Why does the Mormon Church Meddle in Politics?

The LDS Church has a long standing policy on politics. It has three components to it:

In the United States, while many Mormon politicians are considered conservative, they are found in all political parties. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Democrat from Nevada, often disagrees politically with Republican Mitt Romney, former presidential candidate. Yet both are active and faithful LDS, who are allowed the freedom to make their own political choices without Church interference.

In other nations, LDS often are less conservative than their American counterparts, and are also encouraged to be prayerfully involved in their own communities and nations.

These policies are guided by LDS doctrine. Doctrine and Covenants 134 is a declaration of beliefs regarding government. Its contents contain...guiding precepts...

From the article: In the United States, while many Mormon politicians are considered conservative, they are found in all political parties. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Democrat from Nevada, often disagrees politically with Republican Mitt Romney, former presidential candidate. Yet both are active and faithful LDS...

There ya have it...Harry Reid is an active, faithful Mormon with the official church title of "home teacher."

How much authority does a "home teacher" have in the Mormon church? Well, here, allow me to answer that quoting Lds "prophet" Spencer W. Kimball, from his 1981 Deseret Book Co. book, President Kimball Speaks Out:

"It should be remembered...that not just the General Authorities or the stake or ward or mission authorities have the priesthood with power to heal. Numerous brethren throughout the Church, including home teachers, have the authority to bless; and their administration or blessing, combined with grat faith from the blessed one, can bring about spectacular healings." (p. 77)

Y'all didn't know that Harry Reid was a potential "spectacular healer" in the Mormon Church, did ya?

From the article: In other nations, LDS often are less conservative than their American counterparts...

You see, so many FREEPERS engage in stereotyping Mormons 'cause American Mormons are all they know; yet as this article written by a Mormon points out, LDS are often "less conservative" in other countries.

Another media myth we see floating around about Mormon males is that they provide some great leadership because of their two-year missions. Yet as of 1981, in the same book mentioned above, Kimball reported that 2/3rds of Mormon males didn't go on such missions!

Therefore, so many are generalizing about 100% of Mormon males when Kimball said many stakes had only 25% of males who served! (Range of 25-40%)

From the article: These policies are guided by LDS doctrine. Doctrine and Covenants 134 is a declaration of beliefs regarding government. Its contents contain...guiding precepts...

Well, let's look at a Mormon "guiding precept" found in that same Mormon "scriptural" passage -- Doctrine & Covenants 134 -- that this Mormon author conviently doesn't mention...shall we?

Hit the rewind button. It’s mid-1835. Lds foundational "prophet" Joseph Smith is churning out new “Scripture.” Smith is taking aim at new converts. But in that time, did he believe the Mormon “gospel” to be aimed at slaves? (No, not unless express “permission” was granted by their “owners”).

Could you imagine a verse still applicable today—one similar to the Mormon scripture of Doctrine & Covenants 134:12—which would tell you in effect that yes, the gospel was for women who are sexually trafficked--but only if their Pimp-owner says "Yes?".

I mean, imagine if you will, for a moment, that you are the God of the universe; God of every planet; God of the earth; Creator of every person. Imagine for a moment you are speaking forth universal eternal truth. And then imagine that someone claims you (as God) made the following “Scriptural” statement:

”We believe it just to preach the gospel to the nations of the earth, and warn the righteous to save themselves from the corruption of the world; but we do not believe it right to interfere with bond-servants, neither preach the gospel to, nor baptize them contrary to the will and wish of their masters, nor to meddle with or influence them in the least to cause them to be dissatisfied with their situations in this life, thereby jeopardizing the lives of men; such interference we believe to be unlawful and unjust, and dangerous to the peace of every government allowing human beings to be held in servitude.”

D&C 134:12 is LDS “Doctrine” that has never been removed or rescinded!!! This passages makes it quite clear – in contrast to the apostle Paul who vied for the religious freedom of Onesimus while treating him as a full Christian brother and encouraged Philemon to do the same--somehow, LDS think that "religious freedom" applies to everyone except slaves!

D&C 134:12, written in 1835 pro-slavery America, made it quite clear that instead of the Mormons having a universal god who issued eternal truth applicable to all cultures, he is instead an American-sounding god who speaks only in King James English & was beholden to the American slavery industry.

D&C 134:12 "settles" the issue for the Mormon: Are slaves & trafficking victims worthy of the "gospel?" LDS Answer? Nope! "neither preach the gospel to, nor baptize them..." says LDS "Scripture.

And why not? Well, says D&C 134:12: We don't want ya ta meddle with the Mastuhs' business “property,” or to say it as precisely as LDS "scripture" says it: nor to meddle with or influence them in the least to cause them to be dissatisfied with their situations in this life...

(Nah. We can't have unhappy slaves or trafficking victims now, can we? Too disturbing to their "stations" of life, eh?)

Now what are the ultimate reasons for this again? D&C 134:12 provides the answer:

Reason #1: ...such interference we believe to be unlawful and unjust... (There ya have it...wouldn't want to be "unjust" by giving slaves the gospel & baptizing them, would ya?)

Reason #2: ...and dangerous to the peace of every government allowing human beings to be held in servitude. (And, of course, the "closer": Wouldn't want to disturb the peace & quiet of slavery-sanctioning governments, now would ya?)

Also, keep in mind that each Mormon, when determined by their bishop as to whether they are eligible for temple access, are asked interview questions.

The 19th-century version of Q. #2 asked by Mormon bishops of their members -- the longest Q asked was this: Do you speak against...any principle taught in the Bible, Book of Mormon, book of Doctrine and Covenants...

If this question had been retained, contemporary Mormons speaking against polygamy would have to answer, "Oh, yes, I speak against D&C 132 all the time!!!" Or, if they baptized a woman caught in the sex trafficking industry as a sex slave, they would need to say, "Oh, yes, I've directly opposed D&C 134:12!!!"

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.