To whom would you grant the power? Closed on MADB.

[_moksha]

For what it's worth, I don't think the Pope would have gotten us mired in Iraq. Probably would not have approved the use of torture either. Is this two strikes against him?

[_The Dude]

It's stupid that they banned you over this. I can see easier ways for a Mormon to answer this than banning you.

Sethbag was not banned because of that thread. He was banned because he used the H word. :D (And probably because he talked about LDS leadership in a mocking sorta way.)

It looks like he got a warning for the H word and then banned because of this.

[_Moniker]

I'm really disappointed this thread was closed on MAD. It would have been interesting to see the responses. That Christian denominations are all over the map with war, homosexual rights, women's rights, abortion, environment, and the death penalty I could actually see the closest political ally to the LDS as the SOUTHERN BAPTISTS! :)

[Anonymous]

For what it's worth, I don't think the Pope would have gotten us mired in Iraq. Probably would not have approved the use of torture either. Is this two strikes against him?

The Pope of today perhaps. You don't want to know what the worst Popes did when the Papacy was a political and military position as compared to the largely religious [religion that is optional unlike mandatory religion of the Middle Ages] position it is today. The Popes of yesteryear were some bad mothers.

[_bcspace]

I'm really disappointed this thread was closed on MAD. It would have been interesting to see the responses.

Me too. I wanted to post in it but didn;t see it in time.

That Christian denominations are all over the map with war, homosexual rights, women's rights, abortion, environment, and the death penalty I could actually see the closest political ally to the LDS as the SOUTHERN BAPTISTS! :)

Jesus is indeed the ultimate conservative. But Southern Baptists? Puh-leeeze!

[_Moniker]

I'm really disappointed this thread was closed on MAD. It would have been interesting to see the responses.

Me too. I wanted to post in it but didn;t see it in time.

That Christian denominations are all over the map with war, homosexual rights, women's rights, abortion, environment, and the death penalty I could actually see the closest political ally to the LDS as the SOUTHERN BAPTISTS! :)

Jesus is indeed the ultimate conservative. But Southern Baptists? Puh-leeeze!

Well, Southern Baptists agree with the LDS members stance on homosexuality, war, women's rights, abortion, stem cell research and the death penalty. From viewing the board it also doesn't look as though environmental concerns are looked upon too kindly by many LDS. There are (very mainstream) Christian denominations that are not anti-abortion and are not anti-stem cell research, protest the Iraq War, beat up on Bush for the Kyoto Treaty, are very progressive -- those would be waaay too liberal for LDS.

[_moksha]

Jesus is indeed the ultimate conservative.

Indeed, we all remember his parables of Looking Out for Number One and Greed being Good.

[_bcspace]

Jesus is indeed the ultimate conservative.

Indeed, we all remember his parables of Looking Out for Number One and Greed being Good.

Those are not conservative values. Those are left-wing restatements of good values they reject in order to lead people astray.

[Guest]

I'm really disappointed this thread was closed on MAD. It would have been interesting to see the responses.

Me too. I wanted to post in it but didn;t see it in time.

That Christian denominations are all over the map with war, homosexual rights, women's rights, abortion, environment, and the death penalty I could actually see the closest political ally to the LDS as the SOUTHERN BAPTISTS! :)

Jesus is indeed the ultimate conservative. But Southern Baptists? Puh-leeeze!

Well, Southern Baptists agree with the LDS members stance on homosexuality, war, women's rights, abortion, stem cell research and the death penalty. From viewing the board it also doesn't look as though environmental concerns are looked upon too kindly by many LDS. There are (very mainstream) Christian denominations that are not anti-abortion and are not anti-stem cell research, protest the Iraq War, beat up on Bush for the Kyoto Treaty, are very progressive -- those would be waaay too liberal for LDS.

That's a rather broad litany of subjects that LDS members have a stance on. You might be rather surprised as the diversity of opnion among faithful Latter-day Saints on these topics.

Homosexuality: I think the practice is wrong. I think the word marriage should be reserved. But I think gay couples should otherwise enjoy the same protections.

War: I admire the people of Ammon. I detest Bush and his immoral war. I think Bush should be sent to The Hague and tried as a war criminal, together with Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice.

Women's rights: My wife is always right. :)

Abortion: I think abortion, in most cases, is wrong. I think a woman should be free to make wrong choices.

Stem cell research: i support it, no problem. I don't think the Church has staked out a position.

Death penalty: I am generally opposed to the imposition of the death penalty.

Environmental concerns: We are the stewards of this planet and we had better be prepared to account to the Lord what we did with our stewardship.

And yet, I am still LDS. Go figure.

[_Yoda]

Here is a run-down of all of the posts split from the banning thread. Sorry I couldn't just merge them. :(

Author Message
Sethbag
God

Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 1857



LifeOnaPlate wrote:
Apparently "bach" was also banned. He made a quip about God being a homosexual.


Yeah, I saw that Bach got banned, but he was basically asking for it by saying basically that God had enjoyed sodomy the night before.

I never saw a warning in my posts. I need to go back and read through what I posted and see what the warning was about. My participation in that one thread about the California gay marriage ruling came fairly quickly, with several posts in a short time. If someone went through retroactively and slapped a warning on, say, my 2nd or 3rd to last post, and I'd already posted the subsequent ones, I don't think it's fair to be banned for "continuing to post after the warning" or whatever it is they did. I honestly have no clue what happened, except I did state matter of factly that God is a figment of our imaginations.

I'm extremely disappointed that they banned me and then turned around and locked the thread where I asked the TBMs which non-Mormon they would choose to decide, for them, what God's Will is, and enact it (God's Will) into law. That's an exceedingly telling question to ask, because it would be very hard for most TBMs to come up with a non-Mormon whom they would trust to do this.

And that's the point. Many Mormons have no problem expressing a desire for God's Will to be enacted into law, so long as it's God's Will According to Mormonism. But active Mormons maybe make up 1.5million to 2million people out of a population of over 300 million in the United States, and a much smaller proportion pretty much everywhere else in the world. It's not realistic to expect that a Mormon would be the one chosen to decide what is God's Will.

And even if they could get a Mormon into the position to decide God's Will, the hypocrisy is glaring in the idea that Mormons wouldn't trust a non-Mormon to legislate God's Will over them, but expect 298 million other non-Mormon Americans to entrust that job to a Mormon.

It was an exceedingly useful and discussion-worthy post, and it deserved to be discussed by people over there. In fact, a good half or more of me rather suspects that I was banned just so that they could justify locking that thread so nobody would respond (meaningfully) to it. There was a lame response in there from some guy who seems rather surprised that I would assert that in a population of 300 million Americans with only 2 million active Mormons in it, a Mormon wouldn't stand a ghost of a chance being chosen by the people to enact God's Will into law over them.


_________________
"The father in [the brownie/dogpoop] story wouldn't dream of requiring his prophets to be infallible, but then he turns right around and requires, of all things, his movies to be infallible?" -- Dr. Shades
Thu May 29, 2008 10:08 am

Google
Sponsor




Advertisement



Thu May 29, 2008 10:08 am

Dr. Shades
Founder & Visionary

Joined: 23 Oct 2006
Posts: 2889
Location: Shady Acres Status: MODERATOR



Sethbag wrote:
. . . I asked the TBMs which non-Mormon they would choose to decide, for them, what God's Will is, and enact it (God's Will) into law.


OH, SNAP!!!

Sethbag, you're truly one of the great ones. That's no B.S., either.

Quote:
That's an exceedingly telling question to ask, because it would be very hard for most TBMs to come up with a non-Mormon whom they would trust to do this.


Indeed. I would love to see them try, though.

Quote:
And that's the point. Many Mormons have no problem expressing a desire for God's Will to be enacted into law, so long as it's God's Will According to Mormonism. But active Mormons maybe make up 1.5million to 2million people out of a population of over 300 million in the United States, and a much smaller proportion pretty much everywhere else in the world. It's not realistic to expect that a Mormon would be the one chosen to decide what is God's Will.


A point lost on pretty much all of them, methinks. It wasn't lost on me, however, when I was a TBM, which was probably what led to my strong libertarian leanings--much to the amazement of some of my TBM cohorts. They simply couldn't comprehend how/why I would NOT want the government to legislate morality.

Quote:
And even if they could get a Mormon into the position to decide God's Will, the hypocrisy is glaring in the idea that Mormons wouldn't trust a non-Mormon to legislate God's Will over them, but expect 298 million other non-Mormon Americans to entrust that job to a Mormon.


Another excellent and thread-worthy point. To my Mormon friends: Can any of you tackle the above sentence?

Sethbag, I hope you don't think I'm "boot licking" or anything, but between you and cinepro, you easily account for over 90% of the aggregate brainpower at MA&D. Hell, I'd love to borrow, say, 1% of your brain cells for a day just to catch a glimpse of what it's like to be you.


_________________
". . . apologists are far more successful at thwarting progress than they are at making it."
--Trevor, 05/22/08

Introducing WINK--the official J-pop group of Mormondiscussions.com!
Thu May 29, 2008 10:37 am

The Nehor
God

Joined: 29 Apr 2007
Posts: 4411



Dr. Shades wrote:

A point lost on pretty much all of them, methinks. It wasn't lost on me, however, when I was a TBM, which was probably what led to my strong libertarian leanings--much to the amazement of some of my TBM cohorts. They simply couldn't comprehend how/why I would NOT want the government to legislate morality.


This I do not understand. I have strong libertarian sympathies but the common refrain of "The government shouldn't legislate morality" makes no sense at all. Laws against murder exist because we decided murder was immoral. Laws on taxes are designed (theoretically) so that the tax burden is fair (a moral distinction). All laws are moral decisions. They may be bad decisions but I see no other rationale for choosing them. In reality of course some exist because they are practical or benefit those legislating but people tolerate the former and hate the latter (when and/or if they find out).

That complaint should read "Stop trying to get what you think is right made into law. What I (or we) think is right is much better." Then it becomes an actual political topic that can be discussed, debated, etc. The 'legislating morality' line is used to try to shut down your opponents without confronting them.


_________________
That shirt looks good on you, but it would look even better stuffed into the neck of a vodka bottle and flung burning through our office building's window. Let's do it and never look back.
Thu May 29, 2008 11:00 am

bcspace
God

Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Posts: 1401



Quote:
Many Mormons have no problem expressing a desire for God's Will to be enacted into law, so long as it's God's Will According to Mormonism.


So where do you draw the line? Do you allow murder just because Mormons believe it's wrong? Science has already shown the homosexual lifestyle to be fraught with danger and abuse above and beyond the average. Alcohol addiction and gambling are known to be bad for society and the individual. etc. etc.

In other words, one does not have to be a Mormon in order to legitimately believe that a set of laws should be enacted that seem to support LDS doctrine.



Last edited by bcspace on Thu May 29, 2008 11:02 am; edited 1 time in total
_________________
LDS doctrine defined. The first bullet point is the key.

The Ultimate Showdown of Ultimate Destiny
Don't Tase Me Bro!!!
Thu May 29, 2008 11:00 am

mbeesley
Sunbeam

Joined: 01 May 2008
Posts: 52
Location: San Diego



Dr. Shades wrote:
Sethbag wrote:
. . . I asked the TBMs which non-Mormon they would choose to decide, for them, what God's Will is, and enact it (God's Will) into law.


OH, SNAP!!!

Sethbag, you're truly one of the great ones. That's no B.S., either.

Quote:
That's an exceedingly telling question to ask, because it would be very hard for most TBMs to come up with a non-Mormon whom they would trust to do this.


Indeed. I would love to see them try, though.

Can you identify a post by a TBM where they have said that they want Congress to enact God's Will into law?


_________________
Cogito ergo sum.
Thu May 29, 2008 11:21 am

BishopRic
Stake President
Joined: 10 Nov 2007
Posts: 592
Location: SLC (behind the Zion Curtain)



bcspace wrote:
Quote:
Many Mormons have no problem expressing a desire for God's Will to be enacted into law, so long as it's God's Will According to Mormonism.


So where do you draw the line? Do you allow murder just because Mormons believe it's wrong? Science has already shown the homosexual lifestyle to be fraught with danger and abuse above and beyond the average. Alcohol addiction and gambling are known to be bad for society and the individual. etc. etc.

In other words, one does not have to be a Mormon in order to legitimately believe that a set of laws should be enacted that seem to support LDS doctrine.


Interesting how you approach these things. My view is that Mormonism teaches what they do because many of them just happen to be the right thing for people to do. by the way, the safest "sexual behavior" is lesbianism. Should we all be forced to practice that? I'm quite sure most religious practices teach against murder...but there is that exception about Laban deserving his demise....

And I can tell you that Mormons have their own unique preponderance of addictions that are far worse than a glass of wine, coffee or tea. But that's another thread.


_________________
Überzeugungen sind oft die gefährlichsten Feinde der Wahrheit.
[Certainty (that one is correct) is often the most dangerous enemy of the
truth.] - Friedrich Nietzsche
Thu May 29, 2008 11:24 am

asbestosman
God

Joined: 07 Nov 2006
Posts: 3133
Location: in the dog house



Sethbag wrote:
I'm extremely disappointed that they banned me and then turned around and locked the thread where I asked the TBMs which non-Mormon they would choose to decide, for them, what God's Will is, and enact it (God's Will) into law. That's an exceedingly telling question to ask, because it would be very hard for most TBMs to come up with a non-Mormon whom they would trust to do this.

It's not up to me to choose someone to decide God's will. It's up to God.



Quote:
And that's the point. Many Mormons have no problem expressing a desire for God's Will to be enacted into law, so long as it's God's Will According to Mormonism. But active Mormons maybe make up 1.5million to 2million people out of a population of over 300 million in the United States, and a much smaller proportion pretty much everywhere else in the world. It's not realistic to expect that a Mormon would be the one chosen to decide what is God's Will.

For some perhaps. I tend to believe that it isn't the government's job to dictate what is or is not sinful behavior. The government should concern itself with protecting property and freedom.

Anyhow, I think many Mormons have no desire to forcibly ban coffee, but they feel compelled to make a stand against gay marriage along with millions of other Christian Americans. I think what Mormons feel should be codified is that which other conservative Christians tend to feel should be codified. Perhaps they feel that America is supposed to be a conservative Christian country. I don't know. I think such views are mistaken given the church's own battle against polygamy (I don't think the government should have been involved even though I am pleased with the result).


_________________
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy.
eritis sicut dii
Thu May 29, 2008 11:42 am

asbestosman
God

Joined: 07 Nov 2006
Posts: 3133
Location: in the dog house



The Nehor wrote:
This I do not understand. I have strong libertarian sympathies but the common refrain of "The government shouldn't legislate morality" makes no sense at all. Laws against murder exist because we decided murder was immoral.

That's why I say the government exists to protect property, freedom, and perhaps ensure safety, but it does not exist to define what is or isn't sinful behavior. Note that "sin" only makes sense in the context of religion and also note that one can legislate the morality of property, freedom, etc. without worrying about sin.


_________________
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy.
eritis sicut dii
Thu May 29, 2008 11:50 am

Sethbag
God

Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 1857



asbestosman wrote:
Sethbag wrote:
I'm extremely disappointed that they banned me and then turned around and locked the thread where I asked the TBMs which non-Mormon they would choose to decide, for them, what God's Will is, and enact it (God's Will) into law. That's an exceedingly telling question to ask, because it would be very hard for most TBMs to come up with a non-Mormon whom they would trust to do this.

It's not up to me to choose someone to decide God's will. It's up to God.


Yes, and the person God chose is named Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

What, you don't agree with this? Then how about Osama bin Laden. Still don't agree? Then how about Pope Benedict XVI? Still don't agree? Then how about James Dobson? Jerry Falwell? Ted Haggard?

The problem here is pretty obvious. You say, and every other religious person might agree, that it's up to God to choose his deputy on Earth, not we puny humans. The trouble is, God's not making it very obvious who his choice is, and nobody can get everyone else to agree on their view of who it is. And with Mormons being such a tiny minority, all things considered, it's exceedingly dumb for Mormons to support the notion of "God's Will" going into law, because inevitably, once that particular meme were to be accepted, it would be a non-Mormon determining what is God's Will, and then where would the Mormons be? Up a creek, sans paddle.

Quote:
Anyhow, I think many Mormons have no desire to forcibly ban coffee, but they feel compelled to make a stand against gay marriage along with millions of other Christian Americans.

Right. This time the Will of God According to Mormonism happens to align with the Will of God According to Evangelical Christianity. What happens with the next issue, where the Mormons and everyone else disagree on what God's Will really is?

Quote:
I think what Mormons feel should be codified is that which other conservative Christians tend to feel should be codified. Perhaps they feel that America is supposed to be a conservative Christian country. I don't know. I think such views are mistaken given the church's own battle against polygamy (I don't think the government should have been involved even though I am pleased with the result).

Despite how chummy with the rest of Christianity some LDS wish to be, it's pretty clear that most of the rest of Christianity regard Mormonism as egregious heretics. There will inevitably be differences in interpreting what is God's Will that do not come out favorably for the LDS. As a very small minority, Mormons ought to be out there supporting the fight to keep the Will of God out of our lawbooks.


_________________
"The father in [the brownie/dogpoop] story wouldn't dream of requiring his prophets to be infallible, but then he turns right around and requires, of all things, his movies to be infallible?" -- Dr. Shades
Thu May 29, 2008 12:13 pm

asbestosman
God

Joined: 07 Nov 2006
Posts: 3133
Location: in the dog house



Sethbag wrote:
There will inevitably be differences in interpreting what is God's Will that do not come out favorably for the LDS.

I doubt it will happen again. I can't imagine any religious group (or group of various religions) getting enough support to discriminate against any LDS positions. Nevertheless . . .
Quote:
As a very small minority, Mormons ought to be out there supporting the fight to keep the Will of God out of our lawbooks.

I absolutely agree, but I do so on principle, not because I think there's a real threat to the LDS church as it currently stands. The only threat I could even conceivably imagine is a law forcing the church to open its books, but I really don't think that's such a huge deal. The church already has to do it in the UK and it already did it in the past. It may not like doing it, but I don't think it'd be so bad.



Last edited by asbestosman on Thu May 29, 2008 12:25 pm; edited 1 time in total
_________________
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy.
eritis sicut dii
Thu May 29, 2008 12:23 pm

Sethbag
God

Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 1857



mbeesley wrote:
Can you identify a post by a TBM where they have said that they want Congress to enact God's Will into law?


I really don't want to get into a nitpicking thing here. Are you really overlooking things like the LDS Church pushing for anti-gay marriage legislation on the basis that gay marriage violates what God has said regarding the family? And how many TBMs have chimed in agreeing with that legislative agenda, on the basis that homosexuality is immoral, as defined by their conception of God? How many TBMs responded to the California Supreme Court ruling with insinuations that California ought to be destroyed now by God because of it? I'm not going to nitpick whether any given post constitutes a call for "God's Will" to be enacted into law. The desire to see laws be passed based on their interpretation of God's Will has been pretty plain and not hard to see, over the years, about this issue in particular, as well as some others.

And anyhow, my question stands perfectly well even as a hypothetical. If we could get people to agree that God's Will be enacted into law, as determined by someone elected to be The Decider (sorry Bush), which non-Mormon would the Mormons feel comfortable entrusting with that power?


_________________
"The father in [the brownie/dogpoop] story wouldn't dream of requiring his prophets to be infallible, but then he turns right around and requires, of all things, his movies to be infallible?" -- Dr. Shades
Thu May 29, 2008 12:27 pm

bcspace
God

Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Posts: 1401



Quote:
So where do you draw the line? Do you allow murder just because Mormons believe it's wrong? Science has already shown the homosexual lifestyle to be fraught with danger and abuse above and beyond the average. Alcohol addiction and gambling are known to be bad for society and the individual. etc. etc.

In other words, one does not have to be a Mormon in order to legitimately believe that a set of laws should be enacted that seem to support LDS doctrine.

Quote:
Interesting how you approach these things. My view is that Mormonism teaches what they do because many of them just happen to be the right thing for people to do.


Is it suprising that Mormons would vote based on their beliefs? Wouldn't it be forcing someone else's morals on them if they were not allowed to do so?

Quote:
by the way, the safest "sexual behavior" is lesbianism. Should we all be forced to practice that?


I don't think the basis for LDS sexual morals is found in the modern concept of "safe sex".

Quote:
I'm quite sure most religious practices teach against murder...but there is that exception about Laban deserving his demise....


And war, and self-defense, etc.

Quote:
And I can tell you that Mormons have their own unique preponderance of addictions that are far worse than a glass of wine, coffee or tea. But that's another thread.


Such as pyramid schemes. But such does not invalidate the morality of teaching against other addictions does it?


_________________
LDS doctrine defined. The first bullet point is the key.

The Ultimate Showdown of Ultimate Destiny
Don't Tase Me Bro!!!
Thu May 29, 2008 12:37 pm

BishopRic
Stake President
Joined: 10 Nov 2007
Posts: 592
Location: SLC (behind the Zion Curtain)



bcspace wrote:

Quote:
And I can tell you that Mormons have their own unique preponderance of addictions that are far worse than a glass of wine, coffee or tea. But that's another thread.


Such as pyramid schemes. But such does not invalidate the morality of teaching against other addictions does it?


No, I'm referring to food, drug, and pornography addictions -- much more prevalent in the church than the norm. The physical and emotional damage these and other obsessions common in Mormondum are quite a problem. But again, that's another thread....


_________________
Überzeugungen sind oft die gefährlichsten Feinde der Wahrheit.
[Certainty (that one is correct) is often the most dangerous enemy of the
truth.] - Friedrich Nietzsche
Thu May 29, 2008 12:56 pm

mbeesley
Sunbeam

Joined: 01 May 2008
Posts: 52
Location: San Diego



Sethbag wrote:
mbeesley wrote:
Can you identify a post by a TBM where they have said that they want Congress to enact God's Will into law?


I really don't want to get into a nitpicking thing here.

Of course you don't, because if you can keep the question vague, you're more likely to get a response that you can mock.

Quote:
Are you really overlooking things like the LDS Church pushing for anti-gay marriage legislation on the basis that gay marriage violates what God has said regarding the family?

Nope. I do not equate supporting legislation that is consistent with a certain set of moral values with wanting to elect a Congress that will enact God's Will into law. The former is rather specific while the latter is overbroad and vague.

Quote:
And how many TBMs have chimed in agreeing with that legislative agenda, on the basis that homosexuality is immoral, as defined by their conception of God?

I don't know. How many?

Quote:
How many TBMs responded to the California Supreme Court ruling with insinuations that California ought to be destroyed now by God because of it?

I don't know. How many?

Quote:
I'm not going to nitpick whether any given post constitutes a call for "God's Will" to be enacted into law.

Ok.

Quote:
The desire to see laws be passed based on their interpretation of God's Will has been pretty plain and not hard to see, over the years, about this issue in particular, as well as some others.

Ok.

Quote:
And anyhow, my question stands perfectly well even as a hypothetical. If we could get people to agree that God's Will be enacted into law, as determined by someone elected to be The Decider (sorry Bush), which non-Mormon would the Mormons feel comfortable entrusting with that power?

And you posted it as a hypothetical in that other thread. Are you satisfied with the responses you are getting? Doesn't seem like anyone wants to see God's Will enacted into law does it? :D

(The Dude's response was probably the best.)