Should Utah sheriffs wade into the gun control debate?
I’m writing this as a concerned citizen regarding recent media coverage and events in Utah since the Newtown tragedy.
Briefly, here is a little background behind my feelings on this matter. I am proud to say that our son Chris, after his mission and college, enrolled in Officer Candidate School and became a commissioned officer in the Navy. Lieutenant Olsen is current serving as the navigation officer aboard the USS Dallas (familiar to Tom Clancy fans), a fast-attack nuclear sub based in Connecticut.
Chris’s experience in the military has been an education for us. One of the things we’ve learned about is part of the code of conduct in the military: Our men and women in uniform are allowed to have political opinions, and they do, but military ethics do not allow them to speak publicly about their opinions. They understand that in our democracy, it’s the civilians who make policy and enact laws, and it’s their job to serve and protect.
An interesting example is the recent decision to end the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy in the military and allow openly gay people to serve. In polling leading up to the decision, Marines were probably the most opposed to the change. With this in mind, I was talking with Chris right after the decision was announced, and expressed my thoughts that the Marines would have a problem with it. Chris’s reply was surprising: He said, “Dad, of all the services, the Marines will be the first to accept and implement this decision. The Marines get it. They understand their role in our nation. Part of the culture of ‘Semper Fi’ is respect for authority and following orders. A Marine may hate the guts of his squad leader and question his judgment, but he will still put his life on the line to carry out that leader’s orders without complaint.”
Another heart-wrenching example: In 2007, 1st Lieutenant Andrew Bacevich was killed in Iraq. His father, retired Col. Andrew Bacevich, has been one of the most outspoken and eloquent opponents of American militarism in general, and President Bush and the Iraq War in particular. But despite this, Col. Bacevich supported his son’s responsibility to his nation and the commander-in-chief.
The parallel between our men and women in the military, and our men and women in law enforcement, seems obvious. In both cases, those in uniform have been entrusted with the overwhelming responsibility to use deadly force in defense of our laws. In both cases, it seems to me that those at the “point of the spear” should understand what their role is – and is not.
I’ve read a lot of comments in the media recently from some of Utah’s law enforcement officers about their concern for the Constitution. The most important principle in that sacred document is separation of powers. I understand – and even empathize – with the strong feelings many of our local law enforcement officers have towards the Second Amendment. However, I must frankly state: When you accepted the uniform and the badge, you accepted the role that goes with it, and that role does not include interpreting the Constitution. Other functions of government have that role. Some of the comments I have read from Utah sheriffs would be grounds for court martial for a military officer. That fact should give you pause.
Does this mean you should not voice your concerns to elected officials? Not at all; but it should be done in the way military officers do it; privately, not publicly, with the proper respect and deference due to our democratically elected officials (whether you agree with them or not), and always with the understanding that those at the tip of the spear take orders from civilians. I can think of no other Constitutional principle more important than this. The alternative is despotism and anarchy.
This is not about the substance of the gun control debate. We live in the West, so even many Democrats are opposed to more gun control laws. This is about who should be making those arguments publicly. There are many eloquent voices in this state to make arguments on Second Amendment issues. I don’t see the need for law enforcement officers to weigh in on this or any other political dispute. I believe it conflicts with the Constitutional principle of separation of powers, and erodes the legitimate authority of law enforcement. That principle is more important than any one individual’s view on one particular section of the Bill of Rights. Law enforcement should follow the example of our dedicated soldiers, sailors and airmen and should leave arguing political issues to others.
Briefly, here is a little background behind my feelings on this matter. I am proud to say that our son Chris, after his mission and college, enrolled in Officer Candidate School and became a commissioned officer in the Navy. Lieutenant Olsen is current serving as the navigation officer aboard the USS Dallas (familiar to Tom Clancy fans), a fast-attack nuclear sub based in Connecticut.
Chris’s experience in the military has been an education for us. One of the things we’ve learned about is part of the code of conduct in the military: Our men and women in uniform are allowed to have political opinions, and they do, but military ethics do not allow them to speak publicly about their opinions. They understand that in our democracy, it’s the civilians who make policy and enact laws, and it’s their job to serve and protect.
An interesting example is the recent decision to end the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy in the military and allow openly gay people to serve. In polling leading up to the decision, Marines were probably the most opposed to the change. With this in mind, I was talking with Chris right after the decision was announced, and expressed my thoughts that the Marines would have a problem with it. Chris’s reply was surprising: He said, “Dad, of all the services, the Marines will be the first to accept and implement this decision. The Marines get it. They understand their role in our nation. Part of the culture of ‘Semper Fi’ is respect for authority and following orders. A Marine may hate the guts of his squad leader and question his judgment, but he will still put his life on the line to carry out that leader’s orders without complaint.”
Another heart-wrenching example: In 2007, 1st Lieutenant Andrew Bacevich was killed in Iraq. His father, retired Col. Andrew Bacevich, has been one of the most outspoken and eloquent opponents of American militarism in general, and President Bush and the Iraq War in particular. But despite this, Col. Bacevich supported his son’s responsibility to his nation and the commander-in-chief.
The parallel between our men and women in the military, and our men and women in law enforcement, seems obvious. In both cases, those in uniform have been entrusted with the overwhelming responsibility to use deadly force in defense of our laws. In both cases, it seems to me that those at the “point of the spear” should understand what their role is – and is not.
I’ve read a lot of comments in the media recently from some of Utah’s law enforcement officers about their concern for the Constitution. The most important principle in that sacred document is separation of powers. I understand – and even empathize – with the strong feelings many of our local law enforcement officers have towards the Second Amendment. However, I must frankly state: When you accepted the uniform and the badge, you accepted the role that goes with it, and that role does not include interpreting the Constitution. Other functions of government have that role. Some of the comments I have read from Utah sheriffs would be grounds for court martial for a military officer. That fact should give you pause.
Does this mean you should not voice your concerns to elected officials? Not at all; but it should be done in the way military officers do it; privately, not publicly, with the proper respect and deference due to our democratically elected officials (whether you agree with them or not), and always with the understanding that those at the tip of the spear take orders from civilians. I can think of no other Constitutional principle more important than this. The alternative is despotism and anarchy.
This is not about the substance of the gun control debate. We live in the West, so even many Democrats are opposed to more gun control laws. This is about who should be making those arguments publicly. There are many eloquent voices in this state to make arguments on Second Amendment issues. I don’t see the need for law enforcement officers to weigh in on this or any other political dispute. I believe it conflicts with the Constitutional principle of separation of powers, and erodes the legitimate authority of law enforcement. That principle is more important than any one individual’s view on one particular section of the Bill of Rights. Law enforcement should follow the example of our dedicated soldiers, sailors and airmen and should leave arguing political issues to others.
What to do about Utah's corrupt political culture?
Here's the scenario:
On the one hand, we have a candidate for Utah Attorney General that is probably the most qualified the state has seen in decades. He's a respected county attorney of one of Utah's most populous and diverse counties, with a tremendous track record in cleaning up gang violence and creating innovative solutions to drug addiction. He's spent his whole career in criminal law, and refused to actively fund raise among lawyers in his community because this former seminary teacher felt it would be an unethical conflict of interest.
On the other hand, we have a political operative and professional lobbyist and fundraiser who has no experience in criminal law, having spent much of his career working in the payday loan industry. He didn't turn away money from anyone in his quest to raise over a million dollars, including special interests doing business with the state of Utah. While moonlighting when he was the former assistant AG, he became involved in an influence-peddling scandal that had the Provo Daily Herald and the Salt Lake Tribune calling for his resignation, and Ogden's Standard Examiner citing the actions of this individual as an ethical "cesspool". This cesspool is simply a continuation of the previous AG's administration,where flying on private jets and accepting huge amounts of campaign cash trumped the business of being Utah's chief law enforcement officer.
Now for the quiz: Which of the above candidates win the AG race? The answer: In Utah, it's no contest. Candidate #2 wins in a landslide. Why? Because he's a Republican.
This is the latest in a long line of political scandals, in a state where powerful special interests who do business with the state of Utah are free to spend unlimited amounts of cash in campaign contributions to political figures. We are embarrassingly unique in the level of influence peddling and corruption we tolerate.
The problem here is not corrupt individuals. The problem is a corrupt system. D&C 121:39 teaches us that even the best of men will fall if given unlimited power. And we must be brutally honest in diagnosing the root cause of this corrupt system: Most Utah Mormons consistently vote for the Republican candidate, without putting forth any effort whatsoever to actually investigate the candidates or the issues involved. They do this in direct violation of repeated counsel from the highest leadership of the Church.
This might sound melodramatic, but Utah has only one hope. It's us, the LDS Dems. It is our mission to help our fellow Latter-day Saints actually believe the words of the prophet, that the Church does not endorse any political party or candidate, that all political parties have principles consistent with the gospel of Jesus Christ, and that we should carefully and prayerfully study each individual candidate and issue. If we don't work to bring about this change, who will?
We need to use this latest scandal to get people's attention. It's time to "come out of the closet". The LDS Dems executive committee has exciting plans for 2013, including:
- A bold messaging campaign, including billboards along the Wasatch Front proclaiming our values.
- A new push for enlarging our membership
- Work to strengthen our organization outside of Salt Lake County
- Monthly "Family Home Evening" activities, where we will talk gospel principles, not politics, with the goal of inviting friends and neighbors
We plead with all of you to take an active role. When the letter comes asking for donations to fund our messaging campaign, give generously. Attend LDS Dems activities and leadership meetings. Get involved in local LDS Dems leadership; we are in critical need of proactive leaders in areas outside of Salt Lake County especially.
Our fellow Latter-day Saints are too unselfish, too kind, and too good for us to sit idly by and allow them to continue to vote straight ticket Republican, in violation of our prophet's counsel. It's hard and often frustrating work, but nothing you could do in 2013 could have a more lasting effect on our state. Together, if we speak boldly and with conviction, we can perform miracles.
Comments on "How I lost faith in the pro-life movement"
by Josh Hogan
Libby Anne's long blog featured in the December 8th edition of Times and Reasons about how she lost faith in the "pro-life" movement was very thought-provoking. As a man I cannot speak to the great sacrifices women go through for us as they conceive, bear, and raise children. My wife sacrificed so much more of her time and energy, physical, mental, and emotional, for our children than I did because I went off to school or work each day. I was there for her as much as I could be but I did not feel the pain she did. I did not sacrifice personal time, time with friends, meals, and sleep like she did. I appreciate my own mother more because of what I saw my wife go through for our children. I admire single mothers who sacrifice their whole lives for their children.
I also cannot speak to this issue from a legal standpoint. I have no expertise in the law. I can only speak from the perspective of a child and citizen on this issue. As an LDS child I have learned several doctrines that relate to this issue. As an LDS Democrat in Utah I realize this issue is a big reason why many of my faith think the Democratic Party is evil. Therefore, limited though I am, I feel compelled to respond to Libby Anne's blog.
There are many issues surrounding the issue of abortion. Libby Anne focused on an important one. Is a zygote a baby? I believe in the sanctity of life. Our constitution says one of my rights is to live. Therefore, the question I have is, "When did I start to live?" In other words, as a child did my spirit enter my body when I was conceived or somewhere between conception and birth? I don't know. According to Elder Russell M. Nelson, this question is irrelevant. However, this I know. A temple recorder taught me that Church policy is to record stillborn children on family group sheets, making them a part of our family. However miscarriages, which are natural abortions, are not to be recorded on family group sheets. I take from this policy that a spirit whose body has been aborted will have the opportunity to be born again someday. I also take from this policy that the act of being born has eternal significance, whether you are alive or dead at birth. According to my limited understanding of the political part of this issue there is no argument on this matter. Once life has been born our laws protect it. Therefore, Libby Anne's focus on life before birth is appropriate, and it is where the issue of abortion lies.
Since I believe in the sanctity of life, and I know that the natural development of a zygote results in life, I certainly do not believe in abortions of convenience. I thought Libby Anne addressed this very well. She points out that most people who get abortions cite reasons of distress.
The other end of the spectrum is conception. This has to do with sexual behavior. I believe sex is sacred, and is only to be done within marriage between a husband and wife. If we all lived this doctrine abortion would not be an issue.
This leads to another doctrine that I believe, that people have the freedom to make their own choices. It is part of my religion to teach what I know is true to others. This allows people options to choose. Therefore, I believe that abstinence should be taught as an option in sex education classes.
I also believe that as part of allowing people to make their own choices they should take the consequences of those choices. However by its nature, as Libby Anne points out, abortion involves many people, each with choices to make. There is not only the mother and the child, but those who care about them, like the father and the mother's other children. Expanding the circle of care, there are grandparents and people who would like to have children. Conversely, there may be people who don't care, like an absentee father or even a rapist. There are many people, each with the freedom to choose, that have stake in a pregnancy.
There are two other points that are important concerning the freedom of choice. First, I cannot not force my choice on those able to make their own choices. Second, those not able to make choices for themselves need to be represented by someone who can make choices for them. If I am an unborn child I would want people who care about me to do so.
Because of these two things the Church wisely teaches us to council with those who have an important stake in a pregnancy, including our local Church leaders and the Lord Himself, when considering an abortion. I cannot image the emotional turmoil a woman goes through in this situation. She is literally making a life and death decision. She needs our support, not our condemnation, at this time, regardless of how she became pregnant or which decision she makes.
Knowing all of this, what sort of laws should there be surrounding abortion? It seems to me that the laws need to support the issues involved in this decision. They need to balance the rights and concerns of both the mother and the child, and take into consideration those that would care for the child. I think the Church's policy and practice does this. Except in the case of forced sex or the threatened health of the mother or the child, the child should be allowed to develop naturally. Once born, if the child is not wanted by the mother, the child should be given to someone who wants her/him. The Church has a system to support this policy.
Outside the Church I am concerned about the part that the child should be given to someone who wants her/him. The Family Proclamation teaches that children should have parents that love and care for them. What if there are not enough people to care for the children of unwanted pregnancies? I don't think there are. Otherwise we would not have orphanages with so many older children. It also seems to me that adoption laws and practices are very restrictive regarding who can adopt. If I am an unborn, unwanted child what would I want you to do for me? Would I want you to let me be born and take my chances in the government child care system or would I want you to abort me so I could have a chance to be born later to someone who would want me? To me this is the crux of the matter for the unborn child. If I could be loved and cared for in the government child care system I would probably want to be born. If not, then I would probably want to take my chances later.
Considering this, I think laws could be created that support a woman seeking an abortion. She should declare why this is an unwanted pregnancy. She should be examined to determine her health and the health of the fetus. We should make sure she understands that if left alone a healthy fetus will become a person with the same rights that she has. We should also determine who might want the baby. Once the mother understands the issues surrounding an abortion she will have the information she needs to choose what is best for her and for her child.
She may decide to abort due to her own emotional trauma. She may decide to go to term and keep the baby despite risking her own health or even her own life. There are a myriad situations that could happen. I think the laws should simply address the education of the mother regarding the effects of her choice on herself, the unborn child, and those that want the child.
These principles guide me in my outlook on abortion and address the issues involved therein from conception through birth through the raising of the child, from the mother to the child to others who care about them both.
Libby Anne's long blog featured in the December 8th edition of Times and Reasons about how she lost faith in the "pro-life" movement was very thought-provoking. As a man I cannot speak to the great sacrifices women go through for us as they conceive, bear, and raise children. My wife sacrificed so much more of her time and energy, physical, mental, and emotional, for our children than I did because I went off to school or work each day. I was there for her as much as I could be but I did not feel the pain she did. I did not sacrifice personal time, time with friends, meals, and sleep like she did. I appreciate my own mother more because of what I saw my wife go through for our children. I admire single mothers who sacrifice their whole lives for their children.
I also cannot speak to this issue from a legal standpoint. I have no expertise in the law. I can only speak from the perspective of a child and citizen on this issue. As an LDS child I have learned several doctrines that relate to this issue. As an LDS Democrat in Utah I realize this issue is a big reason why many of my faith think the Democratic Party is evil. Therefore, limited though I am, I feel compelled to respond to Libby Anne's blog.
There are many issues surrounding the issue of abortion. Libby Anne focused on an important one. Is a zygote a baby? I believe in the sanctity of life. Our constitution says one of my rights is to live. Therefore, the question I have is, "When did I start to live?" In other words, as a child did my spirit enter my body when I was conceived or somewhere between conception and birth? I don't know. According to Elder Russell M. Nelson, this question is irrelevant. However, this I know. A temple recorder taught me that Church policy is to record stillborn children on family group sheets, making them a part of our family. However miscarriages, which are natural abortions, are not to be recorded on family group sheets. I take from this policy that a spirit whose body has been aborted will have the opportunity to be born again someday. I also take from this policy that the act of being born has eternal significance, whether you are alive or dead at birth. According to my limited understanding of the political part of this issue there is no argument on this matter. Once life has been born our laws protect it. Therefore, Libby Anne's focus on life before birth is appropriate, and it is where the issue of abortion lies.
Since I believe in the sanctity of life, and I know that the natural development of a zygote results in life, I certainly do not believe in abortions of convenience. I thought Libby Anne addressed this very well. She points out that most people who get abortions cite reasons of distress.
The other end of the spectrum is conception. This has to do with sexual behavior. I believe sex is sacred, and is only to be done within marriage between a husband and wife. If we all lived this doctrine abortion would not be an issue.
This leads to another doctrine that I believe, that people have the freedom to make their own choices. It is part of my religion to teach what I know is true to others. This allows people options to choose. Therefore, I believe that abstinence should be taught as an option in sex education classes.
I also believe that as part of allowing people to make their own choices they should take the consequences of those choices. However by its nature, as Libby Anne points out, abortion involves many people, each with choices to make. There is not only the mother and the child, but those who care about them, like the father and the mother's other children. Expanding the circle of care, there are grandparents and people who would like to have children. Conversely, there may be people who don't care, like an absentee father or even a rapist. There are many people, each with the freedom to choose, that have stake in a pregnancy.
There are two other points that are important concerning the freedom of choice. First, I cannot not force my choice on those able to make their own choices. Second, those not able to make choices for themselves need to be represented by someone who can make choices for them. If I am an unborn child I would want people who care about me to do so.
Because of these two things the Church wisely teaches us to council with those who have an important stake in a pregnancy, including our local Church leaders and the Lord Himself, when considering an abortion. I cannot image the emotional turmoil a woman goes through in this situation. She is literally making a life and death decision. She needs our support, not our condemnation, at this time, regardless of how she became pregnant or which decision she makes.
Knowing all of this, what sort of laws should there be surrounding abortion? It seems to me that the laws need to support the issues involved in this decision. They need to balance the rights and concerns of both the mother and the child, and take into consideration those that would care for the child. I think the Church's policy and practice does this. Except in the case of forced sex or the threatened health of the mother or the child, the child should be allowed to develop naturally. Once born, if the child is not wanted by the mother, the child should be given to someone who wants her/him. The Church has a system to support this policy.
Outside the Church I am concerned about the part that the child should be given to someone who wants her/him. The Family Proclamation teaches that children should have parents that love and care for them. What if there are not enough people to care for the children of unwanted pregnancies? I don't think there are. Otherwise we would not have orphanages with so many older children. It also seems to me that adoption laws and practices are very restrictive regarding who can adopt. If I am an unborn, unwanted child what would I want you to do for me? Would I want you to let me be born and take my chances in the government child care system or would I want you to abort me so I could have a chance to be born later to someone who would want me? To me this is the crux of the matter for the unborn child. If I could be loved and cared for in the government child care system I would probably want to be born. If not, then I would probably want to take my chances later.
Considering this, I think laws could be created that support a woman seeking an abortion. She should declare why this is an unwanted pregnancy. She should be examined to determine her health and the health of the fetus. We should make sure she understands that if left alone a healthy fetus will become a person with the same rights that she has. We should also determine who might want the baby. Once the mother understands the issues surrounding an abortion she will have the information she needs to choose what is best for her and for her child.
She may decide to abort due to her own emotional trauma. She may decide to go to term and keep the baby despite risking her own health or even her own life. There are a myriad situations that could happen. I think the laws should simply address the education of the mother regarding the effects of her choice on herself, the unborn child, and those that want the child.
These principles guide me in my outlook on abortion and address the issues involved therein from conception through birth through the raising of the child, from the mother to the child to others who care about them both.
10 NEW YEARS RESOLUTIONS FOR LDS DEMOCRATS
by Crystal
2013 is nearly here! It may already be here by the time you read this blog. I’m sure you’ve made a personal list and checked it twice, but here are a few political resolutions to add to your list for 2013.
And a bonus resolution for our friends outside of Utah: help found a chapter in your state! A number of LDS Democrats have been meeting regularly to launch a national LDS Dems organization. Our next meeting is February 12th, at which we’ll discuss bylaws and some other important items. Email us at [email protected] if you’d like to get involved!
2013 is nearly here! It may already be here by the time you read this blog. I’m sure you’ve made a personal list and checked it twice, but here are a few political resolutions to add to your list for 2013.
- Brush up on your political knowledge. You might check out thinkers like Jim Wallace or Joseph E. Stiglitz.
- Brush up on your spiritual knowledge. So many of us say we’re Democrats because of our Mormonism, and not in spite of it, so what better way to boost our political power than with some spiritual power!
- Sign up 5 friends for LDS Dems. You never know who among your contacts are among those illusive 17% of American Mormons who are also Democrats! It never hurts to ask.
- Follow LDS Dems on Facebook and Twitter. Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ldsdems and twitter: http://twitter.com/ldsdems
- Take a messaging workshop with LDS Dems! Watch our email and social media for details. You’ll learn how to talk to your more conservative friends about your values.
- 2013 isn’t a big election year, but every election is important! Commit now to spend at least 5 hours on a campaign. Make some calls, walk for a candidate, help with a mailing or honk-n-wave. No matter your comfort level, there’s something you can do!
- Do some service with LDS Dems! We’re providing a great opportunity on January 19th. Mark your calendars now and watch our email for details!
- Write a blog/facebook post/twitter series etc. spelling out why you are a Latter-day Saint and a Democrat. Your post could change some minds! Share it with your family and friends. Just don’t be too push or preachy about it. :)
- Get engaged in the legislature. Utah’s legislative session is mid January - mid March. We’ll have another LDS Dems day on the hill like we had last year, but stay engaged throughout the rest of the session as well! Write/call your representative. Utah isn’t a huge place, so your contact makes a difference. It can be overwhelming to keep on top of all of the bills that come out in a legislative session. We suggest you follow blogs such as Blue in Red Zion to help you keep track of it all!
- Attend an LDS Dems executive committee meeting. You don’t have to make time to attend one of our meetings every month, but you can work with an executive committee member to find a specific job that you can do for LDS Dems that works with your schedule.
And a bonus resolution for our friends outside of Utah: help found a chapter in your state! A number of LDS Democrats have been meeting regularly to launch a national LDS Dems organization. Our next meeting is February 12th, at which we’ll discuss bylaws and some other important items. Email us at [email protected] if you’d like to get involved!
LDS progressives need to #OccupytheBible
I just read a book that changed the way I think about both religion and politics. The book is entitled “#Occupy the Bible: What Jesus Really Said (And Did) About Money and Power” by the Rev. Dr. Susan Thistlethwaite. Those who have read the works of Hugh Nibley will find much that is familiar. Dr. Thistlethewaite challenges Christians to #Occupy the Bible by reading the words of Christ from the perspective of those he was preaching to: poor itinerant day laborers and artisans who were suffering under the tyranny of Roman rule, abetted by the Jewish theocracy.
The author finds her inspiration in the Social Gospel movement during the Gilded Age between the Civil War and World War I, and how the movement worked with the leaders of the Progressive movement to fight for social change in America. The problem then, as it is now, are the social ills in America resulting from the ever widening gulf between the rich and poor in our nation.
Dr. Thistlethwaite calls on followers of Christ to #Occupy the Bible by reading it from the street level; when the modern equivalent of Jesus’ original audience dwell today. She promises that if we do so, we will see that the preaching of Jesus of Nazareth was not a prophecy about a future coming of the Kingdom of God, but was an admonition to reject the Kingdom of Caesar to bring about the Kingdom of God in the present. I was led to understand many of the Lord’s parables and much of his preaching in a new light. Foremost is the call from Jesus, in his very first public sermon in Nazareth, to bring about a return of the Old Testament Jubilee; to do a “reset” of the Jewish economic system by forgiving debt, freeing slaves, and returning property taken from the poor. (This is especially reminiscent of Dr. Nibley’s teaching.) And it becomes clear that this call for Jubilee, which threatened the riches and power of the ruling class in Jesus’ day, was the root cause of the fierce anger against the Savior that ultimately cost him his life.
“#Occupy the Bible” is a clarion call for followers of Christ to take upon them the mantle the followers of the Social Gospel fulfilled during the Progressive era. The book challenges us to be on the streets, among the poor, and to speak out bravely and passionately in our communities and churches for social justice. Praying for the poor and dispossessed is important, but must be followed by action. When I closed the last page, I had the feeling that maybe progressive Latter-day Saints need to speak up a little more, to be the disciples on the right hand of the Savior that the Parable of the Sheep and the Goats talks about. Here’s a final quote from Dr. Thistlethwaite: “All Christians, left, right and center, as well as Unitarians, can come together around the simple truth that the biblical message as taught by Jesus of Nazareth was the love of God and neighbor acted out in the Jesus movement. What Jesus and followers did was build up communities of equality and mutual support, economic fairness, gender equality, and live a life of celebration of one another and our love of God. And where those values were not realized in His society, Jesus and his followers protested. That’s real, and that should be the message that the church not only teaches, but also lives.”
You can read more at http://occupythebible.org/
The author finds her inspiration in the Social Gospel movement during the Gilded Age between the Civil War and World War I, and how the movement worked with the leaders of the Progressive movement to fight for social change in America. The problem then, as it is now, are the social ills in America resulting from the ever widening gulf between the rich and poor in our nation.
Dr. Thistlethwaite calls on followers of Christ to #Occupy the Bible by reading it from the street level; when the modern equivalent of Jesus’ original audience dwell today. She promises that if we do so, we will see that the preaching of Jesus of Nazareth was not a prophecy about a future coming of the Kingdom of God, but was an admonition to reject the Kingdom of Caesar to bring about the Kingdom of God in the present. I was led to understand many of the Lord’s parables and much of his preaching in a new light. Foremost is the call from Jesus, in his very first public sermon in Nazareth, to bring about a return of the Old Testament Jubilee; to do a “reset” of the Jewish economic system by forgiving debt, freeing slaves, and returning property taken from the poor. (This is especially reminiscent of Dr. Nibley’s teaching.) And it becomes clear that this call for Jubilee, which threatened the riches and power of the ruling class in Jesus’ day, was the root cause of the fierce anger against the Savior that ultimately cost him his life.
“#Occupy the Bible” is a clarion call for followers of Christ to take upon them the mantle the followers of the Social Gospel fulfilled during the Progressive era. The book challenges us to be on the streets, among the poor, and to speak out bravely and passionately in our communities and churches for social justice. Praying for the poor and dispossessed is important, but must be followed by action. When I closed the last page, I had the feeling that maybe progressive Latter-day Saints need to speak up a little more, to be the disciples on the right hand of the Savior that the Parable of the Sheep and the Goats talks about. Here’s a final quote from Dr. Thistlethwaite: “All Christians, left, right and center, as well as Unitarians, can come together around the simple truth that the biblical message as taught by Jesus of Nazareth was the love of God and neighbor acted out in the Jesus movement. What Jesus and followers did was build up communities of equality and mutual support, economic fairness, gender equality, and live a life of celebration of one another and our love of God. And where those values were not realized in His society, Jesus and his followers protested. That’s real, and that should be the message that the church not only teaches, but also lives.”
You can read more at http://occupythebible.org/
What I Learned and What I'm Going to Do Next
By Josh Hogan
President Heber J Grant has said, “I pray for our country and ask the Lord to bless those who preside in the nation; in the states, in the cities, and in the counties." Now that the election is over I hope as LDS Democrats that we will not only pray for the victors, but reach out to them to continue letting them know our concerns.
President Grant continues, "I pray God to inspire the people that they will obey His commands, and elect good men to office; that they will bury their political differences and seek for good men to hold office..."
I have not had a lot of experience with politics. In fact, this year was my first attempt at being active in any caucus. During this election year I reached out to both Democratic and Republican candidates to try to learn their views on various issues, whether they were high profile issues or not. My goal was to get past the campaign rhetoric and learn what they really thought. By doing so I learned a few of things.
First, I learned that there are many good people running for office. Most of them truly want to make a positive difference. I admire those of you who ran this year. Thank you.
Second, I learned that many candidates, or their campaign personnel, do not respond to people who simply want to know what they think. I don't know why. In my ignorance I thought they would respond to people who are truly interested. Perhaps it is not worth their time answering emails and phone calls compared to updating websites, cold-calling, or writing the next media response. Nonetheless, it was a surprisingly difficult process to get clarification on the issues from the candidates.
Third, I learned most voters are apathetic. They complain a lot and believe many rumors, but they are not interested enough to take the time to get involved. I understand these people. I was one of them until recently. However, now I have met many of you and am excited to work with you from now on. I hope you know how truly exceptional you are.
Fourth, most voters make their decisions on their feelings. These feelings are primarily influenced by the campaign rhetoric in the press. I think it is sad that decisions are made in such a shallow way. (Perhaps this is the reason for the second thing I learned above.)
Fifth, candidates and I agree on most things, no matter their political party. This is something I already knew, but was not sure was still true. I have tracked congress in the past and agree with most of the things they pass by voice vote, which is a lot of the legislation they pass.
The press talks a lot about the differences between our two major parties. Pointing out differences is important for candidates so voters can make the best choice. However, when it comes to governing we need to use a different method.
I met Congressman Matheson for the first time this year. In that meeting he said that he tries to find common ground with people before attempting to solve differences. I like that. I think that if we get past the evil party labels we put on one another we will find that we agree on many things. This will give us an opportunity let down our guard and create ground on which we can agree on more things that are good for our country.
Sixth, campaigning is ugly. I am disappointed at the name calling and accusations I heard and saw from both parties and their candidates this year. I hope in the future our LDS members and candidates will be better examples of our religion. Obviously we will disagree, but let's not "be disagreeable" (President Thomas S. Monson). As President Obama said, "I'd be remiss if my values were limited to personal moments of prayer or private conversations with pastors or friends. So instead, I must try - imperfectly, but I must try - to make sure those values motivate me as one leader of this great nation." (National Pray Breakfast, 2/2012) (On that note, I had ample opportunity to forgive the candidates for maligning one another. :) )
Seven, it takes a lot of work and money to get the word out! Again, thanks to those of you who are involved!!!
From my rookie year learnings I have a few goals.
First, reorganize the Utah County Chapter of LDS Democrats. We lost our wonderful chair, Muriel Xochimitl, to her busy life. Here where the Republican party is so strong we need to organize to fulfill our mission.
Second, keep learning about the candidates and the issues. Come next election I should have few questions for the incumbents because I have been tracking them for 2 years.
Third, work with those willing to be Democratic candidates in 2014 to prepare for that election. I hope they will be willing to help us educate the public on the issues between now and when they run.
I am sure my sophomore year will bring many more opportunities to learn about this world of politics. I look forward to your tutelage as we work to instill LDS values into our communities, state, nation, and world.
Josh Hogan, Acting Chair, Utah County LDS Democrats
Josh is a native of Hansen, ID, who joined The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints at 15. He served a mission to Taiwan and holds a B.A. in Chinese from BYU and a Master of Arts in Organizational Management from the University of Pheonix. He is currently the Manager of Enterprise Data Management at NuSkin. Josh and his wife Lisa have 3 children and 5 grandchildren. He has served in a variety of callings in the LDS Church. Josh is a Reagan-voting-Republican-turned-Independent, and currently serves as the Democratic Chair of Payson's 2nd District and Acting Chair of the Utah County Chapter of LDS Democrats.
President Heber J Grant has said, “I pray for our country and ask the Lord to bless those who preside in the nation; in the states, in the cities, and in the counties." Now that the election is over I hope as LDS Democrats that we will not only pray for the victors, but reach out to them to continue letting them know our concerns.
President Grant continues, "I pray God to inspire the people that they will obey His commands, and elect good men to office; that they will bury their political differences and seek for good men to hold office..."
I have not had a lot of experience with politics. In fact, this year was my first attempt at being active in any caucus. During this election year I reached out to both Democratic and Republican candidates to try to learn their views on various issues, whether they were high profile issues or not. My goal was to get past the campaign rhetoric and learn what they really thought. By doing so I learned a few of things.
First, I learned that there are many good people running for office. Most of them truly want to make a positive difference. I admire those of you who ran this year. Thank you.
Second, I learned that many candidates, or their campaign personnel, do not respond to people who simply want to know what they think. I don't know why. In my ignorance I thought they would respond to people who are truly interested. Perhaps it is not worth their time answering emails and phone calls compared to updating websites, cold-calling, or writing the next media response. Nonetheless, it was a surprisingly difficult process to get clarification on the issues from the candidates.
Third, I learned most voters are apathetic. They complain a lot and believe many rumors, but they are not interested enough to take the time to get involved. I understand these people. I was one of them until recently. However, now I have met many of you and am excited to work with you from now on. I hope you know how truly exceptional you are.
Fourth, most voters make their decisions on their feelings. These feelings are primarily influenced by the campaign rhetoric in the press. I think it is sad that decisions are made in such a shallow way. (Perhaps this is the reason for the second thing I learned above.)
Fifth, candidates and I agree on most things, no matter their political party. This is something I already knew, but was not sure was still true. I have tracked congress in the past and agree with most of the things they pass by voice vote, which is a lot of the legislation they pass.
The press talks a lot about the differences between our two major parties. Pointing out differences is important for candidates so voters can make the best choice. However, when it comes to governing we need to use a different method.
I met Congressman Matheson for the first time this year. In that meeting he said that he tries to find common ground with people before attempting to solve differences. I like that. I think that if we get past the evil party labels we put on one another we will find that we agree on many things. This will give us an opportunity let down our guard and create ground on which we can agree on more things that are good for our country.
Sixth, campaigning is ugly. I am disappointed at the name calling and accusations I heard and saw from both parties and their candidates this year. I hope in the future our LDS members and candidates will be better examples of our religion. Obviously we will disagree, but let's not "be disagreeable" (President Thomas S. Monson). As President Obama said, "I'd be remiss if my values were limited to personal moments of prayer or private conversations with pastors or friends. So instead, I must try - imperfectly, but I must try - to make sure those values motivate me as one leader of this great nation." (National Pray Breakfast, 2/2012) (On that note, I had ample opportunity to forgive the candidates for maligning one another. :) )
Seven, it takes a lot of work and money to get the word out! Again, thanks to those of you who are involved!!!
From my rookie year learnings I have a few goals.
First, reorganize the Utah County Chapter of LDS Democrats. We lost our wonderful chair, Muriel Xochimitl, to her busy life. Here where the Republican party is so strong we need to organize to fulfill our mission.
Second, keep learning about the candidates and the issues. Come next election I should have few questions for the incumbents because I have been tracking them for 2 years.
Third, work with those willing to be Democratic candidates in 2014 to prepare for that election. I hope they will be willing to help us educate the public on the issues between now and when they run.
I am sure my sophomore year will bring many more opportunities to learn about this world of politics. I look forward to your tutelage as we work to instill LDS values into our communities, state, nation, and world.
Josh Hogan, Acting Chair, Utah County LDS Democrats
Josh is a native of Hansen, ID, who joined The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints at 15. He served a mission to Taiwan and holds a B.A. in Chinese from BYU and a Master of Arts in Organizational Management from the University of Pheonix. He is currently the Manager of Enterprise Data Management at NuSkin. Josh and his wife Lisa have 3 children and 5 grandchildren. He has served in a variety of callings in the LDS Church. Josh is a Reagan-voting-Republican-turned-Independent, and currently serves as the Democratic Chair of Payson's 2nd District and Acting Chair of the Utah County Chapter of LDS Democrats.
A day of fasting and prayer for America
November 23, 2012
We are concerned about the future of our country, as are most Americans. In this season when we have chosen new leaders for our nation and our communities, and in the spirit of following the counsel of the First Presidency, we would like to encourage our fellow Latter-day Saints, and all Americans of good will, to join us in fasting and prayer on December 2nd for our country. In this fast, we ask those who participate to consider the following in their prayers:
1. Thank our Heavenly Father for the great privilege of living in America.
2. Express thanks to the Lord and ask His blessings to be on candidates for political office, regardless of political affiliation or who won or lost. Running for office is a great sacrifice for the candidates, their families, and their supporters and we should be sincerely grateful to them for caring so much to serve our nation and communities.
3. Pray that America’s citizens will take their responsibility seriously to thoughtfully and prayerfully study the issues and engage with their elected leaders on finding fair, common sense solutions to the problems facing our nation. On this matter, as in other aspects of our lives, we should with humility “seek not to counsel the Lord, but to take counsel from his hand” (Jacob 4:10).
4. Plead with the Lord that our newly elected leaders will be inspired to approach their great responsibilities with humility, hard work and respect for others, especially those with differing political views. We would ask the Lord that our newly elected officials would be inspired to follow the counsel in “The Mormon Ethic of Civility” (Church Press Release, October 2009) and in Chapter Four of President Gordon B. Hinckley’s book, “Standing for Something”, entitled “Our Fading Civility”. Pray that the Lord will soften the hearts of Americans of different religions, ethnic backgrounds and political views toward one another that the spirit of divisiveness and enmity that has existed in the political sphere will cease.
5. Pray that we as Americans would remember the counsel in D&C 134, that “governments were instituted of God for the benefit of man”, and “that every man should be honored in his station, rulers and magistrates as such, being placed for the protection of the innocent and the punishment of the guilty”. Help all Americans to render proper respect to those we have chosen to lead us, regardless of whom they personally voted for – and help those so chosen to earn that respect.
6. Finally, we would pray that our newly elected leaders would be prompted to have special care toward those who are most vulnerable among us; our children, people with disabilities, the sick, and those suffering temporary economic distress during these difficult times.
Sincerely,
Executive Committee, LDS Democratic Caucus
We are concerned about the future of our country, as are most Americans. In this season when we have chosen new leaders for our nation and our communities, and in the spirit of following the counsel of the First Presidency, we would like to encourage our fellow Latter-day Saints, and all Americans of good will, to join us in fasting and prayer on December 2nd for our country. In this fast, we ask those who participate to consider the following in their prayers:
1. Thank our Heavenly Father for the great privilege of living in America.
2. Express thanks to the Lord and ask His blessings to be on candidates for political office, regardless of political affiliation or who won or lost. Running for office is a great sacrifice for the candidates, their families, and their supporters and we should be sincerely grateful to them for caring so much to serve our nation and communities.
3. Pray that America’s citizens will take their responsibility seriously to thoughtfully and prayerfully study the issues and engage with their elected leaders on finding fair, common sense solutions to the problems facing our nation. On this matter, as in other aspects of our lives, we should with humility “seek not to counsel the Lord, but to take counsel from his hand” (Jacob 4:10).
4. Plead with the Lord that our newly elected leaders will be inspired to approach their great responsibilities with humility, hard work and respect for others, especially those with differing political views. We would ask the Lord that our newly elected officials would be inspired to follow the counsel in “The Mormon Ethic of Civility” (Church Press Release, October 2009) and in Chapter Four of President Gordon B. Hinckley’s book, “Standing for Something”, entitled “Our Fading Civility”. Pray that the Lord will soften the hearts of Americans of different religions, ethnic backgrounds and political views toward one another that the spirit of divisiveness and enmity that has existed in the political sphere will cease.
5. Pray that we as Americans would remember the counsel in D&C 134, that “governments were instituted of God for the benefit of man”, and “that every man should be honored in his station, rulers and magistrates as such, being placed for the protection of the innocent and the punishment of the guilty”. Help all Americans to render proper respect to those we have chosen to lead us, regardless of whom they personally voted for – and help those so chosen to earn that respect.
6. Finally, we would pray that our newly elected leaders would be prompted to have special care toward those who are most vulnerable among us; our children, people with disabilities, the sick, and those suffering temporary economic distress during these difficult times.
Sincerely,
Executive Committee, LDS Democratic Caucus
Is there reason for hope, Utah Dems?
Thanks to a lot of hard work by very dedicated people, led so ably by Jim Dabakis, Utah Democrats were able to "hold serve" in a very tough election cycle. Jim Matheson and Ben McAdams, the two races we needed to win, came out in our favor. And, of course, nationally, things looked good for Democrats. But this begs the question: Are we ever going to make any progress in this reddest of red states?
Let's review some recent history:
2006: This year was actually pretty good for us. Even Utahns were tired of the Bush wars, and we were starting to see troubling times for the economy. Progress was made, baby steps to be sure, but progress. We had high hopes for the next cycle. Which leads to:
2008: I have to admit, personally, that after my favorite candidate (Bill Richardson) was out of the picture, I started rooting for Barack Obama rather than Hillary Clinton. The reason was very simple: I knew Utahns hated the Clintons, so I figured Obama at the head of the ticket would be the better choice for electing Utah Democrats. Sort of misjudged that one, didn't I? It remains a mystery to me why, from the very beginning, there was such enmity from the people of this state towards a man who obviously is faithful to his wife, adores his daughters, and despite all the contrary rhetoric, is very much a centrist. Hate to say this, but is there a possibility some of our fellow Mormons didn't get the 1978 memo from President Kimball? Anyway, turned out Obama was a drag on our candidates that year, for whatever reason.
2010: The Tea Party revolution. Don't need to say more. Democrats across the nation caught cold that year, Utah Democrats caught the avian flu.
2012: The Romney factor. We already talked about that.
So, what happens next? Just from the laws of probability, there is only a one in sixteen chance we can have four bad years in a row! But there are more reasons for optimism. The Romney factor is gone for good. The economy will get better the next two years, and Democrats will justifiably get credit for it. We will know in two years that Obamacare did not, in fact, lead to the ruin of the nation. Most of all, every nasty conspiracy/apocalyptic prediction against President Obama will have been discredited. (Rachel Maddow made a pretty good summary of recent ones in this rant.) At that point, even the most dedicated Obama haters will have to come to terms with themselves. Latter-day Saints do believe in repentance. Thanks to the letter last week from the First Presidency, I'm already seeing some softening towards President Obama among some of my ward members. If we can just be patient for two more years, things will start to look rosy for Democrats in Utah.
Let's review some recent history:
2006: This year was actually pretty good for us. Even Utahns were tired of the Bush wars, and we were starting to see troubling times for the economy. Progress was made, baby steps to be sure, but progress. We had high hopes for the next cycle. Which leads to:
2008: I have to admit, personally, that after my favorite candidate (Bill Richardson) was out of the picture, I started rooting for Barack Obama rather than Hillary Clinton. The reason was very simple: I knew Utahns hated the Clintons, so I figured Obama at the head of the ticket would be the better choice for electing Utah Democrats. Sort of misjudged that one, didn't I? It remains a mystery to me why, from the very beginning, there was such enmity from the people of this state towards a man who obviously is faithful to his wife, adores his daughters, and despite all the contrary rhetoric, is very much a centrist. Hate to say this, but is there a possibility some of our fellow Mormons didn't get the 1978 memo from President Kimball? Anyway, turned out Obama was a drag on our candidates that year, for whatever reason.
2010: The Tea Party revolution. Don't need to say more. Democrats across the nation caught cold that year, Utah Democrats caught the avian flu.
2012: The Romney factor. We already talked about that.
So, what happens next? Just from the laws of probability, there is only a one in sixteen chance we can have four bad years in a row! But there are more reasons for optimism. The Romney factor is gone for good. The economy will get better the next two years, and Democrats will justifiably get credit for it. We will know in two years that Obamacare did not, in fact, lead to the ruin of the nation. Most of all, every nasty conspiracy/apocalyptic prediction against President Obama will have been discredited. (Rachel Maddow made a pretty good summary of recent ones in this rant.) At that point, even the most dedicated Obama haters will have to come to terms with themselves. Latter-day Saints do believe in repentance. Thanks to the letter last week from the First Presidency, I'm already seeing some softening towards President Obama among some of my ward members. If we can just be patient for two more years, things will start to look rosy for Democrats in Utah.