Mormons in the United States – survey results / CIA Official Finds Her Faith / Gun Control – History of LDS in Far West, Missouri / LDS and Islamic Leaders Share Relief Efforts / “I suppose it will be but a little while before some of those officious characters will determine the number of beans that Brother Kimball and I shall have in our porridge…” (Brigham Young) / Should government regulate the internet? / BYU Most Stone Cold Sober University
Newsletter Subscribe
-
Current Book Spotlight
LDS Liberty Network Blogs
-
Most Popular All-Time Articles
- Illegal Immigration and the Fulfillment of Book of Mormon Prophecy - 27,831 views
- Why I Do Not Pledge Allegiance to the Flag - 23,668 views
- Liberty and Socialism Cannot Co-exist! - 12,667 views
- The Coming Apostasy of Latter-day Conservatives - 11,151 views
- Immigration, Individual Rights, and the Constitution - 6,882 views
-
Hey guys,
Listening to the podcast now. Homeschooling mother of two. Just wanted to comment on the comparison of 6% of LDS kids vs. 15% of other religious children in homeschooling or religious education. I believe this is a case of comparing apples to oranges. I’m not positive, but I would hazard a guess that the difference in the stats has more to do with the lack of LDS private and charter schools at the elementary and secondary level. Where I grew up in MA, for instance, there were two private Catholic schools 5 miles from one another, and not a single LDS private school for thousands of miles. I believe if you were to compare JUST homeschooling LDS to JUST homeschooling religious people, the numbers would be closer. In fact, just today I got an email from the HSLDA that said that 4% of school aged children in the US are now homeschooled, so we may actually be ahead of the curve.
I am a former public school teacher, and when I had kids I knew without a doubt that I’d be homeschooling. There is no way I would subject my kids to the mediocre expectations of state schooling. I preach the homeschooling message to anyone who will listen!
I can appreciate your views on the CIA, but I thought your critique of the CIA officer was a bit unfair (which by the way, reflects a similar comment you made in previous weeks about LDS members serving with Unmanned Aerial Systems). I don’t think you are in a position to judge her conversion, her spirtituality, or her sincerity before the Lord (or to accuse her of murder by association with the CIA). As in all things spiritual, we should look to the Savior’s example. Did he reject the publican or the centurion for their service to a repressive empire? Of course not. I would be careful in future episodes in wagging the proverbial finger.
I agree with Luis. The Founding Fathers were actually very supportive of local sumptuary laws. Also, the leadership of the Church even supported the amendment to the US Constitution on prohibition. However Lous’ comment on wagging the finger is a little off base. Too many times we associate the Savior with allowing anyone to do anything. He said “Go and sin no more” and when one group continued to sin, he made a whip and took care of business. That may not apply in the specific case mentioned above, but still.
Luis,
I had some fun with the article, yes. That being said, my personal sentiments are excited against people who make ZERO connection between a knowledge of the truth and the morality of their profession. I love the universal maxim in these cases “if everyone in the world were just like me, how would the universe be?” In her case, the world would be a not so obvious bloodbath in which all people who aren’t disappearing in the night aren’t question whether they should give support to such actions. Her universe is ripe for destruction. How is yours? That’s a question because I don’t know.
Luis,
If my efforts have caused you to embrace federalism out of LOVE for federalism, I have failed. From a practicality standpoint, if you can fragment unrighteous power into lots of pieces, one limits the destructive nature of it. Those who are able to conjugate truth into social norms know that the answer to unrighteous power is simply to tear it down. If someone listens to me and reluctantly embraces federalism because it’s highly unlikely that unrighteous power will receive its just treatment, then I feel like I’ve successfully done my job. Let’s face it…even getting federalism to work is quite a trick. The problem with smaller jurisdictions dictating a drug prohibitionist policy is that it abrogates the right of the individual unless that individual is given the ability to accept that rule or that rule-making body and their procedures by covenant. There are those who advocate for liberty on principle and those who advocate for it based on good results. One of these paths will lead to bloody hands…..
Speaking of bloody hands, I’m sure your wife isn’t a violent person or else you wouldn’t have chosen to live with her. Try connecting her with the violence enacted upon people who are hurting themselves already with drugs. Is it good for them? Does she want to pay for housing them in a box that doesn’t help them? Does she want to corrupt the people who should be serving and protecting by training them to seize the property of those who break these rules?
The folly here is discussion what LAWS should be based on what one thinks is better for other people. Nobody, especially not God ever gave you or anyone that right. When you cast ballots to coerce your neighbor, you assume authority you don’t have and you advocate violence. Yes federalism may yield arguable better consequences in the realm of drugs, but I hope that in accepting a federalist policy, people who should be enlightened don’t find themselves EMBRACING a corrupt invention of man whilst ignoring the principles that God has given us.
Let’s say you have your federalism and you live in a county that is debating drug policy, what do you do now?
I would try to get everyone in the county to accept the county mode of legislation by covenant. This is sort of how we accept revelation from the prophet before we even receive it. OF course, if there was this much scrutiny of their legislation that has to be accepted by covenant, then it might be amended so that ALL voters could accept it by binding covenant. Then whatever laws they write must be obey b/c the people are covenanted.
If that fails then I would advocate as much liberty as possible and get my homeowners associated to out law drugs by covenant. Once you can get that passed, you can put your wife in charge of searching people’s vehicles and home to make sure they are keeping their side of the bargain…and that’s if they were even willing to sign onto the new rule in the first place. What punishments would they be willing to consent to? This is assuming they would consent in the first place to the rule.
AS your wife is spearheading the enforcement of this rule, how would your subdivision fare in prosperity and growth compared to others who have more lax standards as far as substances go? How would your wife be seen in this community that she polices?
There are not clear cut answers to this. IF the people that you attract to your community are just like you, they would probably appreciate her. If she unrighteous agitates to enforce her will on others in a different context, she deserves to be connected with her advocacy and she deserves to see what people think of her as a result. That’s why all government, righteous and unrighteous, should always be local. It’s a great check.
I don’t blame your wife or most other people for their anti-drug sentiments. Most haven’t though this far and most have been simply programmed. I do rejoice when anyone starts breaking out of it.