DiscussMormonism.com

"On his radio program, Fox News’ Glenn Beck encouraged listeners to leave their church if it proclaims a concern for social justice:


I’m begging you, your right to religion and freedom to exercise religion and read all of the passages of the Bible as you want to read them and as your church wants to preach them . . . are going to come under the ropes in the next year. If it lasts that long it will be the next year. I beg you, look for the words ’social justice’ or ‘economic justice’ on your church Web site. If you find it, run as fast as you can. Social justice and economic justice, they are code words. Now, am I advising people to leave their church? Yes!”"

http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstt ... ir-church/

aussieguy55 wrote:"On his radio program, Fox News’ Glenn Beck encouraged listeners to leave their church if it proclaims a concern for social justice:

Wow, talk about Conservative!

News flash: Glenn Beck warns viewers of the perils of compassionate conservatism! "We were once talked into being "compassionate," but it led to some massive spending to do things like give the elderly a break on their spending on medication. Well, I say that old people have had their time, and you won't see me crying about not getting help with my medical bills like some little baby. I save my crocodile tears for things I get paid to say on Fox News."

Wow, talk about Conservative!

Actually he's somewhat of a closet liberal who only recently has begun to sound a little bit conservative.

It's actually worse than him reading McConkie - he's been reading Kleon Skousen. Yes, the guy who wrote books of world history based on the 6000 years described in the Bible.

Anyhow, Beck needn't worry that he may someday be called a hypocrite for not leaving his own church. I doubt we'll see "so-called" social justice on LDS.org anytime soon.

I doubt we'll see "so-called" social justice on LDS.org anytime soon.

Darn! I was looking forward to my extra day off and 10% raise.

A Jesuit response to Beck

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rev-james ... 90669.html

"It's hard not to think of the retort of the great apostle of social justice, Dom Helder Camara, archbishop of Recife, "When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist."

"It's hard not to think of the retort of the great apostle of social justice, Dom Helder Camara, archbishop of Recife, "When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist."

The interesting thing though is that he gave to the poor, not the government. Why they have no food might indeed be some form of tyranny such as socialism or communism as is the case throughout the world.

Jesus was a socialist if he could be considered anything.

Socialism is not tyranny. You're probably thinking of communist countries or socialist countries run by a dictator, but socialism does not require a tyrannical dictator. The best example of pure socialism was the Spanish Revolution.

Here is an excellent point/counter-point on that debate:

http://debatepedia.idebate.org/en/index ... _socialism

Capitalism is the world’s dominant economic system. Within it, the means of production and distribution are owned by individuals: private ownership and free enterprise are believed to lead to more efficiency, lower prices, better products and rising prosperity. Socialism advocates the ownership and control of the means of production and industry by the community as a whole: the community is believed to be both more just and more efficient through central planning, or participatory planning.

Not controlled by a tyrannical government, but rather by the general population.

Jesus was a socialist if he could be considered anything.

No, Jesus displayed only conservative principles. Nary a socialist principle can exist within the gospel.

Socialism is not tyranny.

Socialism is tyranny by definition as it takes a significant amount of coercion to gain control over wealth and it's means of distribution. Even Winston Churchill understood this...

a socialist policy is abhorrent to the British ideas of freedom. Socialism is inseparably interwoven with totalitarianism and the object worship of the state. It will prescribe for every one where they are to work, what they are to work at, where they may go and what they may say. Socialism is an attack on the right to breathe freely. No socialist system can be established without a political police. They would have to fall back on some form of Gestapo, no doubt very humanely directed in the first instance.

Socialism also devalues the individual by making them incapable of choosing values as decisions are made centrally. Yet another form of tyranny.

You're probably thinking of communist countries or socialist countries run by a dictator, but socialism does not require a tyrannical dictator. The best example of pure socialism was the Spanish Revolution.

It doesn't have to have a single dictator or strong-man, it can also have a cabal or central planning committee behind it to enforce it's dictates.