The overall article is well worth reading to better understand current political debates, but that wasn’t what called my attention to it as a possible subject for Mormon Matters. Rather, the following paragraph toward the end of the Article startled me:

“Nothing has set the country class apart, defined it, made it conscious of itself, given it whatever coherence it has, so much as the ruling class’s insistence that people other than themselves are intellectually and hence otherwise humanly inferior. Persons who were brought up to believe themselves as worthy as anyone, who manage their own lives to their own satisfaction, naturally resent politicians of both parties who say that the issues of modern life are too complex for any but themselves. Most are insulted by the ruling class’s dismissal of opposition as mere “anger and frustration” — an imputation of stupidity — while others just scoff at the claim that the ruling class’s bureaucratic language demonstrates superior intelligence. A few ask the fundamental question: Since when and by what right does intelligence trump human equality? Moreover, if the politicians are so smart, why have they made life worse?” [Emphases added.]

When I read the bolded sentences above I almost sputtered to myself. “Of course, the intelligent should…” And then I remembered a series of conversations I had with my wife-to-be several decades ago when I was getting my baptism into the government policy environment in the DC area and she was free-lancing as a classical musician in New York City. When I visited her, it seemed her colleagues were always complaining about how little funding there was for the arts. When we were alone together, this conversation often continued as she noted that the government seemed to have plenty of money to pay me well for what I did. (I had enough spare cash at the time to fly back and forth between the two cities; she once, I found out later, had to walk home from seeing me off at the airport.) I had initially defended my privilege with exactly the same “Of course…” sputtering.

Well, true love triumphed, and we long ago moved on to debate other issues in our marriage, but my memory of those conversations stopped the sputtering, and I could start taking the article’s fundamental question seriously.

What trumps “the worth of all persons”, to use a Community of Christ terminology? Is it intelligence, which we now measure in our culture by having accrediting bodies grant us degrees that say we are intelligent? It is a very seductive idea, until I start to examine it closely. Why does a master’s degree in physics make me more intelligent than my wife’s masters degree in classical music makes her? She can play a piano; she gets calls to do that more often than I get called upon to solve third order differential equations (and she can still do it from memory, too). Who’s more useful? How many of me does society actually need?

Other cultures have believed (do believe?) that the basis of rule should be the ability to defeat enemy armies, to belong to a divinely-favored race or gender or ethnicity, or even a dubious claim to be sired by a previous member of the ruling class.  Shouldn’t I be willing to question the basis of my belief in the rule of “intellect”.

I am proud of my degrees and my connections to what Codevilla’s article calls the “ruling class”. My pride shows, no matter how hard I try to become conscious of it and question my cultural assumption. Oh, oh!

Ancient people of many cultures built monuments to their gods. Often, it became a little confusing about whether the monuments were built to the gods, or whether the people who built them believed they were gods. In places like Egypt or Meso-America there eventually was no mistaking that the pyramids were about the rulers.

I look at the great monuments in Washington. Some are monuments to political demi-gods of the past. But some seem clearly monuments to the present rulers themselves. Oh, oh! In fact, the places you see Senators or House Representatives being interviewed on TV are not the most ornate Congressional office buildings. The newest structures have multi-floor glass walled interiors that work poorly with reflections from TV lights, so they go unseen by most people without day-to-day business there. (And why did I bother to tell you that? Oh, oh!)

Other monuments are ideological. If you can’t get your name on a monument (or at least an office building in your local district), get your name on a law. In the sciences, get an effect, or a theory, or an equation named after you. Win a prize. Leave your mark on history.

In the Book of Mormon, the falling of people into the “pride cycle” is frequently thematically associated with the wearing of “costly apparel”. Those on the fringes of the ruling class could not build monuments, but they could signal their membership in that class to everyone by what they wore. If we take Meso-America as a model, they could make themselves into living pyramids of expensive cloth, jade, or shell.

And the more widely those signs spread (physically or metaphorically), the more ideas like “the worth of all persons” became illusionary self-deception. The more people were excluded from the ruling class, the more strongly those still on the fringe found it necessary to justify doing ever-more-questionable things to hang on to the symbols of status. The gulf between the classes widened into violence.

I am very much on the “fringe” of my culture’s ruling class. I can signal my membership in that class through my university affiliations, the reports I’ve co-authored, the conferences and advisory hearings I’ve attended, and the offices of the government officials who’ve passed me written “attaboys”. I can make my pyramid out of paper, and my mark on history can last digitally until the digital formats themselves become obsolete. Oh, oh!

Intellectualism is not a vice. Neither is being a member of any elite. But could membership in a ruling “intellectual” elite be the particular form of the pride cycle to which our modern Western culture can be tempted?

I love my sweet Mom (Nan McCulloch) — for a hundred different reasons. She’s a wicked cook. A spectacular actress. A fantastic decorator and homemaker. She lets me come stay at her house at a moment’s notice, whenever I need a place to sleep. She’s empathetic. Supportive. Witty. Wise. EXTREMELY thoughtful. And smoking hot (as far as Mom’s go, anyway). I could go on, and on, and on. But what do I admire most about my Mom? I would have to say….it is her openness and curiosity. As a multi-generational, faithful Latter-Day Saint, she has always taught me tolerance of others (gays, intellectuals, feminists…Utahns. You name it). Once more, she is a fantastic example of a faithful, yet curious church member — who is not afraid to study things out, and to face the toughest questions.

And at 70ish (sorry, Mom!)….she isn’t showing any signs of slowing down.

Bored in Vernal:

My mom is a professional woman, an athlete, a musician and a fabulous mother!  She insisted we live up to our potential and told us we could do anything. And she’s always provided the example in her own actions. Near the end of a successful career as the principal of a private school, she returned to the university for an advanced degree (in the days when this wasn’t done very frequently). She told us of a birthday she had when she was required to be in class, where she didn’t know many of the other young students. Instead of feeling sorry for herself, she brought cupcakes and made it into a party! She makes friends wherever she goes. Last year she won a State running competition in her age group (70-80) and qualified to go to the Senior Olympics competition in California where she took second place in the 200 meter dash. The local newspaper reported: “With every hair in place, Nancy Lund raced to victory Friday in the women’s 200-meter dash, smashing age and gender stereotypes as she went.”

That’s my mom!

Mormon Heretic:

My mom really does Rock!  She has a way of making me never want to disappoint her–my dad doesn’t necessarily have this trait.  She has always been a good listener to me, even when she didn’t agree with some of my crazy ideas.  Growing up, she really was my best friend, and a wonderful confidant.  I have often said that my mother has the patience of Job.  She is a true saint, and follower of Christ.

I love her immensely.

Ray:

My mom was one of David O. McKay’s secretaries before she married my dad – one of the youngest to ever hold that job.  She was a top-notch executive secretary, but she walked away from employment to raise her children.  When her first four pregnancies ended in miscarriages and a still-born daughter, my parents almost gave up having any biological children – but she wanted to try one more time, so my dad agreed.  The birth of my sister, followed by me 13 months later, followed by twins 11 1/2 months later led to a diagnosis that almost stopped the growth of their family again – but she wanted more children, so my dad agreed.  My mother had eight children, and I never heard her yell or raise her voice once.  She loved us with all her heart, and she prayed for us with all her soul.  I am grateful for the example she was to us of a totally dedicated daughter of God. My mom is a pianist – and she instilled in us a love of music that will never die.  I sing because it is natural for me, but I play the piano because she is my mother.  My mom translated things into Braille for the blind, typing away on the old Braille machines most of you probably have never seen.  My mom is less than 5′ tall, and I still can see her sitting on the floor in the winter, under the desk (where the opening for the chair was), next to the heater, reading a book – generally an inspirational/spiritual book or the scriptures.   Happy Mother’s Day, Mom.  I love you!

Single Mormon Chick:

“A mother is not a person to lean on, but a person to make leaning unnecessary.” ― Dorothy Canfield Fisher
My mother did this, but what she also did, twenty years after I left home,was to allow me to lean on her. It was brief, but it was significant.
I was raised by the best kind of mother. Firm, but loving. Tough, but kind. Always helpful, but never interfering. She taught me about faith and enduring through hardship and trials. She showed me that a genuine smile can really brighten someones day, so be generous with those smiles.  I inherited her smile, so I try to share it as she always has. I don’t have children, but i find that in addition to her smile, I inherited her maternal instinct. It shines through when dealing with my nieces and nephews and even some of the women that I serve in my calling at church.  We all need mothering sometimes no matter how old we are.

I am grateful to have the best mom.

jmb275:

(I know the picture seems weird, but my mom will understand.)

You brought me into this world and have been on my side ever since. During the most painful moments in my life you have been there. You bandaged me up (and sometimes took me to the hospital ) after so many accidents. You supported me in my many eclectic endeavors in my youth. You wrote to me religiously when no one else did. You were willing to listen when no one else wanted to hear it. You were open to discussion when everyone else was against me. You affirmed me, and yet you did not agree with all my conclusions. You loved me when I wasn’t sure anyone else wanted to. I cannot conceive of a better mother for me than my own. Thank you mom, I love you!

FireTag:

My wife Charlotte became the primary breadwinner of our family after my heart attack, which led her to expand piano teaching from a form of service to a full time business. That would have been enough, but her sense of the Spirit calling her wouldn’t let her rest. She realized her young piano students and the sick and elderly had something to offer each other. She built on opportunities to provide entertainment at a local Methodist-affiliated nursing home to create a now-10-year old program of monthly recitals that involve dozens of students from most major world religions. When a friend contracted breast cancer, she committed herself to find a way to produce music CDs that would be given as gifts to offer hope to patients undergoing treatment at Johns Hopkins Medical Center in association with the Avon Foundation. That “one-time project” quickly led to a request for supplying further CDs to a women’s hospital in the United Arab Emirates, where breast cancer carries with it social stigma unappreciated in the West. Her students brought her stories of personal tragedies among their families and friends, and before she knew what hit her, she was creating a foundation that recorded and sent music CDs to children’s hospitals throughout the United States. While jockeying for position in a gas line with another car, she discovered that the driver of the other car was responsible for helping to coordinate programs for wounded soldiers returning from combat – so the foundation was launched on a project, still ongoing, to deliver music gifts to Fischer Houses and USO’s at bases throughout the US and in Germany. So here’s my tribute to a Mother in Israel whose willingness to act on the leadings of the Spirit awes me.

Joanna Brooks

My mom is a force to be reckoned with.  She’s done so much genealogy that the Church has dedicated a wing of the Granite Mountain Records Vault to her.  In heaven, there are at least ten Cougar Stadiums’ worth of baptized, endowed, and sealed ancestors waving white pom-poms and chanting her name.  My mom has taught Gospel Doctrine so well and for so many years that she carries a chalk pen in her purse.  Every day.  Just in case.  Always ready with the scripture reference.  Always ready with the Journal of Discourses quote.

I’m just saying:  Don’t mess with my mom. You’ve been warned.  My mom rules.

I love you, Mom.  Happy Mother’s Day

Hawkgrrrl

When I think of my mother it is usually as I hear her words escaping my mouth, or even just her tone.  I wonder how many generations of mothers have said these same words in this same tone.  My mother was a convert to the church when she was 28, and from her, I gained perspective on spiritual matters like meaningful dreams, being willing to do something even without rational justification, and a healthy dislike for intolerant and judgmental attitudes (that differ from my own anyway).  In addition to these gifts, my mother gave me important life skills like a ruthless German efficiency (we both have the milk put away before it ever hits the cereal), a strong commitment to order and cleanliness, above average vocabulary and spelling ability, cheap-skatery (that has served me well!), and a strong independent streak coupled with a sense of adventure.  And above all these gifts, I will always be grateful for the moments in life when my mother defended me against injustices, protected me from my own worst instincts, and cut me slack when I didn’t deserve it.  To me, those are the hallmarks of motherhood.  I love you, mom!

A very Happy Mother’s Day to your mothers and ours!

- Sacrificing Principle for Profit: Church Wildlife Enterprises and Hunting Preserves, Sunstone Magazine

I recently learned about the two Church-owned and sanctioned hunting preserves mentioned above and was stunned by what amounts to be the killing of animals for profit by the LDS Church.

Perhaps unlike other Church business enterprises, however, is the fact that missionaries were sent to “serve God in a most unusual way,” according to this July, 2000 article on Deseret News about the LDS Church’s hunting preserves.

According to the information packet from Deseret Land and Livestock obtained by the Sunstone speaker on this podcast, a guided archery hunt to bag an elk can fetch $11,500 plus tax and license, as of the year 2001.  (A more detailed price list can be accessed at around the 28 minute mark of the podcast.) When asked in a letter by concerned members of the Church how the hunting preserves could be ethically justified, the Presiding Bishopric (who oversees the hunting preserves) offered no response or explanation.

Now, many Mormons own a gun and many go hunting.  Millions of Americans go hunting every year and it’s a big industry.  So what’s the problem with the Church getting in on the profits?  Well, when we consider LDS scripture and statements by General Authorities such as the following, it’s clear that we’re not “just another hunting enterprise:”

“And surely, blood shall not be shed, only for meat, to save your lives; and the blood of every beast will I require at your hands.”  (Genesis 9:11, JST)

“I never could see why a man should be imbued with a blood-thirsty desire to kill and destroy animal life. I have known men—and they still exist among us—who enjoy what is, to them, the ‘sport’ of hunting birds and slaying them by the hundreds, and who will come in after a day’s sport boasting of how many harmless birds they have had the skill to slaughter … I do not believe any man should kill animals or birds unless he needs them for food, and then he should not kill innocent little birds that are not intended for food for man. I think it is wicked for men to thirst in their souls to kill almost everything which possesses animal life. It is wrong.” (President Joseph F. Smith, Gospel Doctrine, Vol. 1, pp. 371-372)

“Now, I would like to add some of my feelings concerning the unnecessary shedding of blood and destruction of life … And not less with reference to the killing of innocent birds is the wildlife of our country that live upon the vermin that are indeed enemies to the farmer and to mankind. It is not only wicked to destroy them, it is a shame, in my opinion. I think that this principle should extend not only to the bird life but to the life of all animals … because God gave it to them, and they were to be used only, as I understand, for food and to supply the needs of men.” (President Spencer W. Kimball, “Fundamental Principles to Ponder and Live,” The Ensign, November 1978, p. 45)

“Killing for sport is wrong…One day, to while away the slowly passing hours, I took my gun with the intention of indulging in a little amusement in hunting turkeys… From boyhood I had been particularly, and I may say strangely, attached to a gun. Hunting in the forests of Ohio was a pastime that to me possessed the most fascinating attractions. It never occurred to my mind that it was wrong-that indulging in “what was sport to me was death to them;” that in shooting turkeys, squirrels, etc., I was taking life that I could not give; therefore I indulged in the murderous sport without the least compunction of conscience.”  (Teachings of Lorenzo Snow, p.188-189)

Something happened between the days that those statements were made and the present day where sport hunting for profit within the Church was suddenly considered to be a good idea — so much so that missionaries were initially sent to tend to the grounds.  How did we get from the days where the Church fostered such a high regard for animal life that Joseph Smith prevented the unnecessary killing of rattlesnakes; when the pioneers would lay their hands upon their oxen to bless them; when their animals were valued as they were the key to their survival, and hunting was done only because it was necessary to sustain their lives — to the days when they’re hunted down for recreation and profit?  What does that say about our culture and our religion? 

Did I miss a change in LDS teaching concerning reverence for the Lord’s animal creations?  Or is the only change that we’ve put a price on their heads?

George Q. Cannon, counselor in the First Presidency under Brigham Young and editor of the Juvenile Instructor, probably wrote more concerning the humane treatment of animals than any member of the Church.  In 1868 he began writing editorials advocating kindness to animals and in 1897 he founded a Sunday School-sponsored “Humane Day,” which became an annual event.  Most members of the Church know nothing about it, but this program continued in the Church for the next twenty years.

It is perhaps a bit ironic that leaders of the Church — in the days of when members were more dependent on animals for their food and clothing — were so frequently vocal about the humane treatment of animals, emphasizing that we should never take their lives unless it is to save our own, whereas today — when we are much less dependent on animals for our survival, and are supposedly much more enlightened on the subject of animal intelligence, emotion, and sensitivity to pain – the leaders of the Church are mostly silent on the issue of animal welfare and see fit to send missionaries to tend to sport hunting grounds. 

 In the Deseret News article, referring to Elder Huff, who tended to Westlake, it says:

“Instead of knocking on doors, he spends his time bush- whacking in the thick brush along the southwest shores of Utah Lake, looking for the perfect place to nurture his birds by planting numerous stands of corn, rye and other grains….

Large holding tanks that are no longer used for farming now provide high-profile watering holes throughout the game preserve, attracting not only birds but rabbits, coyotes, deer and even antelope.”

Interestingly enough, President Joseph F. Smith made a very specific statement referring directly to hunting elk, deer and antelope, among others:

“I do not believe any man should kill animals or birds unless he needs them for food, and then he should not kill innocent little birds that are not intended for food for man. I think it is wicked for men to thirst in their souls to kill almost everything which possesses animal life. It is wrong. I have been surprised at prominent men whom I have seen whose very souls seemed to be athirst for the shedding of animal blood. They go off hunting deer, antelope, elk, anything they can find, and what for? “Just the fun of it!” Not that they are hungry and need the flesh of their prey, but just because they love to shoot and to destroy life. I am a firm believer, with reference to these things, in the simple words of one of the poets:

“Take not way the life you cannot give,
For all things have an equal right to live.”

Answers to Gospel Questions, Vol.4, p.48

President Smith seems to predict with amazing accuracy what is going on at places like Westlake, where ”prominent men,” (perhaps the “doctors, dentists and attorneys from Payson north to Ogden, including Park City,” that Elder Huff refers to in the Deseret News article) seem to be so “athirst for the shedding of animal blood” that they will literally spend tens of thousands of dollars to “go off hunting deer, antelope, elk, anything they can find, and what for?  Just the fun of it!”

Indeed, a very elite, lucrative kind of “fun” that had (as of 2001) a six-year waiting list.

Information about these hunting preserves is very sparse, but according to Jim Catano, who contacted the Church’s public affairs department and was “told by the director that he would answer my questions, a second-tier media handler was assigned to inform me weeks later that they would not answer any of the questions I’d submitted in preparation for this article.”  (The article he was referring to can be accessed here.)  After deciding to drop into Westlake unannounced and being given a tour by manager Kevin Albrecht, he found out the following in 2001:

“Our efforts in bringing our opposition to the attention of the Church hierarchy have already had an impact. Not only do missionaries no longer staff the facility but “canned hunts” in which birds that have been raised in captivity are released just before the hunters go in are no longer sponsored. Kevin said he had had several meetings with upper management as a result of our activism, and canned hunts were one of the first things to be changed.

He told me that in a meeting he recently attended of commercial hunting facility managers, people from other parts of the country were surprised how low the daily bag limit is (2 per day as opposed to “as many as you can shoot for a price”) and that the facility no longer plants hatched birds but relies only on wild reproduction. He informed me how strict rule enforcement is and that members must report birds they think they’ve wounded but can’t find as part of their daily limit. He’s fairly confident that members do this although I have my doubts that all do.”

Since information about these preserves is limited, I decided to get in contact with Jim in order to ask him whether he had any new information since his update in 2001.  He said that he had contacted Farm Management Corporation (wholly owned by the LDS Church to run its farm properties) sometime prior to 2003, but they “refused to talk to me and give me any more information on the subject at a certain point.”

So, while there have been positive changes as the result of protest about the initial practice of canned hunting, Jim says that it “didn’t change (his) mind about the merits of the existence of this facility.”  The end result has remained unchanged: animals being hunted down for Church profit.

This isn’t about sustaining the lives of doctors and lawyers or meat going to waste.  Who eats coyote?  And $11,500 for a few elk steaks?  This is about the number of animals being purposely multiplied by creating the perfect conditions and attracting them to the preseve for the purpose of being killed “just for fun” – not because they need the flesh to live on, as President Smith stated above. 

Ironically, The Humane Society of the United States  has a webpage dedicated to praising the LDS Church for its teachings about animal life.  Do we deserve the praise?  Or have we given nothing but lip service to our supposed respect for God’s creations and their right to life?

Despite past teachings and statements by General Authorities on the subject of hunting and the taking of animal life, many of you have no personal problem with sport hunting.  Obviously, you have the legal right to hunt and I realize that I’m unlikely to change your personal views on the matter.  I ask you, however, whether you would be troubled by any of the following purely hypothetical situations:

• The Church preaches against alcohol consumption, but purchases a vineyard in California and profits from the sale of the grapes being harvested to produce wine.
• The Church teaches that pornography is wrong, but has a stake in a popular fashion magazine featuring scantily-clothed women in sexual poses.
• The Church opposes abortion but owns property in Florida that an abortion clinic rents.

Would you be prepared to defend these hypothetical scenarios in the same way that you defend the Church’s hunting preserves?

Of all the good ways to make a buck, is this the best we can do?  Are we or are we not, as a Church, sacrificing principle for profit?

Gerald E. Jones stated the following in in an Ensign article from August, 1972 called “The Gospel And Animals:”

“The prophets have been consistent in reminding men of their duty to the animal world. As the Lord told Noah, “… the blood of every beast will I require at your hands.” (JST, Gen. 9:11.) It is our sacred stewardship to care for the earth and all the creatures on it.”

The prophets have been consistent.  What about the Church?

I’ll leave you with a quote from Joseph F. Smith from an editorial published in the Juvenile Instructor in April, 1927:

“… The unnecessary destruction of life is a distinct spiritual loss to the human family. Men cannot worship the Creator and look with careless indifference upon his creations. The love of all life helps man to the enjoyment of a better life. It exalts the spiritual nature of those in need of divine favor.”

I have lived here in the UK -London for 20 years now and when friends and family come over they sometimes comment on how green we are over here. They observe that most of us dry our clothes on the  line, drive much smaller cars, live in shoe box’s compared to the average size of an American home, walk to the shops, use long life low wattage low energy bulbs, changing windows over for double glazing, doubling up on insulation, are becoming more obsessive about recycling, drive low emission high mpg diesel cars, save left over food, food portions at restaurants smaller and public transport used far more often and readily available.

It amazes some of the Brits when they go to Utah to see how big the houses are especially in many cases for so few people who live in them.  Huge Ford Explorers, steak dinners that could feed a typical family of four.  When they go for the first time they come back thinking that it’s a land of excess.

I know there have been many of the changes I have described above happening in Utah and throughout the states but there is not quite the buzz or emphasis on it that I see here at least IMO!

I also have this theory that Mormons aren’t into green issues because

1. Many believe the second coming will be coming soon (God the creator of this earth will be able to clean up the planet in a second, our efforts are pointless.
2. We have to get our priorities right – family, missionary work, ward service, temple work.  Being green is definitely not a priority now
3. If it was important the prophet and apostles would be vigorously emphasizing it during conference.
4. It would be stressed and accentuated in the manuals
5. Gas guzzling cars – God created fossil fuels for our use.  He created this earth and when we run out God will inspire man to come up with an alternative fuel – he always provides for us.
6. God made fossil fuel for our use and we are fortunate to be Americans and live in a place where fuel is cheap and are blessed to be here.
7. We have proven ourselves in the pre-existence and in this life and we deserve the just rewards for being faithful members
8. An attitude of the more physical stuff I have cars, houses, boats shows were being blessed abundantly
9. We have been hearing a lot about fuel and energy—about their high cost and limited supply, our unsafe and unpredictable dependence on their suppliers, and the need for new and sustainable sources of energy. I leave the discussion of these complicated issues to leaders of government and industry. The fuel I want to discuss is spiritual fuel. Elder L. Tom Perry

Please discuss

]]> http://mormonmatters.org/2009/02/23/why-arent-mormons-green/feed/ 56 http://mormonmatters.org/2009/02/21/on-the-perfect-smile/ http://mormonmatters.org/2009/02/21/on-the-perfect-smile/#comments Sat, 21 Feb 2009 20:19:26 +0000 Andrew S http://mormonmatters.org/?p=4243 I really don’t know if it’s just me, but have you ever noticed that there are a lot of LDS dentists?

I mean, sure, we’ve already heard from reliable sources that Mormons like professions, but what is the deal?

What Mormons Like often spins off aspects of note in Mormon culture in a lighthearted way, but the scary thing is that I usually understand where the guy is coming from — for the vast majority of his posts, when I read them, I think, “I can definitely see that.”

And so, as he notes that Dentistry seems to be the true calling of Mormons, I can’t help but agree. My home ward is a military ward, and generally, we can count on having four or five dentists moving in or moving out at any time of the year (and I guess that’s not even counting the permanent dentists and the dentists in the other ward in the area).

Really, I can only ask, what is the deal?

I guess it probably isn’t just the easy access to medicine. But it does seem spot on that the careers that seem to be popular in the church 1) have big bucks (or big buck potential, 2) a useful skill, and 3) some entrepreneurialism. I can understand that dentistry is a useful skill…but still. Really?

The source of power?

Could it be that LDS culture has such a premium on that standardized cleancut missionary look (complete with perfect smile) that makes dentistry seem more appealing? It seems kinda silly to conjecture on that alone.

I guess the question really should be to ask if this isn’t just my imagination. In your anecdotal evidence, do there seem to be a disproportionate number of dentists? What are other careers that seem to stick out in your mind? Are there any official statistics about popular jobs for church members?

If you are a dentist and LDS, can you say that the church had anything to do with it? Why dentistry? This isn’t necessarily 20 questions, but it certainly appears to be an odd social phenomenon.

Before you give your opinion, here are some more specific questions to consider about an actual government with Jesus at the helm:

1. What kind of government.
   • Will the earth be a theocracy (like Iran) or will there be separation of church and state like in the U.S. (except the deep South and Utah)?
   • Would Jesus be subject to elections?  What if He got voted out?
   • Will there still be dissenting opinions?  Different political parties?  What if someone disagrees with Jesus?  What would He do?  Go all “cleanse the temple” on the Senate?
   • Is Jesus a Democrat or Republican  (remember he hung out with both poor people and tax collectors)?  Will He cut through pork barrel spending with a double-edged sword of fire?  Is Jesus good with money (wasn’t He keeping His money in a live fish last time)?
2. Role of churches.
   • Will there be a “church” during the millenium?  Why would there be?  Isn’t the church like the babysitter while the Savior’s away?  Remember, there wasn’t a church per se when He was on the earth.  He created a movement.  The disciples created a church to keep the movement going and provide support to new followers.  At the least, He could reduce the three-hour block.
   • Will there be various churches then?  Will some be non-Christian?
   • Will there be a mass conversion to one faith or at least Christianity?  Will there be apostates after that?
3. Culture.
   • What kind of shows would be on TV?  Would everyone be self-censoring?  Would there be less taking of the name of God in vain?
   • Would WWJD shirts & caps be irrelevant or an even bigger seller now that we know the answer to the question?
4. Jesus as a Leader.  What kind of political leader would Jesus be?
   • A great communicator (if you have ears to hear anyway).
   • Your basic delegator.
   • He might host some amazing parties (His reputation as a wine-bibber), but none of the cool people will be invited (expect guys in tin foil hats and aging hookers based on His friends the first time around).
   • Would He do interviews with Larry King?  Stephen Colbert?

So, do you take this idea literally?  If so, what do you think it will be like?  Do you fall into the “it will be so different than things are now that we can’t fathom it” (because if so, I guess I would just say “people are people”)?  Discuss.

Some quotes from members around the web:
“[Forcing] me to pay for the upkeep of another is simply the application of Satan’s plan here on earth.” (Comment from post on The Life I am Choosing…)

“Socialist policies and governments just result in greater economic extremes, i.e. greater poverty. More serious than that however, is the reduction of personal freedom and liberty… The Great Plan of Happiness is founded upon LIBERTY. Free Agency is the Lord’s plan, bondage (to any degree) is Satan’s.” (Comment from post on Welcome To My Soapbox)

“Capitalism… is the only economic model under which true charity may be performed. Any other method of government that compels its citizens to give up a portion of their money is practicing a false altruism that puts us on a slippery slope to absolute communism. Force should be shunned at all times, but especially when used as a method of supposedly helping those in need.” (Connor Boyack)

These beliefs seem to be quite common in the bloggernacle, and they often incite all kinds of vitriol. Simply put, many LDS people (don’t even get me started on Glenn Beck) are convinced that taxes used for helping the poor & needy take away our most valuable gift from God, our agency.

Elder Oaks asserted that while many laws and taxes necessarily restrict our freedoms to some extent, they can never take away our agency. Sorry about the length, it’s just really good:

The science of government is a consideration of the procedures by which and the extent to which the official representatives of one group of citizens can impose restrictions on the freedom of another group. Decisions on the extent to which government power should restrict the freedom of individuals are among the most difficult decisions we face in an organized society… How many taxes should we extract, and what compulsory functions should government perform with them? … These are all questions of freedom.

We have to accept some government limitations on freedom if we who live in communities are to have life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. A condition of uninhibited individual freedom would allow the strong to oppress the weak. It would allow the eccentric desires of one person to restrict the freedom of many. Interferences with our freedom do not deprive us of our free agency. When Pharaoh put Joseph in prison, he restricted Joseph’s freedom, but he did not take away his free agency…

The Lord… established the Constitution of the United States to assure “that every man may act… according to the moral agency which I have given unto him” (D&C 101:78). In other words, God established our Constitution to give us the vital political freedom necessary for us to act upon our personal choices in civil government. This revelation shows the distinction between agency (the power of choice), which is God-given, and freedom, the right to act upon our choices, which is protected by the Constitution and laws of the land.

Freedom is obviously of great importance, but as these examples illustrate, freedom is always qualified in mortality. Consequently, when we oppose a government-imposed loss of freedom, it would be better if we did not conduct our debate in terms of a loss of our free agency, which is impossible under our doctrine. We ought to focus on the legality or the wisdom of the proposed restriction of our freedom.

For those of you who think socialized medicine is the plan of the devil because it takes away our agency, Dallin H. Oaks, apparently, does not agree with you.

What do you think? Do taxes that are used for social purposes or individual welfare restrict our God-given agency? Is capitalism the only system under which “true charity” can be performed? Or should we vote to restrict some of our ‘freedom of the pocketbook’ for the benefit of others?

Alma 1:26

And the elders or high priests who are appointed to assist the bishop as counselors in all things, are to have their families supported out of the property which is consecrated to the bishop, for the good of the poor, and for other purposes, as before mentioned… And the bishop, also, shall receive his support, or a just remuneration for all his services in the church.

Unlike local leaders, who maintain their normal vocations while serving in church assignments, General Authorities set aside their careers to devote their full time to the ministry of their office.  The living allowance given General Authorities rarely if ever equals the earnings they sacrifice to serve full-time in the Church.

Marvin K. Gardner, “General Authorities,” p. 539, Encyclopedia of Mormonism

Discuss, my friends: