No, not this:
http://emp.byui.edu/marrottr/callelectsurjsbrmc.htm
I mean this:
http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/official-statement/political-neutrality
I read this article this morning:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/5802d33de4b0985f6d15724c
I'm guessing that there are a lot of LDS folks who are uncomfortable supporting Donald Trump for President. And I'm sure that there are a similar number of LDS folks who are uncomfortable supporting Hillary Clinton. But the reasons for this are interesting.
LDS folks are interested in the character of people. This may sound like a given, but we have a strong doctrinal background for this. In the Doctrine and Covenants, Section 134 clearly spells out each member's duty with regard to the government AND the elected officers and officials:
1 We believe that governments were instituted of God for the benefit of man; and that he holds men accountable for their acts in relation to them, both in making laws and administering them, for the good and safety of society.
...
5 We believe that all men are bound to sustain and uphold the respective governments in which they reside, while protected in their inherent and inalienable rights by the laws of such governments; and that sedition and rebellion are unbecoming every citizen thus protected, and should be punished accordingly; and that all governments have a right to enact such laws as in their own judgments are best calculated to secure the public interest; at the same time, however, holding sacred the freedom of conscience.
6 We believe that every man should be honored in his station, rulers and magistrates as such, being placed for the protection of the innocent and the punishment of the guilty; and that to the laws all men owe respect and deference, as without them peace and harmony would be supplanted by anarchy and terror; human laws being instituted for the express purpose of regulating our interests as individuals and nations, between man and man; and divine laws given of heaven, prescribing rules on spiritual concerns, for faith and worship, both to be answered by man to his Maker. (bold emphasis added)
All of this being true, we have a moral and deeply felt spiritual obligation to "sustain and uphold" the government, and to "honor" our rulers and magistrates. If this is the case, we want to - with all confidence and to the best of our ability - be able to know that our leaders are free from the glaring faults we so often see in our political leaders. We want our leaders to be free from blemish - or at least striving to be so, knowing that no one is perfect - and generally trustworthy. I would also say that we want to be able to have confidence that our leaders are acting out of a true and real sense of patriotism and duty to our Country (or State or City) and in the best interests of all citizens, even when we may not agree with their views or positions. I believe (as an LDS member) that there is such a thing (in political realms) as a loyal opposition - that is, while I may not agree with your position or view on HOW something should be done, I can always respect and admire and value the person because of the trust and confidence I have in that person's basic integrity and patriotism.
So it's troubling when we have major party candidates who do not represent those highest values. It's just difficult to project our own minds into the minds of someone who appears so corrupt - morally and ethically... Someone who is so very different from ourselves....
Which, I think, is why Ted Cruz won Utah's Republican vote. And why Bernie Sanders won Utah's Democratic vote. Neither of whom were successful on a national stage, but both of whom were more acceptable than the alternative. I can even see my fellow LDS folks getting behind Bernie Sanders easier than for Hillary Clinton, and for the reasons mentioned. They may not like his politics, but they can respect and appreciate his integrity and morals. That's something we're not finding in our two major party candidates.
I find myself a bit torn. As an LDS Democrat, I don't love Hillary, frankly. But I find Trump so absolutely reprehensible and repugnant that I can't imagine casting a vote for him. And when talking with my daughter, I find myself looking for (in her words) the lesser of two evils.
One positive from all of this, however, is the rethinking and retooling of dyed-in-the-wool LDS Republicans. Because of how reprehensible Mr. Trump is, and recognizing that he's now the face of the Republican Party (ostensibly, anyway), he's pushing a lot of LDS folks out and to the left. Up to this point, the Republican Party has been able to rely on a small government, morally straight viewpoint that has appealed to many LDS folks, many of whom have said (in my hearing) that it would be impossible to be LDS and a Democrat. Well, now the tables have turned, and the question of morality has become more important than small government. In fact, just yesterday in my High Priests Group meeting, the instructor said that where he had been pretty clear on the immigration issue, he's now had cause to change his thinking. He said, "Let them all in." Which shocked and pleased me greatly.
Because, at the end of the day, I believe that LDS folks want a leader they can follow, one who is morally upright and clean and good in character and purpose. I know I do.
http://emp.byui.edu/marrottr/callelectsurjsbrmc.htm
I mean this:
http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/official-statement/political-neutrality
I read this article this morning:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/5802d33de4b0985f6d15724c
I'm guessing that there are a lot of LDS folks who are uncomfortable supporting Donald Trump for President. And I'm sure that there are a similar number of LDS folks who are uncomfortable supporting Hillary Clinton. But the reasons for this are interesting.
LDS folks are interested in the character of people. This may sound like a given, but we have a strong doctrinal background for this. In the Doctrine and Covenants, Section 134 clearly spells out each member's duty with regard to the government AND the elected officers and officials:
1 We believe that governments were instituted of God for the benefit of man; and that he holds men accountable for their acts in relation to them, both in making laws and administering them, for the good and safety of society.
...
5 We believe that all men are bound to sustain and uphold the respective governments in which they reside, while protected in their inherent and inalienable rights by the laws of such governments; and that sedition and rebellion are unbecoming every citizen thus protected, and should be punished accordingly; and that all governments have a right to enact such laws as in their own judgments are best calculated to secure the public interest; at the same time, however, holding sacred the freedom of conscience.
6 We believe that every man should be honored in his station, rulers and magistrates as such, being placed for the protection of the innocent and the punishment of the guilty; and that to the laws all men owe respect and deference, as without them peace and harmony would be supplanted by anarchy and terror; human laws being instituted for the express purpose of regulating our interests as individuals and nations, between man and man; and divine laws given of heaven, prescribing rules on spiritual concerns, for faith and worship, both to be answered by man to his Maker. (bold emphasis added)
All of this being true, we have a moral and deeply felt spiritual obligation to "sustain and uphold" the government, and to "honor" our rulers and magistrates. If this is the case, we want to - with all confidence and to the best of our ability - be able to know that our leaders are free from the glaring faults we so often see in our political leaders. We want our leaders to be free from blemish - or at least striving to be so, knowing that no one is perfect - and generally trustworthy. I would also say that we want to be able to have confidence that our leaders are acting out of a true and real sense of patriotism and duty to our Country (or State or City) and in the best interests of all citizens, even when we may not agree with their views or positions. I believe (as an LDS member) that there is such a thing (in political realms) as a loyal opposition - that is, while I may not agree with your position or view on HOW something should be done, I can always respect and admire and value the person because of the trust and confidence I have in that person's basic integrity and patriotism.
So it's troubling when we have major party candidates who do not represent those highest values. It's just difficult to project our own minds into the minds of someone who appears so corrupt - morally and ethically... Someone who is so very different from ourselves....
Which, I think, is why Ted Cruz won Utah's Republican vote. And why Bernie Sanders won Utah's Democratic vote. Neither of whom were successful on a national stage, but both of whom were more acceptable than the alternative. I can even see my fellow LDS folks getting behind Bernie Sanders easier than for Hillary Clinton, and for the reasons mentioned. They may not like his politics, but they can respect and appreciate his integrity and morals. That's something we're not finding in our two major party candidates.
I find myself a bit torn. As an LDS Democrat, I don't love Hillary, frankly. But I find Trump so absolutely reprehensible and repugnant that I can't imagine casting a vote for him. And when talking with my daughter, I find myself looking for (in her words) the lesser of two evils.
One positive from all of this, however, is the rethinking and retooling of dyed-in-the-wool LDS Republicans. Because of how reprehensible Mr. Trump is, and recognizing that he's now the face of the Republican Party (ostensibly, anyway), he's pushing a lot of LDS folks out and to the left. Up to this point, the Republican Party has been able to rely on a small government, morally straight viewpoint that has appealed to many LDS folks, many of whom have said (in my hearing) that it would be impossible to be LDS and a Democrat. Well, now the tables have turned, and the question of morality has become more important than small government. In fact, just yesterday in my High Priests Group meeting, the instructor said that where he had been pretty clear on the immigration issue, he's now had cause to change his thinking. He said, "Let them all in." Which shocked and pleased me greatly.
Because, at the end of the day, I believe that LDS folks want a leader they can follow, one who is morally upright and clean and good in character and purpose. I know I do.
Comments