Utah Democrats are very happy with the Church’s new statement on political participation. Here’s a story on their happiness. In addition to the usual urge to vote and consider the candidates carefully, the Church said: “Principles compatible with the gospel may be found in the platforms of all major political parties.”
I know there have been numerous posts on this in the Bloggernacle, and I am a bit late even discussing this. By I would like to add one spin from a person who currently votes Republican: this is very good news and an appropriate gesture by the Church. The Church cannot afford to be tied to one political party. Who knows what direction the Republicans will take in the years ahead. From a missionary standpoint, we risk alienating half of the country — and countless millions overseas — by being seen as a “Republican church.” Kudos to the Church for this reminder.
(You wouldn’t know this was a Republican church from the bloggernacle. GB: I have appreciated your soft words in defense of conservatism in many of your posts. Many of the left-wing comments and outright pinko attitudes I see in the ‘nacle motivate me to pick up my verbal sledge-hammer.)
One of my thoughts was that the intent of the letter may be for Mormons to “infiltrate” the Democratic party and reform its platform and members from within.
Who will the granola crowd be more receptive or open to, them baddy Republican Mormons (ick!) or a fellow Democrat?
If enough Mormons start showing up at the Dem precinct committee meetings, and state level meetings, more people might think “Maybe those Mormons aren’t so bad after all.”
Could the letter be an assignment to “go undercover?”
Isn’t a similar letter read every election season?
Can we possibly read a little more into this very simple, stright forward letter.
cchrissyy: Yes, but this one stands out by going a little farther than the standard election season letter.
Eric: Thanks for asking.
Maybe the GAs who are Democrats are tired of members writing them and asking “How could you be a Democrat?!”
Maybe president Hinckley is laying groundwork to get the church more favorable coverage in the left-leaning national media.
Maybe “Principles compatible with the gospel may be found in the platforms of all major political parties” refers to just two principles.
#1 – if enough mormons start showing up to Dem events, perhaps people will actually start thinking that the Dem party is worse off than ever! haha!
I understood it to mean “Not being a republican is ok.” That has always been the official teaching and has been acceptable in theory, but sometimes in the same vain as “you are free to make your own choices (to your own detriment).”
I think the Republican Party has totally gone against its core tenets so that Republican does not equal conservative and does not equal the party of small government anymore. I think church members have been very slow to acknowledge what the party has become.
But I just think the letter was affirming that the GOP is not the only party that has tenets that are compatible with church teachings.
Does anybody remember which thread was the one where somebody cited some prominent church members who are Democrats? I think they said Boyd K. Packer was a Democrat. I want to print it so I can keep it for in Sunday School if they slam Democrats.
Are you sure aren’t you confusing him with Elder Faust? I’ve never heard that Pres. Packer was a Democrat. That’s not to say he isn’t. But I’d think I’d have heard it mentioned more if he was or had announced it publicly at least.
Political Labels: Up or Down v. Right or Left.
I don’t view political parties by the standard labels of “right†or “leftâ€, “conservative†or “liberal.†These tired, old, wornout terms are loaded with biases, prejudices, preconceptions and baggage, with all good, bad and ugly that implies. Each passing day these labels become less and less meaningful, serving as a pejorative to hurl at ones opposition more than a anything else. So I’ve drawn up a different map to reference and created a different compass that I use to navigate the political battlefield and its minefields.
I vision a flagpole on which Old Glory is raised. The flag symbolizes to me the ideals and principles of liberty contained within the Declaration of Independence, the US Constitution and the gospel, the ideal balance between government and religion. Thus, I view political parties, platforms, policies, etc., as either moving Up towards the ideal or moving Down away from the ideal.
I apply the idiom “run (something) up the flagpole†to test the idea, measure, party, policy, etc., and create my response or opinion from a principle based standard as opposed to a party line. Using that metaphor I can more easily judge all political matters from a non-partisan vantage point & analysis, and decide whether it’s moving us either Up the flagpole towards the ideal or Down the flagpole away from the ideal.
Using the 80/20 rule, I believe the Republican party is Up 80% of the time, whereas the Democrat party is Down 80% of the time.
Yeah, that’s right. But there were others, as well. We’ve got a wonderful Sunday School teacher who is quite conservative and I want to be ready.
I hope this statement gets read by more then the bloggernacle. On a forum I’m onmy political beliefs got dumped in with people that are straight out enemies of the church.
It’s not easy being
greena libertarian in a republican churchannegb, Marlin K Jensen and Faust are the two I can think of right away. I remember reading an article about it a few years ago that listed a few in the Twelve and other positions, but can’t remember where. I’ll try to Google it.
The phrasing used by the Brethren should be taken at face value: there truly are honorable intentions expressed by all major political parties. Conversely, as has been mentioned previously, those same political parties continually struggle to adapt themselves to current societal pressures, and in so doing lose the clearer visions they articulated decades ago.
It is, unfortunately, the act of appeasement (at which act all politicos have made themselves so adept) that does not work from a Gospel perspective. If the Church were to attempt to adapt the way political parties have, we would be on the same footing as the Episcopalians today.
If we view the Constitution as the metaphorical Gospel of the United States, then all parties have fallen from the purer faith, and the rate of descent has increased exponentially over the past thirty or so years.
So ask yourselves, Republican and Democrat alike: when was the last time you voted in complete accord with the recommendations of your party leadership?
I can’t remember, either. But I can always tell you whenever I’ve voted in accordance with the Brethren’s recommendations.
Is the Communist Party a “major political party”? I was under the impression we’d officially decried them during the Cold War. How about the Anti-Mason party? Or the Know-Nothings? Could I have been part of those?
What makes a “major political party” anyhow? Numbers? Ideology?
I can’t remember a time that I voted straight Republican or Democrat. It boggled my mind when my Grandmother would tell me year after year that she voted straight Democrat in the previous election. My vote usually comes down to what I consider the lesser of two evils in local and national election, this usaully ends up being a pretty fair split between two, and sometimes three, parties.
Despite what people are focusing on, I saw the main point of the letter to be encouraging people to attend their neighborhood caucus meetings, as well as encouraging wards to not schedule any activities or meetings that night so ward member could attend the caucus meeting. Unfortunately, my ward had a meeting scheduled last night (the caucuses were last night). Very annoying. Does no one listen to the First Presidency?!