More Bad News for Mormonism and Politics

[_Kishkumen]

bcspace is a bigot.

[_bcspace]

bcspace is a bigot.

It is true that all liberals are bigots, yes. But I am not a liberal. However, it is true that liberals typically degenerate into name calling or stronger forms of violence when proven wrong or they can't get their way.

[_Runtu]

It is true that all liberals are bigots, yes. But I am not a liberal. However, it is true that liberals typically degenerate into name calling or stronger forms of violence when proven wrong or they can't get their way.

I suppose that's better than running away when you've been shown to be wrong.

[Guest]

Democrats are ineligible for a TR; they have to lie to get it.

You are in apostasy. You should repent. From the Church Handbook of Instructions (2010), Book 2, page 189:
"the Church is neutral regarding political parties, political platforms, and candidates for political office. The Church does not endorse any political party or candidate. Nor does it advise members on how to vote. . . . Church leaders and members should also avoid statements or conduct that might be interpreted as Church endorsement of any political party, platform, policy, or candidate."

It goes without saying that the Church is opposed to abortion

As for abortion, you misstate the Church's stance as unqualified opposition. In this you do err (or lie). From the CHI, book 2, page 194:
"It is a fact that a child has life before birth. However, there is no direct revelation on when the spirit enters the body." And from page 195:

"The Church opposes elective abortion for personal or social convenience." But there are exceptions to the prohibition, namely:
"1. Pregnancy resulted from forcible rape [Equality: is there any other kind?] or incest.
2. A competent physician determines that the life or health of the mother is in serious jeopardy.
3. A competent physician determines that the fetus has severe defects that will not allow the baby to survive beyond birth."

The Church's position is much more likely to be acceptable in the Democratic party than in the Republican party. The Republican platform from 2008 said:

Faithful to the first guarantee of the Declaration of Independence, we assert the inherent dignity and sanctity of all human life and affirm that the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed. We support a human life amendment to the Constitution, and we endorse legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to unborn children.

It is unclear which specific "human life amendment" the GOP platform endorsed, but one that has been introduced (the Burke Amendment) in Congress reads as follows:

Section 1. With respect to the right to life, the word 'person,' as used in this article and in the fifth and fourteenth articles of amendment to the Constitution of the United States, applies to all human beings, including their unborn offspring at every stage of their biological development, irrespective of age, health, function, or condition of dependency.

Section 2. No abortion shall be performed by any person except under and in conformance with law permitting an abortion to be performed only in an emergency when a reasonable medical certainty exists that the continuation of pregnancy will cause the death of the mother and requiring that person to make every reasonable effort, in keeping with good medical practice, to preserve the life of her unborn offspring.

Section 3. The Congress and the several States shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation within their respective jurisdictions.

As you can plainly see, the Republican party goes much further in its opposition to abortion than does the LDS church. The human life amendment makes no exception for forcible rape, health of the mother, or a fetus medically determined to be not viable past birth.

[_Kishkumen]

It is true that all liberals are bigots, yes. But I am not a liberal. However, it is true that liberals typically degenerate into name calling or stronger forms of violence when proven wrong or they can't get their way.

It is not name-calling, bc. It is an observation, which you continue to reaffirm in the above quotation. You are a bigot.

[_Runtu]

It is not name-calling, bc. It is an observation, which you continue to reaffirm in the above quotation. You are a bigot.

Precisely. Someone who lumps a large group of people together and says disparaging things, as if every single person in the group is equally awful--yep, that's a bigot.

[_DarkHelmet]

CFR. Show me something published by the church that says the Democratic party is one of the groups implicated in this question.

It goes without saying that the Church is opposed to abortion, feminism, homosexual marriage, opposition to war at any cost, socialism and the welfare state. Thus, Democrats are ineligible for a TR; they have to lie to get it.

Official doctrine does not include "it goes without saying." It is only official doctrine if it is published by the church. So unless you can find it written down in a church publication that the Democratic party is one of the groups that members cannot associate with, it is only your opinion. I believe it was JT Ready's opinion, too. I think he read the same books that you read.

[_Kevin Graham]

Hate laws such as those making abortion as a general method of birth control legal? I agree. As for immigration, even the Utah Compact endorses obedience to and enforcement of the law.

Notice also that liberals such as Democrats can't get a "Temple Card" without lying in the interview:

"Do you support, affiliate with, or agree with any group or individual whose teachings or practices are contrary to or oppose those accepted by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?"

Had bcspace ever answered "yes" to that question he would know that this answer doesn't require immediate disqualification. He is deluded if he thinks all Democrat TR holders lie in their interviews and he is also deluded if he thinks the Church cares. For crying out loud, there are Democrat Mormons in office who have no problem holding a TR. Does bcspace really think these people are hiding their support for and affiliation with the Democrat party?

[_krose]

Democrats are ineligible for a TR; they have to lie to get it.

If you buy into a convoluted re-definition of the question about group affiliations, sure.

Meanwhile, your guy Romney has to lie about being honest, a clear and simple question. (But when you think about it, why would a dishonest person be expected to honestly answer a question about honesty?)

Hell, I just heard him tell two whoppers this morning in the space of about 30 seconds.

[_CaliforniaKid]

Amen to Equality's posts in this thread.

There was a time, back when David O. McKay was President, when you could make a pretty strong case that the Church was against the welfare state. (This, by the way, led to an interesting kind of McCarthyism at BYU, where the administration literally asked students to spy on faculty and report their political views, and to deny the administration had any role in the spying if they got caught.) Some of the Brethren privately dissented from that view, but they kept quiet because they didn't want to openly disagree with President McKay.

Today, however, I daresay things are different. The Church has largely returned to its stance of political neutrality, despite occasional meddling.