Father of Peace wrote:
>
> The founding mythology of mormonism teaches that
> Lucifer's plan of salvation involved coercion, and that
> Christ's plan involved freedom of choice. I believe that
> a person is not living mormonism who
> votes to use the coercion of government in order
> to oppress the actions of peaceable
> non-believers.
Not sure that it is a founding "mythology", but anyway...
One thing that we teach is that everyone is free to choose
their actions. What we have never taught, is that you are
free to choose the consequences of your actions. There are
various laws, eternal heavenly laws by which even God must
abide, god-given laws for mortals to follow, and man-given
laws created by government for us to follow. We are free to
choose to break any of those laws, at any time we wish. But
as sure as day follows night, there will be a consequence to
our actions, that we have no choice about.
Think of it as stepping off a cliff - the law of gravity
demands that things things are attracted to the ground. The
law doesn't prevent you stepping off the cliff, and in no
way impedes your freedom to take that action. But the law
does govern that a consequence of that action is that you
will accelerate toward the earth below.
In a modern society, man must create laws to govern the
peaceful operation of society. Most laws are there to
provide protection to people from other members of society.
There will always be those who choose to break those laws,
and if caught they must face the consequences set down by
the law.
As for mormons imposing their will upon others, in many
respects mormonism's key principles with which we will
pressure government, are the same traditional principles
that any of the judaeo-christian religions are based on, and
hence the same traditional principles that pretty much the
entire western world has incor****ated into Government. For
example some of the 10 commandments are codified into law in
most countries.
But much of society has rejected these values, and as this
rejection has grown, some of these laws have been softened.
For example, s****t and retail used to be prohibited on
Sundays, but now they are almost universally practised in
many countries.
As we see this softening of laws, and the consequential harm
brought upon society as a result, what is wrong with a
person, organisation, or religion, working to maintain laws
that protect society? This is how democracy should work -
the governance of the country should be done in accordance
with the will of the majority of people. If the majority of
the people believe that a particular behaviour is wrong and
causes harm to society, then the majority have the right to
create a law governing that. If the majority thinks
otherwise, then they have a right to prevent a law being
created, or have an existing law repealed. This is democracy
in action.
LDS people, just like any other grouping of people, have a
belief system that governs their behaviour and what they
believe is correct. They have no more, nor no less, right
than any other person to express their opinions and have
that turned into law. Such a decision does not impact on an
individuals right to choose, but it does govern the
consequences of their actions, based upon what the majority
of society believes appopriate.
There would be very few LDS who would advocate banning a
substance like tea, but there are many who are opposed to
public smoking. Just as there are many non-LDS who are
opposed to public smoking. For LDS the reason may stem from
their WoW beliefs, but for many, and for most non-LDS, the
reason for wanting a ban is based on what science has shown
to be the health risks not only to the smoker, but also
those around him. There are many, not just LDS, who would
like to be able to walk down the street without having their
nostrils filled with the horrible pungent smoke of
smouldering tobacco. Such a restriction would be in the
public interest, and while a small pro****tion of the
population would feel wronged, the majority of the
population would benefit from cleaner air, better health,
lower health insurance premiums etc.
|
