LDS Dems Family Home Evening Program

LDS Dems and the Democratic Party have created a program to enrich the spiritual and political lives of members, encourage deep conversation, and invite others to participate in civic and Democratic activities. This program is based on the family home evening planning guides provided by the Church, and does not attempt to deviate, translate, or infer party politics on gospel truths.  The LDS Dems FHE program is a tool for us to open up our homes to our communities, provide answers, understanding, and opportunity to participate in the great democratic process in Utah and our country.

These guides will be monthly. Invite friends, family members and neighbors to come over for a relaxing, informative, and uplifting gospel lesson. Feel free to use these guides and adapt them as you see fit.

 

March

Family Home Evening:                   Citizenship

 

12^th Article of Faith: We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.

Scriptures: Doctrine and Covenants 134; Mosiah 2:17

Gospel Truth

Being a good citizen means more than just obeying the laws of the land. It also means being actively involved in making our community the best possible place for all to live. As we become good citizens of our community, we are doing the will of Heavenly Father in that regard.

What are ways that we can become active in our community?

Have family members find examples of good citizens in the newspaper or magazines or think of someone in your city, at work, or in school who would qualify as a good citizen. Have them explain why the person they chose is a good citizen.

Challenge: List ways for each person in your family to become more active in the next month. Complete one of those suggestions as an individual or as a family.

 

 

 

This post was written by Tim B.

This month we remember the 10th anniversary of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq and consider the lessons learned. LDS scripture commands us to “renounce war and proclaim peace.”1 Even in the limited circumstances where nations are justified in defending themselves, our scriptures teach us that serious, repeated attempts at peaceful resolution of conflict must be attempted first.2,3 In the face of danger and conflict our bias must be for peaceful solutions.

Read more

Read more

The financial crash of 2008 made historians and economists draw immediate comparisons to the Great Depression.  A year after the crash, the reasons and complexities of why the crash occurred were easy to find. Documentaries, books, and an endless amount of media delved into the Great Recession.  However, while there were tons of problems on “why” the crash occurred, there were very few books and analysis that explained how to fix the problems.  Lately, historians and economists have gone back into the archives and libraries to find ways that America overcame the devastation of the 1930’s.  One person keeps coming up in this search—Marriner Eccles, the American Federal Reserve Chairman from 1934 to 1948.  The ideas that created the most peaceful and stable American economy from 1945-1980 were directly influenced by the philosophy and knowledge of Utah’s greatest public servant.

 

Read more

Much has been written about recent activism in the LDS Church throughout the bloggernaccle. And with the recent announcement that at least one of the prayers in the upcoming General Conference will be given by a woman, and with the launch of a compelling new website devoted to gender equality in the Church it seems this issue is not going away any time soon. There are many in the Church who feel such activism has no place--"revelation always comes from God" they say, "and not from picket lines or protests." Others support the causes but disagree with the methods, viewing such initiatives as strategically unwise or doctrinally prohibited.

It is important, however, to explore the different reasons for activism. Here are the three general categories I've come up with. I'm sure there are others, but I think this is a useful way to get at the various motivations driving activism within the Church.

Read more

The following quote by Robert F. Kennedy (click here for recording and video) is a sobering indictment of how far we have strayed from our values, and is more true today than in 1968.

"Too much and for too long, we seemed to have surrendered personal excellence and community values in the mere accumulation of material things.  Our Gross National Product, now, is over $800 billion dollars a year, but that Gross National Product - if we judge the United States of America by that - that Gross National Product counts air pollution and cigarette advertising, and ambulances to clear our highways of carnage.  It counts special locks for our doors and the jails for the people who break them.  It counts the destruction of the redwood and the loss of our natural wonder in chaotic sprawl.  It counts napalm and counts nuclear warheads and armored cars for the police to fight the riots in our cities.  It counts Whitman's rifle and Speck's knife, and the television programs which glorify violence in order to sell toys to our children.

Yet the gross national product does not allow for the health of our children, the quality of their education or the joy of their play.  It does not include the beauty of our poetry or the strength of our marriages, the intelligence of our public debate or the integrity of our public officials.  It measures neither our wit nor our courage, neither our wisdom nor our learning, neither our compassion nor our devotion to our country, it measures everything in short, except that which makes life worthwhile.  And it can tell us everything about America except why we are proud that we are Americans."

A week or so ago I took the blog A Well-Behaved Mormon Woman to task for accusing President Obama of "moral rape" (she since changed that phrase to "a rape of morals") and for accusing liberals of advancing Satan's agenda. I reached out to her on Twitter with the MormonLiberals account, hoping to spur some kind of dialogue about the issue. You can go back through the account's archive to see my attempts to begin a discussion.

Instead of joining in on a discussion, she blocked me entirely. Maybe I went too far, or maybe I was rude. I certainly didn't mean to be, if I was.

I don't know why she blocked the account. But I do know I'm still dedicated to fruitful discussion and dialogue. Her most recent post gave me a lot to think about, and I hope you'll head on over to give it a read.

While Mormon liberals hold many different viewpoints on the issue of homosexuality and marriage, previously on this blog various bloggers have made a pretty good case in favor of marriage equality. But the book highlighted on WBMW serves as a very thoughtful and thorough representation of the opposing viewpoint. I might not agree with all their assertions but I believe it is imperative that we have these discussions, that we engage with the folks we might not agree with. As I've said before, if we are not willing to discuss the issues with each other we shouldn't be at all surprised when our political system doesn't function very well (or when our kids are not prepared for serving missions because they are completely unable/unwilling to talk with people they disagree with).

So please head on over to her blog and read the excerpts she's collected.

I just filled out my official BSA alumni survey. I am very impressed by the consideration the Boy Scout organization seems to be giving this issue. I don't have much to say about the process at this point, though I'm sure there will be a lot to say after they've made their decision sometime after April 1st (when they said the survey was due).

I did some across one person, though, who said he threatened to remove his boys from from the scouting program altogether if they change their policy too allow homosexual scouts and leaders. I leave it up to him to know what is best for his family, but I am quite confused about that sentiment. Here's why:

Imagine an 14 year-old mormon boy who is homosexual. He has the priesthood (openly homosexual males can have the priesthood), attends the temple regularly to do baptisms for the dead (homosexual males/females can hold temple recommends), plans on serving an honorable full time mission (also allowed). In this most fragile of teenage years, though, he is not allowed to work on the same projects, merit badges, or awards his friends and fellow Mormons are, because the BSA won't allow him to be a Boy Scout. He is ostracized among his own people.

Is that really the message we want to be sending to these people, children of our Heavenly Father whom the Church already openly accepts for who they are?

In past decades, there have been a few General Authorities of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints who have been outspoken on American politics. Some Church members frequently quote from these politically outspoken former General Authorities in order to justify certain right-wing political views, often implying a doctrinal quality to such views, and, on occasion, attempt to question the faithfulness of members who disagree.

Read more

In a way, having a Mormon stake president in Sandy, Utah give a sermon at a stake conference of a political nature has at least the benefit of sparking a public conversation.  In case you missed it, here’s the gist:

An LDS stake president in Sandy did something in a speech earlier this month that other Mormon leaders have done many times: He warned that evil is corrupting the world.

Then President Matthew DeVisser did something few LDS leaders ever do over the pulpit: He rattled off a number of Republican talking points, lamenting that voters last year chose "socialism over capitalism, entitlements over free enterprise, redistribution and regulation over self-reliance.

From at least my perception, most Mormons almost to a fault will avoid discussing anything controversial simply to avoid contention.  While I don’t plan on being contentious here, I do believe strongly in “standing for something” in life and that often involves speaking out.

First, I can tell you that this stake president was not speaking for the Lord or the Church, but rather from his own personal opinion and human bias.  He obviously felt very passionate about it, even evoking the “Holy Ghost” as his authority.  I find that disturbing on many levels.

This story has caught the attention of people in circles outside the church, many of whom are close to me here in Nevada.  These sorts of stories do not go over well with people outside the Church, at least the ones who don’t agree with this stake president.

I try to explain that the Mormon Church doesn’t have any beliefs about tax policy, Social Security, or mandated purchasing of health insurance.  It’s hard to convince them when even Mormons don’t usually/always understand this.  The volume of anti-communist/socialist rhetoric from Church leaders of the past don’t make it any easier.

President Heber J. Grant was adamantly opposed to Social Security and FDR’s New Deal in general.  Yet I would submit that most Mormons today don’t see Social Security as a ‘corrupt evil’ or ‘a threat to freedom.’  Mormons and their leaders are subject to the attitudes and prejudices of their day.  Members should remember this.  After all, it wasn’t until nearly 1980 that black members of the Church were allowed to hold the priesthood or women allowed to pray in church.

Church leaders often speak out about things of a political nature.  They’ve spoken out against gay marriage, communism and other moral issues.  One thing that has always disturbed me is the lack of speaking out during the civil rights era.  How about on wars or illegal torture by our government?  Unfortunately they’ve been astonishingly silent.  My only point is that leaders of the Church are not perfect.  They are human, just like all of us.

How about self-reliance?  Yes, that is a principle taught by the Church.  Of course the Church has its own robust welfare system.  So clearly self-reliance isn’t an excuse to leave the less fortunate out in the cold.  So what exactly was this stake president talking about when he started comparing redistribution and self reliance?  The truth is he doesn’t even know.  He didn’t bother to think about it.  He was so juiced up by conservative talking points, he couldn’t think for himself.

The truth of the matter is that with the great recession and the decade leading up to it, this nation has seen a transfer of wealth from the people at the bottom to the people at the top.  That’s redistribution of wealth in reverse.  That probably never occurred to this gentleman and folks of like mind.

We are living in a time of great struggle for people in the bottom 60% of income earners (that’s more than half of us) and yet this stake president is worried about low taxes, deregulation, free enterprise and self-reliance… things known to help the top income earners, not anyone else.  It doesn’t trickle down.

When it comes to poor people, conservatives have an attitude about them that says they are “takers,” that they have a “sense of entitlement” brought about by a “culture of dependency.”  Most of them believe the poor need to pull themselves up by the bootstraps, all 47% of them.

In my estimation, this conservative attitude reflects a regretful level of disdain and judgment towards the poor.  The scriptures certainly suggest as much:

“But wo unto the rich, who are rich as to the things of the world. For because they are rich they despise the poor, and they persecute the meek, and their hearts are upon their treasures; wherefore, their treasure is their god. And behold, their treasure shall perish with them also.” (2nd Nephi 9:30)

I don’t think there’s any dispute that free market enthusiasts are more concerned for wealth than they are about fighting poverty.  As a matter of fact, fighting poverty is never even brought up in conservative circles.  They feel that there is ample opportunity in this country, and if you aren’t doing well, it’s probably something you aren’t doing right, or you aren’t trying hard enough.  Hmmm, what does that sound like?

Mosiah 4:16-18, 26:

16 And also, ye yourselves will succor those that stand in need of your succor; ye will administer of your substance unto him that standeth in need; and ye will not suffer that the beggar putteth up his petition to you in vain, and turn him out to perish.

17 Perhaps thou shalt say: The man has brought upon himself his misery; therefore I will stay my hand, and will not give unto him of my food, nor impart unto him of my substance that he may not suffer, for his punishments are just—

18 But I say unto you, O man, whosoever doeth this the same hath great cause to repent; and except he repenteth of that which he hath done he perisheth forever, and hath no interest in the kingdom of God.

19 For behold, are we not all beggars? Do we not all depend upon the same Being, even God, for all the substance which we have, for both food and raiment, and for gold, and for silver, and for all the riches which we have of every kind?

26 And now, for the sake of these things which I have spoken unto you—that is, for the sake of retaining a remission of your sins from day to day, that ye may walk guiltless before God—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.

The Lord has commanded his faithful to take care of the needy.  The notion of self-reliance should be taught in example, persuasion, and from a sense of duty, not by means of starvation and deprivation.

If you’ve ever found yourself saying “get a job” or “you reap what you sow” or “poor people poor ways” you should probably strongly reconsider King Benjamin’s sermon.  Called it a hand out… or free advice.