LDS Freedom Forum

Sandinista wrote:

Robin Hood wrote:

lundbaek wrote:But if an apostle came to your ward and spoke against healthcare provided by government, I suppose his words would be rejected ? As apostles, Ezra Taft Benson and Marion G. Romney spoke against socialism during Church general conferences, and a statement by President David O. McKay in the 18 October 1952 Church News also warned against socialism. I'm sure I could find additional such statements if I took the time that i don't have now. In recent years, however, at least as of 2007, the Church authorities have recommended turning to government assistance to meet certain needs.

Don't really understand this post.
Why bring socialism into it?
Universal healthcare is not socialism.

What's your definition of "socialism" then?

Well it's not universal healthcare.
If it was, Canada would be socialist, so would the UK and Australia.
As would the US military.
Just sayin....

Robin Hood wrote:

Sandinista wrote:

Robin Hood wrote:

lundbaek wrote:But if an apostle came to your ward and spoke against healthcare provided by government, I suppose his words would be rejected ? As apostles, Ezra Taft Benson and Marion G. Romney spoke against socialism during Church general conferences, and a statement by President David O. McKay in the 18 October 1952 Church News also warned against socialism. I'm sure I could find additional such statements if I took the time that i don't have now. In recent years, however, at least as of 2007, the Church authorities have recommended turning to government assistance to meet certain needs.

Don't really understand this post.
Why bring socialism into it?
Universal healthcare is not socialism.

What's your definition of "socialism" then?

Well it's not universal healthcare.
If it was, Canada would be socialist, so would the UK and Australia.
As would the US military.
Just sayin....

From the Merriam Webster Dictionary: "Socialism: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods"

In a nationalized health care system the government "administers" the means of "production and distribution of goods", in this case the "goods" being health care. So why isn't that "socialism"?

Robin Hood wrote:

Sandinista wrote:

Robin Hood wrote:

lundbaek wrote:But if an apostle came to your ward and spoke against healthcare provided by government, I suppose his words would be rejected ? As apostles, Ezra Taft Benson and Marion G. Romney spoke against socialism during Church general conferences, and a statement by President David O. McKay in the 18 October 1952 Church News also warned against socialism. I'm sure I could find additional such statements if I took the time that i don't have now. In recent years, however, at least as of 2007, the Church authorities have recommended turning to government assistance to meet certain needs.

Don't really understand this post.
Why bring socialism into it?
Universal healthcare is not socialism.

What's your definition of "socialism" then?

Well it's not universal healthcare.
If it was, Canada would be socialist, so would the UK and Australia.
As would the US military.
Just sayin....

And having spent 21 years as a military officer and participating in the "socialistic "military health care system (and still participating in it as a retiree) I don't think any one who uses the system will ever promote it as an example of efficient or cutting edge health care. Read all the recent "bad press" our Veterans Administration (VA) health care systems is getting and you'll start to understand that it's a prime example that Government control of anything is simply an acceptance by the population of mediocrity.

Sandinista wrote:


In a nationalized health care system the government "administers" the means of "production and distribution of goods", in this case the "goods" being health care. So why isn't that "socialism"?

Because universal healthcare is simply a comissioning system. In the NHS for example, healthcare is delivered by Trusts on behalf of the service. The Trusts are governed independently from the government and include clinicians as well as businessmen etc. These Trusts commission services from the private sector to deliver the health service. My son works as an audiologist for a private for-profit company. The company recently won the contract to provide hearing tests and to fit hearing aids on behalf of the NHS in that part of the country. The NHS Trusts (there are a number of them) run hospitals but also place patients in private hospitals where that works best.
This is paid for mostly through the National Insurance system. The difference between our system and yours (I think) is that someone who can't pay NI, perhaps through unemployment or because they are retired etc, still gets exactly the same treatment and access to the same medical care as anyone else.
It's a good system. It works for us (though we love to moan about it) and it is quite cheap to run compared to others. According to the media the NHS is about to collapse, but they've been saying this for at least the last 50 years!
So, whatever our universal healthcare system is, it is not an example of socialism.
And, of course, everyone is free to buy their own medical insurance and seek medical care from the private sector if they wish, so the element of choice us always available, but very few do this.

Robin Hood wrote:

Lizzy60 wrote:I also agree with Glenn Beck on this. Too many people in every denomination (including LDS) are saying we shouldn't speak out in church meetings about things that are political -- like abortion, universal healthcare, socialism, illegal immigration, Christian refugees from the Middle East, on so forth.

Not acting is an action. Not speaking says something.

The problem is, the people in your ward would have different and even contradictory things to say than the people in mine.
For example, if Glenn Beck came to my ward and spoke against universal healthcare he'd be run out of town!

Perhaps not if he were to FIRST relate materials suggesting that universal healthcare is socialistic by nature, it is no longer a part of free enterprise.

From: http://fff.org/2013/12/24/is-americas-h ... sm-or-not/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Is America’s Healthcare System Socialism or Not?
by Jacob G. Hornberger
December 24, 2013

In the healthcare-related controversy over whether President Obama is a socialist or not, it would be better to ask a more fundamental question: Is America’s overall healthcare system socialist or not.

Why is that important?

Three reasons.

First, socialism always produces chaos and crises.

Second, socialism cannot be fixed or reformed and any attempts at improving it only make the situation worse.

Third, if a doctor gets the diagnosis of an illness wrong, it’s likely that he’s going to get the prescription wrong as well. The same applies to the diagnosis and treatment of what ails the American body politic.

As everyone knows, for decades America’s healthcare system has been characterized by never-ending and ever-growing chaos and crises, especially with respect to constantly soaring healthcare costs. That should give us a hint on whether America’s healthcare system is free enterprise or socialism.

Moreover, no matter what healthcare reform is adopted, the chaos and crises only get worse, with the most recent example being Obamacare. That should give us another hint as to whether America’s healthcare system is socialist or not.

If America’s healthcare system is founded on socialist principles rather than free-market principles, then the next obvious question arises: Why not simply repeal and dismantle the socialism and embrace a free market in healthcare as the cure for what ails the body politic? That is, why not rid our society of the disease rather than trying to sustain, improve, or reform it?

So, what’s the answer? Does America’s healthcare system — which is founded on such massive government programs and interventions as Medicare, Medicaid, medical licensure, healthcare regulation, insurance regulation, and income-tax manipulation — constitute socialism or free enterprise?

Perhaps an examination of the healthcare systems of four communist countries, all of which, of course, are based on socialist principles, might help us to answer the question. From Wikipedia:

Cuba: The Cuban government operates a national health system and assumes fiscal and administrative responsibility for the health care of all its citizens.

North Korea: Healthcare in North Korea includes as national medical service and health insurance system. North Korea’s government claims that it provides universal health care for all citizens.

Vietnam: The Ministry of Health (MOH) is the government ministry responsible for the governance and guidance of the health, healthcare and health industry of Vietnam. In conjunction with other ministries and the prime minister’s office, the Ministry is responsible for creating and promulgating long-term health policy programs such as the “National Strategy on Nutrition for the 2001 – 2010 period” and the “National Policy on Injury Prevention 2002 – 2010.”

China: China’s government, specifically the Ministry of Health of the State Council oversees the health services system, which includes a substantial rural collective sector but little private sector. Nearly all the major medical facilities are run by the government.
http://fff.org/2013/12/24/is-americas-h ... sm-or-not/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Or:
Universal Health Care Is Socialism
http://www.studymode.com/essays/Univers ... 45386.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Or:
Universal health care: Unbiblical socialism
http://www.wnd.com/2007/03/40662/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Sandinista wrote:

Robin Hood wrote:

Sandinista wrote:

lundbaek wrote:But if an apostle came to your ward and spoke against healthcare provided by government, I suppose his words would be rejected ? As apostles, Ezra Taft Benson and Marion G. Romney spoke against socialism during Church general conferences, and a statement by President David O. McKay in the 18 October 1952 Church News also warned against socialism. I'm sure I could find additional such statements if I took the time that i don't have now. In recent years, however, at least as of 2007, the Church authorities have recommended turning to government assistance to meet certain needs.

What's your definition of "socialism" then?

Well it's not universal healthcare.
If it was, Canada would be socialist, so would the UK and Australia.
As would the US military.
Just sayin....

From the Merriam Webster Dictionary: "Socialism: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods"

In a nationalized health care system the government "administers" the means of "production and distribution of goods", in this case the "goods" being health care. So why isn't that "socialism"?

It is. Wealthier members of society are plundered by government and therefore, the lesser, or poor, are then provided healthcare from this action. Money from the "haves" is given to the "have nots". Then to top it all off, those that will not participate are then fined, which is direct violation of the Constitution. As if forced universal healthcare is not!

― Howard W. Hunter
“If man will not recognize the inequalities around him and voluntarily, through the gospel plan, come to the aid of his brother, he will find that through ‘a democratic process’ he will be forced to come to the aid of his brother. The government will take from the ‘haves’ and give to the ‘have nots.’ Both have lost their freedom. Those who ‘have,’ lost their freedom to give voluntarily of their own free will and in the way they desire. Those who ‘have not,’ lost their freedom because they did not earn what they received. They got ‘something for nothing,’ and they will neither appreciate the gift nor the giver of the gift.”

Don't get sucked into the notion universal healthcare is fine and dandy.

Glenn Beck a Hypocrite on His Repugnant Attack on Texas Candidate Debra Medina
http://www.awakeandarise.org/blog/glenn ... ra-medina/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Glenn Beck Exposes Himself a Hypocrite with Sarah Palin as “9/11 Truther”
http://www.awakeandarise.org/blog/glenn ... 1-truther/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Vile, Filthy, Mean! Ugliness Revealed in Glenn Beck’s Character
http://www.awakeandarise.org/blog/?s=Glenn+Beck&x=0&y=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Glenn Beck, Not to “Awaken,” Let’s Pray His Audience Will
http://www.awakeandarise.org/blog/glenn ... ence-will/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Tom Woods on Glenn Beck, Judge Napolitano Guest Hosting
http://www.awakeandarise.org/blog/tom-w ... t-hosting/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Glenn Beck a Fraud, Fakest Propaganda On tv, blatant, obvious
http://www.awakeandarise.org/blog/glenn ... t-obvious/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

New World Order Hijacking Freedom Movement? Indeed, Ann Coulter Now, Along with Glenn Beck Support Ron Paul. Who Next, Hannity?
http://www.awakeandarise.org/blog/patri ... t-hannity/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Alex Jones Completely Debunks Glenn Beck’s “Debunk” of Fema Camps
http://www.awakeandarise.org/blog/alex- ... ema-camps/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Glenn Beck Brings on Forked Tongued, Children of Hell, Popular Mechanics Liars, Credibility Lost on 9/11 Issue
http://www.awakeandarise.org/blog/glenn ... 911-issue/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Stephen Colbert Trashes Glenn Beck, A Wolf who “Feigns Tears” of deception, Hates 9/11 Victims Families
http://www.awakeandarise.org/blog/steph ... -families/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

GeeR wrote:Glenn Beck a Hypocrite on His Repugnant Attack on Texas Candidate Debra Medina
http://www.awakeandarise.org/blog/glenn ... ra-medina/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Glenn Beck Exposes Himself a Hypocrite with Sarah Palin as “9/11 Truther”
http://www.awakeandarise.org/blog/glenn ... 1-truther/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Vile, Filthy, Mean! Ugliness Revealed in Glenn Beck’s Character
http://www.awakeandarise.org/blog/?s=Glenn+Beck&x=0&y=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Glenn Beck, Not to “Awaken,” Let’s Pray His Audience Will
http://www.awakeandarise.org/blog/glenn ... ence-will/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Tom Woods on Glenn Beck, Judge Napolitano Guest Hosting
http://www.awakeandarise.org/blog/tom-w ... t-hosting/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Glenn Beck a Fraud, Fakest Propaganda On tv, blatant, obvious
http://www.awakeandarise.org/blog/glenn ... t-obvious/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

New World Order Hijacking Freedom Movement? Indeed, Ann Coulter Now, Along with Glenn Beck Support Ron Paul. Who Next, Hannity?
http://www.awakeandarise.org/blog/patri ... t-hannity/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Alex Jones Completely Debunks Glenn Beck’s “Debunk” of Fema Camps
http://www.awakeandarise.org/blog/alex- ... ema-camps/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Glenn Beck Brings on Forked Tongued, Children of Hell, Popular Mechanics Liars, Credibility Lost on 9/11 Issue
http://www.awakeandarise.org/blog/glenn ... 911-issue/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Stephen Colbert Trashes Glenn Beck, A Wolf who “Feigns Tears” of deception, Hates 9/11 Victims Families
http://www.awakeandarise.org/blog/steph ... -families/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The point being?

The point being is that Beck is the pig of pigs or at least a wolf in sheeps clothing.

GeeR wrote:The point being is that Beck is the pig of pigs or at least a wolf in sheeps clothing.

If you were given the choice between Glenn Beck and Harry Reid, who would you choose?

If anyone desires to know the difference between Socialism and The United Order go here:
https://archive.org/stream/conferencere ... 5/mode/2up" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And if you do not desire to know, there are plenty of prophets that address this issue as well.

Also:

Proper Role of Government Links
"Proper Role of Government": This is a talk given by Ezra Taft Benson. This is the best talk on the proper role of government. Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, he is a Prophet of God!
http://www.latterdayconservative.com/ez ... overnment/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.latterdayconservative.com/download/4/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"A Witness And A Warning": A talk given in General Conference by President Ezra Taft Benson.
"Our Divine Constitution": This talk was given by the Prophet Ezra Taft Benson. It tells us exactly what our responsibilities are concerning saving our Constitution!
National Center for Constitutional Studies Newsletters: This orginization has dedicated itself to teaching the Founding Fathers intent of the Constitution. Excellent information on the Proper Role of Government and what the Founding Fathers taught.
Resource List: This is a list of excellent books and videos that will teach you about the Proper Role of Goverment and our responsibilities.
Quotes from Church Leaders: This is a list of quotes from Church Leaders on the Constitution and related issues. Very informative. http://runwin.tripod.com/quotes.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Other LDS Websites: These are a must!
Constitution Home Study Course: Links available at this site. Check it out!
http://runwin.tripod.com/cstudy.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Is Socialism the United Order? By Elder Marion G. Romney: This is a great conference talk about the evils of socialism. Elder Romney explains the difference between the two and why socialism is the devils counterfit of the Lord's United Order.
The Constitution - A Glorious Standard: This is a great talk given by President Benson at BYU. It tells us what our responsibilities are concerning this great document. A must read for everyone!
The Constitution: This General Conference address was given by the great Constitutionalist President J. Reuben Clark Jr. This is an excellent talk!

As you can see, I did not provide links for all of these. Nor did I compile this list, not sure who did either. Nonetheless, one can find them if one really wants the info.

Oh, don't forget "A Glorious Standard: for all mankind", compiled by Chris Bentley.
Here is one option: http://www.ldsfreedombooks.com/a/books/ ... ind-ebook/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

freedomforall wrote:

GeeR wrote:The point being is that Beck is the pig of pigs or at least a wolf in sheeps clothing.

If you were given the choice between Glenn Beck and Harry Reid, who would you choose?

There is no difference, they're two peas in the same pod except Beck is younger and in media and Reid is old and in politics. Reid seems to be blunt and offensive whilst Beck is more deceitful yea, Reid will tell you to your face he is your enemy and will stab you in the stomach and Beck will tell you he is your friend and when you turn away he will stab you in the back.

GeeR wrote:

freedomforall wrote:

GeeR wrote:The point being is that Beck is the pig of pigs or at least a wolf in sheeps clothing.

If you were given the choice between Glenn Beck and Harry Reid, who would you choose?

There is no difference, they're two peas in the same pod except Beck is younger and in media and Reid is old and in politics. Reid seems to be blunt and offensive whilst Beck is more deceitful yea, Reid will tell you to your face he is your enemy and will stab you in the stomach and Beck will tell you he is your friend and when you turn away he will stab you in the back.

I think you would realize that Beck knows a whole lot more about the Constitution than Reid. Whereas, Reid has already shown his disdain for it.
I would also assert that Beck knows more about the Constitution than Mitt Romney. Romney has also shown he could Flush the Constitution because of his promoting socialistic healthcare in Mass., a model that Obama used for the forced universal healthcare now encroached on the public. I can't believe Beck would do such a thing.

freedomforall wrote: I can't believe Beck would do such a thing.

I can! Look, a traitor is a traitor is a traitor. To Beck the Constitution is nothing but script or subject matter to get ratings for his show. One cannot deceive the public and become successful unless one blends in with an audiences values and then over time wins their trust enough to have a following, then you can use that capital to denigrate and vilify the authentic Constitutionalists at a critical time (when it’s time to vote or stop destructive legislation that can make a real difference). Beck sways the lemming followers to his will as the piper leads them over the cliff. When the people realize they been snookered Beck cannot continue the charade and moves on to a different media venue and then goes about repeating the previous strategy of building new lemming followers over and over and over. Building trust is time consuming but it works.

Glenn Beck has his calling and you have yours. In a world where satan has captured the hearts of so many please do not let yourself be lead astray. Remember your testimony and what you have always known to be truth. The LDS church and it's leaders are not weak on world and community issues, they are doing exactly as the Lord is directing. It just might not be in the way that we think is best, but it is best.

A. That I should write a post about this for at least 1 person here on LDSFF that needs to read it.

B. Isaiah 59:9 "For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts."

C. To magnify my personal calling on earth, even with my limited capacities and reach, and utilize the spiritual gifts Heavenly Father has given me personally.

It isn't up to Glen Beck to 'call out' the churches.

I, too, have struggled with what actions are required of me in order to fulfill my responsibility to this nation and to God's LAW of moral agency.

I was led to much the same conclusion as 'stewie sox'.

As an increasingly manipulated and provoked nation of people it would take very little to set off totally misdirected reactions in every region of the US. People would be fighting amongst themselves rather than finding unity of purpose.

The ONLY Hope is to live the Gospel of Jesus Christ with so much understanding and conviction that others will be converted to the Light. Remember King Nebuchadnezzar's conversion? Daniel DID warn him what would happen if the King continued in his cruelty & indifference to the poor. Nebuchadnezzar continued in his arrogance for another year until the LORD fulfilled his warning.

Read Daniel 4, please!

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/ot/dan/4?lang=eng" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Also, look at Beck's mocking attitude at 9:27 in the video below. I don't care much for infowars approach to the 'news', but there are several strong points made in this 2015 perspective on the 2014 Cliven Bundy standoff in Nevada. Extremely unsettling that Beck & Reid are likewise members of the Church of Jesus Christ.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwbIy5DJDFo" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

To Stewie's comment in the opening post about "counseling your pastor, priest, or rabbi (bishop and stake president in our case) that they have to start confronting bluntly these hard topics.", I have done that, as have a few of my friends and acquaintances. I think that in some cases so doing has the effect of "planting seeds and watering sprouts", and I therefore highly recommend it. If nothing else, your message is presented to someone - who may even then tell someone else about it and ask their opinion on it. Testimony meetings and occasionally SS, PH & RS lessons afford opportunities for us to deliver a message on our responsibilities to support freedom and the Constitution.

lundbaek wrote:To Stewie's comment in the opening post about "counseling your pastor, priest, or rabbi (bishop and stake president in our case) that they have to start confronting bluntly these hard topics.", I have done that, as have a few of my friends and acquaintances. I think that in some cases so doing has the effect of "planting seeds and watering sprouts", and I therefore highly recommend it. If nothing else, your message is presented to someone - who may even then tell someone else about it and ask their opinion on it. Testimony meetings and occasionally SS, PH & RS lessons afford opportunities for us to deliver a message on our responsibilities to support freedom and the Constitution.

So why do so many church members feel that by talking about the Constitution or a society nearly destroyed politically is a big no-no in church?

I think there are several reasons why so many church members avoid or shy away from talking about the Constitution or a society nearly destroyed politically.

They do not understand it and do not want to study it as admonished in the past. Leaders especially know that it could lead to controversy and "split the Church asunder". They might have to do something about it and are too busy to want to think about it. They are not aware of the vital role freedom plays in the Gospel of Jesus Christ. They are unaware that we have a doctrinal imperative to preserve liberty. Their own political persuasions are at odd with the principles of the US Constitution.

lundbaek wrote:I think there are several reasons why so many church members avoid or shy away from talking about the Constitution or a society nearly destroyed politically.

They do not understand it and do not want to study it as admonished in the past. Leaders especially know that it could lead to controversy and "split the Church asunder". They might have to do something about it and are too busy to want to think about it. They are not aware of the vital role freedom plays in the Gospel of Jesus Christ. They are unaware that we have a doctrinal imperative to preserve liberty. Their own political persuasions are at odd with the principles of the US Constitution.

So, bottom line, is that had people been made more acutely aware of their responsibility to study out and defend the Constitution even in church there wouldn't be so much apathy and complacency?
To me, talking about the Constitution and problems in society should be talked about in church, otherwise, why would have so many church leaders spoken of these things in Conference of all places? Yet members treat these subjects like a plague to be avoided.

Three times in the year 1987 we were told what we MUST do. In a January Message of the First Presidency, in a September Ensign article, and by the Prophet himself in the October General Conference. I don't remember any follow-up from local authorities.