Definitions

In order to facilitate this dialog, it is important to understand what I mean when I say Conservative, or Progressive, or Liberal or Right or Left or Republican or Democrat. I see these two groups as follows:

Liberal/Progressive/Democrat/Left.

This is a philosophy that encompases a range of views, from socialism to the ideals preached by those who call themselves New Democrats. In a nutshell however, this philosophy emphasises certain things:

- Government can be a force for good in the world. Government can be used in different ways (regulations, spending, taxation priorities, public works) to imprive the lives of the citizens.

- Social Services - It is important to have strong social services that provide for the unfortunate and the needy in society. These should be provided by the state, and be funded by taxpayers.

- Public Education - It is important to have strong public education, funded by taxpayers

- Redistribution of wealth - While it is a radical idea, many liberals support taxing the wealthy at a higher rate, and using the funds to assist those at the bottom of society.

- Strong international law and institutions. I believe this is a liberal idea, that we should resolve our disputed through international laws and institutions wherever possible, only using war as a last resort.

- Controls and regulations on corporations, to ensure they are acting responsibly, not polluting the environment, not endangering their employees, and ensuring good citizenship, to counter the profit motive.

- Tolerance. The importance of ensuring equal rights for all Americans, no matter race, creed, color, orientation, beliefs etc. Racism, sexism, and institutionalized bigotry are wrong.


Conservative/Republican/Right

Conservatives are a little more difficult to categorize in one group, since there are really two distinct belief sets which sometimes contradict in their ideals. At the extreme, these are represented by the Libertarians and the Religious Right. I will try and include both ideas in my definitions, and show where they contradict.

- Government. Most conservatives believe that Government should stay out of most aspects of life, and that bloated overlarge government is a hindrance to society, not a help. This is different in a sense for some in the Religious Right, who believe that government should be more intrusive in certain areas, mostly regarding morality.

- Social Services. These should not be provided by the government, but should instead be taken care of through private philanthropy and Church groups.

- Public Education. Generally would rather minimize necessary contributions to public education, it is more important to allow private and religious schools to function without guidelines or restrictions from the federal government.

- Redistribution of wealth is an evil, and no person should have their money taken from them to give to another person. Usually believe in the strength of the capitalist ideal, and the survival of the fittest. More interested in personal responsibility for poverty.

- Has little respect for international law and institutions, believing that they put undue hardship on the United States, and effect our sovreignity. This lack of faith in international law and institutions leads to a view of the world where the only thing that is respected is might and force, and that the United States should use the military as a political instrument.

- Believes that there are too many restrictions and controls on businesses and corporations, and that these cause more problems than they solve. Believes that capitalism and the profit motive will lead to good if it is unrestricted.

- Tolerance. Generally conservatives are less interested in tolerance. They have fought against desegregation, women's rights, worker's rights etc. They now are fighting against the rights of homosexuals. They live in a very black and white world, where everything is evil or good, with little grey areas.




These definitions are not perfect, and there is a lot of variation on both sides, however I think they will be important when we review the scriptures, and apply them to those definitions.




- posted by Jolard @ 2:37 PM

 
The Old Testiment

I wanted to spend a lot of my time on this blog looking to the scriptures and using them to support my idea that they lead us to more Liberal than Conservative positions. To that end, I thought I would begin in the Bible, however I will be skipping the Old Testiment and going straight to the new.

Why you ask?

Well I see the old testiment as a difficult egg to crack. In fact, there may be some who will accuse me of taking the easy road. This is because the Old Testiment is often quoted by those seeking support for Republican/Conservative/Right views. Many of the polarizing issues of our day are supported by quotes from the O.T. However I think we need to read the O.T. in a different light from the new for a few reasons. First, I don't think anyone is saying we should live every law found in the O.T. Obviously we do not condone stoning people who commit adultery, or even stoning people who disobey their parents. These are extreme examples, but the O.T. is full of laws like this, that we no longer believe are enforced. When Christ came to Earth, he supplanted the old law, and replaced it with a new. This is not something that members are unaware of, however they sometimes forget that when they quote old testiment scripture to support their views. We either have to pick and choose which O.T. admonitions we will follow (a very dangerous practice) or assume that all the O.T. laws and admonitons are there for enlightening us and instructing us, but not for us to rigidly live by.

That is why I will not spend a lot of time in the O.T. I may go there to rebut other's use of O.T. scripture to support conservative views, but I won't worry about it much myself. To me the parts of our scriptures that we are required to follow are the New Testiment, Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants and Pearl of Great Price. The Old Testiment is useful, but not binding.


- posted by Jolard @ 2:01 PM

 
The 2 big "exceptions"

I wanted to get these right out of the way. These are of course the Abortion issue, and the Gay rights issue.

When I speak to many LDS about Liberal ideals and the Democratic party, these are the issues they bring up the most. To them it would be impossible to vote for a party or an individual who supported these two things. They become wedge issues, or "make or break" issues. I have spoken to LDS conservatives who will agree with nearly every liberal position. In fact they would likely vote Democrat, if it wasn't for these two issues.

This is a real shame, as they are only two small pieces in the spectrum of ideas. Yes many Deomocrats support these issues, but many do not. For me, it is all the other ideas that matter more. I (for example) could never vote for a politician who would reduce funding for public education. I could never vote for someone who would reduce access to health care. I could never vote for someone who advocated policies that increased poverty in America. I could never vote for someone who believes that violence is the solution to international issues. These are make or break issues for me, just like abortion and gay rights are for many others.

However to me there is a HUGE difference. Let's take abortion for example. Abortion happened when it was illegal. It happens when it is legal. The difference is that it is regulated and safe, not done in back alleys with dirty tools. Outlawing abortion would only drive people back to that situation. Now I am not condoning abortion. I believe that as LDS members we should continue to preach that abortion is wrong, and we should continue to call people to repentance. However a law banning abortion only drives it underground.

The gay rights debate is similar. Banning homosexual marriages is not going to stop people being homosexual. It is not going to change their orientation. They are still going to be gay. However gay marriage also brings stability, and reduces dangerous behavior. A gay couple in a monogomous long term relationship is at least not sleeping around with multiple partners over a long period. Also, the right for gay couples to have some legal protections seems fair to me. Once again, I am not advocating homosexuality. We should continue to preach that homosexual sex is wrong. It is abhorent to the Lord. But marriage for homosexuals is not going to effect anyone but homosexuals, and we don't need to go beyond that.

Anyway, my bottom line point is that just because of these two issues, many members will never vote Democrat. I believe this is misguided. We should look for the party that holds most of its values in common with us, and then vote for them. In my case, the vast majority of my values are represented by the Democratic party, and two small issues will not turn me away. There are too many issues in the Republican party that are anti Christian in my mind.
- posted by Jolard @ 9:45 AM

 
The Beginning

Welcome to my blog!

I am a Liberal, and a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. To many this is an incompatible position. To many members, to be LDS means you also must be conservative, and you must support the Republican party in the United States.

I don't believe this is true. In fact, I believe that the LDS church's principles are more closely alligned with those that most would see as progressive, or liberal. With a few exeptions, these Liberal ideals lead me to believe that in order to be a good Mormon, I also should be a good progressive liberal.

This blog will be an exploration of this issue. It will be a way for me to learn about my beliefs, and hopefully to help others understand the issue. I look forward to the journey.
- posted by Jolard @ 4:34 PM