bcspace wrote:In addition, it is not possible for a Democrat to pass the TR questions without lying and they also fit some of the definitions of apostasy given in the CHI.
I've never understood the need to put these additional litmus tests on church members. The existence of GAs who are also Democrats, like Marlin Jenson, James Faust, and Melvin Hammond, puts the lie to this notion that being a Democrat is akin to apostasy.
Elder Hammond once told me of walking up and down a long hallway with President Faust in Lima, Peru, for four hours. What did they talk about? Democratic prospects in the upcoming elections.
I've never understood the need to put these additional litmus tests on church members. The existence of GAs who are also Democrats, like Marlin Jenson, James Faust, and Melvin Hammond, puts the lie to this notion that being a Democrat is akin to apostasy.
The entire gospel is a "litmus test" for salvation and exaltation. All of its principles, doctrines, practices and ordinances are a part of that test (do we accept them and live them, or reject/rebel against them?)
Each one of the above mentioned individuals was of the WWII generation, and members of a very different Democratic party than the one that emerged out of the McGovern coalition and the "class of '74" that came to dominate that party after the sixties.
Even as recent a Democratic icon such as JFK wouldn't recognize his party today.
Last edited by Guest on Sun May 15, 2011 6:03 am, edited 3 times in total.
Nothing is going to startle us more when we pass through the veil to the other side than to realize how well we know our Father [in Heaven] and how familiar his face is to us
- President Ezra Taft Benson
I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white.
Droopy wrote:The entire gospel is a "litmus test" for salvation and exaltation. All of its principles, doctrines, practices and ordinances are a part of that test (do we accept them and live them, or reject/rebel against them?)
Each one of the above mentioned individuals was of the WWII generation, and members of a very different Democratic party than the one that emerged out of the McGovern coalition and the "class of '74" that came to dominate that party after the sixties.
Even as recent a Democratic icon such as JFK wouldn't recognize his party today.
Uh, both Elders Jenson and Hammond were small children during WWII and were active in the Democratic Party in the 1970s and 1980s. You're simply wrong in your characterization.
The present Democratic party is, in essence, an indigenous Fabian socialist-like party that is viscerally hostile to American constitutionalism, free market economics, private property rights, and traditional social/moral values. Yet, I have little trouble believing that there are Democrats (like Sam Nunn or Zell Miller, among others) who have stayed in the party with the idea of helping it come to its senses.
I see little hope of that happening, but its the thought that counts" in such matters.
I'm not at all sure if the Republican party can fully come to its senses either, or, if it does, that it can maintain them over the long term.
Nothing is going to startle us more when we pass through the veil to the other side than to realize how well we know our Father [in Heaven] and how familiar his face is to us
- President Ezra Taft Benson
I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white.
In addition, it is not possible for a Democrat to pass the TR questions without lying and they also fit some of the definitions of apostasy given in the CHI.
I've never understood the need to put these additional litmus tests on church members.
No one has put any additional litmus test on the members. The question about supporting groups opposed to the Church has been there for a long time.
The existence of GAs who are also Democrats, like Marlin Jenson, James Faust, and Melvin Hammond, puts the lie to this notion that being a Democrat is akin to apostasy.
How so? Apostates can come from any direction. And there was a time when being a Democrat did not mean automatic support for opposition to the Gospel like it does now.
Elder Hammond once told me of walking up and down a long hallway with President Faust in Lima, Peru, for four hours. What did they talk about? Democratic prospects in the upcoming elections.
If the subject came up, I would not hesitate to raise my hand in a meeting with any GA who is currently a Democrat and accuse them of apostasy. I would also refuse to sign the recommend of any member who publically campaigns for that party on that basis.
Last edited by Guest on Sun May 15, 2011 6:12 am, edited 1 time in total.
bcspace wrote:No one has put any additional litmus test on the members. The question about supporting groups opposed to the Church has been there for a long time.
Since when was it a plank of the Democratic Party to oppose the LDS church?
Uh, both Elders Jenson and Hammond were small children during WWII and were active in the Democratic Party in the 1970s and 1980s. You're simply wrong in your characterization.
Jenson was born in 1942, and Hammond in 1933 (making Hammond 12 when WWII ended). The were both a part of the WWII/Depression era generation, not the baby boomer generation that, with the help of the Democrat party's old guard minority left wing, took the party into radical leftism after the early seventies, to which it has been in ever escalating thrall since.
I'm in serious doubt regarding the support of the individuals you have mentioned regarding most of the Democratic party's major initiatives over the last forty years, let alone its animating ideology.
Nothing is going to startle us more when we pass through the veil to the other side than to realize how well we know our Father [in Heaven] and how familiar his face is to us
- President Ezra Taft Benson
I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white.
Droopy wrote:Jenson was born in 1942, and Hammond in 1933 (making Hammond 12 when WWII ended). The were both a part of the WWII/Depression era generation, not the baby boomer generation that, with the help of the Democrat party's old guard minority left wing, took the party into radical leftism after the early seventies, to which it has been in ever escalating thrall since.
I'm in serious doubt regarding the support of the individuals you have mentioned regarding most of the Democratic party's major initiatives over the last forty years, let alone its animating ideology.
So, their interest in Democratic elections in the 1980s means they were nevertheless stuck in a 1950s postwar kind of Democratic Party? That makes no sense.