I wasn't even trying to answer the question, I quoted you to grab your attention. And speaking of apostates of the highest order, that includes those who teach their own philosophy and claim it as LDS Doctrine; nothing worse than usurping the position of Prophet or even God in order to claim your own personal philosophy is LDS Doctrine. are sure you are not a closet apostate; and as I recall in a bishopric too - theres an apostate of the highest order, one who using his calling to promote his own philosophy as LDS Doctrine.
Here's the problem. Although the church claims and declares that it contains the fullness of the gospel, it does not have a monopoly on truth, and, indeed, has always taught precisely the opposite.
All truth is one; light cleaves unto light, intelligence to intelligence, and wisdom to wisdom, and so on. There is gospel truth scattered and diffused throughout the world among various peoples and the plethora of beliefs that exist among them, religious, metaphysical, philosophical, and political. Politics and the elements of political philosophy, being central to the human condition and key in determining the kind of society we will live in and the boundaries/conditions it will impose upon our individual potential and progression, must, by definition be, like all other systems of belief and philosophy, composed of beliefs, values, perspectives, and fundamental principles that, when compared and contrasted to the principles of the gospel (which is the frame of reference with respect to which all human systems of belief are inspected, scrutinized, and judged as to the truth they do or do not contain) are either found to be congenial, to one degree or another, or incompatible, all the way to the degree of being aggressively hostile.
The gospel then, is the frame of reference, or template predicated upon which all other truth claims, or assertions regarding various states of affairs in the world are analyzed as to their value and legitimacy. The gospel and its teachings are the means by which we take our bearings on all other claims, propositions, and statements asserting that some state of affairs is the case.
Why it should be thought odd then, that some political philosophies will be found to contain greater or lesser degrees of truth, and that some will be found to contain nary a single grain of truth, while other composite/hybrid forms may synthesize and expound a great deal - while yet remaining deeply imperfect (being human creations, after all), is itself a pertinent question.
Fears by the tiny minority of LDS who continue to cling to leftist beliefs that the substantial majority are clinging to conservative political beliefs is, I think, a displaced anxiety over, not so much that the church is somehow becoming, in some sense, an extension of the Republican party, but over their overt minority position within the church and LDS culture and the clear consensus leanings among most faithful LDS toward conservative/libertarian political philosophy and away from the Left. The real gnawing suspicion here is, I think, that the vast majority of faithful LDS lean toward conservative/libertarian politics for a very consistent, fundamental reason, and that that reason is intrinsic to the gospel itself, and not a quirk of sociocultural history.
The very fact that Harry Ried can make a statement such as "I am a Democrat because I am a Mormon" is interesting precisely because, if it is true, then the opposite statement cannot be true. Reid, years ago, stated in an indirect manner nothing at all different than what bc has claimed for years when he has asserted that one cannot be a good Mormon and a good Democrat where "good" indicates a conscious, knowledgeable acceptance of the Democratic party's core beliefs, values, and policies.
Given the sharp and volatile differences between the Left and the Right philosophically, if one is a Democrat
because one is a Mormon (i.e., LDS doctrines and philosophy
presuppose Democratic party political views), then one cannot be a Republican, conservative, or libertarian, and at the same time be a good Mormon, because conservative philosophy must presuppose incompatibility with Church teachings.
For some odd reason (which we could develop and discuss), Reid can get away with making such a statement, while Ezra Benson, Glen Beck et al, or bc, Loran, or other posters at the MADboards must carefully tip toe across the tulips of the fragile sensitivities of liberal/leftist posters and mods who are not willing to entertain the very same claim being made, by a conservative/libertarian poster, only in more direct language.