Devyn,
I think you’re right that there are too few such groups within the Church (although, in fairness, there are few Church-related groups of which I’m aware, period).

I think you’re wrong about broad Christianity, though. The Catholic church focuses strongly on peach and equality, as do all liberal Protestant denominations that I’m aware of. It’s only evangelical christianity that doesn’t seem to do so (and I’d be surprised to find that there weren’t any evangelicals working for peace and equality; the Culture Wars evangelicals are just louder).

My best guess is that because terms like “equality and social justice” tend to be associated with Leftist groups who often harbor hostile feelings about the LDS Church over things like the Prop 8 vote.

But that’s just a guess.

I tend to think that the ways to pursue peace, equality, and social justice in ‘the world’ are sometimes not consistent with what the gospel’s message is. And the Church’s way of doing that is not always the same as other people’s. Not saying other people’s efforts aren’t good in many, many cases, but just saying that the Church’s official mission is just different.

I wonder, for example, how this group wants to stand against ‘gender inequity’ — if they really are consistent with Church leaders’ position.

I’d be interested to see what your wife’s experience is. I haven’t done much research on this group, but the last time I did, I got the sense that they were a little too leftist and a little too activist. Their website seems toned down from the last time I visited, and it seems that there is a lot of good that can be done by people who are anxiously engaged, so I hope her experience is good.

Any ideas why this may be?

I’ll answer with a question: Has your wife received any raised eyebrows or other signs of mild disapproval as she’s mentioned her membership in this group? I can imagine some members viewing this as a group trying to substitute for the Church, feeling that members should devote all their service to the world via the Church. (“Why would I donate to the local university scholarship fund when I could put that money in the PEF?”)

Hmmm. I find it somewhat troubling that the MESJ claims to speak for Latter-day Saints rather than for their specific organization. Even if I support the group’s mission statement and positions completely, I don’t like that they claim to speak for all members of the LDS Church (as in the MESJ Resolution on the War in Iraq). Perhaps that’s just a slip of language, however, since they don’t make such claims in other resolutions. But I’d rather see more careful wording in public declarations.

Re: #6 and #10, this may vary by area. In my stake the various organizations made Christmas gift packages for needy families, and they feed lunch large groups of the local homeless community every month. There’s probably a lot more we all could be doing, but that’s a start.

Devyn, there’s something ironic about that. My very conservative friends get bothered by any notion of social programs—”Rely on private, voluntary philanthropy,” they cry. But at the same time they are uncomfortable giving any of their means to a charity other than the LDS Church. They are content, as you say, to “let the Church do all the hard work.”

Peter, I didn’t see how MESJ claimed to speak for all members of the Church in its resolution on Iraq. What are the relevant quotes I missed?

The idea that “members seem content to donate to the Church and let it do all the “hard” work” may seem like a cop-out, but I don’t think it is. The Church is very well organized on a global scale, is largely working with a volunteer work force and is involved in a huge variety of practical charitable programs that make a tremendous difference. Contributing to the Church may very well be one of the most efficient means by which to effect good in the world and to make a difference.

Of course members of the LDS Church should find ways to be personally involved in service. Perhaps the idea of “contributing to the Church and letting it do all the work” is a criticism of member detachment from personal engagement and I’m sure many of us could do more.

In regards to MESJ, I don’t know all that much about them – but on the linked website, when I clicked on a link to descriptions of past activities, I saw things like: “observation of World Aids Day”, attendance to a Handel Messiah concert, a group in Wisconsin discussing whether to establish a chapter of MESJ, attendance at an annual Harry Reid social, a presentation on one of the 9/11 anniversaries, “animated discussion on environmental issues”, a “Walk As One” event, a meeting with a 70-year-old Thai buddhist figure, etc. and etc. Here’s a link

Honestly, I’m a bit skeptical. I’m not saying these activities can’t be edifying or positive in tone, but they seem more symbolic froth and organizational chatter with a lot of liberal/political buzzwords thrown into the mix. What is the actual service/achievement that is happening?

why you see the two as diametrically opposed

I don’t.

mfranti, what I meant by my comment is that any of these things can be taken to an extreme — environmentalism, equality, social justice — any good effort can be made into a doctrine/gospel of its own, can look beyond the mark. When I first saw this site, that was the way it felt to me. I don’t have enough exposure, though, to the group to really know, nor did I when I first ran across it. I was just sharing my first impressions from a while back. Which in and of itself probably wasn’t a good idea anyway. I just sort of sit back interested, and probably should have just sat back and listened. :)

In answering the original question I think that for many our Christianity is a mile wide and an inch deep. Mormons I think do better than many groups with the church’s emphasis on humanitarian work, its welfare program, etc but I have always got the sense that for many Christians Jesus is more of a magical talisman than someone we follow. We believe in Jesus up to the point that he makes us feel better about our sins but when it comes to social issues not so much.

Most of the people that join mesj do so because they sincerely believe they are trying to follow Christ. Its been suggested that this is looking beyond the mark but perhaps it is the mark. Perhaps the mark, Christ, would have us do those things. I leave it up to individuals to decide for themselves but I think we should certainly applaud any efforts towards social justice, peace, etc.

The main distinction I see in our church is that while we are very good at individual acts of charity, justice, peace we seem to make a distinction between these individual acts and changing society. I also think that whether its a good thing or not we have become a very pro-America church. For some, I worry nationalism comes before Christianity.

Re: #13 RyanJ, I was looking at this passage:

As Latter-day Saints we call upon the United States government to work out an exit strategy from Iraq that withdraws United States armed forces from Iraq as soon as possible[.]

The other resolutions I reveiwed used “Mormons for Equality and Social Justice” or “MESJ” rather than “Latter-day Saints.”

We do have those groups. They’re called the Priesthood Quorums and the Relief Society. When functioning as intended they are stronger than activist groups.

The operative statement is “when functioning”…

Here’s the full text of the mission statement from MESJ, from the website, with my comments:

Mission Statement

Mormons for Equality and Social Justice (MESJ) is a grassroots organization of Latter-day Saint individuals who are “anxiously engaged” (D&C 58:27) in furthering the cause of Zion by working for the gospel values of peace, equality, justice, and wise stewardship of the earth in a spirit of Christ-like charity and concern.

Grassroots. No difference than the ‘naclesnacker, right?

We do this (1) by raising awareness in Latter-day Saint communities of the inequalities and injustices that exist in the world today, (2) by actively participating in political processes to resolve these issues, and (3) by promoting and engaging in humanitarian service.

I don’t have a problem with raising awareness of an issue, so long as people bear testimony at Church of Mitt Romney’s foreordination…

As Latter-day Saints, we come from a heritage of people who had “a vision of a different world, a world where injustice and oppression, poverty and ignorance would be dispelled and a world where men and women would be brothers and sisters” (Alexander B. Morrison, in Church News [14 Oct. 1995]: 4). We have been urged by Church leaders to work towards making that vision a reality in today’s world by being “full participants in political, governmental, and community affairs,” “using gospel principles as a guide and…cooperating with other like-minded individuals” (First Presidency letter, 15 Jan. 1998, in Ensign [Apr. 1998]: 77).

Nice touch, quoting an ex-GA (and Canadian, I think). Conjures images of Hugh B. Brown (if I’m right about the Canadian).

LDS scripture and prophetic teaching speak out strongly for social justice: for peace, equality, democracy, human rights, and wise stewardship of the earth’s resources. Latter-day Saints are enjoined to “plead the cause of the poor and the needy” (D&C 124:75) and to work towards a society in which “there [are] no poor among [us]” (Moses 7:18). We are challenged to “renounce war and proclaim peace” (D&C 98:16). The Book of Mormon teaches that “there should be an equality among all” (Mosiah 27:3) and calls us to stand against racism, gender inequity, and injustice on the principle that “black and white, bond and free, male and female;…all are alike unto God” (2 Nephi 26:33). The scriptures commend democracy, constitutional law, and human rights (Mosiah 29:26; D&C 98:5; D&C 101:77), while speaking harshly against inequity, exploitation, oppression, and violence (2 Nephi 20:1-2; 3 Nephi 24:5; D&C 38:26; Moses 8:28). Scripture teaches us that we are stewards of the earth and its resources, which should be used “with judgment, not to excess” (D&C 59:20).

Hasn’t Marlin Jensen been seen at Utah immigration meetings, speaking on behalf of the First Presidency? I don’t see anything here to object to.

As Latter-day Saints, we seek the guidance of the Spirit and look to the teachings of Church leaders in our efforts to achieve equality and social justice in our communities and the world at large.

Sounds OK.

MESJ (pronounced “message”) is an independent organization, unaffiliated with any particular political party. MESJ does not speak officially for the LDS Church, but neither does MESJ adopt positions on social or political issues that contradict official positions of the Church.

Seems pretty clear to me their position respective to the Church. And I never saw them taking sides on Prop 8…

bbell,

should we brand people as apostates since the join republican or democratic parties? Is it any organization you have a problem with or just political ones?

I was not aware the LDS Church had taken an official position regarding the state of Israel. Maybe I’m wrong.

Again, operative term is “official positions of the Church”.

(Note – I’m probably not the ideal candidate for MESJ membership. But neither am I going to impugn their motives or value.)

I was not aware the LDS Church had taken an official position regarding the state of Israel. Maybe I’m wrong.

Again, operative term is “official positions of the Church”.

(Note – I’m probably not the ideal candidate for MESJ membership. But neither am I going to impugn their motives or value.)

No, you’re probably right. And you could certainly find lots of support for socialism (and even communism) in early Church teachings.

You can even finesse the group’s resolutions on gay rights and abortion rights so that they don’t technically contradict the Church’s official positions on those issues too.

Like you, I don’t have any reason to impugn the members of MESJ, and I certainly don’t think anyone should have to apologies or face any sort of Church discipline for belonging to this group. But I still wonder what purpose it serves to make this a “Mormon” group.

J. Madson,

Having had the opportunity to click through to your blog gives me a clearer picture of where you’re coming from on these issues. Much like MESJ (or rather, even moreso) your political beliefs seem to be very consistently far-Left. I don’t have a problem with that (though I disagree strongly on most of these issues), and I think there can be a place for you in the LDS Church.

One of the interesting and dynamic things about Mormonism is that there is actually very little of what can truly be called dogma or doctrine, which gives members quite a bit of leeway. Of course, culturally, the Church is often not as flexible.

Very seldom does a ward or stake get directly involved (hands-on) in welfare-type issues involving areas outside the stake.

Hm. I am not sure I agree with this. Every week at the ward I attend, there is a report in the RS bulletin of how many different things the women are doing that have a reach way beyond our stake boundaries. They are *constantly* spending time with welfare-like efforts, simple as they may be.

I think sometimes we do underestimate the potential of our church organizations and sometimes limit ourselves a bit by doing the same things over and over, instead of really stopping to think about how we can help and serve and bring to pass the purposes of the gospel.

Think about if each quorum and RS group all over the world really did focus hard on serving in their respective communities. That alone would make a huge difference, and is, I’m sure. But I think, as Sister Beck said, we could be doing better. And I do think there is something about the Church organizations being united in such a purpose. As much as we can do good in our own ways, I think about the potential of us doing good *together* — in ways that augment the Church’s role and function, rather than perhaps try to compete with it.

I dunno. On the flip side, we have been invited to go out on our own to join the worldwide conversation about the church online. So I really don’t know where the line should be.

TimJ
I assume its not mormon democrats because they dont necessarily agree with democrats. Its theologically driven not culturally or so I understand from my conversations with mesj members.

BBell –

you list actual practices that are against church doctrine such as polygamy, temple rituals at home and for those you call left wing you state people on the left “get into” abortion and gay rights. I hope you are not suggesting they go have abortions or sleep around with people of the same sex simply because they disagree on the role of government and perhaps not the morality in these issues. The two extremes are not comparable. As for getting into peace. whats wrong with that?

The day someone gets called into the SP for supporting peace will be a funny day indeed. So brother or sister you want peace. I think you’ve taken it too far. Im not sure Jesus the prince of peace would approve?

BT

our blog has a variety of contributors and we do not all agree on every issue. I do not vote democrat or republican and think they are both morally bankrupt. If anything pushed me “left” it was the republican parties move towards nation building, pre-emptive war, and abandonment of its more traditional values. Whatever positions I take are from my understanding of the gospel and an attempt to follow Christ not from cultural political cues. I think the best society is one where people voluntarily choose to follow the prince of peace. I personally think abortion should be illegal although some in mesj and my blog may disagree. I personally think war is abhorrent and contrary to Christ’s teachings. I think the only consistently “left” position I have ever taken in my life is that we should be peace makers.

“I assume its not mormon democrats because they dont necessarily agree with democrats.”

I should add, the two platforms are pretty indistinguishable.

I think that when members create orgs like this whether they be right or left wing it usually ends with some level of apostacy. The reason these orgs are formed in the first place is that LDS members who feel that there is something missing in the church get together with likeminded members and go out on a limb together. I witnessed this first hand in the early 90’s when lots of my conservative friends started going bonkers

Agreed, but ultimately, it’s the individual that goes bad.

My SIL and I have similar discussions about the relative value of the ACLU or FIRE. Good? Bad? Only if you are good or bad…

I should point out – MESJ looks pretty darn similar to the political beliefs of virtually every Mormon in Chile, where a female/agnostic/socialist president was recently elected (and was popular amongst Chilean Saints). Unless we’re about to state that Chilean Saints are on the pathway to apostasy, let’s remember that the gospel allows for a lot of different viewpoints. Including peace and dealing with the poor.

J. Madson. What is your personal stance on Prop 8? This is where the rubber hits the road. I would suspect that officially MESJ has a policy that is never against LDS teaching but I suspect that many of the members in fact do oppose Prop 8 and other church teachings and it would not have surprised me to see them involved in the protest at Temple Square.

bbell – But in this case you have a bone to pick with the members of MESJ, not MESJ itself…

Unless you *really* want to start parsing the differences between individual Republicans and the Republican Party compared to gospel teachings…

wow – I go on a business trip and miss a flurry of great discussion. I think that the comments made by each of you are fascinating and I think that giving this group the benefit of the doubt is the correct approach. It does amaze me how quick we are to condemn groups like this and mention it is the road to apostasy without realizing as ESO points out that left Mormons are often left out in the Mormon cultures equalization of republican nationalism with Mormon doctrine (as laid out nicely by BTD Greg and Bbell).

Queuno – you did a great job of responding to the comments here – I have nothing to add but Thanks!

Bbell – why does a personal view against a “Church Stance” automatically point to apostasy when it was explicitly stated that members who were against Prop 8 would suffer no disciplinary action?

Hi Friends,

This group stimulating and thought provoking. Being that I am on the steering committee of MESJ , I take your comments seriously. It is extremely difficult to discussed and to become active in peace and social justice issues within the parameters of various LDS institutions. Thus MESJ is one forum where one can be among like minded LDS community. There are others such as the http://www.TheMormonworker.org Mormons for Obama, http://www.Mormonpeaceproject, ldscooperative.com. LDSLEFT yahoo group. If you present the MESJ mission statement with out the MESJ context you will find such a peace and social gospel principles shown below is conducive within LDS thinking or a least it should be. Here is the essence of the mission statement whc

“As Latter-day Saints, we come from a heritage of people who had “a vision of a different world, a world where injustice and oppression, poverty and ignorance would be dispelled and a world where men and women would be brothers and sisters” (Alexander B. Morrison, in Church News [14 Oct. 1995]: 4). We have been urged by Church leaders to work towards making that vision a reality in today’s world by being “full participants in political, governmental, and community affairs,” “using gospel principles as a guide and…cooperating with other like-minded individuals” (First Presidency letter, 15 Jan. 1998, in Ensign [Apr. 1998]: 77).

LDS scripture and prophetic teaching speak out strongly for social justice: for peace, equality, democracy, human rights, and wise stewardship of the earth’s resources. Latter-day Saints are enjoined to “plead the cause of the poor and the needy” (D&C 124:75) and to work towards a society in which “there [are] no poor among [us]” (Moses 7:18). We are challenged to “renounce war and proclaim peace” (D&C 98:16). The Book of Mormon teaches that “there should be an equality among all” (Mosiah 27:3) and calls us to stand against racism, gender inequity, and injustice on the principle that “black and white, bond and free, male and female;…all are alike unto God” (2 Nephi 26:33). The scriptures commend democracy, constitutional law, and human rights (Mosiah 29:26; D&C 98:5; D&C 101:77), while speaking harshly against inequity, exploitation, oppression, and violence (2 Nephi 20:1-2; 3 Nephi 24:5; D&C 38:26; Moses 8:28). Scripture teaches us that we are stewards of the earth and its resources, which should be used “with judgment, not to excess” (D&C 59:20).

As Latter-day Saints, we seek the guidance of the Spirit and look to the teachings of Church leaders in our efforts to achieve equality and social justice in our communities and the world at large.”

One can actually express these concepts within the confines of LDS Church meetings. I for one see the cause of Zion is the cause for equality , social justice, peace. and righteous living.

I agree 100% with BTD Greg here. When I hear people proclaim that they support “social justice” and “equality” and “peace,” I hear: “the agenda of the far-left wing of the Democratic party.”

The self-proclaimed advocates of peace or social justice or equality are either lying or delusional when they profess to have peace or social justice or equality as their political goals, because self-proclaimed equality and social justice advocates support neither equality nor social justice; they support some very specific kinds of equality and certain very specific forms of social justice — those supported by whacko, leftist Democrats. For example, you’ll never see any of these self-proclaimed “equality” groups advocate flat taxes, even if the graduated income tax violates the principle of equal treatment under the law. And you’ll never see any of these self-proclaimed “social justice” groups advocate rights of legal gun owners to buy or keep or own or sell their guns, or the rights of land-owners against the de facto confiscation of land that occurs when the Federal government decides that there’s an endangered species there.

Equality is a means to an end, not an end in-and-of itself. Not only is it logically impossible for everything to be equal, but it’s a very bad idea to even try to attain equality in all areas where it is practically possible. Should we all pay an equal amount of traffic fines every year? Should all criminals get an equal sentence in prison? We embrace equality, where we embrace equality, because we like the results. Where we don’t like the results, we reject it. Advocating equality qua equality is moronic.

And I couldn’t care less what the scriptures say or what Jesus says about peace. I’ve read it, studied it, and I find it to be a whole bunch of crap. The truth is that the term “peace” is meaningless when removed from a practical context. We have peace in the US right now, because there haven’t been terrorist attacks in a record number of years, but self-proclaimed “peace” advocates don’t much care to celebrate our successful renunciation of war (in the form of terrorist attacks) on US soil for 7 years. The Afghans have less war now than they’ve had for any decent stretch of time in the past few decades, and it’s because the US went to war (and almost none of today’s self-proclaimed peace advocates concerned themselves with the lot of Afghans when Soviets or Talaban were killing them.) When push comes to shove, I love peace more than the self-proclaimed “peace” advocates, because I’m willing to actually fight for it.

But the basic problem with advocating peace and social justice is that doing so uses the terms “peace” and “social justice” in a normative fashion that makes the moral superiority of the self-proclaimed advocates’ opinions axiomatic. This, in turn, prevents serious discussion of the issues, tacitly trivializing them. All that’s left is for the self-proclaimed advocates of “peace” and “social justice” to pat themselves on the back for being such all-round great people. (It’s too bad that entering a political discussion by positing your own moral superiority doesn’t actually make you morally superior.)

The bottom line: If you’re against the war in Iraq or prop 8, then let’s talk about the war in Iraq and prop 8. But don’t pretend that we’re talking about “peace” and “social justice.”

A Latter-Day Saint Proclamation of Peace

Thoughts and Principles From the Latter-Day Saints Community

It is our divine calling to …”Sue for peace, not only to the people that have smitten you, but to all people; And lift up an ensign of peace, and make a proclamation of peace unto the ends of the earth ” (D&C 105:38-39).

The First Presidency of the LDS Church issued a proclamation in 1942 that the “Church is and must be against war. The Church cannot wage war unless and until the Lord shall issue new commands. It cannot regard war as a righteous means of settling international disputes; these should and could be settled–the nations agreeing–by peaceful negotiation and adjustment.” (A message from the First Presidency: 112th Annual General Conference of the Church. Conference Report, Apr. 1942, 88-97);

“While recognizing the need for strength to repel any aggressor, we are enjoined by the word of God to Renounce War and Proclaim Peace! We call upon the heads of nations to sit down and reason together in good faith to resolve their differences. ” (First Presidency: Spencer W. Kimball, N. Eldon Tanner & Marion G. Romney, Church News; 20 Dec.1980)

We are reminded by the remarks of President Gordon B. Hinckley, “War I hate with all its mocking panoply….War is Earth’s greatest cause of human misery. It is the destroyer of life, the promoter of hate, the waster of treasure. It is man’s costliest folly, his most tragic misadventure.” (Salt Lake Tribune:July, 2007)

Nations should not to rush to war when Captain Moroni “…taught never to give an offense, yea, and never to raise a sword except it were against an enemy, except it were to preserve their lives”. (Book of Mormon: Alma 48:14)

We recognize…”The designs of God…to establish peace and good will among men; to promote the principle of eternal truth; to bring about a state of things shall unite man to his fellow man: cause the world to “beat their swords into plow shares, and their spears into pruning hooks,” make the nations of the earth dwell in peace…” (Teaching of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pg.248)

Let us remove the causes of war by pressing forward in eliminating hatred, oppression, poverty, and imperial nationalism. Indeed, let us promote the teachings of Jesus Christ; for through him will the world find true peace.

Let us “seek to go forth build and establish the cause of Zion”. For it is written…”that every one who will not take his sword against his neighbor must needs flee unto Zion for safety…and it shall be the only people that shall not be at war one with another” (D&C 6:6 and 45:68-69)

Contact Bart Tippetts, the author of this document at barttip@msn.com. Phone: 801-859-8150

“Joseph Smith said something about the matter. It’s in the current RS/PH manual. Essentially, JS said that those who say that the Brethren are wrong are on the road to apostasy.”

See Bookslinger, I think you’re missing the point. The MESJ seems to believe, by way of cherry-picked verses and prophetic quotes, that they are really the ONLY ones following the Brethren/Christ. The rest of us don’t really care about equality or peace or social justice (whatever that is).

My friends,

You are taking MESJ too seriously. We are all active members in the Church. There other groups such as history , business, this blog that uses the word Mormon. We are talking about an entitiy that is mainly a support group who wants to be among like minded saints who are to be involved in peace and social justice issues. Discussing and doing politics in Church is not appropiate, thus LDS members can have an avenue to become involved politically among their own kind.

We are not cherry picking LDS thought to emphasize the fact we are the only ones who have the truth . We are just showing their is social justice and peace theology within LDS context. Read the mission statement again. They are a set of concepts that can be applied by LDS at large.

Where in the mission statement that some form of Marxist Liberation Theology is being promoted? However Zion does promote a liberaton for the poor.

#59,

“Liberation” for the poor?

#51 B. Tippetts – Thanks for visiting and for your comments. I appreciate your thoughts and I think that those of us who have not served in a war zone have no right to be warmongers, wherein, those who have been in war seem to be among the more peace seeking of people…

53. DKL – perhaps you hear “the agenda of the far-left wing of the Democratic party.” because everything is political to you and you sometimes can’t see outside of the Republican house of cards to see any good in anything that could be remotely seen as left. While some groups that promote peace certainly have political agendas, I think that equating them with issues like taxation are silly (personally I am all for a flat tax). I also don’t think that MESJ has any stand on gun rights or land rights – again you seem to be bringing in your beefs with the left which does not appear to be what MESJ is about. So what exactly is wrong with their mission statement:

“As Latter-day Saints, we come from a heritage of people who had “a vision of a different world, a world where injustice and oppression, poverty and ignorance would be dispelled and a world where men and women would be brothers and sisters” (Alexander B. Morrison, in Church News [14 Oct. 1995]: 4). We have been urged by Church leaders to work towards making that vision a reality in today’s world by being “full participants in political, governmental, and community affairs,” “using gospel principles as a guide and…cooperating with other like-minded individuals” (First Presidency letter, 15 Jan. 1998, in Ensign [Apr. 1998]: 77).

I am not even going to comment on the rest of your tirade against Democrats – you really missed the boat on this on. Also, not going to comment on your statements about Christ and peace…

56 MAC – So what is wrong with an organization focused on peace and equality? How is that so problematic for Church members to join? Is it any different from other social groups focused on a cause (e.g., rotary club, etc.)?

57. Tim J. – So Tim, that was a rather rude, snide comment – care to cite why you conclude that MESJ thinks “by way of cherry-picked verses and prophetic quotes, that they are really the ONLY ones following the Brethren/Christ. The rest of us don’t really care about equality or peace or social justice (whatever that is).” I don’t think anyone on this post (note I am not part of MESJ) said anything judging non-MESJ members – so what is your point beyond being rude?

Devyn,

It is not the peace and equality part that is problematic, it is the Mormon part.

And looking at their website, while their mission statement doesn’t say anything explicit about politics other content does. It would not be fair to present it as an apolitical organization.

There are enough divisions within the Church, creating lefty groups in an attempt to balance the righty leanings of some of the membership is only going to create additional strife.

I believe it would also compete with the missions of the Church for members time and energy. Nasmomdele said it much better than I could in #60.

TimJ – I think that many otherwise faithful Republicans (I am neither R or D, by the way) cherry-pick scriptures to prop up their own political leanings. Be careful to paint both sides with the same brush. All of those people who supported Romney, for instance, should also spend more time in their quorums.

So it really doesn’t do you any good to bash a group of Mormons for starting a group devoted to Social Justice (which you want to denigrate and apparently don’t want to understand). You might as well yell at Church members for supporting an evil organization like BYU football, which wastes millions of dollars and generally (in recent years) serves more as an embarrassment to the Church than a positive influence.

“…I hate to see members of the Church start inventing standards for personal righteousness that the Brethren themselves haven’t established.”

Well said.

“You might as well yell at Church members for supporting an evil organization like BYU football, which wastes millions of dollars”

I’m not sure if this is tongue-in-cheek, but, like most football programs, I imagine BYU’s football team brings in a good share of revenue which helps keep tuition low.

“However, as many Mormons equate conservatism with doctrine, the voice of those with different views is often washed out, ignored, or, worse, shut down.”

I agree that this happens and it is unfortunate.

But I don’t see that, if one believes that the mission of MESJ (made known by their resolutions) is truly what the gospel of Christ is about, made known by Mormon scripture and prophetic counsel, how you can remove yourself from the discourse instead of working with and within the Church to affect change. I don’t see how alienating yourself is a good idea and how it solves anything. Again, to cherry-pick a scripture, “if ye are not one, ye are not mine.”

And Tim,
I don’t see how they are alienting themselves. The members I’m aware of are active in the Church, hold callings, give talks, and contribute. The fact that they want to do additional service, activism, or whatever outside of church doesn’t mean they are alienating themselves (unless my going to work every day means I am; I’m not sure I could float that by my wife with a straight face, though, as a reason to quit).

Maybe we should send all of our hard-core right wing members in the US to spend the next 10 years in Europe and South America and Africa, and bring those members over to the US, for political reindoctrination. Then perhaps we’ll end up with millions of Saints who have a different perspective on the folly of “party politics”…

I’m not sure if this is tongue-in-cheek, but, like most football programs, I imagine BYU’s football team brings in a good share of revenue which helps keep tuition low.

(I realize I created the threadjack, and I apologize…)

I believe that tuition and athletic department expenses are not related at BYU. BYU football helps fund other athletic programs and is generally self-sustaining (using its own revenue and donations). I believe that most D1 programs are operating at a loss, nationwide. If you scrapped BYU football, you’re only cost BYU other sports; it would have no impact on tuition costs. BYU football is at best of extremely modest benefit to the Church’s image, and in many cases, is negative, particularly after the Crowton era (and with the way the team has played under Bronco, it is developing a reputation in many places as an ego-driven program that talks too much and can’t back it up on the field). At least that’s how it is in North Texas, where when people think “Mountain West”, they think TCU first, Utah second, and BYU a very distant third.

So, yes, I believe that the BYU football homer is dangerous to the Church and is on the way to apostasy (at least as much as the average MESJ member might be).

Why not for a group in RS? Our ward has a book group, cooking group, sewing group, etc. Why would this one fail? I can’t possibly see a reason nor would I see a reason a Bishop or RS President would object, if presented in the right way. The number of people this could affect would be huge.

Why restrict this to just the RS or a ward/stake level? Why can’t a body of Saints from across different wards and stake boundaries get together in a set of mutual interests?

Surely you don’t believe that one’s social life be completely enveloped inside a ward boundary, do you? If so, get off the ‘nacle…

Because again, by the formation of this group (and others) I don’t see compromise. I don’t see unity. I don’t see the Church as “one”. I see a pretty sharp divide that is growing, and neither side is helping close the gap by compassionate discourse and understanding.

(It’s probably worth noting that, while I was in law school, I was a member of the J. Reuben Clark Society, a non-correlated but self-identified Mormon group and, in theory, I could be a member of the non-law-school group. It is another group that, as best as I can tell, strives to do good, motivated by Mormon beliefs, but that falls outside of the structure of the Church.)

It is soooo good to see all this concern for polarization and splintering of the church. Is anybody on this thread who thinks MESJ is dangerous willing to say the same things about people who affiliate with Liberty Lobby, Eagle Forum, National Center for Constitutional Studies, etc, etc, etc., and who have no qualms whatsoever about dragging their ideas (if that is the word I am looking for) into official church meetings? They are only about 1000 times more popular among church members that MESJ, which is really pretty small potatoes.

Also, to anybody affiliated with MESJ — can you explain to me what the difference is between justice and social justice?

#62,

You prove my point- that is an incomplete discourse on war- Pres. Hinckley’s remarks in 2002 ruffled many anti-war feathers.

There has been a lot of great discussion on this board about the potential benefits and drawbacks of groups like MESJ. The simple reality, I believe, is that MESJ is motivated by two primary ideas… 1. a belief in the LDS Church, and 2. an acknowledgement that within this shared set of values, there are opinions, acts of sercvice, and issues that can be performed outside of the normal Church structure.

Let me list some other organizations based on this same idea – EFY, Southern Virginia University, The Mormon History Association, Daughters of the Utah Pioneers, Bookcraft, FAIR, etc.

The idea that the simple existence of an organization like MESJ could lead to apostacy is ridiculous and dangerous. If nothing else, the group provides an arena for people to discuss issues that are important to them outside of the normal Church structure.

#64.

Tim,

I agree to become extremely effective is to promote peace and social justice within the context of scriptures , LDS thought on Zion , is to do so among various church entities. However when it comes to politics then being among like minded LDS for a particular cause is not to involved Church organizations . To do so there will be polarization.
However to build the cause of Zion which does call for liberation of the poor and proclaim the gospel of peace, salvation, and righteousness then networking among LDS within various Church organizations is appropiate.

Much of MESJ activity is done among small affinity groups or chapters. We come together to discuss various issues and from which certain politcal action is initiated. I found mesj members do a lot of their politics within other non LDS groups. MESJ provides a support group mainly. I am sure other LDS groups or networks are formed such as opposing abortion, for school vouchers , for Prop 8 (done at church meetings)etc.

“Maybe we should send all of our hard-core right wing members in the US to spend the next 10 years in Europe and South America and Africa….”

Seconded!

Oh, that would be so dreamy….

“Maybe we should send all of our hard-core right wing members in the US to spend the next 10 years in Europe and South America and Africa….”

No doubt it would be more economical to send the left wing instead.

#100

MESJ Mission Statement is more like a visionary statement. A set of principles that forms a paradigm from which one can make particular decisions or initiate action. The scriptures all have various forms of visionary statements. May I suggest the following:

D&C 105
38 And again I say unto you, sue for peace, not only to the people that have smitten you, but also to all people;
39 And lift up an ensign of peace, and make a proclamation of peace unto the ends of the earth;
40 And make proposals for peace unto those who have smitten you, according to the voice of the Spirit which is in you, and all things shall work together for your good.
41 Therefore, be faithful; and behold, and lo, I am awith you even unto the end. Even so. Amen.

So you take this statement as meaningless: “As Latter-day Saints, we come from a heritage of people who had “a vision of a different world, a world where injustice and oppression, poverty and ignorance would be dispelled and a world where men and women would be brothers and sisters” (Alexander B. Morrison, in Church News [14 Oct. 1995]: 4).

How odd that thoughts of the Brethren have no meaning. Perhaps you can reject all the thoughts of the Brethren at conference which are fullpf vision and possible scripture.

Indeed we want a world where there is no poverty, oppression, injustice. It is called Zion.

You my brother rejecting Christ teachings on peace is astounding.

You might as well yell at Church members for supporting an evil organization like BYU football, which wastes millions of dollars and generally (in recent years) serves more as an embarrassment to the Church than a positive influence.

Now this is a protest I can see myself scribbling out a poster for. Where do I sign up?

This whole MESJ argument about whether you want to be for peace, love and understanding reminds me of a particular Seinfeld episode – Who Doesn’t Want to Wear the Ribbon?!?!

B. Tippetts: Indeed we want a world where there is no poverty, oppression, injustice. It is called Zion.

Whether or not we have poverty depends, of course, on how you define “poverty.” Self-proclaimed equality advocates tend to prefer a relative definition of poverty, whereby poverty is defined in terms of income inequality; i.e., in the EU, you live in poverty if you income is below 60% of the national median equalized disposable income after social transfers for a comparable household. This sort of definition ensures that we will always have poverty, because it’s mathematically impossible to eliminate below-average incomes. That is good for the job-safety of self proclaimed anti-poverty advocates, but not much else.

In a country as rich as the USA, where government assistance (on both a Federal and a state level, and sometimes even on a municipal level) ensures a minimum standard of living, one could create an arguably valid definition of poverty whereby nobody lives in poverty.

The best way to eliminate poverty is to create a wealthy middle class and provide a meaningful (if aggressive) definition of poverty. To be sure, the Census Bureau and the Department of Health and Human Services in Zion will have some pretty creative statisticians — and they won’t belong to the opposition party.

Lastly, if we define poverty as “altogether lacking the resources to provide for the necessities of life” then every moral, sane person opposes poverty, and it’s silly to pretend that you have some special devotion to its elimination. I think that your cause is futile not because I favor poverty, but because I realize that your proposed means to eliminating poverty are ineffective.

DKL: “Lastly, if we define poverty as “altogether lacking the resources to provide for the necessities of life” then every moral, sane person opposes poverty, and it’s silly to pretend that you have some special devotion to its elimination.”

Thank you for succinctly pointing out the sanctimonious smugness of the “peace equality and social-justice” crowd.

Bart,

I appreciate your comments, but as someone who works in the marketing world, let me tell you that your homepage does not match the message you are trying to get across here.

#111

Tim, I agree that is why I am interested in developing a web site that is consistant with my message. It will be non political while focusing ond the cause of Zion and finding practical solutions in empowering the poor. Which is one of the pillars of Zion.

One of my post is being moderated and will not go through . Can you help me here?

Bart

B. Tippetts, regarding the links to poverty that you provide, we used to have that kind of poverty in the USA just 70 years ago. For example, Elvis Presley was born into that kind of poverty.

Here’s what I challenge you to do: Go without air conditioning this coming summer, and then send the money that you save to a worthy charity to help starving children.

What ever DKL . I am seeking dialogue and you cast sarcasism. You wanted know what I mean by poverty so I presented some examples and what LDS should do in response. In our scriptures and thoughts of the Brethren we will find the answers. Those I quoted I hope was informative Check out http://www.lamosquitia.org. This is one of projects I once worked on. Norma I. Love is LDS.

MAC. How one percieves their theology will help influence ones politics. I was discussing the concepts within MESJ mission statement not the web site which has problems . I am not the web master. I am creating a blog that will be discussing social gospel and peace theology of Zion which I have alluded to earlier.

Peace.

DKL. We finally come to some sense of understanding. What means do you think I am proposing that wse may disagree on in eliminating absolute acute poverty? I do not recall I mentioned any.

B. Trippitts, the means that I propose for eliminating poverty is loosening international environmental restrictions on 3rd world countries, free-trade, and open borders. Legends of Enoch’s Zion aside, history has shown only one effective method for eliminating poverty: industrialization. Does that agree with what you propose?

DKL: “When I hear people proclaim that they support “social justice” and “equality” and “peace,” I hear: “the agenda of the far-left wing of the Democratic party.”

And the opposite would be the right-wing of the GOP: “social injustice”,and “inequality between races and religions” and most of all “war”. The GOP since 1981 has proven this.

#96 B. Tippetts “Did your wife join the Boston chapter?” Yes, I think so, she has been involved in a few things.

#100 DKL – “First of all, Republicans are as guilty as Democrats when it comes to using meaningless spin in place of substantive discussion in order to make stupid policy more attractive. Well, actually, Republicans don’t do it to promote stupid policy as often, just because they don’t promote as much stupid policy. But they definitely play the spin game as much as Democrats.” Absolutely agree with this but why does everything have to be political?

“The problem with the mission statement is that it’s utterly meaningless. Saying that you want “a world where injustice and oppression, poverty and ignorance would be dispelled and a world where men and women would be brothers and sisters” is like saying “the working man deserves a fair shake.” The idea is to say something using words that have absolutely no concrete meaning in order to get people to feel good about what you say. It’s the sort of thing you hear coming out of the mouth of a politician or a beauty pageant contestant, and — unfortunately — it’s the kind of thing you’ll read in the scriptures. It’s a con job, pure and simple.” Agreed that these can be empty words, but I think that a group that aspires to do this is at least headed in the right direction.

“It’s not a tirade against Democrats. It’s a series of arguments against the idea of promoting peace, equality, and social justice. A more merciful God would have created a world in which such arguments aren’t necessary. For my part, I thought that Vietnam already proved that self-proclaimed peace advocates do more harm than good.” I still don’t understand why promoting peace, equality, and justice are a bad thing. It reminds me of the ACLU or NRA (neither of whom I really don’t like), but they fill an important role in this country as it is critical to have alternate voices to create a true democracy and prevent one side or the other from becoming too dominant…

“So now you’re unwilling to defend Jesus?” I don’t think he needs me to defend him… :)

Elder Payne – great missionary. He was in our ward for something like 7 years it seemed…

B. Tippetts: Free enterprise, save the rain forest, worker own cooperatives, education, access to capital, fair trade, safe water, eliminating diseases, preventing abusive exploitation, smart industry and agri business, land reform, micro credit are just several concepts for sustained ecological and economic development.

Please explain what saving the rain forests have to do with ending poverty? I’m not saying that it’s not a worthy goal. I just don’t see how it fits within the scope of social injustice, equality, and peace.

Please identify an historical precedent that shows that a developing nation can achieve a wealthy middle class with worker owned cooperatives, “fair trade (i.e., protectionism), “smart industry and agri business”?

Lastly, ecological development is anathema to economic development.

The problem here is that you want to encumber developing nations with the kind of restrictions that wealthy nations adopt once their citizens are rich enough to care about their environment. These restrictions work with rich nations, because they have money to burn. You’ll never transition a developing nation into a wealthy nation by imposing these restrictions during its developmental phase.

This kind of talk about how things really work doesn’t usually appeal to those who are trying to eliminate poverty because they follow Christ — but Christ didn’t know the first thing about economics. The ethic He taught the poor was to wait for a better life when after they’re dead. But I don’t suppose that you consider Christ’s actual teachings to be very Christ-like.

I conclude that your efforts to eliminate poverty will stifle the very development required to eliminate it.

DKL. It will take a whole new discourse to explain what I mean eliminating poverty in detail . However you think this should not even a the mandate as Saints since you believe Jesus taught the poor are to wait for better life after death. Please my brother search the topicl guide on Zion and the poor. Then perhaps we can have some basis to proceed with this discussion.

I am not talking about achieving a weatlhy middle class here but just to empower people to have basic human needs for survival and to maintain some basic quality of life, which is a subjective value based upon various societal norms . Also google in Mondragon Cooperative and you will find this billion dollar enterprise is 4th largest in Spain.

I think you search for a theology that is comfortabe with your economic and political philosophy; ie . Social Darwinsim or survival of the fittest. Apparently you are struggling how Christiianity fits in your paradigm. Just my obervation not a judgement.

B Tippets – DKL does have a good economic point that we developed countries try to force a conservation framework on developing economies which, effectively, stifles their development. While I agree that we need to conserve, I think that the approach you are advocating requires significant subsidizing by the developed world – which we are unlikely to make. So it puts us all in a catch-22, conserve and develop the third world at the same time – very challenging to do. However, I think the efforts you mention are worthy good efforts and, in time, a framework for successful economic development will be created by someone… (I hope)

This is an essay I wrote earlier. Notice the audience I am writing it to. The context of this writing would be different if I was writing to LDS members at large. See also http://www.buildingzion.org

To My MESJ Friends and LDS Progressives,

Often I wonder what is the future of Mormons for Equality and Social Justice . Its mission statement (See http://www.mesj.org ) as a proclamation for peace, equality , and social justice is so powerful but yet we seem to be a fringe element of the LDS community. Although it still has a unique purpose as being a support group among LDS who are anxiously engage bringing about social and political change.

Nevertheless, the peace and social justice theological principles of the MESJ mission statement is consistant among all LDS faithful religious beliefs and the organization to help promote its principles is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. The cause for social justice and peace in this case comes from a different perspective which establishing the cause of Zion.

As a matter of correctness the cause of Zion is not a political movement but establishing a whole new ethos of how we arrange our social relationships and economic structures . Although when members understand the peace and social theology of Zion often they will establish their own political perspectives.

Please read below this draft essay as try to understand how the cause of Zion is the cause for social justice . Latter I will submit the relationship of Zion and the cause for peace. I have listed some ideas at the near end of this piece how Saints can implement Zion. I would appreciate your comments. Eventually, I will produce a web site that will focus on this theme. Latter this article will be further edited and sent in a PDF format with foot notes. Please forward this email to your LDS friends. Your comments are appreciated.

. Seek Forth and Establish The Cause of Zion

As Latter-day Saints, we come from a tradition that declares “a vision of a different world, a world where injustice and oppression, poverty and ignorance would be dispelled and a world where men and women would be brothers and sisters.”(Alexander B. Morrison, in Church News ,14 Oct. 1995) We will “plead the cause of the poor and the needy.” (D&C 124:75) We will work towards a Zion society in which the Saints become one heart and one mind and dwell in righteousness and there are no poor among us.(Moses 7:18) “There should be an equality among all” (Mosiah 27:3) ; that “black and white, bond and free, male and female;…all are alike unto God” (2 Nephi 26:33)

Zion is where the pure in heart dwells where upon we are to cleanse our selves from sins and become perfected and develop the pure love in Jesus Christ.

We recognize that…”The earth was made for man: and one man was not made to trample his fellowman under his feet, and enjoy all his heart desires, while the thousands suffer. We will take a moral view, a political view… to see the inequality that exists in the human family…What is to be done? The Latter-day Saints will never accomplish their mission until this inequality shall cease on the earth.” #

Saints of Zion will “think of your brethren like unto yourselves, and be familiar with all and free with your substance, that they may be rich like unto you. But before ye seek for riches, seek ye for the kingdom of God. After you have obtained a hope in Christ ye shall obtain riches, if you seek them; and you will seek them for the intent to do good—to clothe the naked, and to feed the hungry, and to liberate the captive, and administer relief to the sick and the afflicted..”#

“Throughout history, the Lord has measured societies and individuals by how well they cared for the poor. He has said: “For the earth is full, and there is enough and to spare; yea, I prepared all things, and have given unto the children of men to be agents unto themselves. “Therefore, if any man shall take of the abundance which I have made, and impart not his portion, according to the law of my gospel, unto the poor and the needy, he shall, with the wicked, lift up his eyes in hell, being in torment” (D&C 104:17–18; see also D&C 56:16–17). Nevertheless as we pursue the cause of Zion, each of us should prayerfully consider whether we are doing what we should and all that we should in the Lord’s eyes with respect to the poor and the needy.”#

The Prophet Joseph Smith said: “The building up of Zion is a cause that has interested the people of God in every age; it is a theme upon which prophets, priests and kings have dwelt with peculiar delight; they have looked forward with joyful anticipation to the day in which we live; and fired with heavenly and joyful anticipations they have sung and written and prophesied of this our day; but they died without the sight; we are the favored people that God has made choice of to bring about the Latter-day glory. We ought to have the building up of Zion as our greatest object”#

The before mentioned quotes and admonishments from our prophets and scriptures compel us to work toward unity of the faith and purpose by focusing our efforts helping the poor and oppressed people and in essence establishing a Zion society; a society of righteousness, equality and social justice. Zion will be built by persuasion not force. It is a libertarian movement that is not divisive but will bring about a unity of the faith and purpose as people freely give their consecrated lives for the empowerment of the poor. It is this preferential option for the poor that the Saints in Zion will be tested as a social morality .

Saints both ancient and modern have found the quest for Zion was and always is an imperative. Indeed, at the very beginning of the restoration of the Jesus Christ’s ancient church the cause of Zion was declared by the Prophet Joseph Smith. (D&C 6: 7.) Through out early church history its members made Zion their ultimate cause as they settled in Jackson County, Nauvoo, and the Great Basin Territory and surrounding areas.

New economic arrangements were instituted that made the pursuit of commerce for the collective good of God’s kingdom. The saints were trying to achieve economic equality when the pursuit of wealth was not to be only for personal enrichment. but also others will be rich like them selves. As it is so stated in the Book of Mormon. “But before ye seek for riches seek ye for the kingdom of God. And after ye have obtain a hope in Christ ye shall obtain riches, if ye seek them: and ye will seek them for the intent to do good….to clothe the naked, and to feed the hungry, and to liberate the captive, and administer relief to the sick and the afflicted.” (Jacob 2:18-19)

It seems now that us modern Latter-Day Saints have lost this Zion vision; this ethos that we are to pursue wealth for the intent to do good not just to build upon earthly treasures of Babylon. Although, there are many saints who have given up much of the their time and wealth for the betterment of others. We are now more of a global church and many of our members are living in oppressive poverty. It seems that working toward a Zion economy is needed more than ever. What then are we to do?

First of all let me state that saints of Zion must express their concerns about the direction of the global community such as resorting more toward war in resolving international differences , participating more in the environmental destruction of our planet, perpetuating global economic policies that produces economic inequalities, to name a few. Indeed there is a need for strong political advocacy through out the world to make governments and corporations to be more aggressive in eliminating political and economic inequality. This secular political component is our duty as admonished by the Brethren and scriptures; to be anxiously engaged in civic affairs.

As there is a political component so too there is an apolitical component if you will that is necessary to establish a just and equitable society. Again the imperative of Zion is to stand for righteousness, equality and social justice, however this is not a political process but a process of changing individual and collective behavior. Even though on many occasions when political and economic oppression is so massive among many nations, non-violent governmental force is necessary to promote societal conditions of liberty and justice. Government should be constituted where its very existence comes from the sovereign will of the people. It is only in this context can a Zion society exists.

Politics is the distribution of power by the state, which by it is nature is coercive and promotes conflict . In contrast the ideal of Zion will be built by persuasion not force. It is a libertarian movement that is not divisive but will promote unity of the faith and purpose as people freely give their consecrated lives for the spiritual and economic empowerment of the less fortunate .

We invite all LDS members from conservative and progressive social-political persuasions and economic classes into one cause. When people get involved for the cause of the poor there is a unity of pure hearts in trying to help those who suffer. As the quest for Zion becomes paramount all kinds of opportunities and avenues begin to open up. Consider the following.:

1. It is extremely difficult to advocate progressive causes within the traditional institutions of the LDS Church. However discussing and implementing the cause of Zion such as helping the poor achieving economic liberation is appropriate within various entities of the Church. One can use the scriptures and declarations of the Brethren as a guide.

2. We can go on expeditions to the developing countries and try to understand the economic hardship of our fellow brother and sisters and then try to be of assistance to their plight.

3. Such assistance should not only be kind of acts of relief charity but actually giving part of our selves such as consecrating our lives and excess fortunes as we try to assist in on their on going efforts for self and community economic sustainability.

4. One activity could be that we organize economic support groups and that our funds will go to micro credit lending and enterprises among the poor LDS member’s business efforts. We can teach the principles of business,and how to set up community based cooperatives or their own development groups.# We can rely upon the BYU Center for Economic Self Reliance and current LDS church humanitarians programs as resources in our endeavors.

Note: I am mentioning poor LDS members now since there is a terrific bond that is developed as we work in solidarity with our fellow brother and sisters. Although we must not exclude their poor non-members friends.

5. Let various LDS wards and stakes members know about what other LDS inspired groups are doing working among the poor. Action fairs can be organized among the wards and stakes where groups can present their causes and programs.

6. LDS members can set up for profit enterprises for their own sustainability but excess profits will be directed to development programs among the poor .

7. During Family Home Evenings we can discuss the writings and scriptures on Zion.and brain storm ideas that will empower the poor. . Invite speakers during Firesides and expose the extent of poverty among the Saints and what are the solutions. Volunteer to talk in Sacrament , Relief Society, and Priesthood meetings about this subject.
.
When wealthy and not so wealthy LDS members see needs of the poor their compassionate hearts are open to their plight. Indeed there is a change of heart. No longer the pursuit of more expensive homes, cars, and other items is their primary concern. In essence that have adopted those saints and the communities who are in need. Church members will seek more wealth not just for them selves but the intent to do good.. This is the beginning process working toward Zion.

I have serious problems with this statement by Dallin Oaks.

Both in support and in warning about this kind of group, by Dallin H. Oaks (1992, link here) addresses this issue very clearly (my emphasis added):
“Some persons have a finely developed social conscience. They respond to social injustice and suffering with great concern, commitment, and generosity. This is surely a spiritual strength, something many of us need in greater measure. Yet persons who have this great quality need to be cautious that it not impel them to overstep other ultimate values. My social conscience should not cause me to coerce others to use their time or means to fulfill my objectives…In the same way, we should not feel alienated from our church or its leaders when they refrain from using the rhetoric of the social gospel or from allocating Church resources to purposes favored by others. We should remember that the Lord has given his restored Church a unique mission not given to others. We must concentrate our primary efforts on those activities that can only be accomplished with priesthood authority, such as preaching the gospel and redeeming the dead.”

My comments

Christianity is the social gospel of Zion .. One way to preach the gospel is to put it in action. , religiously, personally, economically, and poititically.

I have problems with this redeeming the dead. when millions of children die before they are 5 years old. . People are dieing faster then we can redeem them. How about redeeming the people who live in acute poverty to have more life…

I am indeed alienated from the Church and its leaders when they do not speak out against this horrific war in the Middle East, torture, imperialistic agression, violence , genocide, the conditions of extreme poverty., the environmental destruction of our planet., the extreme over consumption of bloaded industrial democracies while billion people on this planet just do not enough to eat. Hundreds of billions of dollars are spent for weapons of war. while these same dollars can go to alleviate global hunger.

We are heading toward global disasters and we preach for Jesus Christ to come to save us, while it is the our earthly actions that is bringing about our demise. We want to go to heaven but why not also try to make heaven on earth. Perhaps this heavenly quest is to escape from hell for many that is not of their own doing..

Marx is correct.. Religion is the opiate of the people. I would say it is abuse of religion .Relgion should be the social and spirtual liberation of the people Religion for many people is to feel good while others suffer. It is the pious endeavors of the religious and materialist which are some of the reasonw many others are suffering.

Our social conscience is to compels not force others to live our values for social justice, equality, and peace. The ultimate value is to eliminate suffering within a moral, physical, and social.context.

This year we are studying the Doctrine and Covenants but yet when it comes to Zion the out line only speak of the pure in heart ;no mentioning about there is no poor among us. . Check out the lesson on D&C 98. There is no mentioning of renouncing war and proclaiming peace.;only to be good citizens.

When we were discussing the people of Ammon in the Book of Mormon the topic was converting to Jesus Christ.but nothing in the topic about laying down weapons of war for peace..It is the conversion to Christ should compel us to turn the .weapons of war into plow shares. . Not practical but is the ideal we should work for.

Zion is for social justice and is our social gospel.

B Tippets,

Your 135 re-inforces to me my concerns about MESJ. Thanks for being so clear about how you see things. I Esp appreciate attempts be people who claim to be “committed LDS members” to correct Elder Oaks. Also lets not redeem the dead!!

Devyn S., I think passing Prop. 8 had a bigger impact on the American nation than what a similar amount added to aid for Africa would do for that continent. Also, if you think about we spend to send missionaries out each month, or to pay for air-conditioning of California chapels, $40 million is not a large amount of money.

Well, Devyn, I also disagree with you (which makes sense since you disagree with me). I don’t think there is an inevitable future plotted out before us on this issue, especially given the not-all-that-impressive track record so far of pushing forward gender-indifferent marriage; the same day Prop. 8 passed, two other states did the same thing and it was hardly even newsworthy.

Also, I am not trying to knock aid, but building a $20,000 school today won’t acomplish much without $20,000 put into its operation next year, and probably $20,000 to rebuild it seven years from now. Such work is never complete. It should still be done in whatever way is useful.

For comparison, the California state budget faces a $42 billion shortfall. That’s not the whole budget, just the deficit. And that’s not all economic activity in the state, just the budget of the state government. Again, $40 million spent by Prop. 8 supporters, plus a similar amount spent by opponents, is not a large amount of money.

An example when Latter-day Saint First Presidency being advocates for social justice.

A Proclamation on the Economy

The First Presidency
and Council of the Twelve Apostles of the Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-Day Saints

THE EXPERIENCE OF MANKIND has shown that the people of communities and nations among whom wealth is the most equally distributed, enjoy the largest degree of liberty, are the least exposed to tyranny and oppression and suffer the least from luxurious habits which beget vice. Under such a system, carefully maintained there could be no great aggregations of either real or personal property in the hands of a few; especially so while the laws, forbidding the taking of usury or interest for money or property loaned, continued in force.

ONE OF THE GREAT EVILS with which our own nation is menaced at the present time is the wonderful growth of wealth in the hands of a comparatively few individuals. The very liberties for which our fathers contended so steadfastly and courageously, and which they bequeathed to us as a priceless legacy, are endangered by the monstrous power which this accumulation of wealth gives to a few individuals and a few powerful corporations. By its seductive influence results are accomplished which, were it more equally distributed, would be impossible under our form of government. It threatens to give shape to the legislation, both State, and National, of the entire country. If this evil should not be checked, and measures not taken to prevent the continued enormous growth of riches among the class already rich, and the painful increase of destitution and want among the poor, the nation is likely to be overtaken by disaster; for, according to history, such a tendency among nations once powerful was the sure precursor of ruin.

YEARS AGO IT WAS PERCEIVED that we Latter-day Saints were open to the same dangers as those which beset the rest of the world. A condition of affairs existed among us which was favorable to the growth of riches in the hands of a few at the expense of many. A wealthy class was being rapidly formed in our midst whose interests in the course of time, were likely to be diverse from those of the rest of the community. The growth of such a class was dangerous to our union; and, of all people, we stand most in need of union and to have our interests identical. Then it was that the Saints were counseled to enter into co-operation. In the absence of the necessary faith to enter upon a more perfect order revealed by the Lord unto the Church, this was felt to be the best means of drawing us together and
making us one.

A UNION OF INTERESTS was sought to be attained. At the time co-operation was entered upon the Latter-day Saints were acting in utter disregard of the principles of self-preservation. They were encouraging the growth
of evils in their own midst which they condemned as the worst features of the systems from which they had been gathered. Large profits were being consecrated in comparatively few hands, instead of being generally
distributed among the people. As a consequence, the community was being rapidly divided into classes, and the hateful and unhappy distinctions which the possession and lack of wealth give rise to, were becoming painfully apparent. When the proposition to organize Zion’s Co-operative Mercantile Institution was broached, it was hoped that the community at large would become stockholders; for if a few individuals only were to own its stock, the advantages to the community would be limited. The people, therefore, were urged to take shares, and large numbers responded to the appeal. As we have shown, the business proved to be as successful as its most sanguine friends anticipated. But the distribution of profits among the community was not the only benefit conferred by the organization of co-operation among us.

CO-OPERATION has submitted in silence to a great many attacks. Its friends have been content to let it endure the ordeal. But it is now time to speak. The Latter-day Saints should understand that it is our duty to sustain co-operation and to do all in our power to make it a success. The local co-operative stores should have the cordial support of the Latter-day Saints. Does not all our history impress upon us the great truth that in union is strength? Without it, what power would the Latter-day Saints have? But it is not our doctrines alone that we should be united, but in practice and especially in our business affairs.

Your Brethren:

Brigham Young, Daniel H. Wells, Wilford Woodruff, Orson Pratt, Lorenzo Snow, Franklin D. Richards, Brigham Young Jr., George A. Smith, John taylor, Orson Hyde, Charles C,. Rich, Erastus Snow, George Q. Cannon, Albert Carrington

1875

what approach are you talking about?

Other bloggers . please refere to my post #145 to see the context of the is discussion

We always quote prophets and Church leaders past and present. The substance of the Proclamation on the Economy is profund and its ideals applies also today. Please consider Union of Interest and Cooperation. How does it rub you the wrong way?. Discuss its merits and do not be so quick rejecting it without doing critical anlaysis. . It only reaserts social justice theology and is so consistent what we read in the scriptures such as in the BofM in reference being divided into classes or in the D&C when Josesph Smith states the world lieth in sin when there is economic inequality. Reference will be presented later. Should we say his statements also are archaic? How about current a church leader proclaiming at the last conference that societies are measured by how they take care of the poor.

We have scriptures and the teachings of the prophets that are over 3000 years old. Please do not tell me they do not apply to us today. Indeed that is why we have church writings as a guide post in how we structure our selves personally and collectively that brings ua closer to God’s purpose.

We are to learn from church history not to censor it . My cause is the cause of Zion.

Where have I preached false doctrine or twisted Church thinking in response to the proclamation I am not pulling out thoughts of the Brethren to support any leftist government programs. Zion is the pure in heart and there is no poor among us. Its out come is economic equality and unity I have not advocated economic state socialism. There are statements from our leaders where the Welfare Program is a prelude to the United Order.

The Proclamation states a problem and its solution is new church programs to provide solutions. My thinking comes from scriptures and thoughts of the Brethren past and present. Indeed the ideal is work toward communal cooperative economics of Zion. Past Church policies have been modified to serve the poor such as borrowering from the ideas of the past and apply them to day. eg the Perpetual Education Fund vs. Perpetual Emigration Fund. So to working toward economic cooperativism which is a main stream thought can be useful today ; especially among the LDS poor within the Third World countries. Indeed I will proclaim the thoughts of the Brethren among all LDS in Church, blogs , media. Again the Proclaimation has prophetic implications today especially when you have extreme class distinction and distribution wealth among developing countries.

May I suggest an excellent book on this subject , “Working Toward Zion” by Warner Woodworth and James Lucas.

Yes there are times when war is justified but the Church stated that it is and must be against war as principle and work toward peaceful negotiations. Another topic latter . Gotta go.

#151 I didn’t mention leftist programs or state socialism.

I simply think that you are skirting modern-day revelation and Church programs, however ineffective they may be, in some effort to politicize theology. All I can say is that my money goes to PEF, Missionary Funds and everything else on the list twice a month and I see great “social justice” fruits of those contributions. And I don’t have to say anything political to get things done, either.

Yes there are times when war is justified but the Church stated that it is and must be against war as principle and work toward peaceful negotiations.

Do you see that you’ve once again twisted what has been said? Not that I don’t agree. I just don’t agree with the dishonesty.

#152- I did. Equality of opportunity- Freedom to choose one’s path and excel to the heart’s desire.

#153 My friend, I just do not see where you are coming form . Let us go back for the moment. When I posted #145 about the Proclamaition on the Economy , I stated here is an example of the First Presidency being advocates for social justice and nothing more. Where am I politicalizing theology although theology does give substance for certain political views? If you read my previous post , Zion is not a political movement. See post #135. I think the confusion here is that I am discussing from a political perspective, which I am not. Principles discussed in the Proclamaition are universal and are backed up in scripture. However , the means to bring about social and economic equality within the LDS context is when we are to work toward the fullfillment of the Law of Conscreation not by politcal force In the interim we can incorporate some its principles within modern day business and social enterprises.

You stated you can show reference when war is justified and indeed there are through out scripture when ones review Captain Moroni’s discourse . Also again the earlier Brethren have stated in 1942 the Church is a must be against war. This principle is also consistant with D&C 98.eg. to renounce war and proclaim peace. Current Brethren have referred to this scripture many times in their writings. I will give total verse in my next post.

My Freind, I enjoy this dialogue. Let try to understand one another. Throughout these exchanges one can find wisdom.

Brother Bart.

#154 Devyn S.,

Yeah, those eternal principles of gender, marriage, and family need to go the way of pre-industrial Utah communal economic thought.

Babylon the Great
By Larry Barkdull

Babylon is the inverse of Zion. If we desire to become Zion-like, we must not partake of or participate in anything that Babylon does, believes in or promotes; otherwise, we will suffer her fate. To the degree that we embrace Babylon, we reject Zion . Only when we make a clean break from Babylon and never turn back will we finally qualify as Zion people. Therefore, there are only two choices: Babylon or Zion.

The process of leaving Babylon and coming to Zion begins with the discovery that we are not home. We have fallen into a lone and dreary world that is as foreign as hell is to heaven. From the moment of that discovery and for the rest of our lives, if we want to be Zion , we must point our direction away and up.

The Originator and Promoters of Babylon

This earth began as Zion but soon was infiltrated by a being, who determined to wrest ownership from the Creator and reign as the god of this world. That being, of course, was Satan. From the outset, he systematically reversed every Zion doctrine with his anti-Christ philosophy, which he designed to appear so reasonable and close to the truth that he could even deceive the very elect. Imitating God the Father, Satan searched for a son to champion his anti-Christ gospel. He found a willing candidate in Cain, who advanced a doctrine so damaging that the entire antediluvian world became irretrievably corrupt and eventually warranted annihilation in the days of Noah.

After the Flood, Cain’s descendant, Nimrod, became heir to the diabolical throne, and a new anti-Christ dispensation began. Nimrod perfected what Cain had started by conquering much of the world and building a capital with a tower or temple to ascend illegitimately into heaven. Nimrod’s temple city was called Babel or Babylon . Forevermore, Babylon would be the code name by which prophets of God would identify and describe the Satanic culture, which always led its people to individual damnation and collective destruction. Sodom and Gomorrah are examples.

Today, the anti-Christ philosophy dominates the earth. Both figuratively and literally, it “slayeth the saints of God, yea, and tortureth them and bindeth them down, and yoketh them with a yoke of iron, and bringeth them down into captivity.” 1

Escaping Babylon

In one way or another we have all been infected by Babylon , and when we become sufficiently sick, we seek heavenly help to get out and go home. To escape Babylon completely requires information, courage and covenants. In the process of leaving, we might react like Laman and Lemuel for a season, constantly looking back and longing for life in Babylon.

But at some point we will come to realize that Zion and Babylon do not mix and we have to make a choice. We can only straddle the gulf between Zion and Babylon for so long; because the two go in opposite directions, we will eventually be forced to jump to one side or another. The only safety, according to Nephi, is summed up in his statement: “ We heeded them not.” 2

Descriptions of Babylon

Babylon is so diverse, pervasive and disgusting that the prophets seem to struggle to find adequate language to describe her. Babylon is often called “the world,” but that term usually gives way to more graphic descriptors that focus on Babylon’s central elements: “whore” to portray her many sexual perversions; “The Mother of Harlots and Abominations of the Earth” to illustrate her continually spawning myriad seductive evils; “carnal, sensual devilish” to depict her strategy to exploit our human nature, tempting us to gratify our senses, which will cause us to become like the devil; “Great and Abominable Church” to illustrate that she is full of idolatry, envy and covetousness, and that her vile desires and philosophies are worshipped by her adherents as if they were doctrines of a perverse religion; and “Great and Spacious Building” to express her pride and scope of influence.

By whatever name, Babylon ‘s aim is to trap and destroy us. Nephi reveals Babylon ‘s four-fold strategy:

The pursuit of wealth
Fashion and materialism
Sexual sins
Peer acceptance and popularity 3
This strategy is so successful that even Satan is taken aback by Babylon ‘s “dark and blackening deeds [which] are enough to make hell itself shudder, and to stand aghast and pale, and the hands of the very devil to tremble and palsy.” 4 Without question, Babylon has made us to “bow down with grief, sorrow, and care, under the most damning hand of murder, tyranny, and oppression.” 5

Nephi describes Babylon in terms of the extent of her detestable deeds and the depth her corruption. His list includes:

contention
man’s wisdom replacing God’s wisdom
denying the power of God
“eat, drink and be merry,” as a way of life
pride
secret sinning
reviling against that which is good
placing trust in carnal security
flattery
taking and giving offense. 6
These items and more define Babylon as a physical location, and a spiritual condition: i.e. false philosophies and doctrines, and a corrupt condition of the heart.

Competition

In Babylon competition rather than cooperation is the name of the game. In Babylon , competitive enterprise is the primary engine that drives progress. Competition, however, spawns more losers than winners, and therefore is the cause of widespread misery. Competition accounts for social classes, educational disparity, poverty, oppression, dishonesty, murder and war. Like it or not, Zion is devoid of competition. If we love to compete, we are living in the right place.

Hypocrites

Babylon is filled with hypocrites, whom Jesus labeled the worst sinners—those people who pretend to be what they are not, to be better than they really are, or to appear pious and virtuous when they are not. Hypocrites have no place in Zion.

Man’s Philosophies and Pseudo Religions

Babylon bounces her adherents from one false philosophy to another, always keeping them off balance so that they will never find the truth. These man-made philosophies are like flavors of the month; when one fades in popularity, another takes its place. These philosophies are embraced by the people of Babylon as pseudo religions; humanism, intellectualism, atheism, fundamentalism, modernism are a few. All these are designed to limit or remove God from our consciousness and to enthrone man and his genius.

Babylon Today

Prophets have compared Babylon today to the days of Noah and Lot, whose antediluvian world and later the societies of Sodom and Gomorrah were completely obliterated, as punishment for their sins. To negotiate through Babylon ‘s filthiness in the last days, the Lord has given us the Book of Mormon. This book of scripture contains two accounts of once-mighty nations that imploded by their embracing Babylon ideals.

Do we really believe we are immune?

President Kimball stated that latter-day Babylon would deceive even the very elect—as many as half the saints, according to the parable of the Ten Virgins, would not be ready for the Savior’s coming. President Kimball had three primary concerns: 1) The abuse of the environment: the pollutions of mind, body and our surroundings; 2) The pursuit of personal affluence: man’s transferring his trust in God to trust in material things, in an effort to assure security and happiness for the remainder of his life; 3) Trust in military security. The folly in pursuing these elements of Babylon can only result as it did for the Jaredites and Nephites.

Babylon’s Pervasiveness

Jesus, John, Paul, and Moroni join Nephi and other prophets, who foresaw Babylon ‘s latter-day dominance. Their descriptions are chilling, and yet many of us still make no attempt to flee. Jesus portrayed our day as a time when “darkness covereth the earth, and gross darkness the minds of the people, and all flesh has become corrupt before my face.” 7

We live in physical Babylon and partake of spiritual Babylon as though we have no option. At times, we seem powerless to cease participating in her lifestyle and believing her philosophies. We assume that this is just the way life is and that we are helpless to change things. The people in the days of Noah and Lot held similar views and were caught up in the destructions: “And as it was in the days of [Noah], so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man. They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that [Noah] entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all. Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded; but the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all. Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed.” 8

Babylon’s Future

Babylon will fall. Can there be any doubt? From the days of Enoch to the present, Babylon ‘s latter-day demise has been prophesied repeatedly. T here have been countless prophetic descriptions of Babylon and myriad authoritative declarations concerning why she must be destroyed once and for all. When we consider Babylon ‘s characteristics, we are astonished that anyone would want to stay.

Zion is Our Only Safety

The prophets have indicated that Zion will rise in proportion to Babylon ‘s collapse. So we have a choice. If Babylon and Zion were two elevators, one crashing and the other ascending, which would we choose to ride? We cannot choose both. The one and only solution for safety and security in a world gone mad is to flee to Zion and hold fast to the true doctrines, covenants and ordinances. Without sounding alarmist, the days of indecision and straddling are past. We must make a choice. Hugh Nibley said, “ Babylon ‘s time is all but used up, and the only thing for the Saints to do is to get out of her.” 9

Comments

The articles in this column are adapted from a soon-to-be-published book called The Three Pillars of Zion. Many of us long to become Zion people. I invite your comments. Please visit my website: http://www.larrybarkdull.com.

#157 nasamomdele – ok my vague response warranted the sarcasm, but I do hope that the principles around gender roles and responsibilities dissolve to be parental responsibilities instead of male or female responsibilities…

I have to disagree with this statement “I think societies (including the Church) generally do a good job of frowning upon autocratic, strict or otherwise imposed gender order” In Primary, we are learning a song which explicitly states the dad is provider, protector, leader, while mom is nurturer and teacher. It was enough to make me puke – by bucketing people this way, we give Men an out to do those things you sarcastically mention… I am sure it was fun to throw together – it was fun to read…

oh yeah, this song is a doozy. I think that the leadership lays out the roles as you say, but that has not trickled down to the membership because of songs like I mention as well as other ingrained views…

LDS Promoting Torture.

LDS lawyers, psychologists had a hand in torture policies
By David R. IrvineUpdated: 04/29/2009 08:22:17 PM MDT
david irvine An overheard conversation among several women at a local deli: “I can’t believe this country elected Obama as president; it must be a sign of the end times when the Constitution will hang by a thread.” The irony of this uniquely Utah political thread about church elders saving the Constitution might have shocked the lunch bunch had they read The Dark Side by Jane Mayer (Doubleday, 2008). Reading Mayer’s disturbing book is likely to lead to the conclusion that the Constitution is more imperiled than ever; but it also reveals the troubling fingerprints of several of my fellow Mormons whose handiwork, not the Obama election, did so much to create the present crisis. Although the decisions which put us in the grim business of torture, body-snatching, extraordinary renditions, making people disappear, indefinite confinement without charges and warrantless wiretapping were made by the president and vice president, members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints served as helpful enablers. Not only did they provide the legal architecture, they provided the “scientific” patina for the plunge into the barbaric business of torture. Take Latter-day Saint Timothy E. Flanigan, deputy White House counsel, who, along with David Addington, John Yoo, Alberto Gonzales, and Jim Haynes comprised the secretive “War Council” of lawyers — a self-appointed group Mayer describes as having virtually no experience in law enforcement, military service,
——————————————————————————–
Advertisement
——————————————————————————–
counterterrorism or the Muslim world. Together, they were the brain trust that devised the legal cover that Vice President Dick Cheney needed to work his will. They secretly crafted the warrantless surveillance program which allowed the National Security Agency to intercept telephone calls and e-mails to and from American citizens within the United States. They secretly devised the Bush military commissions, which were essentially kangaroo courts and legally insufficient to satisfy the minimal adjudicatory standards required under the Geneva Conventions, which, as provided by the Constitution and Congress, constitute the supreme law of the land. They secretly conspired to ignore the law and frame interrogation techniques around the methods of the Spanish Inquisition, the Soviet KGB and Chairman Mao. Flanigan once told his LDS ward congregation that it was gratifying “to work in a White House where every day was begun with prayer.” In 2005, prior to his rejection by the Senate to be Gonzales’ deputy attorney general, Flanigan was asked whether waterboarding, mock executions, physical beatings and painful stress positions were off-limits. “[It] depends on the facts and circumstances… .” He went on: “‘Inhumane’ can’t be coherently defined.” BYU law school graduate Jay S. Bybee was the assistant attorney general directing the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel. At the instigation of Addington and Yoo, Bybee issued official legal opinions that redefined the crime of torture to make it all but impossible to commit. Barbarity was not torture unless it created pain equal to death or organ failure. A newly-declassified Bybee memorandum lists 10 previously top-secret interrogation techniques approved for use by the CIA, including waterboarding. Incredibly, Bybee seems to have been unaware that the United States had prosecuted waterboarding as a war crime after World War II. In 2003, before his role in authorizing U.S. torture was known, Bybee was given a lifetime judicial appointment on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Had his role in torture been known, it is unlikely he would have been confirmed. Two devout Mormons also engineered the more grisly wet work. Because the CIA lacked personnel in 2001 with interrogation expertise, the agency turned to two psychologists, James E. Mitchell and John B. Jessen, who had worked with the Air Force’s Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape programs. Neither had an intelligence or interrogation background or had experience with Muslim terrorists, but, according to the FBI, they had experience in designing, testing, implementing and monitoring torture techniques that were illegal in the United States and elsewhere in the civilized world. These two were responsible for “reverse-engineering” the SERE program — which was intended to toughen American pilots against torture (and the false confessions it had produced in the Korean War) — and they built the CIA’s surreal secret interrogation program around the same brutal coercion that had successfully forced American POWs to lie to their North Korean and Chinese captors. In other words, they assumed that the very brutality which had forced American soldiers to lie would magically force a Muslim terrorist to tell the truth, even if he had to be waterboarded 183 times. Mitchell advised that suspects must be treated like dogs in a cage. “It’s like an experiment, when you apply electric shocks to a caged dog, after a while, he’s so diminished, he can’t resist.” The Mitchell/Jessen methodology became the basis for prisoner treatment at Guantanamo, Bagram, CIA secret prisons and Abu Ghraib. It involved isolation, sensory deprivation, disorientation, nudity, sexual humiliation, waterboarding, painful stress positions, withholding food and medical treatment, extended sleep deprivation and subjection to temperature extremes. These were used singly and, more commonly, in combination with one another. Retired Air Force Col. Steve Kleinman, a former SERE instructor and interrogator, says of Mitchell and Jessen: “I think they have caused more harm to American national security than they’ll ever understand.” David R. Irvine is a Salt Lake attorney and former Utah legislator residing in Bountiful. He was commissioned in the U.S. Army Reserve as a strategic intelligence officer in 1967 and retired as a brigadier general. He taught prisoner of war interrogation and military law for 18 years for the Sixth United States Army Intelligence School.

Devyn

It is quite accurate. The article is from the Salt Lake Tribune. I have met Bybee personnally while attending Chevy Chase Ward. Mitchell and Jessen were featured on “Democracy Now”. Google in Impeach Jay Bybee. I would latter start a topic on this subjdect. Can you post it or how can I become a guest blogger?

Devyn,

This is not an “article” but an op-ed. Meaning, it is opinion.

Sure there were a lot of Mormons who were working at the Justice Department at the time. There were also a lot of Catholics and evangelicals, but you don’t see articles in the Salt Lake Tribune about those, do you?

What was the religion of the legal officers at the CIA who requested the opinions from OLC at Justice? What was the religion of the other lawyers at OLC who wrote opinions on the matter (other than Bybee)? Don’t know? Hmm. I wonder why they guys are highlighting “Mormon involvement?”

Could it be they have an agenda? Nah. They just found it “interesting” is all.

Devyn S.,

Some of this was covered about two years ago on BCC, including a link to Vanity Fair article about Mitchell and Jessen. There has also been some discussion recently of an LDS woman (and RM) who killed herself after participating in two days of enhanced interrogations which she seemed to have objected to. Newsweek had a bit more info on Mitchell a week or two ago in their article about an FBI interrogator who was getting info out of terrorists without torture until Mitchell showed up.

I find it interesting that people of the same faith can have such differing reactions to (and involvement in) what seems like a clear-cut moral issue.

Torture is a moral issue. You can not seperate legality from morality about torture. There is no legal precedent for torture as Bybee infers. The very idea that LDS are involved in this torture regime is an atrocity to our faith.

Mr. Tippetts (#177),

There is legal precedent for how the crime of “Torture” is defined. Just like there is legal precedent for how the crime of “murder” is defined, and the crime of “larceny” and the once-existing crime of “adultery.”

Now, adultery is still immoral, but in most states it is no longer illegal. If I were rendering a LEGAL opinion on the subject, I would say that in my state it is not illegal. If I wasn’t asked about the morality of the act, I wouldn’t render an opinion on it. That wouldn’t be my job.

The same is true for what Mr. Bybee and the other very capable lawyers at OLC were asked to do – render a LEGAL opinion on whether certain specific acts would fall within the LEGAL, criminal definition of “Torture.” That’s it. That’s all they did. There is nothing illegal in rendering the opinion and the opinion is very well reasoned. Agree or disagree on the morality of the acts, the legal reasoning in the memos is sound.

175. a random John – thanks – you are correct that it is interesting how people of the same faith interpret things that seem black & white – I do it all the time as well – interpret things in a completely opposite way from other Mormons.

It is our faith should be the guiding paradigm to determine our ethics. To me how LDS can promote torture is should not even be a question of argument. If any thing we should be the greatest critics of Bush torture regime and be in the fore front to determine if criminal acts were committed.

Here is a link.

http://media.mcclatchydc.com/smedia/2008/06/04/14/Tab-L.source.prod_affiliate.91.pdf

The second document is the Bybee memo. John Yoo, now a tenured law professor at UC Berkeley, wrote the first memo on the link.

Indeed.

Mr. Tippetts,

If you’re going to cut and paste someone else’s work into a post, you should probably give them credit.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5i7tADnxuR79MJPcf7h0C8jxGSMGQD985E6L80

Agribusiness for the Arabs but the Sudan government will not develop agriculture for it black Muslims citizens in Darfur nor the black Africans in South Sudan. Instead the government policy is to ethnic cleanse non Arabs from their land as to monopolize oil and other land resources.

Monday, May 25, 2009

The project began on a small scale, with two wells dug into the ground a short distance from the Nile as the river snakes a path through remote northern Sudan.

Tests on the underground water quality and the soil proved positive and a small batch of wheat was -harvested last year, confirming that the land was suitable for cereal and forage crops.

The results mean Hail Agricultural Development CompanyHail Agricultural Development Company, a Saudi Arabian agricultural company, will move ahead to the next stage of a 22,000-acre project in Africa’s largest country. For the oil-rich Gulf kingdom it means it is a small step closer towards its controversial longer-term strategic goal of securing food resources through large-scale farm projects overseas.

Since details emerged of Saudi Arabia’s plans to ensure supplies of wheat, rice, corn, soya beans and alfalfa through overseas agricultural investments, officials have insisted they intended the programme to be private sector led.

The government’s role will be to secure bilateral agreements with nations hosting the farms, including details of how much would be exported back to the kingdom. It will also provide financial support through development institutions and last month announced the setting up of an $800m company to invest in joint ventures and assist with infrastructure development.

But it is the kingdom’s private sector – which has helped the desert nation be wheat self-sufficient for the past three decades – that is expected to be the player getting its hands dirty on the ground.

HadcoHadco will carry out a pilot project for corn next month, and it hopes to be producing about 6,000 acres of wheat in Sudan in 2010, with a 48-year-lease on the land for an annual fee of about SD£3 ($1.30, €0.90, £0.80) per feddan (1.04 acres, 0.42 hectares).

“It’s the first country that gives us land without complicated procedures,” said Mohammed Rasheed al-Balawi, HadcoHadco’s agriculture general manager. “The area is big, the people are friendly [and] they gave us the land almost free.”

HadcoHadco, which secured a SR100m ($27m, €19m, £17m) soft loan from a Saudi development institution, expects to invest SR170m in the project.

The company’s ultimate target is to farm 100,000 hectares – nearly three times the land it cultivates in its home country – which will include investments in other, more distant countries such as Turkey and Kazakhstan. With those nations, however, it will wait until the government has secured bilateral agreements as the authorities work on a list of some 20 countries they will recommend to the private sector.

“We have good experience on large-scale farming so we said to the government that we can, as the private sector, secure your needs from your major imported crops 100 per cent,” Mr Balawi said. “Give us support, politically and financially, but we can do it.”

The initiative comes as Saudi companies, such as Hadco, face challenges at home following the government’s decision to phase out its domestic wheat programme by 2016 to protect its finite water resources, with annual 12.5 per cent reductions in production.

Mr Balawi said it was a problem because “some of these areas, they depend on the agriculture business”, but added Hadco may look to produce more wheat overseas than it has at home.

HadcoHadco, which has been in the business for almost 27 years and produces about 60,000 tons of wheat annually in the kingdom, is not the only one to harbour such ambitions.

Several firms have joined forces to form a limited liability company, JannatJannat, which will seek to acquire companies, enter into joint ventures and set up greenfield projects – all overseas. It has a target of securing 100,000 to 215,000 hectares of land to grow wheat, rice, vegetables and fodder, said Saad Al Swatt, chief executive of Tabuk Agricultural Development CompanyTabuk Agricultural Development Company, one of Jannat’s main investors.

Jannat has plans to invest $40m in African countries, and Tadco, Jannat and its other partners signed a memorandum of understanding Authority for Agricultural Investment AAAID
Sudan | Financial Services
News | Profile | Officers
to set up an agricultural company to invest abroad, according to a statement on the Saudi stock market on Saturday.

The AAAID was set up by Arab governments during the 1970s oil boom to contribute to Arab food security.

The companies are moving ahead with plans in spite of some analysts questioning the risks of the programme and whether Saudi companies have the experience and appetite to invest abroad.

Particular concerns have been raised about the prospect of an Arab country shipping food from impoverished African states that suffer perennial food shortages, while also dealing with the sensitivities that surround land ownership.

HadcoHadco hopes to offer Sudan employment and development through the project, with an estimate it will create at least 500 jobs.

By Andrew England in Abu Dhabi

Please go to Financial Times as the source for this article.

Mormon Nonviolence 2009 Writing Contest

In connection with the launch of latter day satyagraha’s sister website http://mormonlutherking.com, mormongandhi is looking for a creative and prolific nonviolent practitioner or theorist who can combine his or her knowledge of mormonism with the principles and ideas taught by Martin Luther King, Jr. I know you are out there, mormon luther king!

Please spread the word. Deadline for submission: 28 August 2009 (46 years after MLK delivered his I have a Dream speech on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial). For more information, check http://mormongandhi.com

Neda means voice; The voice of Iran. She is becoming a symbol of the new Iranian revolution . She died being shot at a protest rally

http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/world/neda-a-voice-which-became-silent_100207744.html

Thomas Jefferson once wrote: The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

Unfortunate, but I think it’s true. Even the Book of Mormon teaches that sometimes the innocent must take up the sword to defend themselves from evil.

Sam Adams wrote: “If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.” 


Violence should be the last resort. But also remember:

“One sword keeps another in the sheath.” – George Herbert

Si vis pacem, para bellum is a Latin adage translated as, “If you wish for peace, prepare for war”.

Non violence brought down communism in Eastern Europe mainly. Practicing non violence is the the way of Christ, for He knew to spread His kingdom one must find the Kingdom of God within. Not once did He advocate violence to the Jews to cast of the shackles of Roman oppression to which non violence brought Christainity to Rome.

One may quote patriots to justify radical militant violent change is based upon romantic delusions and out historical context that does not apply to the present situation in Iran. To me I will follow the higher law of the Jesus new convenant which is based upon love, reconciliation, forgiveness and turning toward Him

Let us not pull on teachings in the Book of Mormon out of context to the current situation in Iran to support neo con political agendas that is destructive and gives misunderstandings of the purpose of the Book of Mormon prophets. Telling the Iranians to prepare for war so they can have peace and justice in their country is a distortion of political and social realities that is developing there. It will only promote more blood shed. Iran is the beginning of a new revolution for liberty indeed but violent militantism will cast the country into civil war. Promoting peace is to prevent war.

There were times the sword was not shield to defend lives and liberty of the earlier American ancients but not to spill blood out of revenge to estblish political power. Using defense when attacked by a foreign aggressor was the last resort.

Let us understand our own LDS heritage of Joeseph Smith teachings when he knew that taking refuge and promoting the gospel of love and restoring God’s Kingdom on this earth and building Zion was far more important than taking on the mobs of Missouri. He taught we should live peacefully with one another . His wisdom was and is indeed the right course to which the Church was not destroyed but is currently flourshing.

Bookslinger – nice set of quotes.

B Tippetts – I am anti-war for the most part, but for people like the wack jobs in Iran, they only understand violence. They will kill/suppress anyone, so one must either fight back or be destroyed. I think that in the case of Eastern Europe, it was peaceful but, as much as I hate to admit it, Ronald Reagans defense buildup contributed a lot to that fall. So while we did not fight, we built an awful lot of weapons to fight with.

We are talking to different issues. To repel an external aggressor violent force is necessary. To bring about internal political change non violence is effective and humane and follows christain ethics. Those who advocate violence for internal regime change does not follow the calling of a Latter-day Saint and goes against our gospel principles.

What is the correct US foreign policy in regards to Iran is another discussion.

No appeasement . In Iran just be effective to bring out eventually regime change through the process of reform not revolution is to avert civil war and massive blood shed. The means should be judge by the ends it creates. What is most critical with our relation with Iran now is to convince them not to aquire a nuclear weapon and prevent a global war. The Iranian social and political transformation which is moving away from a political Islamic state . The June 12th movement is afront to such a state and the ruling powers will eventually adapt to new political and social political realities. Non violence is less messy and may take longer for regime change but it will eventually happened.

The Polish experience is an excellent model what should take place in Iran. The Iranian pro democracy reformers are not discusing a strike.

Wrong about Clinton . He bomb the Serbians until they eventually agree to a cease fire which is still in place.

Promoting non violence in Iran.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/06/22/dabashi.iran.myths/index.html

“I am convinced that we are witness to something quite extraordinary, perhaps even a social revolution that is overriding its economic roots. Although there are many similarities, this is a much different event than the 1977-1979 Islamic Revolution. I am not sure that this movement either sees itself as a revolution or will actually transmute into one.

Given the brutality it faces, it has no choice but opt for a nonviolent civil disobedience route. The age of ideological warfare is over in Iran. If anything, this momentum is the closest event in Iran to the civil rights movement of the 1960s in the United States, and precisely like that movement, its economic dimensions are couched in social demands.

We need to adjust our lenses and languages in order to see better, and there is no better adjustment than just cautiously, hopefully and responsibly watching what is unfolding in front of us and reading it accordingly.

This movement is ahead of our inherited politics, floating ideologies or mismatched theories. We need to sit back, hope for the best and let this inspirational movement of a whole new generation of hope teach us courage and humility.” (Hamid Dabashi)

The most humane Christian way to bring about political change within tyrannical governments is through non violence . What is the appropiate response to external threats is a different discussion and unrelated to my orginal post on this subject. So tell me do you think we should start sending weapons to would be insurgents of Iran and Korea to bring about regime change? If you do what theological basis do you support such a postions. Why is non violence such an alien concept to certain neo cons of the LDS culture. Have you ever studied the writings of Ghandi or Martin Luther King.

Please read my post #156. Try to understand your Christianity when you are so prone to bloodshed ,killings. .

Support Human Rights in Iran. Please sign the petition.

http://www.amnesty.ca/urgentappeal/2009/UAN_iran/index_fb.html

I used the Mormons For Equality and Social Justice thread just to present the issue on Iran. I am glad you for social justice etc. What proper context is subjective . However our LDS leaders teaches us to become involved in political affairs of this nation and world wide. Living the gospel is indeed a moral imperative. So to putting the gospel into social action is a community imperative. I am not here debate liberal LDS groups but to do all we can to stand for justice for where there is liberty the gospel can be preached and lived.

The saints among earlier Christ Church in the old and new world were taught the ideal of Christain equality as means to care for the needs of the poor to be bestowed by consecration not by force.

Working Toward Zion Part 1.

Consecration

¶ And when they had prayed, the place was shaken where they were aassembled together; and they were all filled with the bHoly Ghost, and they spake the word of God with boldness. And the multitude of them that believed were of aone heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that bought of the things which he cpossessed was his own; but they had all things dcommon.. And with great power gave the apostles awitness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great bgrace was upon them all. Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses asold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, And laid them down at the apostles’ feet: and adistribution was made unto every man according as he had bneed. And Joses, who by the apostles was surnamed aBarnabas, (which is, being interpreted, The son of consolation,) a Levite, and of the country of Cyprus, Having land, sold it, and brought the amoney, and laid it at the apostles’ feet. (Acts 4:31-37)

1 And it came to pass that the thirty and fourth year passed away, and also the thirty and fifth, and behold the disciples of Jesus had formed a church of Christ in all the lands round about. And as many as did come unto them, and did truly repent of their sins, were abaptized in the name of Jesus; and they did also receive the Holy Ghost. And it came to pass in the thirty and sixth year, the people were all converted unto the Lord, upon all the face of the land, both Nephites and Lamanites, and there were no contentions and disputations among them, and every man did deal justly one with another. And they had aall things common among them; therefore there were not rich and poor, bond and free, but they were all made free, and partakers of the heavenly gift.
(4 Nephi 1:1-3)

Note: Below are scriptures from 2 Corrinthians Chapter 8. Verses selected below is to provide a certain emphasis with out loosing the complete context of Paul’s letter.

3 For to their power, I bear record, yea, and beyond their power they were willing of themselves; 4. Praying us with much intreaty that we would receive the gift, and take upon us the a fellowship of the ministering to the saints. 5 And this they did, not as we hoped, but first agave their own selves to the Lord, and unto us by the will of God. 7 Therefore, as ye abound in every thing, in faith, and utterance, and knowledge, and in all adiligence, and in your love to us, see that ye abound in this grace also.
8. I speak anot by commandment, but by occasion of the forwardness of others, and to prove the bsincerity of your love. 9 For ye know the agrace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that, though he was brich, yet for your sakes he became cpoor, that ye through his dpoverty might be rich.
11 Now therefore perform the doing of it; that as there was a readiness to will, so there may be a performance also out of that which ye have.12 For if there be first a awilling bmind, it is accepted according to that a man hath, and not according to that he hath not. 13 For I mean not that other men be eased, and ye burdened: 14 But by an equality, that now at this time your abundance may be a supply for their want, that their aabundance also may be a supply for your want: that there may be be equality:

Solving Hunger Problems Among LDS in Sudan

I need some help. How can I become a guess blogger and discuss this water irragagation subject below. I want to explore this idea with scientist and other knowlege people on this blog.

DKL . Notice the article presented defers dependence on food aid and uses free market concepts in development. I want to have a special topic in this blog other than through Mormons Equality and Social Justice because of its political controversy element and distracts people to read about this subject.

There is a group of Latter-day Saints who live in Akobo , Sudan. A extremely poor area . They live by life rain cycles to grow their food but live right near the river. Google Earth can give you the location . I woke this morning and thought about how Utah was first agriculturally developed through irragation. The river near by Akobo is the solution to their hunger

I met a man from Sudan in my Stake who part of a LDS inspired and mangaged NGO call http://www.sudanhelp.org . One of their target areas for development is Akobo, Sundan where they have relgious LDS connections.

There is a lot of analytical discussion on this blog so let us use our knowledge to solve poverty problems for our LDS brother and sisters in East Africa. Please read below.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0201/p01s03-woaf.html

Bart

Wow this is gettint intense i think i
will not take saides and sit on the side line and wait this out to se the outcome.

Nothing to explain B Tippetts – it is spam

My post is not a spam. Just quoting scripture. I should have asked for commentary. How can I be a guess blogger so I can not start a subject.

This concept speaks truth to establishing a Zion society and is wihtin LDS tradition. It is so relevant to day that we should not work just to get ecnomomic gain but work for the ocmmon purpose of Zion. Economic equality is a pure truth among Christ’s teachings

Living History: Orderville’s utopia was nearly perfect — for about a decade
By Kristen Rogers-iversen

Special; to The Tribune

Updated: 09/11/2009 05:47:10 PM MDT

This bad economy stinks. But it is making us rethink our economic systems. What isn’t working? Is there anything we can learn from the past?

I think so. Not that we’d actually do this, but Orderville’s experience in communal living resulted in economic success and generally happy people. After interviewing former members of the Orderville community, historian Andrew Jenson wrote, “I was assured by several of the brethren who stuck to it till the last that they never felt happier in their lives than they did when … they were devoting their entire time, talent and strength for the common good. Good feelings, brotherly love and unselfish motives characterized most of those who were members until the last.”

In 1875, after Brigham Young urged his followers to form “United Orders,” a group of people founded Orderville. They had lofty goals.

Resident Thomas Robertson explained, “Accumulating wealth was not our object, that was furthest from our minds; our aim was to establish a principle of equality — as near as our fallen natures would admit of, striving always to grade upwards to the mark.”

In Orderville, everyone owned property in common. Everyone who worked received equal wages. The community ate meals together — making 300 pounds of flour into bread each day! They organized dozens of very successful enterprises, such as blacksmithing, livestock, mills, molasses making, cloth-making, freighting, shoemaking, farming, public works, schools

——————————————————————————–

Advertisement

——————————————————————————–
and much more.

Within this system, people lived plainly, but they didn’t have to worry about losing their jobs. One woman, looking back, exclaimed, “My, we did work, but, Oh! We were happy.”

“Here was an ideal situation — industry with cheerfulness,” wrote author Mark Pendleton. “They had a purpose in life: to establish a better social order here on earth and to secure for themselves a high degree of exaltation in the spirit world.”

The residents of Orderville believed that all God’s children were equally entitled to the bounties of the earth. They believed that communities flourish when people use their property, time and talents for the good of all.

Isaac Carling was one who gave his all for the good of all. A cabinetmaker by trade, he devoted his “spare” time to making things for others. He made toys for Christmas — by the hundreds. He made small tables and chairs, rockers, wash tubs, wagons, large sleds, bedsteads, tin plates and plaster-of-Paris doll heads and limbs.

For adults, Carling made jewelry and household goods. He organized a free night school, where children spent happy evenings learning drawing and painting. And, as Emma Carroll Seegmiller later wrote, “Wherever Brother Carling was, there were beautiful flowers, and many took lessons from him in the culture of plants.”

Others contributed their own gifts. For instance, girls would serve at the communal meals, but some went beyond mere duty. Emma’s sister Kezia and friends would often rise early in summer and gather hundreds of wild roses from the creek bank. They would place a single rosebud at each plate, filling the room with fragrance.

Orderville wasn’t a perfect community, of course. No would-be Utopia has ever been perfect — or even successful — for long. But it worked pretty well — until, after 10 years, the experiment came to an end.

Why? Lots of reasons. The state economy was changing. Kids began to want store-bought clothes. The group discontinued its communal meals. Brigham Young died. And Apostle Erastus Snow urged the Order to start paying wages based on talent, skill or education instead of equal wages. Cooperation and communalism weakened as people began to covet and hoard.

It’s a pity. We could use more of their communal attitude today:

Live together, work together,

Angels do above;

Each one try to help the other

This will bring true love.

Kristen Rogers-Iversen can be reached at kristenri@yahoo.com.

Sources: “The Orderville United Order of Zion,” by Mark A. Pendleton, and “Personal Memories of the United Order of Orderville, Utah,” by Emma Carroll Seegmiller; A History of Kane County, by Martha Sonntag Bradley.

Return to Top

The issue is not equal entitlements for bounties of the earth but nourish your stewardship toward the common good of Zion until there is no poor among you.

I’m pretty sure the goal of that kind of deal is to HAVE a stewardship, in other words… be the guy in charge. No thanks.

Wow this is gettint intense i think i
will not take saides and sit on the side line and wait this out to se the outcome.

Free Windows 7 Themes