Why are so many members Liberals?

[lundbaek]

Apparently in high places in the Church are some who believe that illegal immigrants should continue to get certain benefits and freebies at taxpayer expense, and made that position clear in Utah in late 2007.

[InfoWarrior82]

I would have to agree with the posters on this thread that believe that this is an issue because members misunderstand what it means to be charitable. Does true charity (the pure love of Christ) become manifested best when conducted by the state or rather the individual? If it is through the state, I would love to hear an explanation.

[iamse7en]

I would have to agree with the posters on this thread that believe that this is an issue because members misunderstand what it means to be charitable. Does true charity (the pure love of Christ) become manifested best when conducted by the state or rather the individual? If it is through the state, I would love to hear an explanation.

My dad has a liberal friend with whom he often has political discussions. I once heard him use King Benjamin's sermon as justification for the redistribution of wealth. I assume it's this specific scripture:

I would that ye should impart of your substance to the poor, every man according to that which he hath, such as feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, visiting the sick and administering to their relief, both spiritually and temporally, according to their wants.

I guess he misunderstands that King Benjamin said "YE SHOULD impart" of your substance, not "I should impart of YOUR substance" to the poor, according to their wants. I truly believe liberalism (and any form of statism, really) is a disease of the mind. I believe it's a tool of the devil. That scripture should be clear to any idiot on the street, but this very intellectual and successful lawyer thinks King Benjamin believes the government should steal our property and give it to someone else - for our and their good. I guess he also misreads this important principle only a few verses later:

And I would that ye should remember, that whosoever among you borroweth of his neighbor should return the thing that he borroweth, according as he doth agree, or else thou shalt commit sin; and perhaps thou shalt cause thy neighbor to commit sin also.

Sounds like property rights is a principle of God.

I guess this intellectual also ignores the words of then Elder Benson who declared:

Many are now advocating that which has become a general practice since the early 1930s: a redistribution of wealth through the federal tax system. That, by definition, is socialism!... Today’s socialists–who call themselves egalitarians–are using the federal government to redistribute wealth in our society, not as a matter of voluntary charity, but as a so-called matter of right... The chief weapon used by the federal government to achieve this “equality” is the system of transfer payments. This means that the federal governments collects from one income group and transfer payments to another by the tax system. These payments are made in the form of social security benefits, Medicare and Medicaid, and food stamps, to name a few. Today the cost of such programs has been going in the hole at the rate of 12 billion dollars a year; and, with increased benefits and greater numbers of recipients, even though the tax base has been increased we will have larger deficits in the future.

Today the party now in power is advocating and has support, apparently in both major parties, for a comprehensive national health insurance program–a euphemism for socialized medicine. Our major danger is that we are currently (and have been for forty years) transferring responsibility from the individual, local, and state governments to the federal government–precisely the same course that led to the economic collapse in Great Britain and New York City. We cannot long pursue the present trend without its bringing us to national insolvency.

I wish President Monson would give a speech like this on Sunday. It would sure as heck fire start shaking the dead wood of the tree. People were up in arms about Julie Beck's talk a couple years ago. One like this would send these liberals where they belong: out of the Church.

Was I too strong?

[AussieOi]

My dad has a liberal friend with whom he often has political discussions. I once heard him use King Benjamin's sermon as justification for the redistribution of wealth. I assume it's this specific scripture:

I would that ye should impart of your substance to the poor, every man according to that which he hath, such as feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, visiting the sick and administering to their relief, both spiritually and temporally, according to their wants.

i emphatically have had my life changed by that scripture.
i take that as an obligation we shoudl take upon ourselves, and not others
as you similarly said in your post there
great quote as well
aint gonna happen from the pulipt though
you know the church is a corporation too?

[lundbaek]

Yes, iamse7en, I for one think you came across "too strong". There are many members who are still liberal or socialist who have not yet learned all the principles of the Gospel, and still espouse principles of socialism and legalized plunder. It seems the Lord is giving them as much time as possible to awake to and espouse those principles of government that the Lord would have us live by. I'll be the first to admit that there are some members who desperately need an awakening, especially those who are in positions to wrongly influence other people. But for the sake of the thousands of members for whom there is more hope, I think the Lord will keep them in the Church as long as He knows there is still hope for them.

[Rand]

There is a lot of energy and intensity on this topic. I do think the tendency to cause contention is what we must be careful of.

Here is the thing I have found most enlightening on the topic of liberals VS conservatives. I don't think it has been posted yet.

http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/jonat ... _mind.html

(If someone can explain how to imbed a video, I will do it. )

A liberal can be a righteous LDS. So can a conservative, of which I believe I am. But, it is the tendency to coerce that becomes a problem in either etiology. IMO.

[Rincon]

.

[lundbaek]

How can one be a totally faithful member of the Church for any length of time without realizing that the Lord authored the US Constitution, without coming to understand the basic principles of the US Constitution, without understanding and eschewing the evils of legalized plunder, and without opposing laws and government programs that deprive persons of free agency? I can think of only one LDS member of Congress who has not, that I know of, proposed and/or supported government welfare and foreign aid. And I'm not totally sure of him. Fact is, I know of only 2 members of Congress in my lifetime who abided strictly by constitutional principles. One of those was a Democrat, and neither was LDS.

[Rincon]

How can one be a totally faithful member of the Church for any length of time without realizing that the Lord authored the US Constitution, without coming to understand the basic principles of the US Constitution, without understanding and eschewing the evils of legalized plunder, and without opposing laws and government programs that deprive persons of free agency? I can think of only one LDS member of Congress who has not, that I know of, proposed and/or supported government welfare and foreign aid. And I'm not totally sure of him. Fact is, I know of only 2 members of Congress in my lifetime who abided strictly by constitutional principles. One of those was a Democrat, and neither was LDS.

President Hugh B. Brown was a Democrat. James E. Faust was a Democrat. So a Democrat can be a faithful LDS member.

[lundbaek]

Has any General Authority ever said or written anything that would indicate disdain for constitutional principles?

[Mahonri]

Has any General Authority ever said or written anything that would indicate disdain for constitutional principles?

any answer in the affirmative would probably not be appropriate for this forum

[shadow]

Has any General Authority ever said or written anything that would indicate disdain for constitutional principles?

To be fair, constitutional principles can be interpreted differently by different people. And to be more fair to those who might not see eye to eye with you, constitutional principles are for a righteous people. We aren't a righteous people so some people might think we need to give or take on a few things. Before I get beaten up , I'm not saying I think along those lines, just that some people do.

[TonyOlsen]

How can one be a totally faithful member of the Church for any length of time without realizing that the Lord authored the US Constitution, without coming to understand the basic principles of the US Constitution, without understanding and eschewing the evils of legalized plunder, and without opposing laws and government programs that deprive persons of free agency? I can think of only one LDS member of Congress who has not, that I know of, proposed and/or supported government welfare and foreign aid. And I'm not totally sure of him. Fact is, I know of only 2 members of Congress in my lifetime who abided strictly by constitutional principles. One of those was a Democrat, and neither was LDS.

President Hugh B. Brown was a Democrat. James E. Faust was a Democrat. So a Democrat can be a faithful LDS member.

Ronald Reagan, at one point, "was" a Democrat.

..the key word there is "was".

But I've found it isn't really as much about left versus right as it is about force versus freedom, or Statism/Communism/Socialism/Totalitarianism versus Libertarianism. (Although I'd consider many Conservatives Libertaraians)

[7cylon7]

This is very simple. Socialist, Fascism, Communism, Dictators and Monarchies are all evils designed by the devil. Why do you think the last two conferences we have heard about the WAR in heaven. They are trying to tell us that those forms of government are of the Devil and we fought for freedom in the pre-existence. The law of consecration will ONLY work with RIGHTEOUS people. If one person tries to abuse the system it will start to fail. Everyone must be looking out for their neighbor. If in fact we do this the scripture show us over and over again that the wealth of the saints grows faster and higher than any group using any other economic system. All are elevated above those that do not live the law. Think of the billions going to CEOs and Entertainers... that money would be voluntarily given up and put back into the kitty. Billion and millions to be used to improve life for all instead of it going to a few. This system will not work in our current day. Once the economy has collapsed then and only then will we be willing to start this new system.

These other forms of government are all about ENSLAVEMENT. You first have to see that. These forms of government are to control you. to keep you down. Someone else will tell you what you can and can't do. What you can and can't eat. What you can and can't think. What you can and can't be. It is to keep all mankind from coming to a knowledge of their Savior the true Christ.

It is really simple to see.

[Amore Vero]

.

[TonyOlsen]

To me, it appears to come down to a misunderstanding most people have about freedom. They believe that "freedom is a perk to be tolerated ONLY when we can afford it", instead of "freedom is the source of all of our blessings". Because of this, people tend to replace freedom with force in "bad areas", instead of realizing that much of the "bad" in those areas came from the force already being used there.

People will still choose to be what they will, and God will reward them according to their actions, but you have an overall better chance of righteousness when people are free to learn from their own (or others) mistakes. They'll grow more under freedom than under force.

...this is why God chose the plan of Agency over Satan's plan of Force.

...and even though this is part of the Gospel, I'm sad to relate that most people - even members of the Church - just haven't had that "click" light-bulb "aha" moment yet, where they actually finally understand it.

I suspect the reason for this is because Satan doesn't want us to learn why Satan's plan of Force was bad... and those who seek for power are happy to help Satan's agenda (whether they think they are or not), and as long as the government controls our schools and media (FCC decides who gets to broadcast and who doesn't), the power-hungry in government will continue to spoon-feed our children the fallacy that "force will solve all of our problems"... and the classic "...and if it doesn't, it's only because we didn't use enough force".

[jeanpierre]

I think most Mormons, even most American Mormons, are more liberal/socialist than they think they are. But what are they to think when certain apostles have supported or now support socialist candidates like FDR and Senator Reid or candidates who obviously espouse certain socialist principles.

[Matthew.B]

Has anyone else noticed a distinct link between members who are self-proclaimed liberals and members who are 'cultural Mormons'? Among my friends (YSA crowd) the more 'liberal' one gets, usualy the more lax with the overt commandments one is and the greater affiliation one will have for the cultural Mormon crowd.

Although truth be told, most of my friends are so absorbed in themselves, their problems, and their careers/education that they can't be bothered to take these things seriously- and most of those who do are leftists. (Out of the 100 or so YSA's I've known over the past few years, IIRC about 6-8 care about the Constitution and follow the prophets' guidance, at least 10-15 are liberals and cultural Mormons, and the rest don't care for discussing it- ever.)

It's for these reasons, and others, that I'm actually looking forward to the Cleansing. The dishonest in heart can go away and leave the honest in heart be, and the Mormons with honest hearts can finally come together with spiritual eyes fully open and again rally around correct principles of agency and government.