Holding back the tide of Liberalism

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_Gazelam
_Emeritus
Posts: 5659
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:06 am

Re: Holding back the tide of Liberalism

Post by _Gazelam »

Liz,

So, Gaz... Do you personally believe what you referenced in your OP from the JoD?

Do you think that Brigham Young is right, and it is a matter of time before the Church takes over the government?

That's actually what my Dad believes, which is why I'm curious as to where you fall.


I don't see the church taking over the government until Christ comes again. I also don't see that as being what Brigham is referencing. The American Nation as such - with all its freedoms, rights, and constitutional guarantees - came into being and continues to exist so that a proper religious climate would prevail for the restoration and spread of the gospel. (See 3 Nephi 21

That the Mormon community has such strong ties to the republican party is not what is important to notice in the census. The republican party at one time represented a core set of values that many Mormons embraced, but has since shown itself to be no friend of freedom. During the Bush years the republicans had all the power they wanted to set things right, but instead chose to do nothing. Also with their anti-terrorism plan they have stripped away many freedoms and rights that are essential to a democracy. Even so they are still a better choice than democrats who seek to strengthen the abuse of freedom. I don't think either of the parties want to crush freedom, both simply have different views on what freedoms should be and represent. I think its more a question of values.

Mormons have a strong tie to family that is inherent in their belief system of a God that is a Father, not simply a creator. Liberalism sees no need for a family as a central base on which to base a democracy, not understanding that family values are critical in building up a community. A family instills a sense of identity and purpose in youth, who then grow up to carry on traditions and defend what is valuable to the social structure.

Also liberalism and the so called "democratic" party at at their hearts socialists. Why is socialism incompatible with man’s liberty? Socialism cannot work except through an all-powerful state. The state has to be supreme in everything. When individuals begin to exert their God-given rights, the state has to suppress that freedom. So belief in God must be suppressed, and with that gone freedom of conscience and religion must also go. Those are the first of our liberties mentioned in the Bill of Rights.

A democrat could be compared to the Kingman in the Book of Mormon that Captain Moroni struggled so hard to contend against. They seek to surrender their liberty so that a great King can rule over and with tyranny support their abuses of freedom. This is all well and good when the tyrant is on your side, but not when the wind blows against you when the weather changes.

Ezra Taft Benson spoke out against a strong federal government. he stated:

It is a firm principle that the smallest or lowest level that can possibly undertake the task is the one that should do so. First, the community or city. If the city cannot handle it, then the county. Next, the state; and only if no smaller unit can possible do the job should the federal government be considered. This is merely the application to the field of politics of that wise and time-tested principle of never asking a larger gr a larger group to do that which can be done by a smaller group. And so far as government is concerned the smaller the unit and the closer it is to the people, the easier it is to guide it, to keep it solvent and to keep our freedom.....It is well to remember that the states of this republic created the Federal Government. The Federal Government did not create the states.

source: Link

It is the churchs view that all things should be set up to create strong and self sufficient individuals. We believe that every man in his nation has a God given right to defend his person, his liberty, and his property. We need government mainly to control the element of crime that springs up. People generally do very well for themselves when left alone.

The reason that so many people want to embrace a system that wants to steal from the rich to give to the poor is the same reason so many embrace fad diets and crazy health foods. Its a quick fix that requires no forethought. No real lifestyle change. Everyone knows that eating right and exercising really is what solves bad waistlines, but why go that route when you can just use a miracle cure?

As our country slides further into a bohemian liberal mindset our constitution that supports individual freedoms will come more and more under attack, and it will be those who support the old standard of individual freedoms without the interference of big government that will have to stand up and defend it. Those who have a real view of the purpose behind the Plan of Salvation and mans eventual destiny will feel the strongest about these issues. And from the graph above it seems readily apparent as to who those people will be.

I would urge all who are interested in these things to read Ezra Taft Bensons talk provided in the link above.
We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light. - Plato
_Morrissey
_Emeritus
Posts: 329
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 1:42 am

Re: Holding back the tide of Liberalism

Post by _Morrissey »

Gazelam wrote:Image

Data from a new gallup poll:
Results are based on telephone interviews with 160,236 national adults, aged 18 and older, conducted Jan. 2 - June 30, 2009, as part of Gallup Poll Daily tracking. For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±1 percentage point.

The red/blue discrepancy is striking, but as one notes, "The one thing the four Republican aligned states have in common? Small populations."

...and Mormons

Image

Link


"When the Constitution of the United States hangs, at it were, upon a single thread, they will have to call for the "Mormon" Elders to save it from utter destruction; and they will step forth and do it." (Discourses of Brigham Young, p. 361)
.
.
.
.
.


I'm sorry, but this is just stupidity. Not your average run-of-the-mill stupidity, but no holds barred, 'hey everyone, look at me, I'm really, really stupid,' stupidity.
_Droopy
_Emeritus
Posts: 9826
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 4:06 pm

Re: Holding back the tide of Liberalism

Post by _Droopy »

You have to be naïve or blindly partisan not to see that politics has a cycle. Conservatism has been proven wrong just about as many times (Bush, Iraq, economy, McCain/Palin... remember?) but Conservatism will be back before long. Well, it might resurrect as neo-neo-conservatism, but still....



You know, for some, ignorance isn't just bliss, its, to use Paul's phraseology, a consuming fire.
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.

- Thomas Sowell
_krose
_Emeritus
Posts: 2555
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 1:18 pm

Re: Holding back the tide of Liberalism

Post by _krose »

Gazelam wrote:I don't see the church taking over the government until Christ comes again. I also don't see that as being what Brigham is referencing. The American Nation as such - with all its freedoms, rights, and constitutional guarantees - came into being and continues to exist so that a proper religious climate would prevail for the restoration and spread of the gospel. (See 3 Nephi 21

Does this mean that you believe the Book of Mormon was talking about the USA when it makes these kinds of predictions? I take that to mean you do not agree with those who say it all happened in a small portion of Central America, among a small group of people who were surrounded by a large population of previous inhabitants?
"The DNA of fictional populations appears to be the most susceptible to extinction." - Simon Southerton
_The Dude
_Emeritus
Posts: 2976
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:16 am

Re: Holding back the tide of Liberalism

Post by _The Dude »

bcspace wrote:I explained that cycle. You seem to not have read any further after that sentence.


I read it. Maybe it's true that I didn't take your "just-so" story seriously.

Droopy wrote:You know, for some, ignorance isn't just bliss, its, to use Paul's phraseology, a consuming fire.


Did I mention "blindly partisan"?
"And yet another little spot is smoothed out of the echo chamber wall..." Bond
_Droopy
_Emeritus
Posts: 9826
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 4:06 pm

Re: Holding back the tide of Liberalism

Post by _Droopy »

Why does liberalism continuously resurrect after failing and being proven wrong over and over again? It's because people have figured out how to vote themselves largess. And what is a liberal? Someone who is generous with someone else's time, money, and lives. Hence, the greed for the largess.



As Bastiat so succinctly pointed out, once a citizenry realizes that they can vote themselves the fruits of the labor of their fellow citizens and live at their expense, the days of a free, constitutional republic are numbered.

Once this mentality takes hold of a critical mass of a population (what we today call the "entitlement mentality), it is almost impossible to moderate or change, and people will behave like beasts to protect and enhance their entitlements and "rights" extracted from the labor, creativity, and investments of their neighbors.

No matter the degree to which leftism fails, time and again, leftism's ultimate genius is to play to the basest passions and emotions of the human spirit: greed, envy, resentment, and the preoccupation with "carnal security" and then to place as many people as possible onto some kind of gravy train, so that if liberalism fails, the gravy trains themselves go off the tracks and everyone loses something.

Ideally, it is in the self interest of most of the population to support leftist policy and governance, as not to do so, at some point, involves losing some kind of "benefit" or "right" or "service" supplied by the state.

However, at certain historical nodes, such as the end of the Carter years, or as with Obama's present plunge in popularity in concert with the most disliked Congress probably in American history, a critical mass of the population finally becomes really fearful of leftist dominance of the organs of power and begins to have second thoughts. People are really now becoming afraid of the $12,000,000,000,000 of inflationary fiat money this administration has proposed to spend over the next decade. They are afraid of the economy wrecking potential of cap and trade and the EPA's new regulatory powers regarding CO2. They are afraid of Obama's nationalization of a huge percentage of the economy and the rationing of care and decline in quality of care that we know will occur under such a system.

They are afraid of what is apparently the Obama administration's view that the war on Islamic terror is essentially over, and we need only give our enemies cookies and they will go away.

They are afraid of Obama's preposterously naïve and intellectually vaporous multiculturalist view of the world and its various peoples/ideologies.

They are wondering about an administration and a congress that says nothing as union brownshirts supplied by the primary sugar daddy of the Democrat party (big labor, and especially the public sector unions) attack, intimidate, and disrupt demonstrations and town hall meetings by opponents of the administration.

They wonder as billions of dollars of "stimulus" money move to the coffers of an organization that led the way in the professionalization of voter fraud, ACORN, with which Obama has a long working relationship.

They wonder as the most extreme ideological radicals from the outer fringes of American political culture, such as Sonia Sodomeyer, sail into the Supreme Court virtually unimpeded, while constitutinalist judges of far more intellectual heft and experience, from Bork and Thomas to virtually all of Bush appointees, meet visceral character assassination campaigns and filibusters.

If they wonder long enough, then a compendium of conservatives and blue dog Democrats will put a conservative leaning President into office, and change the complexion of Congress.

When marginal conservatives like George Bush, or country club liberals like Nixon, make a hash of things and/or govern like the Left themselves, a backlash is created. But even with this, the welfare/entitlement state continues on its course. Sometimes it is slowed in its progress, but never stopped or turned back, and eventually, what Peter Schweizer has called "the takings coalition" among the citizenry reasserts itself, and the cycle returns in favor of the Left.

The problem is that Obama, far more than Clinton before him, is quite capable, especially with the present Congress, of doing irreparable damage to the constitution and the nation before being put out to Pasture.
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.

- Thomas Sowell
_Droopy
_Emeritus
Posts: 9826
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 4:06 pm

Re: Holding back the tide of Liberalism

Post by _Droopy »

Did I mention "blindly partisan"?

I don't think you did, but no matter, as someone who is incapable of moving anywhere beyond Katie Couric or Hardball in their understanding of politics and political philosophy doesn't really deserve to be taken seriously.
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.

- Thomas Sowell
_The Dude
_Emeritus
Posts: 2976
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:16 am

Re: Holding back the tide of Liberalism

Post by _The Dude »

Drippy wrote:such as Sonia Sodomeyer


Hashing names is the most memorable part of your illucid rants. Thanks for that.
"And yet another little spot is smoothed out of the echo chamber wall..." Bond
_The Dude
_Emeritus
Posts: 2976
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:16 am

Re: Holding back the tide of Liberalism

Post by _The Dude »

Droopy wrote:
Did I mention "blindly partisan"?

I don't think you did, but no matter...


Actually, I did mention it. You even quoted it. But no matter.
"And yet another little spot is smoothed out of the echo chamber wall..." Bond
_Gazelam
_Emeritus
Posts: 5659
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:06 am

Re: Holding back the tide of Liberalism

Post by _Gazelam »

Krose,

Does this mean that you believe the Book of Mormon was talking about the USA when it makes these kinds of predictions? I take that to mean you do not agree with those who say it all happened in a small portion of Central America, among a small group of people who were surrounded by a large population of previous inhabitants?


Wow, excellent point. I had to stop and think about this.

I am of the opinion that the Book of Mormon people existed in the Incan empire. The Temples at Machu Pichu bear a strong resemblance to our Temples today, even going so far as to have a replica of the Garden of Eden built into the Temple, including gold and silver animals and plants. Link

The Nephites were told that the Gentiles would drive their people out of the land, which would in fact mean Northern America. The prophecies concerning a free people also fit better into Northern America. I would suppose that perhaps he meant both areas.

I don't know.
We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light. - Plato
Post Reply