October 3rd, 2012

Am I a Satan-Supporting Raving Lunatic Engaging in Priestcraft?

Holding political positions outside the mainstream of Mormondom, I’ve found it interesting to see how people react as they try (or, in most cases, don’t try) to understand how I can argue that the gospel of Jesus Christ harmonizes with libertarianism.

The last 48 hours serve as a microcosm of the responses I’ve received over the years as I’ve strengthened and advocated these views. Two days ago, for example, I was told that supporting the right to free speech of those whose speech I actually don’t agree with means that I support Satan’s plan against agency.

After calling out a woman for advocating the genocide of an entire nation, Libya, for the actions of an extreme few, and suggesting that her cry for mass slaughter of innocent people was an evil thing to do, I was called a “raving lunatic” by this woman yesterday morning.

Then, in the afternoon, I was called out for “priestcraft” when referenced in a question about my advocacy of Mormon libertarianism on BYU’s 100 Hour Board, a forum for BYU students to receive answers to their random questions within four days. Some of the answers, provided by anonymous, volunteer students, are laughably misguided.

But they deserve a response.

The question reads as follows:

I recently watched a political video that a friend posted on Facebook. In the video an LDS man, Connor Boyack, was saying that if Mormons studied and applied the principles taught in the Book of Mormon and the words of modern-day prophets, they would all be Libertarians. I have also seen articles in which Liberal or Conservative Mormons have claimed the same thing about their own party. What do you think about this way of thinking?

Do you believe that if we all studied the gospel enough we would all come to the same conclusion on political matters?

Three respondents—all anonymous—chimed in to offer their two cents about the video in question (one in which I explicitly state that I am supporting lowercase ‘l’ libertarianism, not the uppercase ‘L’ Libertarian Party—but the questioner apparently missed this and uses the capital ‘L’ version). The first person said that in his political science class, his fellow students concluded that the prevailing political philosophies “contain elements of truth that can be found in the gospel” and that “a good member of the Church could support any of the three” they were considering in class. This ability for Latter-day Saints to support wildly contrasting (and conflicting) policies is justified, according to this BYU student, because “God’s will for us” is that “The Church is officially politically neutral.” Um, what?

But then there’s this: “The idea that our Heavenly Father would desire all of us to support a particular position but refuse to reveal it runs contrary to everything I know about His nature.” Silly me, I thought God has revealed his will on a variety of positions, such as stealing, murder, adultery, self-defense, the family unit, war, and on and on and on. But perhaps our friendly BYU student only reads the children’s illustrated version of the scriptures which leaves some of these weightier matters out.

“I believe that individuals can receive divine guidance for themselves on political matters,” he continues, “but that is as far as their stewardship goes and claiming that their answers apply to other people is inappropriate.”

Let’s illustrate an example:

1. God says “thou shalt not murder.”
2. I say “you and I should not murder.”
3. This BYU student says “that’s inappropriate, you’re not acting within your stewardship!”

Of course, the divine guidance he’s referring to saturates the scriptures, which are specifically given to God’s children so that they can liken them unto themselves. This counsel isn’t circumstantial, to be obeyed or ignored according to one’s wishes. It’s universal to all of God’s children, and thus one is not wrongfully stepping outside his stewardship by suggesting that another one of God’s children adhere to a general commandment to which we are all subject.

The second student to attempt an answer at the question about my video “reject[ed] the video’s thesis” because “the principles of the gospel transcend political ideologies or do not specifically inform the kinds of policies at the core of those ideologies.” It is clear from the rest of his rambling comment that he does not understand the political ideology he is commenting about, which as I argue in Latter-day Liberty, can be and is informed by the gospel of Jesus Christ.

This person did introduce an interesting argument, however, when further “reject[ing] the videos’ premise.” He argues that my advocacy of the fusion between libertarianism and Mormonism “sounds an awful lot like someone saying, ‘If you just studying [sic] the gospel more/better, you’d agree with me.'” To my knowledge, I have nowhere said anything of the sort. I recognize that serious students of the gospel may come to a different conclusion than me, even one I feel is completely wrong. Numerous scholars have invested significantly more time than me in reading and studying the Constitution, but that doesn’t mean that their interpretation of its text is inherently improved by virtue of their investment of time and attention. So, too, with the gospel; I’ve had interesting discussions with life-long gospel scholars who I feel have missed the mark when it comes to things like agency, peace, the golden rule, and other important gospel topics.

Finally, the third respondent—the brief and pointed reply. This one deserves to be quoted in full:

Any person using their religion to convince someone else to do something unrelated to that religion is practicing priestcraft. Each member of the Church is encouraged to choose for themselves what is right for their own personal needs and beliefs. No political party is completely right, but none of them are completely wrong. Nothing is ever that easy.

First off, Mr. “Crowley” horribly misunderstands what priestcraft is. Priestcraft, as defined in Webster’s 1828 dictionary, entails the “management of selfish and ambitious priests to gain wealth and power, or to impose on the credulity of others.” In other words, it means using the gospel to line one’s own pockets or amplify one’s perceived authority. It is not, as Crowley claims, “convinc[ing] someone else to do something unrelated to [their] religion.”

Perhaps in time this student will learn that the gospel of Jesus Christ exists to be applied to life, generally—not just to the narrow subset of activities that are appropriate for non-controversial discussion in Sunday School. But Crowley believes that religious things shouldn’t be used to suggest a course of action on things “unrelated to that religion.” What, then, is our religion in his eyes? And what subject matter does it specifically include and exclude? I side with Joseph Smith’s expansive view, which effectively means that our religion is extremely comprehensive:

Mormonism is truth, in other words the doctrine of the Latter-day Saints, is truth. . . . The first and fundamental principle of our holy religion is, that we believe that we have a right to embrace all, and every item of truth, without limitation or without being circumscribed or prohibited by the creeds or superstitious notions of men, or by the dominations of one another, when that truth is clearly demonstrated to our minds, and we have the highest degree of evidence of the same.

Our religion deals as much with war and theft and murder and agency and drugs and all sorts of interpersonal problems as it does with faith and repentance and baptism. The Crowleys of the world would have us cram Joseph’s sweeping view into the narrow confines of a politically correct box that you can purchase at Deseret Book (which, of course, wouldn’t actually be priestcraft).

As I ponder these misguided comments, and my own admittedly imperfect responses to them above, I can’t help but recall experiences serving a mission for the LDS Church in Honduras a decade ago. On numerous occasions I encountered a person who thought they knew what the Book of Mormon was about, but actually didn’t. Some thought it was Joseph Smith’s journal of digging for gold, others thought it was an altered version of the Bible, and many claimed it to be a novel of sorts, conjured up in the mind of its uneducated, teenage author.

Our response was direct and invitational, each time the same: read the book. The best and only efficacious way to combat this ignorance, and the popular myths passed on through hearsay, was to encourage people to read the book and find out for themselves. This makes sense, for how can a person understand something he has not taken the time to actually understand?

So, too, with our friendly BYU students. I’m not even sure they watched the video referenced in the question. Even if they did, however, it is not a sufficient substitute for reading the book I was very briefly discussing. In order to understand my claims—why I believe that the gospel of Jesus Christ strongly supports a libertarian political philosophy—one must take the time to read the arguments in detail.

I realize that many people claim to lack the time, and few have the interest, to investigate my claims. (My experience was similar with encouraging people to read the Book of Mormon.) But without an honest inquiry into the arguments made by somebody with whom you disagree, I believe it is problematic to opine on their positions. Doing so leads to the awkward allegations that one is supporting Satan’s plan, is a raving lunatic, and is engaging in priestcraft. They may be comforting conclusions to make to justify and perpetuate one’s ignorance, but they end up leading people into a proverbial ditch.

45 Responses to “Am I a Satan-Supporting Raving Lunatic Engaging in Priestcraft?”

  1. Jeremy
    October 3, 2012 at 8:40 am #

    If I had to pin most people’s discomfort with some of the things you say on anything, it would be the stark bluntness that some of your messages have. For myself, I am closely related to a few people that choose, for their own reasons, to live in their own reality. When things come up that don’t agree with that reality they do all sorts of things to remove the obstacle, to not rock the boat. This reaction can range from ignoring or lying to themselves all the way to out and out vigorously going on the offensive against the source of the obstacle. It doesn’t matter what is true at that point — the obstacle threatens their very reality.

    If there is one criticism that I have for you at times Connor is you tend to rely very heavily on logic and facts, often ignoring the above. This can make it look like you are coming across as heartless, uncompassionate, or un-empathetic. You can be completely correct in what you are saying, but the way you say things sometimes can often be less (or counter) productive simply because people feel threatened or stupid.

    I tend to this at times. It’s not always enough to be right — it’s everything surrounding the conversation and the context as much as the facts and the truth.

    I don’t personally believe that you are any of these negative things. You’re doing your best to get the truth out there and I find that very commendable. I look forward to following your fairly public path of progression and wish you the best. =)

  2. Connor
    October 3, 2012 at 9:04 am #

    It’s a valid criticism, Jeremy. In fact, it’s one I was recently discussing with some folks on Facebook in reference to my anti-war advocacy. On that issue, those with close ties to the military are often offended by my positions on things and react defensively to my allegations that our military is fighting immoral wars, etc.

    The criticism in that case was that the “blunt” approach was not effective, in that I was not convincing people who disagreed with me, and in fact was alienating many of them. My response was that while that certainly may be true in some cases, it is not true in all. People respond differently to different stimuli. To some, the blunt approach may be a turn off. To others, it may be the confrontational content needed to finally “wake them up” and make them reconsider their own assumptions.

    So in general, I agree—there is always room for improvement, especially with the delivery. But I hesitate to agree that it’s true in every case, since I personally have seen people adopt my positions after being directly and boldly confronted on them. I suppose it ultimately depends upon the individual, right? So if I were to adopt a totally different approach to conveying these ideas, then I perhaps might convert some who I otherwise would have not reached, but then leave behind those who need a little more bluntness to challenge their opinions.

    All the same, it’s a good guiding principle to always be thinking about how we can be more effective in persuading people to embrace the truth.

  3. outside the corridor
    October 3, 2012 at 9:33 am #

    I will need to watch the video–

    Being a ‘libertarian’ in Mormon culture is about as popular as being Samuel the Lamanite upon the wall, Connor–

    I applaud you for making an attempt to teach people–

    you are going up against a powerful and polluted culture–

    *I* believe–

    the gospel is pure; it is there; the truth is there, but it’s been so contaminated by popular culture–

    A close family member of mine is reading your book and appreciates it very much–

    those of us who share your political views don’t think you are harsh at all, and what is wrong with logic?

    Oh, dear–

  4. Andy Rasmussen
    October 3, 2012 at 9:55 am #

    Well Connor, I have not ever responded to one of your posts, and I hesitate to do so now because I have doubts about my ability to express what are some very personal thoughts on the matter.
    Let me say first that I value what you’re contributing to the LDS political discourse. I have read your book and I’m familiar with your views. Your logic is usually air tight but sometimes I think you begin from faulty premises and so I don’t agree with all your conclusions. But overall I’m glad you’re doing what you’re doing and I can even acknowledge that your role may be both useful and necessary even in some of the ways I’m uncomfortable with.
    But I think my discomfort is shared by some like those you mentioned in this post, and it’s fair to expand on these points a bit too.
    You are fond of quoting Joseph and many other prophets often in your writings and musings, and you do so respectfully and, I think, correctly. But my impression is often similar to the student you mentioned that said you seem to think that if everyone was just as smart as you we would all come tothe same conclusions as you do. Sometimes, Connor, you seem to use the words of scripture and prophets as weapons in your never ending crusade.
    You probably will disagree with me, but the more I live and study people the more convinced I am that our opinions about truth come at least as much from our own experiences as they do our intellectual or logical understandings. Your approach seems to minimalize or even scoff at the validity of any experience but your own. And as such it is necessarily combative and narrow. Again, this is just my perception, but I think it may be one that might have value to you going forward.
    When I read the writings of Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, or any of their successors or other scriptural prophets, one overriding theme seems constant: we can accomplish nothing in this world except by the principles of love, compassion, forbearance, mercy, and forgiveness.
    This has the potential to go way off topic here and get too personal for a blog post, so let me just offer one example I’ve thought a lot about the past year or so.
    In 3rd Nephi, when the Lord appeared at Bountiful following the destruction he gave the people the fullness of His gospel. He endowed them with the new covenant and the true understanding thereof to such a degree that they established a perfect society. This is the great apex of the Book of Mormon, of course, and has direct application to our day.
    I think it’s instructive to notice what He taught them first. After appearing and introducing Himself he first gave the authority to baptize. That specific authority following His fufilling of the law was key. But what came next? Before the Sermon at the Temple, before temple concepts and covenants, before even further blessings and at-one-ment? He said their disputations must cease. Period. Now they had been arguing over points of His doctrine, the manner if baptism and such. These are things of eternal import that must be done in the right way. But the Lord didn’t settle their arguments, he simply said the spirit of confrontation must cease or you cannot be mine. It didn’t matter who was right as long as there was contention, they couldn’t move forward.
    What was Joseph’s response when folks asked how he gained and retained so many followers? He said, “it is because I posses the principle of love.” For every story of him rebuking the demonic guards on a cold Missouri night there are half a dozen of him making friends with those same captors to the point where they allowed him to walk freely among them and even preach a time or two.
    Please don’t take this as me getting on my own soapbox or trying to tell you how to be. These are simply some thoughts I’ve had as I’ve watched political discussion here in Utah. I realize harshness and combativeness sometimes have their legitimate place. I just wonder if maybe we all sometimes might be a little too condescending to those whose experience and perspective differs from our own.
    Obviously I don’t think you’re Satanic or engaging in priestcraft, but I think some of those comments you mentioned might have more merit than you’re acknowledging. I wonder if a shift in tone might not help to extend your message even farther and faster than you’ve already accomplished.

  5. outside the corridor
    October 3, 2012 at 10:00 am #

    well, Connor, I watched the interview, and I thought you did a splendid job–

    very well done–

    but then I happen to share your political views, so–

    I don’t know how to converse with the ‘typical’ Mormon on politics–

    generally, I just end up feeling like banging my head against whatever hard surface is near–

    LOL!

    And I’m not a young person, but I’ve had this experience most of my life; I never could accept the left/right paradigm, but then I always took the scriptures quite literally–

    and now–

    HA! With Romney running I have to be VERY careful not to open my mouth–

    my husband is in a leadership position in our ward, and he has told everyone he takes a position of neutrality in the church building, but many won’t leave him alone; he gets chased around the church and asked what his beliefs are–

    when he can’t send up a ‘cheer’ for Romney those who chase him say, “ah, HA, now we know the truth? WHY can’t you support a Mormon?”–

    and begin to argue with him–

    going to church and coming home from church have become very stressful the last year . . .

    since we worked on the RP campaign and donated to it–

    friendships have been strained heavily–

    it’s a heartache–

    and he has been SO careful–

    me? I literally keep my mouth shut–

    but then I don’t have a leadership position–

  6. outside the corridor
    October 3, 2012 at 10:13 am #

    To the other respondents on here . . .

    I guess I don’t see things the same way, but I can understand that sometimes those of *us* who hold minority political views might feel defensive–

    But this is Connor’s blog. If he can’t come on here and safely tell about his experience with people who don’t understand his views, where can he go?

    I don’t think that some of those who don’t agree with those of *us* who are more libertarian in our political beliefs . . .

    can understand how much restraint many of *us* use in our conversations with those who do not share our beliefs–

    how alone *we* feel when *we* hear all the commonality between those who, for example, support Romney.

    Where do *we* go to find support ourselves? Why do *we* not need support?

    Those in the minority often find themselves out in the ‘cold’ socially–

    whatever their minority–

    Samuel the Lamanite certainly felt the sting of rejection–

    in more ways than one–

    Connor doesn’t know me from ‘Adam’. I have written that I am an older (much older, easily old enough to be his mother) woman who lives far from the intermountain west who is a temple recommend holding Mormon–active in the church, temple marriage, returned missionary–

    but I guess that feelings of defensiveness come out in me when I sense that Connor is being unnecessarily criticized for saying in a very non-confrontational way–

    what he believes–

    just because his beliefs are minority beliefs and not comfortable to many others–

    I won’t go away, Connor–

    I know I’ve stepped on toes, because I speak out strongly about Romney and his business activities–

    and I don’t mean to offend; I know he is a child of God as well as anyone else–

    but I come on here to find a tiny measure of safety in a very unsafe world, politically, in my own LDS community–

    and, male and manly as my husband is, he feels the same way–
    I share with him Connor’s blog (as well as a few others that are similar), and he finds it very reassuring–
    he is ‘hungry’ for a feeling of political comraderie–

    I worked hard in my educational ‘career’ to be open-minded and not ethnocentric . . . and I love cultures very different from my own, but I am probably not successful in being accepting of what I find intolerant in my ‘own’ LDS culture–LOL! THAT is a hard one for me–

  7. Jeremy
    October 3, 2012 at 12:15 pm #

    Thanks for the response Connor. It sounds like you’re sensitive to this and keeping an eye on things.

    For the other posters in here… Sometimes the discussions break down because it’s an apples and oranges discussion. Many times at work we will go the rounds only to find out that everyone agrees in the end, usually because of some misunderstanding about semantics or fundamental assumptions about project fundamentals. I think this often happens in political discussions — so many assumptions are necessary just to have a meaningful conversation that it’s easy to get in’t “I’m right and you’re wrong” rather than helping people understand the truth. The former is more “do what I say because I’m right”, the latter is more coming to a mutual understanding, even if both parties disagree. I think one is far more constructive than the other.

    I’ll go back to lurking now. Thanks Connor for keeping things interesting. =)

  8. outside the corridor
    October 3, 2012 at 4:03 pm #

    Jeremy, don’t worry–

    off blogs like this I’m a bridge builder; I have worked for years to find commonalities and not confront–

    however, recently more and more of our LDS friends are literally turning on us and challenging us and saying that it will be our fault if Obama is re-elected–

    huh?

    It’s moved beyond sharing ideas and trying to find things in common–

    and it’s a scary feeling–

    because, as I said before, *we* are in the minority–

  9. baerman
    October 3, 2012 at 7:00 pm #

    My brother in law, Sam bushman, has always been vocal and I lived with that for 18 years before I was fully “converted.” I never had a good argument for him. I never won. I found through my own “testimony” that I agree with him 100% now. He recently reminded me to keep my mouth shut at church. This surprised me as I thought he always was outspoken. He chooses to remain silent at church unless someone asks privately then he feeds milk before meat. I recently decided to go silent on Facebook after being fairly vocal for the last year. I had a cousin unfriend me and countless others hide me. Oh well. The public message can’t touch everyone the same way. So if I had a suggestion I would have a “hard core” feed and a softer feed for those who want the milk but aren’t ready to have their whole world tipped.

  10. Paradigm Patriot
    October 3, 2012 at 9:09 pm #

    Most people suffer from the following:
    Cognitive Dissonance — is the term used in modern psychology to describe the state of holding two or more conflicting cognitions (e.g., ideas, beliefs, values, emotional reactions) simultaneously. In a state of dissonance, people may sometimes feel surprise, dread, guilt, anger, or embarrassment.

    Cognitive dissonance can occur in many areas of life, but it is particularly evident in situations where an individual’s behavior conflicts with beliefs that are integral to his or her self-identity.

    something to consider:
    “…”Wait until it becomes popular to do,” says the devil, “or, at least, until everybody in the church agrees on what should be done.” This fight for freedom might never become popular in our day. And if you wait until everybody agrees in the Church, you will be waiting through the second coming of the Lord.”
    -Ezra Taft Benson,
    Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson, p. 659-660

    Keep up the good work Connor!

  11. Jim Davis
    October 4, 2012 at 12:54 am #

    On the topic of delivery methods, I have been giving this a lot of consideration lately, especially as it applies to the liberty movement. As a group we present a powerful message with a poor (often unsavory) delivery.

    I’m reminded of the story President Packer told about himself as a mission president. His wife had prepared a beautiful cake with the words “The Gospel” inscribed on the top and asked a zone-conference full of missionaries who wanted a piece. When one elder volunteered President Packer sunk his fingers into the cake and threw it onto the elder’s suit. After doing that he asked if there were any other takers (which of course there were none). Then he took out a crystal dish, a silver serving knife and with great dignity he cut off a slice from the other side of the cake and once again asked if anyone wanted a piece. He contrasted both delivery methods as follows:

    “The lesson was obvious. It was the same cake in both cases, the same flavor, the same nourishment. The manner of serving either made it inviting, even enticing, or uninviting, even revolting. The cake, we reminded the missionaries, represented the gospel. How were they serving it?” -Boyd K. Packer (Teaching, No Greater Call)

    I’m not pointing this story at Connor. I actually agree with him that his unique approach to teaching can influence people that other methods couldn’t. I believe that regardless of which methods we choose to spread our beliefs that love needs to be the foundational ingredient in that. But tough love is still love. We should reprove betimes with sharpness (when the Spirit directs) but also show an excess of love afterwards (D&C 121:43). Just because you don’t feel the love when you’re being rebuked doesn’t mean the deliverer doesn’t have it.

    Consider when Nephi spoke to Laman and Lemuel using harsh words:

    1 And now it came to pass that after I, Nephi, had made an end of speaking to my brethren, behold they said unto me: Thou hast declared unto us hard things, more than we are able to bear.

    2 And it came to pass that I said unto them that I knew that I had spoken hard things against the wicked, according to the truth; and the righteous have I justified, and testified that they should be lifted up at the last day; wherefore, the guilty taketh the truth to be hard, for it cutteth them to the very center.

    3 And now my brethren, if ye were righteous and were willing to hearken to the truth, and give heed unto it, that ye might walk uprightly before God, then ye would not murmur because of the truth, and say: Thou speakest hard things against us.

    4 And it came to pass that I, Nephi, did exhort my brethren, with all diligence, to keep the commandments of the Lord.

    5 And it came to pass that they did humble themselves before the Lord; insomuch that I had joy and great hopes of them, that they would walk in the paths of righteousness. (1 Ne 16)

    Notice how Nephi’s words inspired them to be humble (albeit, temporarily) despite how “hard” and pointed his delivery was.

    I bring up these examples to show, how I believe, we should consider delivering our convictions:

    1st- Elder Packer’s method of inviting and enticing people to accept truth should guide how we deliver our message as individuals. This is strategy. It plays into garnering more converts.

    2nd- Nephi’s method of just saying how it is in a pointed manner should not deter us from seeing and accepting the hard truths that others are delivering to us. We should be humble and truth-loving enough to reject our faulty ideas/actions and accept the truth, regardless of the manner in which it was delivered. Being teachable, humble, contrite- these tie into principle. These play into our being solid converts.

  12. Christopher Hansen
    October 4, 2012 at 2:40 am #

    The simple truth is that most Mormons reject the Gospel of Liberty giving it only lip service and come near to liberty with their mouths while their hearts are far from liberty. and instead lend aid, encouragement OR sympathy to what the prophets have repeatedly call the counterfeit gospel of Satan which is Socialism/Communism and/or similar isms. When they do lend aid, encouragement or sympathy they CANNOT be true to the faith.

    Most Mormons today have been seduced, like the Nephites of old, into the plans of Gadianton and the Secret Combinations of Socialism. Therefore they CANNOT be true to the gospel of Christ which is the gospel of liberty and have, instead, become voluntary slaves to the religion of Satan, which is, in part, Socialism.

    Mitt Romney is a practicing Socialist that continuously lends aid, encouragement AND sympathy to Socialism. He IS NOT true the Gospel of Liberty! Obama is a practicing Marxist. Both are controlled by the Super Capitalists. Neither is a choice for liberty and both are a choice for Satan’s counterfeit religion.

    Message from the First Presidency, Improvement Era, August 1936, p. 488:
    Latter-day Saints cannot be true to their faith and lend aid, encouragement, or sympathy to false ideologies such as socialism and communism. The official Church position on communism remains unchanged since it was first promulgated in 1936: “We call upon all Church members completely to eschew Communism. The safety of our divinely inspired Constitutional government and the welfare of our Church imperatively demand that Communism shall have no place in America.”

    President Ezra Taft Benson Of the Council of the Twelve in A Witness and a Warning wrote:
    But whenever the God of heaven reveals His gospel to mankind, Satan, the archenemy to Christ, introduces a counterfeit. Communism introduced into the world a substitute for true religion. It is a counterfeit of the gospel plan. The false prophets of Communism predict a utopian society. This, they proclaim, will only be brought about as capitalism and free enterprise are overthrown, private property abolished, the family as a social unit eliminated, all classes abolished, all governments overthrown, and a communal ownership of property in a classless, stateless society established.

    President Marion G. Romney, in the First Presidency Message in the September 1979 Ensign, wrote: “Communism is Satan’s counterfeit for the gospel plan, and … it is an avowed enemy of the God of the land. Communism is the greatest anti-Christ power in the world today and therefore the greatest menace not only to our peace but to our preservation as a free people. By the extent to which we tolerate it, accommodate ourselves to it, permit ourselves to be encircled by its tentacles and drawn to it, to that extent we forfeit the protection of the God of this land” (p. 5).

    Members that do not think for themselves and will not fight for personal liberty are doomed to the lesser kingdoms.

    We have heard men who hold the priesthood remark that they would do anything they were told to do by those who preside over them–even if they knew it was wrong. But such obedience as this is worse than folly to us. It is slavery in the extreme. The man who would thus willingly degrade himself should not claim a rank among intelligent beings until he turns from his folly.
    A man of God would despise this idea. Others, in the extreme exercise of their almighty authority have taught that such obedience was necessary, and that no matter what the Saints were told to do by their presidents, they should do it without any questions.
    When Elders [leaders] of Israel will so far indulge in these extreme notions of obedience as to teach them to the people, it is generally because they [the leaders] have it in their hearts to do wrong themselves.
    – As published by Joseph Smith in the Millenial Star,
    Archive Volume 14, Number 38, Pages 593-595

    Liberty lovers are duty bound to disobey laws that enslave us like Social Security, income tax, driver’s licenses, and many more.

    “All acts of the legislature apparently contrary to natural rights and justice are, in our law and must be in the nature of things, considered void… We are in conscience bound to disobey.” –Robin vs. Hardaway, 1 Jefferson 109, (Va., 1772)

    Are members of this Gospel of Liberty disobeying laws that are contrary to natural rights and justice or are they just voluntary slaves and drones that refuse to disobey such evil laws or in most cases, just tradition and government fear tactics?

    I testify that most Mormons do not have a clue about liberty because they have been voluntary slaves for their whole lives and practice at least 3 MAJOR planks of the Communist Manifesto. They support the Federal Reserve System, pay income taxes and send their children to government schools.

    They have rejected the Gospel of Liberty and embraced the Gospel of Socialism.

    I weep for the lost and fallen members that have become practicing Socialists and therefore have been led or are being led carefully down to Hell.

    Hace a wonderful and blessed day,

  13. scott stover
    October 4, 2012 at 5:59 am #

    Andy – re: your comments about the Lord teaching about the spirit of contention first. I had an experience this weekend that is relevant. We had been hosting lectures in our home on secret combinations. The presenter, before each lecture, admonished the attendees to guard jealously the presence of the spirit, and to not allow the spirit of contention. Then, the content of the lecture proceeded to include sarcasm and outright demeaning comments about politicians and leaders whose actions supported the secret combinations. For the third time during this series, (this ended up being the last time he is presenting the lectures at our home) contention rose to the point that the lecture was interrupted, and in this case, it ended.

    I have been and continue to be discomforted by the contention – the sarcasm, the demeaning comments, the disrespect – that, in general, imbues the political discussions in almost all forums. It’s like most people don’t know how to state their views without insulting those who disagree with them.

    I would make it clear that I am not accusing Connor of this – I am making a general observation, and using this forum for stating it again (this is not the first time). As Jeremy said, if we’re going to reach people with the truth, we must share it with them in a way that they, given their unique context of experiences, can hear them. The Lord does that for us – we have the obligation to do the same for others. THAT is love. Of course, it’s impossible for Connor or anyone else to personally tailor each communication to individual needs – but as Jeremy and Andy said – it is important that we take these principles into consideration as we attempt to share these truths with others.

  14. Christopher Hansen
    October 4, 2012 at 11:16 pm #

    Would you consider the following statements demeaning and disrespectful?

    1 Nephi 12:23 And it came to pass that I beheld, after they had dwindled in unbelief they became a dark, and loathsome, and a filthy people, full of idleness and all manner of abominations.

    Mormon 5:15 And also that the seed of this people may more fully believe his gospel, which shall go forth unto them from the Gentiles; for this people shall be scattered, and shall become a dark, a filthy, and a loathsome people, beyond the description of that which ever hath been amongst us, yea, even that which hath been among the Lamanites, and this because of their unbelief and idolatry.

    How about when Christ called a woman seeking HIs help a “dog”?

    Do you believe that a Mormon that is a Communist my feel insulted by the following?

    David O. McKay, Conference Report, April 9, 1966, pp. 109-10. Italics in original.

    The position of this Church on the subject of Communism has never changed. We consider it the greatest satanical threat to peace, prosperity, and the spread of God’s work among men that exists on the face of the earth. . . .
    The entire concept and philosophy of Communism is diametrically opposed to everything for which the Church stands—belief in Deity, belief in the dignity and eternal nature of man, and the application of the gospel to efforts for peace in the world. Communism is militantly atheistic and is committed to the destruction of faith wherever it may be found.

    Would a Mormon on Social Security feel condemned and insulted by the following:

    Ezra Taft Benson, 1960, So Shall Ye Reap

    May I assure you that communism is not merely an economic program. It is a total philosophy of life, atheistic and utterly opposed to all we hold dear as a great Christian nation. While we might effectively bridle or destroy every so-called communist within our own borders, we shall not vanquish this political virus, and its common forerunner, state socialism, so long as people are determined to achieve security through state-imposed materialistic schemes rather than through righteous living and wholesome activity as free men.

    Would Mormon who allows their parents to be taken care of by the government feel insulted by the following from President Monson:

    “How can sons and daughters… agree to a scheme [Social Security?] which would make their fathers and mothers the objects of public organizations that help the poor and cast the burden of their support on the community and stigmatize them with the loss of independence and self-respect.” President Monson, First Presidency Message, Guiding Principles of Personal and Family Welfare 1986 AD

    I wonder if the epistles from Captain Moroni would meet your standards concerning political discussions?

    If a man is a practicing socialist how should I tell him kindly that the prophets have repeatedly stated that “there will be no exaltation for them spiritually” without sounding contentious?

    How can a priesthood holder explain to an political inept uneducated voluntary slave that a Federal Reserve Note is not and cannot be a “dollar”?

    How can an educated Mormon explain to members so ignorant that they don’t even know what a dollar is that they cannot claim, under penalties of perjury, how many dollars they have in income when they cannot define what a dollar is, without sounding pretentious?

    How can a thoughtful and concerned Mormon tell members that have embraced Marxism’s 2nd, 5th and 10th planks and joined in the secret combinations that they have been seduced into satan’s plan without sounding condescending.

    President Benson sounded rather sarcastic to me about Mormons that refuse to learn what they need to do to uphold the Constitution and stop being practicing socialists when he said:

    “This devilish tactic of persuading people not to get concerned because the Lord will protect them no matter what they do is exposed by the Book of Mormon. Referring to the devil, it says, “And others will he pacify, and lull them away into carnal security, and they will say: All is well in Zion; yea, Zion prospereth, all is well – and thus the devil cheateth their souls, and leadeth them away carefully down to hell.” (2 Nephi 28:21) I like that word “carefully.” In other words, don’t shake them, you might awake them.”

    I look forward to you explaining these things to me in an uncontentious manner.

    It is obvious that we need your instruction on this important issue.

  15. scott stover
    October 5, 2012 at 7:11 am #

    Well, Chris, fortunately I understand all that you are saying – not to suggest that I don’t struggle with the issue of whether I will accept social security, or with the fact that my family accepted medicaid to help pay for my mother-in-law who was debilitated by alzheimer’s and spent the last 18 months of her life in a rest home. Fortunately, I appreciate the effort that you put forth in crafting your response with appropriate quotes. Fortunately, I choose not to be offended by your sarcasm because I realize that you make a good point in the things you say. Fortunately I personally am able to fold your comments into my own growth experience, because I do not feel threatened by these things, even if they do potentially represent difficult choices that I might fall short of. Unfortunately, not everyone would react the same way and the fact remains that if you were to approach THEM in this manner, you would lose them. Instruction? There is not an easy answer, and I would not presume to tell YOU or CONNOR how to do what you feel called to do. I WOULD presume, however, as I did, to point out some of the challenges associated with trying to change the way people think, challenges that, by my observations, need to be pointed out, and which you might choose to fold into your own growth process. I actually perceive a difference between teaching “hard things” as you illustrate quite effectively, and resorting to cheaper, lazier tactics such as name-calling, personal derision, and facetiousness, all of which were noticeably absent in the examples you offer. So, what I’m trying to say is that I have observed a lot of contention that I think is unnecessary, ineffective and contrary to the spirit of the gospel, and that it’s important to do all we can to deal with an inherently contentious subject in as kind and loving a way as possible. Thanks for the opportunity to further illustrate my point, which I apparently did not do very effectively the first time.

  16. outside the corridor
    October 5, 2012 at 8:12 am #

    There is a scripture in the D&C (and I can’t think of it right now, but I’ll look for it if anyone makes a demand of me)–
    where Joseph Smith was told that if the saints did everything they could but were prevented by their enemies from fulfilling His commands–

    they would not be held accountable–

    The important thing is to educate ourselves and others about what the true principles of liberty (and everything else) are–

    and do our best to apply them–

    Nobody is putting that theory into practice perfectly–

    even those of us who have almost killed ourselves trying–

  17. Christopher Hansen
    October 5, 2012 at 12:20 pm #

    Dear Sco,

    Hey Bro…Sorry if I didn’t write your entire given name. But don’t mind me, I am just easily insulted when people I don’t know presume to abbreviate my given name. Amazing how easy it is to insult others, is it not? You just never know what will be an insult to the soft hearted.

    Thankfully my skin is rather thick after 45 years of front line political battles for liberty including running for office repeatedly to give people a REAL choice for liberty and also repeated trips to court including the Nevada Supreme Court repeatedly (we won most of the time and every Supreme Court case.)

    I have been involved in politics since I was 8 years old. I helped by gathering signatures, at the age of 10 (I was spit on and cursed for my efforts), to establish the Independent American Party of Nevada. I was its State Chairman for four years recently. It is called the IAP because of the Hancock prophesy in 1844 AD by Joseph Smith in which he also predicts that the Republican Party will become one of the two major parties and that the USA would be spending its time strength in foreign wars in preparation for a foreign invasion after the US is weakened by those foreign wars.

    My family was sanctioned and not allowed to even give our testimonies in church by our Stake President in the 1960s because we were “Bensonites”. Naturally he did this to us while speaking for God with the power of the Priesthood and Priesthood leadership while he was also committing adultery and was later punished for his indiscretions. Naturally the sanctions were not lifted however because after all…the Stake President silenced us with the power of the Priesthood and as God’s appointed Stake President.

    Today the Area Seventy General Authority for Las Vegas is a blatant flag waving socialist and an OPEN Senator Harry Reid supporter (he came out of the closet 12 years ago). He ordered the local Stake Presidents to have Harry Reid, in 2010 AD, give Firesides at every Las Vegas area Stake Center. We got that stopped by going to the press and letting the Stake Presidents know that any Harry Reid Fireside would have protest signs in front of it.

    One of this Socialist gods of the Amorites worshipping Seventy’s Priesthood leadership friends (secret combination conspirators) was my former Stake President who used the Ward Lists to invite members to come to a Meet Harry Reid party 12 years ago. My family and I protested the meeting with signs that read “Gadianton Robbers For Harry Reid Enter Here.” The Socialist Mormons that attended were insulted by the truth.

    TOO BAD. It was politics. Every law Harry Reid supports is more insulting to me than any name he or his supporters could EVER call me. Everything the Republican and Democratic leadership do (and those that support them with money and votes) is more insulting to me than any words or tones of voice or name calling. These people are GADIANTON ROBBERS and are out to enslave me and my children. I don’t CARE if I hurt their feelings, any more than Captain Moroni worried about hurting the feelings of king-men or Gadiantons or invading Lamanites, when I tell them, as the prophets have done REPEATEDLY, that they cannot be “true to the faith” while they “lend aid, encouragement OR sympathy” to Socialist, Fascist, Super Capitalists like Romney or Obama or either of the twin parties of FALSE ISMS. (Ron Paul is a RARE if not the single Republican exception.)

    This same Socialist Stake President refused to give me a temple recommend even though he could not tell me why. In fact he was unable to explain of even allege a transgression or what I needed to do to “repent” in order to obtain a temple. I moved to a new Ward and Stake and got a temple recommend immediately. Maybe the Socialist Harry Reid Supporting Stake President was receiving inspiration from one of the Amorite gods while my new Stake President worshipped a non-Amorite God and let me into His temple?

    Hey Bro Sco… Is it name calling to tell the truth about the people you are talking to, or should we, as GOOD Mormons, LIE by our silence and allow them to go uncondemned and therefore unwarned? Should we not be passionate about our warning to them instead of treating their abominable and damnable wickedness like it was some minor indiscretion that will not keep them out of the Celestial Kingdom? Should we not worry about their blood upon our hands for letting them believe we do not recognize by the Spirit and testify of their obvious wickedness?

    I don’t pay income taxes. I have not paid income taxes my whole life. Neither has my wife. I have letters from the IRS that we, my wife and I, are not required to file 1040s. I don’t have a Social Security Number and neither do my children. I don’t have a driver’s license either. In other words we ACTUALLY “eschew” socialism because the prophets COMMANDED us to eschew Socialism and that if we did not we could not have spiritual exaltation. Spiritual exaltation is, oddly enough, important enough to me that I will risk the loss of property, death, dismemberment, jail or even prison to eschew Socialism so that I am not lead carefully down to Hell with the Mormons that lend encouragement and sympathy to Super Capitalist Fascists like Romney.

    For us, Medicare and government welfare, etc. are not even available because we refuse to get Marked with the Beast’s Number (SSN). We trust in God like we are commanded to do and do not put our faith in the false gods of the Amorites aka: Government welfare (voluntary slave) programs.

    “In Joshua’s time they were called “gods of the Amorites,” on one, and “the Lord” on the other. . . . In these days, they are called “domination by the state,” on one hand, “personal liberty,” on the other hand; communism on one, free agency on the other.” (P.P.N.S., pp. 215-216)

    It is not an easy choice to eschew Socialism in the USA as we have been COMMANDED to do. I know how hard it is. I do it.

    I have been cursed and maligned by Socialist/Fascist Mormons for doing such terrible things as running for governor against Jim Gibbons, a “Mormon” Nevada Fascist Republican who was elected governor with Mormon support. Jim Gibbons naturally turned out to be an adulterous drunk plus being a socialist. This was the man who the vast majority of Nevada temple recommend “worthy” Mormons supported and voted for. By their fruits ye shall know them?

    The simple fact is that vast majority of U.S. Mormons don’t want liberty. They want Socialist security. They volunteer to become “taxpayers” and they sell their birthright of sovereignty and the gospel of liberty for a mess of government “benefits” and they do it voluntarily. They CHOOSE slavery over liberty.

    Here is the well documented problem: There is no GOOD way to reach them. Kind words do not reach or teach them. The soft voices of the apostles and prophets as they speak in the Mormon standard General Conference Kindness monotone DO NOT WORK! The warnings of the prophets fall on dead ears. I no longer worry that I may “lose them” with sarcasm or insults by calling them socialists because IT DOES NOT MATTER what you or I say. They are totally converted to the Satanic counterfeit religion of socialism. They practice it when times get tough (when they CLAIM to fight for liberty) or they embrace it even when times are easy by sending their children to government propaganda mills called public schools while they file 1040s and APPLY for voluntary Social Security Numbers. I am a heretic to their Satanic religion because I do not follow the 12th article of faith (in their limited and false, even idiotic understanding of that article of faith).

    Elder/President Benson was totally frustrated with Mormons and their worships of the false Satanic religion of Socialism.

    “Should it be of concern to us when the mouthpiece of the Lord keeps constantly and consistently raising his voice of warning about the loss of our freedom as he has over the years? There are two unrighteous ways to deal with his prophetic words of warning: you can fight them or you can ignore them. Either course will bring you disaster in the long run.

    “Hear his words: ‘No greater immediate responsibility rests upon members of the Church, upon all citizens of this Republic and of neighboring Republics than to protect the freedom vouchsafed by the Constitution of the United States.'(P.P.N.S., p. 157)

    “As important as are all other principles of the gospel, it was the freedom issue which determined whether you received a body. To have been on the wrong side of the freedom issue during the war in heaven meant eternal damnation. How then can Latter-day Saints expect to be on the wrong side in this life and escape the eternal consequences? The war in heaven is raging on earth today. The issues are the same: Shall men be compelled to do what others claim is for their best welfare or will they heed the counsel of the prophet and preserve their freedom?”

    Most Mormons were so seduced by the plans of Gadianton when Benson spoke these words that they could not understand that he was WARNING THEM PERSONALLY of their own coming destruction. It is even WORSE today among the seduced Mormons as history repeats. Mormons, to the greater part, are totally seduced by Socialism/Gadianton Robberism.

    The VAST majority of Mormons are on the “wrong side of the freedom issue” and yet they expect to “escape the eternal consequences.”

    But back to the be kind and gentle while speaking to Socialist Mormons or you may “lose them” conundrum. IT DOESN’T WORK. Not even the First Presidency could figure out a way to convert Mormons to Christian liberty and get them to eschew Socialism (the New Deal) etc. The First Presidency could not even give, “any practical suggestion to you (Secretary of the Treasury) as to how the nation can be turned about.”

    “We believe that our real threat comes from within and not from without, and it comes from the underlying spirit common to Naziism, Fascism, and Communism, namely, the spirit which would array class against class, which would set up a socialistic state of some sort, which would rob the people of the liberties which we possess under the Constitution, and would set up such a reign of terror as exists now in many parts of Europe. We confess to you that it has not been possible for us to unify our own people even upon the necessity of such a turning about, and therefore we cannot unfortunately, and we say it regretfully, make any practical suggestion to you as to how the nation can be turned about. Faithfully yours,” /s/ Heber J. Grant, J. Reuben Clark, Jr., David O. McKay. (First Presidency letter to U.S. Treasury, September 30, 1941 AD)

    Mormons, like Israel of old, REJECT liberty and Christ and chose a king/socialism. History REPEATS!

    So, what I have discovered after 40 years of research and front line practice is that kind words are meaningless to such converted to the religion of socialism, being lead carefully down to Hell, Mormons. Only acts like those of Captain Moroni will actually work on such dedicated seduced Gadiantons and king-men Mormons:

    Alma 62: 10 And thus it became expedient that this law should be strictly observed for the safety of their country; yea, and whosoever was found denying their freedom was speedily executed according to the law.

    It is with horror I realized that NOTHING else will work for such a deeply converted people that are so spiritually dedicated to the Latter-day gods of the Amorites. The warnings in the Book of Mormon are of OUR DAY.

    “Brethren, if we had done our homework and were faithful, we could step forward at this time and help save this country. The fact that most of us are unprepared to do it is an indictment we will have to bear. The longer we wait, the heavier the chains, the deeper the blood, the more the persecution, and the less we can carry out our God-given mandate and world-wide mission. The war in heaven is raging on earth today. Are you being neutralized in the battle?” E. T. Benson

    The longer we wait, the heavier the chains, the deeper the blood, the more the persecution, and the less we can carry out our God-given mandate and world-wide mission???!!!

    The blood part is coming soon. The chains are here and getting heavier with all the Republican laws like the USA PATRIOT ACT etc. I actually hope it comes while Romney is President. Wouldn’t that be ironic. It will happen and it will be soon.

    And I testify of the truthfulness of these things in the name of my savior, Jesus Christ, Amen

  18. Christopher Hansen
    October 5, 2012 at 12:40 pm #

    Dear outside the corridor,

    May I ask you a few questions:

    What is doing our best?

    Is it doing what we can without violating the so-called laws?

    The Founding Fathers committed treason to their king and government and risked everything to have obedience to God.

    Was Rosa Park violating the law when she refused to sit in the back of the bus?

    “All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void.” –Marbury vs. Madison, 5 US (2 Cranch) 137, 174, 176, (1803)

    “An unconstitutional act is not law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed.” –Norton vs. Shelby County, 118 US 425 p.442

    “Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them.” –Miranda vs. Arizona, 384 US 436 p. 491

    Is it doing what we can without risking losing our job?

    The Founding Fathers risked everything financially.

    Is it doing what we can without risking prison?

    The Founding Fathers risked prison and many went to prison.

    Is it doing what we can without risking torture?

    The Founding Fathers risked torture and were tortured.

    Is it doing what we can without risking death and many died?

  19. scott stover
    October 5, 2012 at 5:35 pm #

    Christopher – please forgive my shortening your name – I meant no harm, but I will certainly respect your wishes in the future.

    Well, I sure stepped into a hornet’s nest, didn’t I. Seriously, thank you very much for your testimony, for your story. It proffers me a perspective that I was completely missing before today. I am very much the people you describe – it remains to be seen to what extent I will repent.

    You have my respect, and you have helped me to realize that I have MUCH to ponder, MUCH to learn. I will not, however, stop trying to contribute where I can, even if that means I must limp off to lick my wounds once in a while.

    And please……call me Scott. (humor – har, har)

  20. outside the corridor
    October 6, 2012 at 9:51 am #

    Christopher Hansen:

    I assume your questions are rhetorical. Be grateful that you have been given the strength to do the battle you have done.

    Not everyone has the same strength. Some of *us* believe as you do, but because of physical/mental imperfections, we are unable to be as strenuously committed to changing the world. We merely do our best to survive.

    Not all righteous men in the late 1700s were ‘founding fathers’. Not all righteous women were married to ‘founding fathers’.

    Not all righteous acts involve political battles or boycotts (of SS, IRS, etc.)–

    and some of *us* have different missions. I assume that while you were doing all you were doing you didn’t experience terminal illness or loss of children or someone in your family so heavily handicapped as to keep you from being able to be involved so heavily in civic living/obligations. If so, who took care of the terminally ill/handicapped/mentally ill?

    Who planted and raised the gardens. Who built the home? It does sound as though you weren’t born into poverty either. The ‘founding fathers’ were not; they had the luxury of time, because they were ‘funded’–in order to serve.

    I don’t know many cognitively handicapped/physically handicapped/terminally ill people who . . .

    can go door to door to be spat upon.

    Please be careful. It is one thing to appreciate right ideas; it is one thing to applaud those with courage. It is another to ‘rebuke’ those who don’t display your own strength of character, because perhaps they don’t have strength to HAVE character?

    I don’t get personal on here very often. We raised several special needs, adopted children from horrific backgrounds–

    and in order to adopt them, we had to have SS numbers for them–

    and we didn’t use government health programs to assist them in their struggles (or any kind of government programs) even when we were jobless and homeless (practically, but for the grace of God and that a loving person in our new community who let us sit his/her empty house)–

    we didn’t use government programs even when one of us (a parent) lost his/her health and almost died–while still managing to feed those children–

    You don’t know what sorts of struggles and challenges others have? Do you?

    You assume that everyone has the level of prosperity that you and your stake presidents and LDS political leaders have, but not everyone who loves liberty enjoys the prosperity to battle interminably an entire lifetime.

    Sometimes people are broken by the battle. Did you ever meet; do you know George Hansen? I knew (and my husband) and met him, both before and after his time in prison for fighting the IRS. There is a hero, but I’ve never caught him telling others to go and do as he has gone and done–he’s too humble for that!

    We chose to fight the battle of helping troubled/damaged/broken children.

    I will never accuse anyone of not doing enough until I know what kind of journey he/she/they has/have taken in this life.

    All I want is to know the truth; the truth does set us free. I happen to love Ezra Taft Benson; I have some real questions about his involvement in the JBS, however; it’s not an entirely pure organization; its founding was funded, in part, by the Rockefellers–

    I can read the constitution to my damaged children, even if they can’t comprehend the words or ask me to read something more simple to them–

    At least two of my special needs children are incapable of understanding what ‘liberty’ even means–

    So don’t challenge others to go and do as you have done, until you have gone and done as they have done.

    There is compromise in every man/woman’s life–

    otherwise there is no mortal trial.

    There are prices every man/woman pays for not having been as perfect as Jesus Christ, our Savior. And that is why we love Him; that is why we worship Him. He completes us–

    even if we are not perfect in our civic responsibilities–

    even if we end up being issued SS cards–

    And if you adopted special needs children from horrific backgrounds while running for political office . . . who took care of those children in your absence?

    For all I know you have done ‘it all’–

    if so . . . God grant you a measure of humility to understand that not all of us can do ‘it all’–

    I don’t come on here to tell people to ‘follow’ me–because I don’t believe they should, anyone. I don’t believe I am worth being followed. I believe that only Jesus Christ is worthy of being followed. And where/how a person follows Jesus is a very personal choice.

  21. Christopher Hansen
    October 6, 2012 at 9:16 pm #

    Dear outside the corridor,

    For those men and women that did not assist General Washington, they may have been “righteous” but this is what Elder Benson, in numbering the excuses given by Mormons as to why they do not join in the battle for liberty, said in General Conference, about those that did not participate:

    Fifth: “It might hurt your business or your family,” says the devil, “and besides why not let the gentiles save the country? They aren’t as busy as you are.” Well, there were many businessmen who went along with Hitler because it supposedly helped their business. They lost everything. Many of us are here today because our forefathers loved truth enough that they fought at Valley Forge or crossed the plains in spite of the price it cost them or their families. We had better take our small pain now than our greater loss later. There were souls who wished afterwards that they had stood and fought with Washington and the founding fathers, but they waited too long – they passed up eternal glory.

    So even if they were righteous they still PASSED UP ETERNAL GLORY.

    I got my back broken 28 years ago. I am in constant pain from the injury. Then I got hit by lightening 25 years ago. That gave me PSTD and nerve damage and panic attacks and a few disorders that still plague me. I could go on and on but to put it bluntly I have lived with constant pain for the last 30 years. I am currently recovering from back, neck and shoulder injuries I sustained at the hands of the police (the broke my left shoulder) when they came to “Help” us when we were attacked by a Pit Bull that jumped our 6 foot block wall fence. The dogs owner, who had been previously convicted of battery against ME when he nearly blinded me after his dog attacked my daughter in the street, came over the fence too so we called the police. The pit bull nearly killed my Boxer and seriously hurt my wife and bit my son. The Cops “helped” us by crippling me, injuring my wife and stealing my son’s pistol.

    I learned that night and the months and years that followed that Las Vegas Cops and their bosses are criminals with badges that care only for their own power and paycheck. I pray for the Lord to hedge up the way of the police as they are the enemies of God and liberty today.

    My wife has Multiple Sclerosis. She was diagnosed 22 years ago. So some of us have “physical/mental imperfections” but we still put our faith in God and do what He commands and that is to eschew Socialism.

    Good for you in adopting special needs children. We adopted one such little girl that has multiple personality disorder. She certainly will never fight for liberty nor would God expect her to. We adopted her without Social Security Numbers. The Religious Freedom Restoration Act federally and the religious protections in Nevada offer many opportunities to get religious exemptions from so called SSN requirements.

    It is VERY true that “Not all righteous acts involve political battles or boycotts (of SS, IRS, etc.)–” but as President/Elder Benson stated: “As important as are all other principles of the gospel, it was the freedom issue which determined whether you received a body. To have been on the wrong side of the freedom issue during the war in heaven meant eternal damnation. How then can Latter-day Saints expect to be on the wrong side in this life and escape the eternal consequences?”

    ALL OTHER PRINCIPLES are LESS important according to that quote.

    Was it wrong for Elder Benson and Presidents Grant and McKay, etc. to rebuke those Mormons and Americans that did not reject the New Deal programs.

    “This we feel we can definitely say, that unless the people of America forsake the sins and the errors, political and otherwise, of which they are now guilty and return to the practice of the great fundamental principles of Christianity, and of Constitutional government, there will be no exaltation for them spiritually”

    Was that a rebuke or just a warning? I don’t rebuke anyone. I just quote the prophets and for that I am often accused of rebuking others or judging them. I don’t judge them. I just quote the prophets and let people judge themselves.

    You state: “You assume that everyone has the level of prosperity that you and your stake presidents and LDS political leaders have, but not everyone who loves liberty enjoys the prosperity to battle interminably an entire lifetime.”

    What is my level of prosperity that allows me to eschew socialism while others cannot? I don’t own a home. I don’t own a car. I don’t have any savings because the Cops took everything from me including my small unlicensed construction business because I am now crippled.

    My wife took care of my adopted daughter. We also housed many homeless children and adults. You asked.

    I understand that there are many excuses for not being involved fully in the fight for liberty. Elder Benson gave at lest 7 in his talk “Not Commanded In All Things.” I understand that there are many excuses for not adopting children in need or for having abortions or for divorce or theft or sending children to government schools or accepting government welfare like Social Security and paying a voluntary income tax that is nothing more than Satanic tithing.

    I DO NOT JUDGE YOU. Judge yourself. If you feel you are doing what God want you to do then THAT is what you are to be doing.

    All I do is to quote the prophets. Here is one I especially like:

    “Another warning: You and I sustain one man on this earth as God’s mouthpiece – President David O. McKay one of the greatest seers who has ever walked this earth. We do not need a prophet – we have one -what we desperately need is a listening ear.

    “Should it be of concern to us when the mouthpiece of the Lord keeps constantly and consistently raising his voice of warning about the loss of our freedom as he has over the years? There are two unrighteous ways to deal with his prophetic words of warning: you can fight them or you can ignore them. Either course will bring you disaster in the long run.

    “Hear his words:

    “‘No greater immediate responsibility rests upon members of the Church, upon all citizens of this Republic and of neighboring Republics than to protect the freedom vouchsafed by the Constitution of the United States.'”

    So if you or other Mormons feel that their calling is to do something of less importance that is surely your/their choice. I certainly do not feel a responsibility to protect the freedom vouched safe by the Constitution for anyone else and especially not for Mormons or Romney or Obama supporters any more. I feel my calling now is to prepare for the worst. It is too late to save the Constitution because the vast majority of Mormons and Americans DO NOT WNAT LIBERTY. They want kind masters.

    All I do now is work to keep my family free of voluntary slavery. No SSNs. No birth certificates. No driver’s licenses. No 1040s. No draft registration. No government schooling and teaching a strong foundation of what liberty really means. I do not feel compelled by the Spirit to do more than this any more.

    I still publish articles about “What is a dollar?” and about the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and how it can be used to free ourselves from the Civic Religion of Socialism and Marxism. I write about police corruption and political corruption on Independent AMerican News (search YAHOO not Goggle). I am currently suing FANNIE MAE because they are a criminal organization. But I no longer am active in politics because the Electronic Voting Machines in Nevada are 100% rigged so voting is no longer a real option. America’s Owners own the voting machines now.

    Do what God tells you to do by the Spirit. God commanded Alma’s Nephites to be in temporary bondage. If you feel compelled to remain in voluntary slavery because it is God’s choice for you then do it and be sure you are doing what your Father wants of you.

    I do not judge. I simply quote the prophets and let people look into the mirror.

    Have a blessed and wonderful day.

  22. outside the corridor
    October 7, 2012 at 10:18 am #

    Christopher Hansen, I should not have responded to you.

    If I could erase my post, I would.

    There can be no response given to you. I wasn’t asking to be “attacked” when I posted my earlier “everyone does his/her/their best” post–

    and I won’t remove that post–

    but I regret the one in which I made an attempt to explain why I posted that one.

    It’s obvious that nobody can answer you–

  23. outside the corridor
    October 7, 2012 at 11:13 am #

    Christopher Hansen, though I wish I could take off the post where I exposed my personal choices and my family’s structure and some of experiences . . . to what I perceived as your disdain and judgement, even though you say you don’t judge–

    I realize that you, like all of us, are only needing the approval we all need from our fellow humans/mortals. Some of *us* who have made different choices in our lives and have done what I have always called “swimming upstream”–
    find ourselves outside a comfortable social paradigm–

    and we mortals long, more than anything, to ‘belong’–

    I think that might be why Connor came on here; even Jesus Christ often felt alone and needed companionship and reassurance that He wasn’t alone–
    None of us likes to be excluded or reprimanded or told that our lives are not of value or that we are hurting others when our motives are anything but other-destructive–

    Maybe you really need someone to tell you that you have fought the good fight–

    Scott Stover did that better than I. I believe he is more humble and teachable than either you or me–

    The fact is that what any of us has done doesn’t matter to anyone else–not in terms of being able to compare/compete–

    and it needn’t matter to anyone else. We are commanded not to do our alms before men.

    Alms is a broad category for any good works we might accomplish while here in mortality–

    I made the mistake of talking about my private family’s choices, and in doing so I exposed my ‘alms’–

    and I regret that. If Connor could take that post out, it would be a blessing to me.

    It does sound as though your life has been difficult; I wouldn’t say it has been more difficult than any life I have ever heard about, but *we* are not in competition here in mortality; this isn’t a contest to see who can be more obedient or who can suffer more–

    I certainly don’t think that my life has been more difficult than that of anyone else. It hasn’t been a cakewalk, but I daily am grateful that I haven’t had some of the trials that I know others have suffered–

    and I am ashamed that my own post could be construed in any way to mean that I think that my life has been harder than anyone else’s life, etc.–

    I don’t believe that. I believe that personal missions are sacred, and personal revelation is sacred, and what one man/woman chooses shouldn’t be the business of any other man/woman/child–

    I am ashamed that I felt I had to explain to a total stranger why our children had been assigned SS numbers–only to be told that I had made the wrong choice, according to that stranger–

    I should not have to–

    So it was wrong of me to do it–

    If you can be teachable, Christopher Hansen–

    then perhaps you could read this verse in Mosiah:

    27, chapter 4: And see that all these things are done in wisdom and order; for it is not requisite that a man should run faster than he has strength. And again, it is expedient that he should be diligent, that thereby he might win the prize; therefore, all things must be done in order–

    what is the ‘prize’? I believe it will be that Father in Heaven will be pleased if any one of *us* does what He intended for us to do. Each of us will have unique callings–our callings and our capabilities will not all be the same, and so it is important that we not push our own expectations on others.
    This is why I am a Mormon libertarian, the strictest interpretation of that word–

    I believe so powerfully in moral agency that I don’t really believe that any one LDS has a right to impose his/her opinions and spiritual values on another. Expressing them in a general way is fine, perhaps, but thinking to tell others how to live can be perilous for both parties–

    It is all right to ‘share’, but there is a very fine line. Telling others what to do, even if a person is using the words of a prophet (which I just did)–
    is something that has become so common in our day that I think it causes great peril, in that humans/mortals, even and especially LDS, no longer know how to think and act for themselves–

    You have thought and acted for yourself; let others do the same.

    Again, if Connor could remove #20, I would appreciate it, even if there were some useful ideas in there; I regret having talked about my personal/family’s choices–

  24. Christopher Hansen
    October 7, 2012 at 11:13 am #

    outside the corridor,

    Without question no one answers to me. I don’t want anyone to answer to me. I am no one’s judge. If the words that I quote have an effect upon you then you and you alone need to act on these feelings.

    I certainly do not know you nor do I know your heart. All I have done is to QUOTE THE PROPHETS.

    You asked questions about my personal life. I answered them. If you do not like my answers then you do not like the truth about my life. What can I say? I have lived my life so as to be able to eschew Socialism because I felt and know that failure to do so, for me, was to face eternal damnation. If you do not feel that way then it is your choice. I do not condemn you for your choices. I do not know your choices. I only quoted the prophets.

  25. Christopher Hansen
    October 7, 2012 at 12:33 pm #

    Can a member of the Church “win the prize” if they are not true to their faith”?

    I know that we must “endure to the end” to “win the prize” so can anyone that does not “endure to the end” because they CANNOT be “true to the faith” “win the prize”?

    Please explain how is it possible to “win the prize” without being true to the faith. I await your instruction so that I may be teachable.

    The official position of the Church since 1936 has remained unchanged: “Latter-day Saints can not be true to their faith and lend aid, encouragement, or sympathy to any of these false philosophies.” (aka “Communism and all other similar isms.”

    I await your instruction.

    Failure to warn people about sin IS a sin. Is that not what you are trying to do. Warn me that I am wrong in my approach?

    Captain Moroni spoke out and gave the Nephites a choice. He held up the Title of Liberty. Are you condemning such an act as the Title of Liberty as taking away free agency?

    How about Abinadi? Should he have failed to express the truth and the words of the prophets out of fear that he was taking the “moral agency” from Noah and his priests?

    HOw does speak or the written word take away free agency or “moral agency”? I certainly have not forced my beliefs upon you. I have not threatened to harm you or put you in prison. The “line” is not a “very fine line.” It is a brilliant and well defined line. Until I FORCE my beliefs upon you by threats or intimidation or physical harm or taking your property or liberty you keep your “moral agency” to do whatever you please.

    I speak out and you certainly have a choice. I have forced nothing upon you. You are responding because YOU made the choice to respond. You read what I wrote because YOU chose to read it. Being silent causes great peril to your own soul in my opinion. I wash the blood of Mormon Socialists from my hands when I quote the prophets. I have a right to preserve my salvation by warning others. Would you limit my right to warn others of the harm I see them inflicting upon themselves? Would you limit my right to free speech or my right to freedom of the press?

    Even in the hardest of times I have never felt alone. I always felt like I was doing what Christ wanted me to do. I was led by the Spirit politically and in legal matters. Not even the Socialist Marxism loving local Church leadership that would not allow me to go to the temple did not make me feel alone. Christ supported my efforts and I KNEW it. I essentially lived by the following:

    “Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.” — John Quincy Adams

    I often vote alone.

    I do not impose my beliefs upon anyone. You are free to be a voluntary slave or a Christian true to the faith sovereign with God given rights instead of government granted privileges. You are also free to sell your sovereign birthright of being created equal to every king on earth. As the Founding Fathers wrote in 1775 AD:

    “We have counted the cost of this contest, and find nothing so dreadful as voluntary slavery. — Honour, justice, and humanity, forbid us tamely to surrender that freedom which we received from our gallant ancestors, and which our innocent posterity have a right to receive from us. We cannot endure the infamy and guilt of resigning succeeding generations to that wretchedness which inevitably awaits them, if we basely entail hereditary bondage upon them.”

    Most Mormons “tamely to surrender that freedom…” They CAN and do “endure the infamy and guilt of resigning succeeding generations to that wretchedness which inevitably awaits them” with our Socialist system.

    Americans and most Mormons have entailed hereditary bondage upon their children. Government officials call the Social Security System “A SACRED pact between the generations.” YES…The President of the United Staes used to word sacred to describe Social Security. It is a civil religion like Elder Faust warned us about:

    “There seems to be developing a new civil religion. The civil religion I refer to is a secular religion. It has no moral absolutes. It is nondenominational. It is nontheistic. It is politically focused. It is antagonistic to religion. It rejects the historic religious traditions of the nation. It feels strange. If this trend continues, nonbelief will be more honored than belief. While all beliefs must be protected, are atheism, agnosticism, cynicism, and moral relativism to be more safeguarded and valued than Christianity, Judaism, and the tenets of Islam, which hold that there is a Supreme Being and that mortals are accountable to him? If so, this would, in my opinion, place the United States of America in great moral jeopardy. For those who believe in God, this new civil religion fosters some of the same concerns as the state religions that prompted our forefathers to escape to the New World.”

    There is no Social Security Trust fund. The taxes paid by children, grandchildren and great-grand-children pay for the SS checks of the Elderly. Social Security recipients hire the government to STEAL from other Americans. It is a Satanic system that takes away free agency. President Hunter was quite clear about what occurs:

    “A man will not recognize the inequalities around him and voluntarily, through the gospel plan, come to the aid of his brother, he will find that through “a democratic process” he will be forced to come to the aid of his brother. The government will take from the “haves” and give to the “have nots.” Both have lost their freedom. Those who “have,” lost their freedom to give voluntarily of their own free will and in the way they desire. Those who “have not,” lost their freedom because they did not earn what they received. They got “something for nothing,” and they will neither appreciate the gift nor the giver of the gift.” Teachings of Howard W Hunter pg 169 Publisher: Bookcraft (1997)

    Elder Maxwell also explained TODAY’s situation:

    “As a nation we ignored the warning signals which preceded the great depression; we were also unready to face the onrushing realities of Fascism and Communism—whereas today many are blind to the dangers of self-oppression, the chains we put on ourselves, which is the real tyranny of our time.” Neal A. Maxwell, 1972

    Self-oppression? Chains we place upon ourselves? Voluntary slavery is what the Founding Fathers called it. The Socialist system we have in the USA today is based upon “voluntary compliance” (aka voluntary slavery):

    Here is what Mormon Senator Harry Reid said about our voluntary tax system: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7mRSI8yWwg

    Here is what others have said:

    “Let me point this out now. Your income tax is 100 percent voluntary and your liquor tax is 100 percent enforced tax. Now the situation is as different as day and night. Consequently, your same rules just will not apply…” — Dwight E. Avis, Head of ATF, IRS—House Ways and Means Subcommittee Hearings—1953

    “The real point of audits is to instill fear, not to extract revenue; the IRS aims at winning through intimidation and (thereby) getting maximum voluntary compliance.” — Paul Strassel, Former IRS Headquarters Agent “Wall St. Journal”, 1/28/80

    From Publication 21/1998 update: Do you have to file a tax return and pay taxes? Answer from Pub. 21: The U. S. income tax system is built on the idea of “voluntary compliance.” This means that it is left to the taxpayer to keep the necessary records, file a return on time, pay any required taxes, and meet any other requirements of the tax law. The system is built on trust in the citizens to know their responsibilities and to do what needs to be done. Taxpayers voluntarily follow the steps the tax system lays out. Failure to do so can result in penalties.
    Two aspects of the Federal Income Tax system—voluntary compliance with the law and self-assessment of tax – make it important for you to understand your rights and responsibilities as a taxpayer. ’Voluntary compliance’ places on the taxpayer the responsibility for filing an income tax return. You must decide whether the law requires you to file a return. If it does, you must file your return by the date it is due. — IRS Publication 21

    “You are among the millions of Americans who comply with the tax law voluntarily.” — 1992 Form 1040 Tax Instruction Booklet

    “Our tax system is based on individual self-assessment and voluntary compliance.” — Mortimer Caplin, IRS Commissioner, 1975 IRS IR Audit Manual

    “The mission of the service is to encourage and achieve the highest possible degree of voluntary compliance.” — Donald C. Alexander, IRS Commissioner, Federal Register, March 1974

    “The IRS’s primary task is to collect taxes under a voluntary compliance system.” — Jerome Kurtz IRS Commissioner, 1980 IR Annual Report

    “We have a voluntary compliance system.” — Fred Goldberg, IRS Commissioner, Nightline with Ted Koppel, Apr.13, 1990

    “Our system of taxation is based on voluntary assessment and payment, not upon distraint.” — United States v. Flora, 362 US 145 (1958)

    You have the same voluntary choices the Founding Fathers had. Many of the men that CHOOSE not to be voluntary slaves could not afford shoes or food or proper clothes while at Valley Forge. The level of anyone’s financial status does not absolve them from making a choice to practice liberty instead of giving it lip service. It does not absolve us from the crime of STEALING from others because we are in need. Just because the people voted to hire the government to steal from others so that they could get a government check does not make it anything less than theft and covetous.

    The Prophets warned us that if we embraced Socialism and the New Deal and did not repent of that evil we could not have spiritual exaltation.

    Was the First Presidency wrong? If so what else have they been wrong about and which teachings should we follow?

  26. scott stover
    October 7, 2012 at 1:27 pm #

    Funny that “Outside the Corridor” would say that I provided what Christopher needed better than she did. That actually made me feel better, because I was feeling like I rolled over and bailed too soon (kind of a macho pride thing going there). But I think the reason I did so was that I really do not like contention, especially I do not like to promote contention. I personally believe that it is seldom constructive, because people typically stop listening when things become contentious. Yet, somehow, this became a contentious discussion. Why? Surely not because I shortened Christopher’s name. I’m not going to try to answer my own question – I will take a page from Christopher’s book and allow each to figure the answer out for themselves.

    I do have something to say about how we gain the prize. I believe that we gain the prize according to who we become. A friend of mine shared something with me once – that we need to “become” the type of person who, when we arrive in “heaven”, heaven is still heaven to all the others who are there. This, of course, is tied totally in with the concepts of liberty, agency and love. We need to become such that we respect the liberty and agency of others, and love others in the way that they need to be loved.

    I learned a lot from these posts, and I am resolved that I will incorporate them into my thoughts and personal growth. And I will strive to so, and to teach others, with as little contention as possible, consistent with the learning capabilities of any who will listen.

  27. Christopher Hansen
    October 7, 2012 at 5:19 pm #

    Dear Scott,

    The comment about shortening my name was to demonstrate how easily people can be offended. Nothing more than that. People that are offended by what other participants say or write after they voluntarily join into a political discussion need to look into the mirror to find out who needs to fix the problem. If you cannot take the heat of politics then get out of the political kitchen. The prophets and men like Captain Moroni cut to the chase about HARD issues. If Captain Moroni’s epistles were not contentious then what were they? Why were they so contentious? Because his liberty and the liberty of his family and children and wives were at stake. Nothing has changed today except the actors. My liberty WILL and has been directly effected by Mormons that REFUSE to eschew Socialism and instead lend aid encouragement OR sympathy to these false isms and REFUSE to repent of their practice of socialist policies.

    They are no different than those that supported King George or Hitler or Stalin or Mao or the plans of Gadianton or the king-men or any other tyrant or evil philosophy. They are a threat to my liberty. When they take government welfare (and Social Security is government welfare according the the Supreme Court) then it allows for the government to say: “See…the people want this…they need this…Government MUST take this money from others to give it to those that need it.” And then they enforce this theft with the gun and the badge!

    What is the difference between a robber that steals your property personally and a Social Security recipient that has hired the government to steal your property at 14% a pay check? Would you be worried about the robber’s feelings if you called him a thief to his face? Would you resist with all your power or would you allow the robber to steal from your wife and children like you allow Social Security beneficiaries do to them? Would you allow the personal individual robber to steal the property of your family and friends because you needed to: “respect the liberty and agency” of the robber?

    Practicing socialists ARE THIEVES. They are promoting, as good, the principle of Communist/Gadianton theft which is the RELIGION OF SATAN. The AARP is an ORGANIZED CRIME SYNDICATE. Socialists like Romney are the king-men and invading Lamanites and Gadianton Robbers of our day. They are not just the nice little ole’ lady down the street that struggles to live on Social Security. They are the people that VOTE for men, like Harry Reid and Orrin Hatch and Mitt Romney that would and have enslaved you and take your property so that they can have a government check.

    Here is what these sweet little old ladies and gentlemen and OTHER welfare leaches offer us as history repeats:

    10 And I write this epistle unto you, Lachoneus, and I hope that ye will deliver up your lands and your possessions, without the shedding of blood, that this my people may recover their rights and agovernment, who have dissented away from you because of your wickedness in retaining from them their rights of government, and except ye do this, I will avenge their wrongs. I am Giddianhi.

    Only they HAVE control of the government today. They won the war in 1913 AD. They FORCE us to deliver up our lands and possessions a little bit at a time. The IRS is their enforcement arm. The Federal Reserve is their Master. They have guns. They arrest people and have arrested many of my friends. They STEAL property. They are Gadianton Robbers. And where is there main IRS office in the West? Why in Ogden, Utah, of course, where they can hire thousands of dedicated Mormon Socialists.

    Our immediate situation has BECOME AWFUL.

    Ether 8:24 Wherefore, the Lord commandeth you, when ye shall see these things come among you that ye shall awake to a sense of your awful situation, because of this secret combination which shall be among you; or wo be unto it, because of the blood of them who have been slain; for they cry from the dust for vengeance upon it, and also upon those who built it up.

    Today Socialists are supporting secret combination that ARE among us. People that take government welfare, like Social Security, are enemies of liberty eveyr bit as much as any supporter of any OTHER Secret Combination. And you and others would have me give them respect and courtesy. I do not recall Captain Moroni giving such lowlifes and threats to his liberty such accommodations.

    Benjamin Franklin was a traitor to the king (did he violate what would be today the 12th article of faith?). He was an adulterer. In fact he was a serial adulterer and was involved in underground sex clubs in France while working to obtain help for the American Revolution. Is adultery not considered to be neigh unto murder as a sin. So why was Franklin ordained a High Priest while many other Founding Fathers were not? Did this traitor to the Crown and an adulterer “gain the prize” we all seek? How?

    George Washington was a slave owner. So was Thomas Jefferson. Did they “gain the prize”?

    Ben Franklin and George Washington were ordained as High Priests in the St. George Temple. Why was that? Was it because the fight for liberty is the most important of all gospel principles?

    Ezra Taft Bensons, in General Conference, stated:

    “As important as are all other principles of the gospel, it was the freedom issue which determined whether you received a body. To have been on the wrong side of the freedom issue during the war in heaven meant eternal damnation. How then can Latter-day Saints expect to be on the wrong side in this life and escape the eternal consequences? The war in heaven is raging on earth today. The issues are the same: Shall men be compelled to do what others claim is for their best welfare or will they heed the counsel of the prophet and preserve their freedom?”

    LDS doctrine is quite clear. If you lend aid, encouragement OR (not and) sympathy to socialism or communism or other similar isms you CANNOT be true to the faith. And “unless the people of America forsake the sins and the errors, political and otherwise, of which they are now guilty and return to the practice of the great fundamental principles of Christianity, and of Constitutional government, there will be no exaltation for them spiritually…”

    Besides murder can anyone tell me what other sin of omission and or commission has such a damning judgment as no possible spiritual exaltation?

    When is it time to start screaming instead of whispering in Mormon General Conference Kindness Monotones, so as not to offend, that the Gadianton Robbers are among us ? They are our neighbors…They are our judges and friends and family members. They are sitting next to you in the temple and in Church.

    When is it time to EXPOSE THEM for what they are? Or would exposing them show a lack respect for their liberty and agency?

    Are we to love them like Lachoneus and and Captain Moroni did? Or should we let them continue to steal our land of liberty so that we do not appear to be rude?

    How about if we love them like Nephi loved Laban to death? Or how about like the stripling warriors loved such thieves or like the Founding Fathers loved the Tories and the Hessian Mercenaries? Isn’t that the way they NEEDED to be loved so that liberty could be defended?

    Our situation is awful. But I guess many Mormons believe that we should treat these thieves and robbers like honored guests. Heck…even the Nazis had good table manners. And of course the Jews marched into the ovens without so much as a fight. http://www.independentamerican.org/2012/09/05/even-the-nazis-had-table-manners/

    And if I have offended you because of my intentionally harsh words please forgive me 70 times 7 and let me continue to squash your feelings and agency while you refuse to become contentious. What else can you do except forgive me since I have now asked for such forgiveness even if you know in your heart that I am not sincere? Just treat me like you would any Socialist Romney or Obama Supporting Mormon. I am sure the Lord will support and condone you because of your perfect table manners just before the New American Neo Romney Nazis come and take you to the Mormon internment camps being set up by FEMA.

    Just submit to such evil and God will protect you. Right?

  28. outside the corridor
    October 8, 2012 at 9:05 am #

    Scott Stover,

    I agree with you, and I appreciate your honesty. Some of *us* have struggled with contention so much that we simply don’t want it anymore; I am one of those. I am not free of it, but I don’t want it.

    Christopher Hansen, I should have stopped three posts ago–LOL!
    But I will now be blunt with you. You antagonize and alienate those who are ‘fighting’ beside you.

    I think I understand you fairly well now after your three or four long posts.

    I have met people like you before, and while you may feel exonerated of your ‘harshness’ (your word) by your self-admitted ‘righteous’ choices, you don’t really help anyone understand liberty any better than those who administered the Inquisition helped Jews to come unto Christ.

    You make many assumptions. You talk ‘big’ about others not being able to take the heat (which presumably you can). You don’t know what battles *I* (or Scott or anyone else on here) has fought, and yet you come back and stand behind the words of the prophets and claim that you and only you know what they were saying and what they meant.

    Your words about Franklin and Washington are revealing. That you claim to have personal knowledge about which of the founding fathers had their temple work done, based upon the loudness of each man, and the louder a man was the better his chances, even if he owned slaves or committed adultery–
    is offensive. But then you seem to believe that the more you offend the more you are defending liberty?

    So, I’m not sure that anyone can do or say anything. I will certainly not whine to you if I get carried away to a FEMA camp; I won’t ask for your help. I didn’t ask for your help.

    You have forgotten an entire ‘chaper’ in the Book of Mormon. The anti-Nephi Lehites who did bow down and allow themselves to be killed. Maybe there are those living among you, who are LDS, who have already made that choice, to die; I guess you would classify them as those who couldn’t take the heat, so they got out of the political kitchen. (your words)–

    I hope your harsh words have helped you, because they have done nothing for me. I am convinced to continue to make the choices *I* have made, and I am very much aware of all that is going on. I study it all the time. I worked on the Ron Paul campaign. I will not vote for Romney or Obama, but I believe that the elections are ‘rigged’ anyway–

    You and I part ways in one major way. I believe in a Savior, Jesus Christ. I believe that He loves everyone, even those who have ‘fallen’ to socialism. And I don’t believe that I can save anyone. I used to believe that, and apparently you still do–
    You’re not going to save anyone, Christopher Hansen, but Jesus Christ has already saved you.
    Most of those prophets knew that most of the damage had already been done, and they were warning those who would heed. Truth does set *us* free.
    You made your own choices based upon their words; others have made their choices based upon their words–
    and personal revelation. And I hope you aren’t too disappointed when you find that there are those who didn’t use your battle methods who will be with Jesus Christ in the end–
    :)

    In the middle of one of the most difficult times in the ‘history’ of the world (right now) each man/woman makes his/her choices. I guess we’ll see how things turn out.

  29. Ana B Lau
    October 13, 2012 at 8:25 pm #

    I didn’t really want to comment because I know I might get some crazy people wanting to tell me how wrong I am as much as they wanted to say how wrong Connor was. However, THE TRUTH IS THAT THERE IS A TRUTH. We say that so proudly every Sacrament Meeting/ Testimony Meeting but when applied to the daily life or politics do we just FORGET ABOUT IT? No no no no no! It doesn’t STOP being the dang truth.

    If you share the truth with people applied to the daily life is a FAR cry from priestcraft. PLEASE people! It is JUST as if I tell a friend that stealing from someone is not good because the Lord doesn’t condone stealing. What if I tell my friend that I know a political philosophy that doesn’t condone stealing? Still not priestcraft.

    I think there is a MAJOR problem in the USA with this generation (Or perhaps I just noticed it because it is my generation). You can tell that most of the 20 something year olds now a days come from public schools, which teach one dimension, one perspective, and do it very poorly way with a hint of “we’re the best ting there is in the world.”

    Sorry Connor that by being a public figure you have to go through ridiculous attacks. Thanks for all you do to further the work of God.

  30. Christopher Hansen
    October 14, 2012 at 8:12 pm #

    Amen Ana B Lau,

    Telling people the truth about Socialism and who is a Socialist is no different than saying theft is wrong or who is a thief. Truth is truth and proclaiming it is not priestcraft. If it causes contention then it is contending with the devil or with his agents.

  31. Jimx
    November 2, 2012 at 7:41 pm #

    I just looked up the definition of priestcraft.
    “a derogatory reference to priests who use their influence to control secular or political affairs”
    http://dictionary.die.net/priestcraft

    If anyone advocates a particular public policy, or anything political, using the Bible, Koran or any spiritual book…does this make them involved in Priestcraft?

    Satan? whose definition? I am assuming that its the LDS definition, but there would be a lot to cover when dealing with the origin of the word, and its history. The name wasn’t actually used very often in the O.T. Used much more frequently in the N.T. I don’t believe it was ever used outside of the Bible, and Koran and movements which came from them.

    I would actually suspect that libertarianism is very satanic, if it means freedom, responsibility and individualism. Not as its defined by mormonism, but by people like Anton Lavey.

  32. Alexis Anne
    November 24, 2012 at 11:29 am #

    Mr. Christopher Hansen,

    I am very curious about one thing:

    When we’ve all moved on to our next stage of existence, would it bother you if you, your family, and other like-minded individuals were not quite so alone as you appeared to think you would be? Would you be happy that the grace of God allowed others the same reward as you received despite their not having endured the self-inflicted hardships you suffered, i.e. not having taken upon themselves the “mark of the beast” SSN’s, not having lived without driver’s licenses? Or would you be resentful?

    I’m merely curious.

  33. AV
    November 24, 2012 at 11:59 pm #

    Andy R.,

    About your comment regarding contention :

    I don’t believe that just because the hearer is offended and becomes contentious means that the delivery person didn’t speak with or possess love or didn’t deliver his message in a Christlike way.

    There were many things that Joseph Smith taught and said, even often condemning people directly, that strongly offended those who didn’t like hearing the truth.

    Just because one speaks with love or speaks the truth, doesn’t mean that no one will be offended. And just because someone becomes offended and contentious doesn’t mean the delivery person did something wrong or didn’t have love or should stop teaching truth or bearing their testimony.

    Even Christ offended many and caused much contention by his delivery and what he said, but that didn’t stop him from continuing to deliver his message.

    The scriptures are filled with men who possessed love and spoke just as God wanted them to, yet who’s delivery of truth clearly offended many of those they were talking to, such examples being Abinadi, Nephi, Moses, Moroni, Samuel the Lamanite, etc.

    God clearly did not want those men to stop teaching truth just because it caused contention.

    I believe it shows Christlike love to speak the truth, even boldly, even if it does offend those who are pricked by such truths. For it is the one thing that could help them repent and save them. Even if those who hear our message don’t want to be around us anymore or even if it ends a relationship with a family member or friend for this life, for the more important thing is that the truth we shared will ring in their ears forever and hopefully help them repent someday before it’s too late.

    I believe what Christ was talking about regarding ‘contention’ is regarding those who ‘felt’ contention in their hearts and who ‘without’ the Spirit tried to argue or debate with others about doctrine. Without the Spirit Christ is right, we won’t get anywhere with anyone just debating them and we should not even try.

    But as Connor said, sometimes boldness is the vital thing that will wake some people up if they are ready and wanting to wake up.

    Someone who is just bearing their testimony about the truths they believe in, is not necessarily contentious, nor is Christ saying they should stop teaching truth, even if it causes some to react with contention.

    Truth by nature almost always causes contention in most of it’s hearers, (cause most people don’t want to hear it) no matter who is teaching it or how they say it.

  34. Christopher Hansen
    November 27, 2012 at 9:30 pm #

    Alexis Anne,

    I don’t understand where you get the idea that I believe that I will be alone or that there will be less than the “few” that will be chosen as per the scriptures.

    I certainly do not feel that I have self-inflicted hardships. Do you believe that self-inflacited liberty is a hardship and not a blessing? I believe that those that choose voluntary slavery have the self-inflicted hardships. My wounds are battle scars from fighting for liberty.

    We few…We happy few. We band of brothers… Read about how their scars were worn proudly while those that did not fight would be ashamed.

    People that fight for liberty, and there have been billions throughout history, will be in the Celestial Kingdom right next to the well known adulterer but freedom fighter Ben Franklin. I just happen agree with Presidents Grant, McKay and Benson that those Mormons (and Americans) that choose voluntary slavery and do not eschew socialism CANNOT have a spiritual salvation. Did the mislead the members REPEATEDLY?

    I hope that everyone that chooses liberty over slavery will dwell in Glory with our Father in Heaven. I also know that the choice and judgment is WAY above MY pay grade. Christ will save who He will save and He knows the names written in the book of life. I have nothing to say about it and shout for joy that Christ is MY King and that His judgments will be both merciful and just.

    Perhaps the Prophets have been repeatedly wrong about those that do not eschew Socialism.

    Perhaps what they have preached is false doctrine.

    Perhaps Free Agency is not important.

    Perhaps we don’t need or are not required to endure to the end to be saved.

    Perhaps we are saved by Grace alone and our works are dead and accomplish nothing.

    Perhaps Calvin was right?

    But me…I happen to agree with the Prophets.

  35. scott stover
    November 28, 2012 at 5:46 am #

    Nicely put, Christopher. There at the end, you kind of started sounding like Judge Napolitano.

  36. Christopher Hansen
    November 28, 2012 at 10:07 am #

    scott stover,

    I honestly don’t know if sounding like Judge Napolitano would be a good thing or a bad thing. I have heard he is very pro-consitution but I have only seen a few of his videos on youtube.

    I think you liked what I wrote in my response. If so…Thank you. If not then please explain.

  37. scott stover
    November 28, 2012 at 10:35 am #

    Yes, I liked it. I considered sounding like Judge Napolitano to be a compliment – but more from pattern standpoint than a content standpoint.

  38. Christopher Hansen
    November 28, 2012 at 12:54 pm #

    Then thank you again.

    I have been heavily involved in the liberty movement since I was 10. I was taught the words of the Prophets, Grant, McKay and Benson, concerning socialism and supporting the Constitution, before I could read. The speech “Not Commanded in All Things,” by Benson had a profound effect on my life as did the letter from the First Presidency to the U.S. Secretary of the Treasury (Grant was then President) about how we could not be saved if we did not repent of practicing FDR’s New Deal programs.

    We were repeatedly commanded to eschew Socialism and Communism and yet almost every Mormon gives no thought to their practice of Socialist programs in their everyday lives like Social Security or planks of the Communist Manifesto like free government schools, credit money like the Federal Reserve Notes and the 2nd plank, graduated income tax.

    But Mormon howl: It is the law so we HAVE to do it. What I discovered and PROVED was that you did not HAVE to do it at all. You could do like the Christians of Rome and say: I cannot follow God and Mammon and if necessary FACE THE LIONS for your choices.

    I have repeatedly asked the priesthood to tell me if those commandments have been repudiated like, for example, the Adam God Theory or earthly practice of polygamy were officially repudiated, and from what I can tell there has been no such repudiation or denunciation of the commandment to eschew such false political isms or risk damnation.

    I had to ask myself if I was TRUELY obeying those commandments and spent decades in study and realized that if I was practicing socialism or allowing socialism in my life then I was not eschewing socialism (shun) and would not be given a spiritual salvation no matter what else I did or what OTHER “lesser principles” that I followed.

    I looked at other commandments. If I were to just steal a little then am I still a thief? If I just murder one person then I am still a murderer? If I have just one OTHER god before my Father in Heaven then I have violated that commandment? If I bear false witness AT ALL then I have committed that sin? So I asked myself: If I am just refusing to eschew socialism on just a few things and not ALL things am I obeying the commandment to eschew false political isms or not? The answer was of course, that if I was not completely eschewing socialism that I was in violation of that commandment. I was worshipping the gods of the Ammorites on a letter-day level (See Not Commanded in All Things).

    The more I studied Communism and its published goals and planks and manifesto the more I realized my AWFUL situation. I decided I had to do the equivalent of facing the lions Christian had to do in the days of Rome.

    After all are we not all tested?

    I made my choices and if I find even the slightest amount of socialism in my life then I repent of it and never d it again.

    I don’t have a Socialist Security Number.

    I don’t file income tax returns and have letters from the IRS that I am not required to file. Naturally I don’t pay income taxes either. To do so would mean I was a practicing Communist at least as per the 2nd plank of the Communist Manifesto. And to do that I had to make some tough choices. But was I any better than the Roman Christians or President John Taylor concerning polygamy? Was I not required to have my faith tested?

    I had to make the choice between living in the Garden of Socialism or eating of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. I chose knowledge and the harder life outside the Garden of Satan’s counterfeit religion of Socialism.

    The blessings of liberty are incalculable. I know because I am a free man living in a Socialist State.

  39. jimx
    November 28, 2012 at 6:43 pm #

    Christopher,
    It might be great to review who Karl Marx was and his background, and also who founded the federal reserve system. Just doing a brief scan of the history of taxes, I see that its ancient in origin, and accross many cultures. I don’t immediately see any connection at all to socialism or to satan.

  40. Christopher Hansen
    November 28, 2012 at 10:59 pm #

    Jimx,

    I have studied the Marx, Trotsky, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, and many other fathers of Communism/Socialism. Marx, according to Trotsky, was the prophet of Communism and was compared by Trotsky to Moses. Marx, according to Keynes, established nothing more than a religion when he created Communism because it had no scientific basis and was just a religion. The prophets have repeatedly stated that Socialism and/or Communism are just Satan’s religion.

    The Federal Reserve System is anti-Consitution and Satanic in origin established to steal the labor of those that are ignorant of what is being done to them in small amounts. It is the Fascist form of Marx 5th plank. It was established in 1913, the same year that the 16th Amendment was place into the Constitution without ever being ratified properly. In 1913 we lost our Republican form of government and became dominated by a small group of powerful men.

    I have done far more than a brief scan of the history of taxes. I am considered to be an expert on some forms of U.S. taxation and have worked on many IRS criminal cases around the country.

    Some taxation is not Satanic. Sales taxes are essentially voluntary taxes. If you do not want to pay the tax don’t buy the product. If they are used to promote the GENERAL welfare (not the verbicided definition of welfare but its original Constitutional meaning in 1787 AD) then it is probably not of Satan. But a graduated income tax coupled with a monetary system of credit is Satanic.

    “The chief weapon used by the federal government to achieve this equality is through so-called transfer payments. This is a term that simply means that the federal government collects from one income group and transfers payments to another by the tax system. These payments are made in the form of Social Security benefits, housing subsidies, Medicaid, food stamps, to name a few.” President Ezra Taft Benson, 1987 AD

    Taxes that are taken under threat of law and then given to others does not support the general welfare but create a Socialist State and that is Satanic. Social Security is, according to President Grant, in direct opposition to the the teachings of Christ. Social Security is, of course, voluntary slavery. After all you apply for the number and keep it voluntarily.

    “[A]s a nation we ignored the warning signals which preceded the great depression; we were also unready to face the onrushing realities of Fascism and Communism—whereas today many are blind to the dangers of self-oppression, the chains we put on ourselves, which is the real tyranny of our time.” Neal A. Maxwell, 1972

    Most Mormons voluntarily place the chains of slavery upon themselves by applying to the government for benefits or numbers or licenses. It is the tyranny of our time and the greater part of Mormons embrace this form of slavery.

    “A man will not recognize the inequalities around him and voluntarily, through the gospel plan, come to the aid of his brother, he will find that through “a democratic process” he will be forced to come to the aid of his brother. The government will take from the “haves” and give to the “have nots.” Both have lost their freedom. Those who “have,” lost their freedom to give voluntarily of their own free will and in the way they desire. Those who “have not,” lost their freedom because they did not earn what they received. They got “something for nothing,” and they will neither appreciate the gift nor the giver of the gift.” Teachings of Howard W Hunter pg 169 Publisher: Bookcraft (1997)

    Most Mormons demand socialism just like the Israelites demanded a king and ALSO rejected Christ. History is just repeating. Those that reject liberty and choose slavery will not have a spiritual salvation, unless of course the prophets lied to us about that.

  41. jimx
    November 29, 2012 at 6:26 pm #

    Chris Hansen,
    I am not sure what to make of the assesment that socialism is of satan. The LDS people have this idea that satan takes away agency, or tries to. What I know about satanism as a religion is that its libertine, I don’t see the connection between that and socialism, if anything capitalism would be more satanic, especially if there isn’t any regulation other than ones natural biology.

    Many of the monotheistic philosophies however do place a lot of regulations, and promote a sense of restriction and regulation into laws, either officially or by culture. I am not sure I understand your definition of what is satanic.

    I just found out there is a Christian socialist movement, I don’t know much about it, but if one were to ask the average american, they would probably say thats a contradiction of terms, yet it exists. The main concern in their arguement is about equality, and yes they use the torah and the christian new testiment to build their case.

  42. Christopher Hansen
    November 29, 2012 at 9:23 pm #

    jimx,

    It’s Christopher, not Chris.

    Are you LDS? If not then you do not have the same foundation of philosophy that I have. This is not criticizing you or your opinion I am just stating a fact. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believes in latter-day Prophets and is not bound to only the Bible.

    I am LDS so I study the LDS Prophets and Apostles (leaders) and after study and prayer I agree with them about this issue especially my study seems to agree with them at every turn when I use Non LDS research materials. I also agree with you the SUPER capitalism is ALSO a “false ism” and Satanic. But Communism and Socialism are ALSO Satanic. The Super Capitalists are actually higher in the New World Order pecking order than Communist/Socialist leadership. The Rothschilds bankers, naturally, being at the top (as far as I have been able to find). Super Capitalism is the philosophy of survival of the fittest and that anyone that cannot defend themselves deserves slavery, death or poverty. It is as Satanic as Communism and it also totally antagonistic to Free Enterprise. It seeks for monopoly to steal choice and free agency. I support Free Enterprise and believe that the destruction of monopolies is one of the few duties of a Freedom Loving government in a Constitutional Republican form of government. The USA does not have such a government today. In fact it has the exact opposite.

    Here is a small sample of LDS published beliefs on Communism and Socialism as per LDS leaders:

    “Latter-day Saints cannot be true to their faith and lend aid, encouragement, or sympathy to false ideologies such as socialism and communism. The official Church position on communism remains unchanged since it was first promulgated in 1936: “We call upon all Church members completely to eschew Communism.” Message from the First Presidency, Improvement Era, August 1936, p. 488.

    “The position of this Church on the subject of Communism has never changed. We consider it the greatest satanical threat to peace, prosperity, and the spread of God’s work among men that exists on the face of the earth. . . .
    The entire concept and philosophy of Communism is diametrically opposed to everything for which the Church stands…Communism debases the individual and makes him the enslaved tool of the state, to which he must look for sustenance and religion. Communism destroys man’s God-given free agency…” David O. McKay, Conference Report, April 9, 1966, pp. 109-10.

    “[W]henever the God of heaven reveals His gospel to mankind, Satan, the archenemy to Christ, introduces a counterfeit. Communism introduced into the world a substitute for true religion. It is a counterfeit of the gospel plan. The false prophets of Communism predict a utopian society. This, they proclaim, will only be brought about as capitalism and free enterprise are overthrown, private property abolished, the family as a social unit eliminated, all classes abolished, all governments overthrown, and a communal ownership of property in a classless, stateless society established. President Marion G. Romney, in the First Presidency Message in the September 1979 Ensign, wrote: ‘Communism is Satan’s counterfeit for the gospel plan, and … it is an avowed enemy of the God of the land. Communism is the greatest anti-Christ power in the world today and therefore the greatest menace not only to our peace but to our preservation as a free people. By the extent to which we tolerate it, accommodate ourselves to it, permit ourselves to be encircled by its tentacles and drawn to it, to that extent we forfeit the protection of the God of this land’” (p. 5). President Ezra Taft Benson Of the Council of the Twelve, A Witness and a Warning

    “May I assure you that communism is not merely an economic program. It is a total philosophy of life, atheistic and utterly opposed to all we hold dear as a great Christian nation. While we might effectively bridle or destroy every so-called communist within our own borders, we shall not vanquish this political virus, and its common forerunner, state socialism, so long as people are determined to achieve security through state-imposed materialistic schemes rather than through righteous living and wholesome activity as free men.” Ezra Taft Benson, 1960, So Shall Ye Reap

    “Communism is in reality a form of religion in which men deny the God of the Bible and worship the gods of compulsion and power and war. Philosophy in all its forms and varieties is a way of worship. It is an attempt by reason and without revelation to explain existence, ethical principles in general, and the whence, why, and whither of life.” Elder Bruce R. McConkie 1985, A NEW WITNESS FOR THE ARTICLES OF FAITH, p. 54

    “Atheism, like theism, is divided into many sects: communism, agnosticism, skepticism, humanism, pragmatism, and others.” Boyd K. Packer, 1975, Teach Ye Diligently, p. 225

    “As Americans, we have marched a long way down the soul-destroying road of socialism, atheism, and totalitarianism.” Ezra Taft Benson, This Nation Shall Endure, p. 93

    “Three of the major devices that have led men to reject the truth concerning God have been and still are (1) apostate Christianity, (2) the theory of biological evolution, and (3) communism.” Marion G. Romney, 1977, Learning For The Eternities, p. 2

    “In distinguishing communism from the United Order, President David O. McKay said that communism is Satan’s counterfeit for the gospel plan, and that it is an avowed enemy of the God of the land. Communism is the greatest anti-Christ power in the world today and therefore the greatest menace not only to our peace but to our preservation as a free people. By the extent to which we tolerate it, accommodate ourselves to it, permit ourselves to be encircled by its tentacles and drawn to it, to that extent we forfeit the protection of the God of this land.” President Marion G. Romney Second Counselor in the First Presidency, The Message: America’s Promise, New Era, Mar 1980, p.4

    “Communism and all other similar isms bear no relationship whatever to the United Order. They are merely the clumsy counterfeits which Satan always devises of the gospel plan. Communism debases the individual and makes him the enslaved tool of the state to whom he must look for sustenance and religion; the United Order exalts the individual, leaves him his property, “according to his family, according to his circumstances and his wants and needs,” (D&C 51:3) and provides a system by which he helps care for his less fortunate brethren; the United Order leaves every man free to choose his own religion as his conscience directs. Communism destroys man’s God-given free agency; the United Order glorifies it. Latter-day Saints can not be true to their faith and lend aid, encouragement, or sympathy to any of these false philosophies. They will prove snares to their feet.” First Presidency Message, in Conference Report, Apr. 1942

    “The “communist manifesto” drafted by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, for the Communist League . . . in . . . 1848 is generally regarded as the starting point of modern socialism. No, socialism is not the United Order… Now, not forgetting our duty to eschew socialism and support the just and holy principles of the Constitution, as directed by the Lord, I shall conclude these remarks with a few comments concerning what we should do about the United Order.” President Marion G. Romney SOCIALISM AND THE UNITED ORDER COMPARED

    “We cannot afford to minimize the threat of socialism in America. We must be on guard against unsound theories and programs which strike at the very root of all we hold dear… Today’s Socialists… are using the federal government to redistribute wealth in our society—not as a matter of voluntary charity, but as a so-called matter of right… Yes, we have traveled a long way down the soul-destroying road of socialism… Men… ascended to high political offices by promising what was not theirs to give, and citizens voted them into office in hopes of receiving what they had not earned. I fear for the future when I realize that our once-free institutions—political, economic, educational, and social—have been drifting into the hands of those who favor the welfare state, and who would “centralize all power in the hands of the political apparatus in Washington. This enhancement of political power at the expense of individual rights, so often disguised as ‘democracy’ or ‘freedom’ or ‘civil rights,’ is ‘socialism, no matter what name tag it bears.” Ezra Taft Benson: Teachings, 1988, p. 692- 693)

    “Today two mighty forces are battling for the supremacy of the world. The destiny of mankind is in the balance. It is a question of God and liberty, or atheism and slavery… Those forces are known and have been designated by different terms throughout the ages. “In the beginning” they were known as Satan on the one hand, and Christ on the other. In Joshua’s time they were called “gods of the Amorites,” on one, and “the Lord” on the other. …In these days, they are called “domination by the state,” on one hand, “personal liberty,” on the other hand; communism on one, free agency on the other. (Prophets, Principles and National Survival, pp. 215-216)

  43. jimx
    November 30, 2012 at 11:34 am #

    Christopher,
    That is a lot to read and consider, I may come back to this at some point. But from the summary I can definately see dualistic thought. I tend to not see things as black and white anymore. Thats a pretty central tendancy of the monotheistic faiths. For example, I don’t see the choice as atheism/slavery, as slavery has co-existed with theology and the bible has been used to support it, however accurate or inaccurate that association might be. Satan/christ seems pretty false because there still exists a whole segment of the world that knows little or none of either one.

    To illustrate the either/or thinking, is there any statement from LDS authorities condemning ‘super capitalism’? I can only guess that it could not be found. I would be interested if any LDS authority has ever issued a statement that condemns capitalism in any form. I have heard one critic that was attempting to discredit both by labling them monetary systems. But am not sure what would replace it that wasn’t either one.

  44. rman
    October 22, 2014 at 8:57 pm #

    If a priest is promoting himself for financial or power/authoritarian gain, that is acting outside the scope of his religious directive.

  45. iimx
    October 24, 2014 at 7:43 pm #

    Christopher Hansen,
    One of the greatest occultists of all time has stated his philosphy in a single phrase, “Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law”. -Aleister Crowley I don’t see communism in that phrase, or atheism for that matter.

    The Wican rede, “As you harm none, do as you will”. Some have accused that as being “satanic”, and here again, I don’t see communism or atheism, as they believe in a God or a number of gods.

    If you take a look at the Joy of Satan webpage, there are essays at length against Communism, socialism. Why would they support socialism? In fact they claim that Communism has Christian roots.
    http://www.angelfire.com/dawn666blacksun/Communism_is_Christianity.html

    The united states is not founded on Christianity, and is not a christian country specifically, but it has a lot of christians who think that.

Leave a Reply

Leave your opinion here. Please be nice. Your Email address will be kept private.