesus Christ and the principles of our great nation.  

What do you think of the talks in conference condemning all things nationalism?

[webbles]

1 minute ago, theguy said:

Church leaders are playing politics. Same way that the church could not have survived external pressure if they had stayed polygamous.

However, the will of the Almighty Lord is always the same. The anti-christ is the jewish race and all true white Israelites are going to band together again under the banner of Jesus Christ.

Where does it say that the anti-christ is the jewish race?  Also, what the heck is a "true white Israelite"?

[pogi]

19 minutes ago, theguy said:

Church leaders are playing politics. Same way that the church could not have survived external pressure if they had stayed polygamous.

However, the will of the Almighty Lord is always the same. The anti-christ is the jewish race and all true white Israelites are going to band together again under the banner of Jesus Christ.

Thank you for demonstrating to those who may be on the fence exactly who Christian nationalists are. 🤢🤮

Edited August 8, 2022 by pogi

[pogi]

Wow, you go out with a bang. 

Edited August 8, 2022 by pogi

[Hamba Tuhan]

I've reported the troll. I'm assuming a few others have as well.

[webbles]

31 minutes ago, theguy said:

The ancient Israelites were white.

But what does that mean?  What does "white" mean?  Are we talking about just skin color?  Because if so, no one is white except albinos.  If we are talking about ancestry, then no one is pure "white" (which ever ancestry is supposedly "white") because of all of the intermarriages that have happened throughout the years of Earth's existence.

And all the other stuff you quoted doesn't give any credence to the idea that the jews are the anti-christ.  You need better sources before going around saying things like that.