Reagan simply didn't detest the Mormons enough for some of y'all. I'm sorry, but you're going to have to live with that fact.
Posted on 02/19/2012 7:03:57 AM PST by JustTheTruth
... Mitt Romney said he was "not concerned about the very poor" but would fix America's social safety net ...
But if he wants to see a welfare system that lets almost no one fall through the cracks while at the same time ensuring that its beneficiaries don't become lifelong dependents, he could look to his own church.
(snip)
Launched during the Great Depression, the Mormon welfare system was designed by church leaders as a way to match the ... unemployed faithful with ... temporary labor. As storehouse manager ... explains, goods and services were traded so that if a father needed food for his family he could get some in exchange for, say, repairing the fence of a widow down the road.
(snip)
... "Our primary purpose was to set up insofar as it might be possible, a system under which the curse of idleness would be done away with, the evils of a dole abolished and independence, industry, thrift and self respect be once more established among our people. The aim of the Church is help the people to help themselves. Work is to be re-enthroned as the ruling principle of the lives of our Church membership."
(snip)
. . . the primary source of capital support is the Mormons' monthly fast, as church members are asked to contribute what they would have spent on two meals. Many give much more, says Mr. Foster.
It is safe to assume that Mr. Romney's (...) donations are supporting the kind of safety net that government can never hope to create. Jesus may have said the poor will always be with you, but he didn't say Medicaid would.
(WSJ - must excerpt)
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Your babies are so spoiled. But I can go you one better...In my daughters garage, she has a heat light for her barn cats and they use it in the winter....spoiled cats and goats.....LOL (But under the heat lamp is a little bed for them to sleep in,) but our goats got heat lamp area’s when they were giving birth and for 3 days after...then they got kicked out with the rest of the flock into the barn...Kidding season in Michigan is March. Can we all say COLD for a wet new born kid....
THX 1138
different blog
more about where the money goes
LDS Inc. owns .7% of Florida
07.18.2009
· profxm ·
Posted in Money, Tithing
My brother-in-law came to visit last weekend. As science geeks, we tried to see a shuttle launch while he was here (the launch was canceled 11 minutes before liftoff because of weather – ugh!). On the way to watch the launch we stopped by Deseret Citrus and Cattle Ranch to see the Mormon Church’s ranching operations:
LDS Inc. owns .7% of Florida
07.18.2009 · profxm · Posted in Money, Tithing
My brother-in-law came to visit last weekend. As science geeks, we tried to see a shuttle launch while he was here (the launch was canceled 11 minutes before liftoff because of weather – ugh!). On the way to watch the launch we stopped by Deseret Citrus and Cattle Ranch to see the Mormon Church’s ranching operations:
sign by main entrance
Alas, as former Mormons, we failed to consider that they wouldn’t offer tours on Sunday. But we stopped by the Visitor’s Center anyway and drove around a bit. Here’s the Visitor’s Center:
the Visitor’s Center
I knew from the Deseret Ranches’ website and this wikipedia page that the ranch was big, but actually driving around the ranch made me wonder just how big it is. So, I spent a good 10 hours or so trying to see if I could map out just how big the ranch is. After all that time, I realized it was simply too big for me to easily map out by myself. But, the research I did do provided me with some fascinating information.
First off, thanks to a corporation registration website in Florida, I was able to track the name changes of the holding companies for the ranch over the years, eventually finding the current name. It used to be Deseret Properties of Florida, Inc., Deseret Farms, Inc., Deseret Farms Inc., Deseret Ranches of Florida, Inc., Deseret Livestock Company, Deseret Properties of Florida, Inc., Deseret Ranches of Florida, Inc. (1), Deseret Ranches of Florida, Inc. (2), but it is now called Farmland Reserve, Inc.. Once I finally found the current holding company, I was able to visit the property tax appraisers’ websites for the three main counties where the ranch is located: Osceola, Orange, and Brevard. On those sites I found all the property listings of Farmland Reserve, Inc. Here’s a summary of what I found after I added them all up:
County Acres Value
Osceola 182,685.50 $763,252,812.00
Orange 64,843.57 $208,286,252.00
Brevard 41,559.66 $12,552,680.00
Hillsborough-FRI 3,952.94 $30,145,012.00
Total 293,041.67 $1,014,236,756.00
Yep, you’re eyes do not deceive you – LDS, Inc. has more than $1 billion in for-profit property in Florida. The acres convert to 457 square miles, or .7% of the State of Florida. I can’t say for certain, but my guess is that LDS, Inc. is the largest landholder in the state behind the government. For comparative purposes, Disney owns 25,000 acres (that’s all of their properties, not just Disney World), or about 1/12th of the land owned by the LDS, Inc. holding company.
To tally all of this information, I actually built a spreadsheet that you’re welcome to download and peruse. I also started drawing the land parcels in Google Earth, but once I realized just how many there were, I decided I just didn’t have the time. I did complete all the land in Orange County and started on the land in Osceola County. If you want to see the maps or, better yet, if you’d like to improve/complete the maps, you can download them here: Orange County, Osceola County. If you do download them and improve them, please send me a copy of the updated versions as I’d like to have them.
As I was searching through these listings, on a whim I decided to see if Farmland Reserve, Inc. owned any property in my county, Hillsborough, FL, which is all the way across the state from Osceola and Brevard Counties. Turns out they do (see above table). That’s in addition to the $12 million owned by “Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints Corporation”, which is the company that holds the churches. This makes me wonder just how much property Farmland Reserve Inc. owns. I checked a couple additional counties in Florida but didn’t find any more property.
One of the reasons I wanted to visit the ranch is because my aunt and uncle recently completed a mission there (I should have gone while they were there, but never made it). The amazing thing about the fact that they served a mission there is that they did zero proselytizing and they paid to serve their mission. So, what did they do? My uncle was a high school shop teacher. He knows how to build and repair homes. So, they put him to work building homes on the ranch. He’s round 70 years old and was working 12 hour days 6 days a week for 18 months. His wife ran some of the tours and did other odd jobs around the ranch. When I found out that my aunt and uncle were paying for the opportunity to work for Farmland Reserve, Inc., a billion dollar for profit company, I was not very happy. Not only did the LDS Church use tithing money to buy the ranch (I’m assuming, maybe it was profit from some other business venture), but now it makes people pay for the opportunity to make one of their subsidiaries money. How is that at all ethical?
To wit, the obvious question is: How does the billion dollar ranching operation of the LDS Church further its religious aims? Why does a religion need a billion dollar ranch? Anyone?
Finally, all this searching around for property owned by LDS, Inc. led me to realize that we, the MSP community, could probably put together a pretty good estimate of the property holdings of LDS, Inc. (in the US at least) fairly easily if we distributed the work among us. If each person looked up the holdings of LDS, Inc. in their county and put them in a spreadsheet, we could aggregate them and keep a running total of known property value of the LDS religion. It would make a cool little widget for MSP to display. Thoughts?
Views: 10723Post to Facebook262626262626262626Post to Twitter333333333Add to RedditSend via GmailSend via E-mail programPrint with PrintFriendlyPost to BloggerGet Shareaholic for Internet Explorer0
170 Responses to “LDS Inc. owns .7% of Florida”
« 1 2 3 4
151 The Richmeister Again says: August 15, 2011 at 10:27 pm
Hey Guys,
Thanks for the replying.
@China Blanco I’d be glad to Latter Day Main Streeters a discount from my safety warehouse, but our pricing is a bit difficult. I own another business that sells all kinds of casual clothing, like sweatshirts, t-shirts, etc.: http://sweatshirtstation.com. I just created a discount code for people who visit this page to use: mormonsareflippinawesome (Yes, the coupon code says “Mormons are flippin’ awesome”, and it’s a joke)
@Kuri I’m sure there are all kinds of arguments that could be made about how General Authorities of the Church are supported, and we’d have just as many rebuttals to any attempts to smear the Brethren. The simple answer to all of the criticisms is this: anyone who knows anything about the good men and women who lead the LDS Church also knows that they could never be seriously accused of glutting themselves upon the labors of us common members. That simply doesn’t happen.
A suggestion I have for profxm and his buddies is this, instead of rallying the troops to try to figure out how to make the Church’s good works look like they’re evil, why don’t you guys get out there and help with the next stake assignment to pick oranges, bottle peanut butter, or can food for those who need help? Your energy would be much better spent and you’d have a way better time helping instead of chucking stuff at us from the peanut gallery. I’ve helped load beef onto conveyors and packaged hot dogs at one of our meat packing plants, canned all kinds of stuff at the bishop’s storehouses, picked oranges, peaches, and other fruit at our vineyards, and thoroughly loved every minute of being able to give back after having been financially blessed myself. The only qualm I might have about all of those activities is that they always make me wear a hair net even though I’m bald, but I can easily get over that. Give it a try folks. See what it means to serve: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzjvE0ehnEI
0 likes
152 Chino Blanco says: August 15, 2011 at 10:53 pm
Dude, did you call me a girl? It’s C-h-i-n-O, with an O. But the discount is much appreciated. Thanks. Weirdly enough, though, when I tried that discount code, it added 15% to the total. What’s up with that? (just jokin’)
You know, I worked on welfare farms all the time growing up. And my dad has continued to volunteer many spare hours to one church project or the other.
Here’s my question to the church leadership: Why don’t you run things so I don’t feel like my dad’s being treated like a chump? I don’t like how there are two classes of Mormons: those who give, give, give and those who profit, profit, profit. Or is there some other reason that LDS finances are stamped Top Secret?
It’s a racket.
1 likes
153 kuri says: August 16, 2011 at 8:06 am
Rich, I don’t care if GAs get paid by the church; I think they probably should. After all, “the laborer is worthy of his hire,” as some guy once said. But you’re the one who quoted scripture as if they don’t. I guess you didn’t get the memo: Now that GAs get paid directly from church funds, an unpaid clergy is no longer a sign of the One True Church.
1 likes
154 Richard says: August 17, 2011 at 1:23 pm
I have a strong feeling that Kuri and Chino (Sorry about calling you China, but my fingers seem to be trained to type those letters in that sequence. I lived there for a year and I have a lot of friends over there.) won’t change your minds no matter what arguments are made or what evidence is given. You’re pretty set on calling the LDS Church’s finances black regardless of what color they really are.
Regarding the “unpaid clergy is no longer” comment, my brother (a bishop) gets no compensation for the 30+ hours he puts into his calling. I’d call that unpaid. I get nothing for playing the organ on Sunday. I also don’t get paid to head up the scout committee. I’ve never been paid for any of my church callings, although I’ve had ones that required a lot of time and energy. In short, we do in fact have an unpaid clergy.
The essence of this conversation is the accusation made here that somehow there are fat cats at the head of the Church who are living lives of luxury and oppressing members of the Church to finance their lifestyles. There’s simply no evidence anywhere that supports that claim. I’ve seen the schedules of some of the Brethren. I certainly don’t envy the work load they carry. Frankly, the accusations I’ve seen by anti-Mormons against the leaders of the LDS Church come from a purposeful, agenda-based ignorance about who they are and what their callings mean. If your anti-Mormon sentiment isn’t based in a bedrock of unjustified contempt for the Church, I invite you to educate yourselves:
Elder Bednar describes an apostles role:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBtE5QbcDbU
Conversations with LDS Church leaders: http://feeds.lds.org/LDSConversations
0 likes
155 kuri says: August 17, 2011 at 9:44 pm
Rich, you’re the one who quoted Alma saying he never received a penny from the church. It’s not my fault if GAs don’t live that way.
0 likes
156 JJL9 says: August 18, 2011 at 8:24 am
I can’t say that I have read all 155 of the previous comments, but I read the first 50 and also the last few, and I can say that one thing is clear.
Those of you that are questioning the ethics of the Church want to appear to be sincere, objective observers. You want to put yourselves out there as not feeling any hostility toward the Church and not being prejudiced in any way, but just sincerely asking questions that you think need to be asked.
The problem is that when your questions are answered in logicial and concise ways that clearly put to rest any concerns you might have, you refuse to follow logic and reason. You twist words, you change your arguments, you cling to logical fallacies, or even to positions that have no basis.
The Lord has asked us to pay tithing. He has clarified this policy through his living Prophets. If you know this, then you also know that the blessings you receive for obeying this commandment far exceed the difficulties you encounter as a result of paying your tithing. If you don’t believe this, then fine, don’t pay tithing. Nobody is forcing anyone to do anything. In fact, your continued obsession that people that are struggling should be given an exception and not required to pay tithing, would injure those parties and take from them the blessings that they receive when they pay their tithing. How about you just leave it up to them to decide for themselves?
Chino, as to your question, “Why don’t you run things so I don’t feel like my dad’s being treated like a chump?”
If you feel that way, that’s your problem. Your dad is probably understands that the blessings he receives now and in the hereafter are far greater than the time and effort he is providing. That’s the way it works. We are always indebted to the Lord. When we sacrifice of ourselves for his cause, he immediately blesses us to an even greater extent. The more we try to pay off our debt, the more it accumulates as he always provides us with more than we have given. You may not know that, but you could.
0 likes
157 Don says: October 10, 2011 at 6:09 pm
There is a saying in the church…. ” Member who can’t live the gospel can leave the church but they can’t leave it alone.”
0 likes
158 profxm says: October 10, 2011 at 7:21 pm
Hi Don. If that makes you feel better about your religion, feel free to believe it.
0 likes
159 kuri says: October 10, 2011 at 10:18 pm
I know a saying too: “De Nile ain’t just a river in Egypt.”
0 likes
160 dpc says: October 11, 2011 at 10:20 am
I don’t like this post at all. I’m not sure what the issue is. Is there something morally wrong about a religious group holding a certain amount of property? To the extent that this post argues for that position, it is basically a rehashing of economic antimsemitism with a different target group. I find it shocking that such an attitude would be seen as acceptable in this day and age.
Plus having practiced corporate law and dabbled in tax law, I don’t see why the big hullabaloo about the profit/non-profit divide. Just because an organization is non-profit, it does not follow that its senior executives and directors are not well-paid or that they are recipients of vast benefits. Just because an organization is “for-profit” does not mean that it’s a big, bad entity that squeezes its customers for every last ounce of cash that it can. If the ranch holdings were non-profit, the money it made would have to go back into the ranch itself because of innurement laws. Because it is run as a “for-profit” organization, the Mormon church (as the sole shareholder, presumably) can declare dividends and reinvest that money elsewhere, possibly for humanitarian goals.
0 likes
161 profxm says: October 11, 2011 at 10:27 am
dpc,
The questions that make this practice sketchy in my opinion are:
1) Why does a religion need a for-profit ranch?
2) Why is it okay for people to volunteer for a for-profit ranch owned by a religion but not okay for people to volunteer for, say, McDonald’s?
3) Why are religions that run for-profit subsidiaries not required to report the profits and expenses from those?
4) Why doesn’t the LDS Church voluntarily report how much money it makes from this and where the money goes?
Maybe this ranch is run purely for humanitarian reasons, but neither your nor I know that to be the case.
0 likes
162 JJL9 says: October 11, 2011 at 10:33 am
1) Every single religion and/or non-profit and/or charity requires money to fund their religious and/or non-profit activities and/or charitable activities. One way to fund those is to take donations and simply spend the money. Another way is to take donations, invest the money, and generate a perpetual stream that can be used for those purposes. Sounds like an incredibly wise way to do it.
2) It is perfectly ok for people to volunteer at, say McDonald’s. Why would you possibly think it’s not?
3) Why would they be? What business is it of yours? You are not required to report your profits and expenses to the public. Why should they be? Why should anyone be?
4) Because it’s none of the public’s business. It’s none of your business. Why do you even care? Is anyone asking you to report where your money goes?
It’s none of your busienss whether “this ranch is run purely for humanitarian reasons”. It has nothing to do with you. Why do you even care?
0 likes
163 chanson says: October 11, 2011 at 10:43 amIt’s none of your busienss whether “this ranch is run purely for humanitarian reasons”. It has nothing to do with you. Why do you even care?
This post has nothing to do with you, JJL9. Why is it your business that we’re discussing it? Why do you care? Why are you wasting your time reading this post and writing comments on it if the topic is so uninteresting?
0 likes
164 profxm says: October 11, 2011 at 10:52 am
JJL9, I think we’ve had this discussion before, but I can’t find where. It is my business if religions get tax breaks. You agreed. You said we should cut the tax breaks for religions. I agreed. So, until religions lose their tax exemption status, this is my business.
As far as your other points go, for-profit corporations are not allowed to have people volunteer for them in ways that will generate profit, or they have to pay them. Internships are highly regulated by the government. The same does not hold for LDS Inc., even though the ranch is for-profit. Another case of religions being treated differently.
As far as #1 goes, well, if they are making money to give to the poor, I’d be fine with it. But you don’t know where the money is going any better than I do. So, I don’t know that that is what they are doing.
1 likes
165 dpc says: October 11, 2011 at 10:57 am
profxm- For points 1 and 2, don’t get all wrapped up in the profit/non-profit divide. It’s a way to comply with tax/corporate law in a way to maximize the money the Mormon church can get to spend on what it wants.
As for number 3, private organizations (including for-profit corporations) have no obligation to disclose their finances. Non-religious charities are required to disclose how much they spend on overhead and how much they use to benefit the targets of their charities. The only reason that big corporation disclose finances is because of securities law. It makes the financial system transparent so that corporations can raise more capital while the investors can more appropriately allocate risk.
As for number 4, even if the church disclosed its financial statements, I doubt that anyone without a finance background would really know what they were looking at. I’ve looked at lots of finance statements and they are usually pretty staid. When was the last time you looked at a 10-Q or a 10-K? Plus I can see a lot of disaffected ex-Mormons complaining (although, I admit, most likely with good intentions) about the amount spent on office furniture or vehicles or printing costs when that money “could have gone to the poor” or “tsunami victims” as though a church were just some kind of glorified disaster relief organization or wealth-redistribution scheme.
0 likes
166 JJL9 says: October 11, 2011 at 11:26 am
@163
Chanson, this is a blog. It is, by its very nature, an open invitation to seek opinions, and to foster debate. It may not be “my business” that you’re discussing this, but it is a public forum, that theoretically seeks public input. I’m interested in the most basic principles of freedom and liberty. That’s why I care. I believe that adherence to these princples brings about the greatest amount of wellbeing and even prosperity in any society. That’s why I care.
I also have an interest in what the LDS church does because I am a member, I pay tithing, fast offerings, etc… So, I’m interested. But that hardly means that the LDS Church has a duty (fiduciary or otherwise) to disclose anything to me about those ranching operations. They can disclose as much or as little as they please and I can decide for myself if I want to participate or donate to the Church.
The difference between my interest in this discussion, and your interest in the ranch’s financial operations is that this is a public forum that seeks public input. Private individuals, and private businesses, both for-profit and non-profit, are, wait for it….. wait for it… Private.
They are private, which means NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS.
@164
I do agree that all special tax breaks should be done away with. But two wrongs don’t make a right. I will focus on promoting more freedom and liberty, which includes removing special tax breaks, and which excludes making private information public. You can’t promote a principle by violating it.
Also, McDonald’s can organize a charitable effort and recruit volunteers. The LDS Church can recruit volunteers (missionaries or otherwise) to aid in their charitable and other non-profit endeavors. If part of those efforts include oversight of their for-profit businesses, so be it. Non-profit corporations can own for-profit corporations. I served on the board of a non-profit organization that owned a for-profit corporation. The profits from the for-profit corporation were used to bolster our non-profit activities. I was a “volunteer” board member, working for free for the non-profit. Part of my responsibility included oversight of hte for-profit business.
Again, you don’t know “where the money is going” and that’s ok. It’s not your money. Not your business.
dpc is basically right about the laws regulating corporations in the US, but I think this discussion is not about what the regulations are, but what they should be.
His point about reading 10-Qs and 10-Ks is completely beside the point. Either it makes sense to require disclosure or it does not. In my opinion, it does not. He also mentions securities laws and says that “it makes the financial system transparent so that corporations can raise more capital while the investors can more appropriately allocate risk.” If this were the case, you wouldn’t need a law to enforce it. Congress should not care if a company can raise capital. The company does care. The company should do whatever they think potential investors require to attract investment. Investors should invest in whatever companies they are comfortable investing in. If Company A discloses everything, that naturally reduces the risk of the investment. If Company B does not, that’s Company B’s problem, not mine, and not the US Government’s. If an investor does not want to invest because the potential risk is deemed too high because of the lack of disclosure, then he/she does not have to invest. Pretty simple.
0 likes
167 chanson says: October 11, 2011 at 11:38 amthis is a blog. It is, by its very nature, an open invitation to seek opinions, and to foster debate.
Exactly. I’m glad to see you’ve figured out the answers to the questions you posed in the end of @162.
0 likes
168 Chino Blanco says: October 11, 2011 at 11:50 pm
As long as there are other churches that keep open books, it ought to come as no big surprise when some folks wonder why tscc doesn’t.
0 likes
169 S Colby says: January 11, 2012 at 12:30 pm
So what? Is there ap oint to this information. The LDS Church owns lots of land and produces product on this land. It also feeds people from this land.
It has owned this land for decades and decades. It like other land owners ahd maintained th land and taken cre of the land. Whether theLDS Church is a church or other organization, it has properly used the land and not let it run down. It is not doing anything illegal. Is there a purpose to slamming the LDS church here. Would you be doing the same if it was Disney or an individual or the Catholic church? I doubt it!
Your comment that the place was closed on Sunday for tours was telling in itself. As if this was wrong, so what if the LDS ranch is closed on Sunday. My hair dresser is closed on Sunday and Monday big deal. My fabric store is closed on Saturday to observe Sabbbath. Are you going after them for that?
0 likes
(latterdaymainstreet.com)
They scream and yell lies but never can defend Mormonism.
i actually saw that movie i get the reference really gone now ; ) bye
If President Reagan was merely campaigning on his stop at the Welfare Centers in Utah, then he certainly said some empty words. I respect President Reagan too much to think that lowly of him.
Here are his words. They don’t sound like campaign rhetoric to me. And why would he need Utah’s measly few electoral votes?
“Here is an entire industry, as you can see. It is manned by volunteers, people from the church. The foodstuffs that are here are raised by volunteers, picked by volunteers. They’re brought here, they’re canned, they’re put up in whatever packages are appropriate, and they’re used to distribute to those people who have real need here in the State of Utah and all over the country, for that matter — people from the church. And you wonder why others haven’t thought of the same thing and been able to do this same thing — so much more efficiently with so much less bureaucracy, in fact, virtually no bureaucracy, as compared to government’s attempt to do this. This is all available for the needy, and all produced by volunteers.”
I think I liked this quote from him the best.
“But you ought to be asking questions about this, because I think this is one of the great examples in America today of what we’ve been talking about — about what the people could do for themselves if they hadn’t been dragooned into believing that government was the only answer to this.”
“If President Reagan was merely campaigning on his stop at the Welfare Centers in Utah, then he certainly said some empty words. I respect President Reagan too much to think that lowly of him.”
If you do not think Reagan made campaign appearances in states and said kind things about the local area and leaders, you are detached from what happens on every Presidential campaign. It happens in every kind of factory, including mormon “food factories.”
Reagan, despite being willing to employ mormons, never became a mormon, recommended anyone become a mormon, and never ceased being a Christian.
Did he know the whacky things mormons believe? Who knows?
Did he know mormons believe in an infinite number of gods, unlike Reagan himself, who believed in ONE GOD? Who knows?
Did Reagan know the mormon cult teaches there are Heavenly Mother Gods who BREED in heaven to populate worlds? Who knows?
Did Reagan know any of the other comdemned, heretical, anti-Christian things mormonism teaches? Probably not.
He had enough on his plate saving the USA and the world from Communism. We can’t hold that against him.
He simply toured a food warehouse that provides food [mainly] to mormon members. He said some nice things to his hosts, knowing there are lots of mormons who vote.
I still don’t understand why you’re trying to make this a political expediency issue. Utah had 5 electoral votes during the Reagan years.
In 1980, 72.8 percent of the population voted for Reagan.
In 1984, 74.5 percent of the population voted for him.
http://www.media.utah.edu/UHE/e/ELECTIONS.html
Surely you can come up with a better reason to brush off Reagan’s praise of the LDS welfare system.
Reagan simply didn't detest the Mormons enough for some of y'all. I'm sorry, but you're going to have to live with that fact.
Dear, dear n00b,
You wrote, “Surely you can come up with a better reason to brush off Reagan’s praise of the LDS welfare system.”
I gave you the real reason. You (apparently) want so much for it to be a blanket endorsement of the false religion of mormonism, instead of some kind words on a campaign stop and an endorsement of community self-sufficiency.
Are you a mormon? Does that explain your desire?
“Reagan simply didn’t detest the Mormons enough for some of y’all. I’m sorry, but you’re going to have to live with that fact.”
I don’t know anyone on FR who “detests mormons”, n00b. Just the false religion that enslaves those dear people.
Your reasoning for dismissing Reagan’s words in support of the private welfare system of the LDS is lacking in substance. If you really care to learn about what motivated Reagan, instead of blanket political insults in this election cycle, I suggest you research Reagan’s trips (yes, multiple trips to Utah) to the state of Utah over the years, including different LDS adminsitrations.
Here’s a hint. This is what he said to his aides, not the press or the LDS Church about the welfare square experience.
“You know, there is a program that comes very close to being the most ideal way dealing with those who are poor and unfortunate; and that is the Mormon Welfare Program,”
Yes, I’m a “noob”, as if that should matter... Does that make you better than me for some reason? And yes, I’m a member of the LDS church, and am frankly amazed at the vitriol from some of you on this site from time to time. Not all, there is hope yet...
I'll touch just one. What you are calling "tithing sunday" is actually called "tithing settlement." Yes, you do meet with the bishop to declare your status (i.e. if you have paid a "full" tithing). Only this happens in December, not tax time. You don't bring your w2 because you haven't even received it yet. And you are the one that claims if you are a full tith payer or not - not the bishop. He just marks down what you say. (I am sure if the number seems off, the bishop would ask you about it). And most folks have been paying though out the year, so there isn't any "how do you wish to pay" going on.
Any bishop who does what you are describing is an aberration.
And nice unstated, but implied, threat at the end.
n00b, that is nothing to feel bad about. As time passes, you will grow.
Here’s some advice:
Lose the Mormon victim mentality and whining. Disagreement is not “vitriol”... Except as you imagine it.
I pinged one dear friend who grew up Mormon in Utah. Blessedly, color country came to know Christ and had the courage to break free and follow Him. Since she has a Mormon husband, I’m sure she can convince you she doesn’t hate Mormons.
Are these people actually accusing Mormons of having to bring w2’s to tithing settlement?
I would assume that even former members would know that that occurs in November or December before w2’s are even issued.
Something smells funny.
Oh, I know plenty of former mormons who don’t express vitriol, but I know plenty who do. I suppose this site has both as well.
Back to subject. Top 10 historical photos of Reagan in Utah throughout the years.
Reagan and Mormons:
President Ronald Reagan’s administration was full of members of the Church. Three served on his personal White House staff - David Fischer, Gregory Newell, and Stephen M. Studdert (Special Assistant to President Reagan). Ted Bell served as Secretary of Education, Angela Buchanan was Treasurer. Rex Lee was Solicitor General. His White House included Roger Porter, Brent Scowcroft, Richard Beal, Blake Parish, Jon Huntsman Jr., Dodie Borup and Rocky Kuonen, and there were many other Latter-day Saints throughout his Administration. President Thomas S. Monson served on a Presidential Commission on Volunteerism. Others were ambassadors. LDS senators and representatives were held in special regard, and the Tabernacle Choir was his special inaugural guest.
So, you've brought your W2 to tithing settlement? In December?
There is no credibility in linking cultic sources - even if the include pictures of Reagan.
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.