Blog

Earlier, I had written a post titled, “I will not quit my post until properly relieved.”  I wish to thank those of you who commented–even if you disagree.

The point of my original post was that we should follow the Brethren when they act ex officio, even if it means certain defeat.  I would like to comment more along those lines.  Now, what should you do if you’re a government official, and the Brethren advocate policy X, which is extremely unpopular, and, in your best judgement wrong, and perhaps illegal or perhaps unconstitutional?  Then your oath as a government official may supercede the Brethren’s counsel.  The late Rex Lee stated in his confirmation hearing as US Solicitor General that if the Brethren advocated something in contravention with the Constitution and laws of the United States, then his duty was to side with the law.  Indeed, all Latter-day Saints (at least the ones in the USA) are expected to “befriend” the constitutional law of the land [D&C 98:5-6]. Even Dallin Oaks opposed the Brethren’s take on a public issue (school prayer).

[Read more…] about More musings on Prop 8 and Amendment 2

I’ll be up-front about my politics here: They’re conservative, libertarian, anti-foreign intervention, and pro-civil rights. I have mixed feelings about California’s Proposition 8; I probably would vote “no” on it if I still lived in California.

Considering my views, it only makes sense that I’ve read and enjoyed Andrew Sullivan’s blog for many years.

But at issue is not my politics, it’s Mr. Sullivan’s over-the-top claim in his October 31st blog post:

Yes On 8 has been bankrolled to the tune $20 million from the LDS church. And their main theme has been the ancient blood libel against gay people (and Jews): that we’re out to “recruit” or abuse others’ children.

Disagreement with another’s political views is one thing; outright dishonesty is quite another.

Believe what you want, Mr. Sullivan, about what’s really in Mormons’ hearts as they go to the polls on November 4th. But no pro-Prop 8 campaign advertising has even come close to using “blood libel against gay people” and fears of gay “recruiting” or abuse of children — let alone made it the “main theme” of the campaign.

Andrew Sullivan is employing the same sort of stereotyping of Mormons that he complains Mormons are doing about practicing homosexuals. And, as someone who usually enjoys his writing, I find it beneath contempt.

Twenty-eight years ago, I was introduced to Heavenly Father’s Church, through the auspices of “Uncle Sam.”  One thing that those drill sergeants shoved into our heads were the General Orders:

Events of the past few years have me re-reading the Book of Mormon, as Mormon implies that he is writing it for our benefit, because we’re going through the same thing [Mormon 8:35-36]. 

In California, the Church seems willing to make a “last stand” on the issue of homosexual marriage–which is part of a concerted effort to make the behaviour seem normal, rather than the sin that it is.  Sadly, it appears that this is a fight that the Church will lose–if not at the polls, then in the courts, ratified at the polls when people elect those who appoint the anti-Mormon and anti-Evangelical judges. [Read more…] about “I will not quit my post until properly relieved.”

Critics frequently argue that—unlike believing Mormons who supposedly grasp at straws and rely on irrational feelings to support their beliefs—they (the critics) are rational, logical, and rely on the findings of science and empirical evidence for their beliefs. On an on-line discussion board populated by ex-Mormons who gather to vent about their former faith, one poster—using the screen name “Baffeled [sic] and Bewildered”—recently asked, “Why do intelligent people still buy into the [Mormon]…lies?” [Read more…] about Rational belief and rationalization