Wednesday, October 03, 2012

Was it LDS Liberty that justified Plural Marriage?

More nonsense from LDS Liberty.  They recommend replacing the US Pledge of Allegiance with some pseudo-Religious propaganda instead.  The suggested "covenant" smacks of something that shouldn't be here at all.  I am ashamed to realize that such a poorly-considered idea comes from someone that I early on attempted to inculcate with the principles embodied in the Scout Oath.  I was apparently a poor teacher.  


I Pledge Allegiance to the Title of Liberty

Posted on June 29, 2012 by JC Bollers

We invite all who have entered the path toward eternal life to affirm their faithfulness to the covenant of liberty upon this land by pledging allegiance to the Title of Liberty that the blessings of liberty may rest upon our nation. We know that as we make only God our king take upon ourselves the name of Christ in all things both public and private and live his commandments in faith, that he will protect us, prosper us and number us among his covenant people. We proclaim that the understanding and performance of the very substance of this Title of Liberty will save this nation.
The following is an example of a covenant that we can make to affirm our allegiance to this standard:
“I covenant to sustain and establish the Title of Liberty and that I will not forsake God or be ashamed to take upon myself the name of Christ. And if I fall into transgression may the Lord rend me as I rend my garment.

 Then Connor goes on to explain why the Pledge is socialist propaganda, and he refuses to participate at all.

 Connor Boyack: Why I Do Not Pledge Allegiance to the Flag

Again this raises problems with the 12th Article of Faith and is inconsistent with established Church policy.

  We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.

Reference to the 12th Article of Faith always brings up a specious question about Plural marriage, and the guys at LDS Liberty never miss that opportunity.

  • negates the 12th Article of Faith
  • Shiloh Logan The 8th Article of Faith actually vindicates and validates the 12th Article of Faith -- if you are honest and consistent to the message.
  • Charity Angel Do you know who is in this picture? Just curious because I know one of my ancestors was arrested and imprisoned for awhile for polygamy.
  • Spencer W. Morgan One of mine was too, in Idaho. I'll do some digging and see what I can find.
  • Spencer W. Morgan I found a few of the names:

    The photo caption reads:

    "Polygamists in striped prison uniforms, including George Q. Cannon (center with cane), William Gimbert Saunders (second from
    right), and William Morley Black (right of Cannon with white beard). These men were also known as "Prisoners of Conscience."

    Just for the record, the 8th Article of Faith is in no way related to political ideology:
     We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.

    Evidently, they derive something from the scripture that somehow justifies unlawful acts, as long as they feel good about it, or something like that.
    BTW, it is Wilford Woodruff that is featured in the center.
     It just so happens that I have a my own "Prisoner of Conscience" photo that features my own ancestor, Peter Barton, seated, in the center of the photo.  He served in the Utah State Senate for a term, and was the bishop of the Kaysville Ward for many years.  I don't think he is a particularly good poster child for the cause of rebellion.  He was the first polygamist to be pardoned by the Governor of Utah, for good behavior.  What is seldom considered is that the Lord instructed the church about the practice, when they were supposed to observe it, and when is was to cease.  The "Prisoners of Conscience" were all about obedience, not rebellion.  Too many overlook this point.

When it is the will of the Lord for church members to disobey the law of the land, the Lord will make it known through the Prophet, and none other.  This is not a principle of individualism, the noble one standing against Government oppression and tyranny.  It is the principle of obedience and sacrifice, of sacred covenants with God.  And to construe it as an example of rebellion and non-conformity for appearances is nothing more than mockery, of those faithful ones, and the Lord's laws.


Michael said...

As an Eagle Scout I Disagree with you so very much.

This article dose a poor job of conveying what was said in the actual article and is purposefully manipulating and misrepresenting the subject matter.

To quote from Thomas Moore

"Some men think the Earth is round, others think it flat; it is a matter capable of question. But if it is flat, will the King's command make it round? And if it is round, will the King's command flatten it?"

Jim Cobabe said...

Michael, you are certainly welcome to your own opinion. Rebut my blog entry, if you will. Insinuate that I am a flat earther, with my head in the sand. Just don't try to represent these perverted views as doctrines of the LDS Church. You and the "LDS Liberty" group are not entitled to make such assertions and continue as members of the Church.

I think, enough said on my part.

Jim Cobabe said...

BTW, Michael, you are also welcome to try and demonstrate that "Prisoners of Conscience" ever refused to express appropriate loyalty to the US Government, even as they were imprisoned for their beliefs.

Michael said...

AoF 11 We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.

Honoring obey and sustaining the Law aswell. The law is not laws but the law. what is the law. maybe self research on what church leaders say the law is. it is in the articles of faith by talmage.

There are limits to what are and are not good laws see section 134 of the Doctrine and Covenants.

then watch

Finally they do not try to come across as messengers for the church such an accusation is blatantly false. they allways have a disclaimer

Jim Cobabe said...

Michael, as a Church we have traditionally followed the counsel of the apostles and prophets, particularly the living prophet who is currently the President and head of the Church. Members are not on a random course, left on their own to decide which laws they will obey and which not. We follow the example and counsel of the Brethren.

If the Brethren are inspired to so teach it, the Lord will instruct the Church, through them, when we should reject the law of the land as "bad law" or not. Until then, we are subject to Kings, Presidents, rulers and magistrates, and honoring and sustaining the law. See AofF 12.

I don't hear anything from Elder Benson advocating anarchy or a general revolution against government, though I've read extensively from his teachings.

Michael, a disclaimer is a lawyer's device intended to obfuscate and deceive. What I gather from the members of the group belies any disclaimer. In any case, that is a matter other men can read for themselves, and judge for themselves. I'm not telling anyone they should take my word for it.

Jim Cobabe said...

Elder Dallin H. Oaks on this subject:

Jim Cobabe said...

Another instructive speech from Elder Dallin H. Oaks:

Jim Cobabe said...

Most pertinent from Elder Oaks:

"Even when victimized by what they must surely have seen as very severe government oppressions and abridgments of freedom, the Mormon people and their leaders have remained loyal to their government and its laws.

"Think of the persecutions in Missouri, the expulsion from Nauvoo, and the repressions suffered in the Utah Territory. As long as a government provides aggrieved persons an opportunity to work to enlarge their freedoms and relieve their oppressions by legal and peaceful means, a Latter-day Saint citizen's duty is to forego revolution and disobedience of law. Our doctrine commits us to work from within. Even an oppressive government is preferable to a state of lawlessness and anarchy in which the only ruling principle is force and every individual has a thousand oppressors. (See D&C 134:6.)

"Church members who seek to use LDS doctrine as a basis for concluding that government infringements on inalienable rights have excused them from obeying the law seem to have forgotten the principle of following the prophets. Until the prophets invoke this principle, faithful members will also refrain from doing so. We remain committed to uphold our governments and to obey their laws.

Anonymous said...

LDS Liberty and other oxymorons

Jim Cobabe said...

I suspect just "morons" would suffice to characterize most of them. ;->