From my friend:
I read this talk some years ago and think the counsel is till very good. As the election nears it seems that the majority of the Facebook political chatter is negative,fearful and impugns the motives of he candidates. I wish people cold just simply say I am voting for so and so without the fear mongering. Romney is not a craved plutocrat that is controlled by the Mormon hierarchy nor is Obama a socialist with a secret plan to enslave America. Come on people. We a fortunate to have two decent honorable men running for the highest office in the land. Play nice.
The talk:
The tendency to indulge in . . . "long-range" criticism of public officials, especially as regards their private life and character. I include within the group not only political officers, but all others who, by reason of their elevation to positions of leadership, assume a responsibility for the direction of movements and causes. I recognize, of course, that the policies of a man in public place and the wisdom of his actions and statements are legitimate subjects for public debate and that proper criticism of such matters is not only allowable, but is to be encouraged in the interests of good government and civic procedure. But is it necessary in such an analysis of issues to bring imputations against a man's character, his intentions, and his honor? I think it is not, and I believe that inestimable and unnecessary damage is done to personal reputations, sensitive feelings, and legitimate family pride by the misconceived and cruel strategy that the way to win an ideological victory is to assassinate the character of an opponent. . . .
I think that those who occupy positions of public trust and responsibility in state, church, or businesses are entitled to a measure of sympathy in the discharge of their obligations. It certainly is not easy to please everybody, and the enforcement of the best and soundest policies invariably affects someone adversely. Because a person is affected adversely is no justification for an attack on the personal character of the enforcing or policymaking officer.
So until we can stop calling men "crooks" [or, I might add, any other pejorative name] just because they disagree with us, we have much to repent of. . . .
[We ought] to yield obedience to this divine injunction of the Savior, to refrain from intemperate judgment, to impute good rather than evil to the intentions of men, and to investigate and know the facts before deciding. We are much too prone to judge men by the mistakes they make, forgetting that we ourselves are constantly making mistakes. We seldom know or consider their intentions and that they themselves suffer most for their mistakes, in both disappointment and consequence. Most people need our sympathy, rather than our censure, in their failures. Stephen L Richards, The Church in War and Peace (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 1943), pp. 168_-70
