Right-Wing Politics and the "Good" Mormon

[_subgenius]

Which would make it untenable for Mormons to vote for a proven liar?
Romney's screwed if the members decide you are right.

actually, any politician would be screwed, and no Mormon would go to the polls at all....but perhaps you remember the name of a politician who can not be proven a liar.

proven a liar what a goof of a statement...your obsessions are almost a psychosis

[_subgenius]

Which side of the political fence was God on during World War Two?
Churchill or Hitler

exactly what was the "political" issue that had a fence running through it?

(and obviously God was on the side of Churchill, for He allied him with the Americans)

Which side of the political fence was God on during the Vietnam conflict?
North Vietnam or South Vietnam

it seems that God was with the French, as He prompted them to leave.

[_subgenius]

Which side of the political fence was God on during World War Two?
Churchill or Hitler

Which side of the political fence was God on during the Vietnam conflict?
North Vietnam or South Vietnam

though arguably, one could simply say that God was on the side of those who survived.

[_Drifting]

Which would make it untenable for Mormons to vote for a proven liar?
Romney's screwed if the members decide you are right.

actually, any politician would be screwed, and no Mormon would go to the polls at all....but perhaps you remember the name of a politician who can not be proven a liar.

proven a liar what a goof of a statement...your obsessions are almost a psychosis

I notice that when you lack substance you start being rude.
I don't know if that's a reflex or a conscious decision, but either way is definitely a 'tell'.

[_subgenius]

I notice that when you lack substance you start being rude.
I don't know if that's a reflex or a conscious decision, but either way is definitely a 'tell'.

[_bcspace]

My question is this: In what way does right-wing politics go hand-in-hand with being a good Mormon?

Conservatism encourages neutral conditions under which an individual is tested and can freely decide between enticements as well as be responsible for his actions. This compares well with 2 Nephi 2. Also, there is nothing in conservatism that conflicts with LDS doctrine whereas virtually everything in liberalism is in conflict with LDS doctrine.

[_moksha]

Conservatism encourages neutral conditions under which an individual is tested and can freely decide between enticements as well as be responsible for his actions.

Living without restrictions would tend to widen the range of human behavior when humans are actively allowed to engage in a social and economic dog eat dog struggle, thereby showing their capacity for villainy and heroics, but does the Church actually say that permitting this villainy to occur is a good thing?

... nothing in conservatism that conflicts with LDS doctrine whereas virtually everything in liberalism is in conflict with LDS doctrine.

Not sure I buy this thinking. Can you cite doctrine that condemns those who help the poor and downtrodden? Doctrine that says uncontrolled greed and inequity is a good thing? It has always seemed to me that the deepest reasons for conservatism such as the philosophical justification for greed or discrimination are either amoral or antithetical to Christianity, of which Mormonism is a definite subset.

Even the newly latched onto Conservative morality issue of abortion is something the LDS Church views as being on a case by case basis with existing circumstances being the deciding factor.

[_kjones]

My question is this: In what way does right-wing politics go hand-in-hand with being a good Mormon?

Conservatism encourages neutral conditions under which an individual is tested and can freely decide between enticements as well as be responsible for his actions. This compares well with 2 Nephi 2. Also, there is nothing in conservatism that conflicts with LDS doctrine whereas virtually everything in liberalism is in conflict with LDS doctrine.

Amazing!-- I mean it's amazing that there are really LDS who think that, although I think they could only be American LDS (my wife is French, very devout, active, and she votes Democrat, all of the time, every since she came here). Politics is not really my game, and since the end of Bush/Cheney I have made a conscious effort to become even less political than I was. Of course I still vote, try to follow the issues.... I am a Utah registered Democrat, although if I lived in CA again I would probably register Republican. I agree with Hugh Nibley who said that the Republican and Democratic parties are not two different roads (i.e., one leading to heaven and the other hell) but two different forks in the same road (not a verbatim quote but this is the sense of what he said). You could say the same thing about conservatism vs. liberalism. I identify in Utah as a Democrat because I find Utah County Republican ideals...how should I put it...distasteful, and sometimes even offensive to my LDS ideals, ideals informed through the scriptures and a lifetime of church activity. It is true that I also find Washington DC beltway Democratic ideals sometimes distasteful and offensive as well...but generally slightly less offensive than Utah County Republican ideals. And for this reason and none other I identify as a Utah Democrat. But I would never suggest that one cannot be a good and faithful Mormon and at the same time a Republican. What I mean is that I could just as easily turn the above quote on its head and say that "virtually everything in conservatism is in conflict with LDS doctrine"...but of course that would be ridiculous.

Note: Interesting that Joseph Smith was nothing if not a liberal revolutionary who threatened everything the conservative and "moral majority" of his day held sacred, and I suspect that one day not too far off another Joseph Smith will come along, and in that day he will be just as offensive and just as threatening to the "righteous" conservatives as he will to the "wicked" liberals. Both parties are man made constructs, and both are offensive to God, both far far away from ideal of Zion, the United Order Joseph Smith and later BY tried to institute among the saints and failed.

[_bcspace]

Just because there are Mormons who vote Democrat doesn't make it right. It really boils down to two things for Mormon Democrats. Either:

1)They don't know the doctrine.
2)They don't believe the doctrine.

In my experience, it's usually the latter.

[_kjones]

Just because there are Mormons who vote Democrat doesn't make it right. It really boils down to two things for Mormon Democrats. Either:

1)They don't know the doctrine.
2)They don't believe the doctrine.

In my experience, it's usually the latter.

So, Brother Nibley didn't know the doctrine, nor did Hugh B. Brown (even a more liberal democrat than Nibley was), nor Pres. Faust--because these men certainly believed it. Today there is Elders Marlin Jensen and Steve Snow of the Seventy. Elder Jensen was church historian, and he has been replaced both Elder Snow--and both were well known democrats, both very active in the Utah Democratic party before their calls. These men certainly believe the doctrine...so it must be they don't understand it? I think most Utah LDS would say that Harry Reid, Democrat from Nevada and Senate Majority Leader, doesn't understand the doctrine nor does he really believe it; but I would disagree. When he said at the BYU Law School Commencement a few years back that "I am a Democrat, not in spite of my LDS beliefs but because of them," I believed him. It is the way I feel. But I am not bothered in the least if one of my Republican brethren in my High Priests Group feels differently.

There is not one way and one way only to read and understand "the doctrine", i.e., the scriptures, especially when it comes to politics. Hugh B. Brown and Ezra Taft Benson are good examples of this. Both were apostles. Pres. Brown was in the First Prez, later ETB would become, for a very short time, president. I think it is safe to say both understood the doctrine, but they drew different conclusions when it came to politics. ETB was not just right-wing Republican, he openly advocated the John Birch Society, and his son Reed was later chapter president for Utah (I think). He openly opposed Civil Rights, said it was a communist tool, etc., etc. Hugh B. Brown, on the other hand, a known Democrat, not only strongly favored Civil Rights, he lobbied every church president he served under to extend the priesthood to the blacks. Etc, etc.

I don't think you can say that one of these men was right and the other wrong, or one understood the doctrine and one didn't. It has so much to do with background, one's experience. Harry Reid grew up in Searchlight, NV. His mother took in washing for the local brothels, and his father was a drunk and ne'er do well. I think he later committed suicide. Reid learned to fight as youth, both literally and figuratively, and it is no wonder that today he has a lot of sympathy for the underdog. Hugh B. Brown was much the same way, if I am to believe certain statements he made. Omar Kader, former BYU faculty and active Mormon today, is a Palestinian and a Democrat. Given his background, it would be hard to think of him as a Republican, or espousing Republican ideals.

And that's okay--at least I think it is. "There is too much sameness among this people," Brigham Young said. "Let there be no stereotyped Mormons."