LDS Freedom Forum

Subcomandante wrote: ↑November 15th, 2021, 4:46 am

Reluctant Watchman wrote: ↑November 15th, 2021, 4:39 am I'm glad God doesn't care about those "Credentials" and "Qualifications."

He doesn't. But the responsibilities of those who have those credentials and qualifications are bigger. And God entrusts bigger things to those that make the effort to gain as much education as they can.

Subcomandante wrote: ↑November 15th, 2021, 2:54 am

Godislove wrote: ↑November 14th, 2021, 7:14 pm

Subcomandante wrote: ↑November 13th, 2021, 6:02 pm

Gadianton Slayer wrote: ↑November 13th, 2021, 5:57 pm
He literally says in the same talk that the first amendment isn’t absolute.

I think he is more qualified than most of us to say what the First Amendment says and doesn't say.

f7922e19b5aeec66c0de7834f04cbe4b.jpg

He also said we should each understand the constitution the way the founders meant it to be understood. I have seen so much gross misrepresentation of what the founders actually wrote....for example implying that 'promoting the general welfare' justifies the use of vaccine mandates.
Oaks is no better qualified on knowing what the first Amendment says than each church member who studies the constitution should be.

But when an acclaimed university is going to have a person give a talk on the Constitution, who do you think they are going to select?

A. A person who has a juris doctorate at a prestigious law school, and who taught constitutional law for multiple years, clerked for a Supreme Court justice, was himself a state supreme court justice, and was considered by two presidents for a federal supreme court pick?

B. Some random online poster whose claim to fame on the Constitution is an originalist setting as described by well known John Birch Society members? No credentials, no degrees, just informal studies on the Constitution.

This is what I mean by "Credentials" and "Qualifications." Yes, having those papers are indeed important in this day and age. This is why he is more qualified than any of us to opine in that specific setting what the First Amendment says and doesn't say. And it is VERY clear that the First Amendment DOES have limitations and is no way absolute, and court after court has ruled on this.

Lizzy60 wrote: ↑November 15th, 2021, 5:29 am

Subcomandante wrote: ↑November 15th, 2021, 4:46 am

Reluctant Watchman wrote: ↑November 15th, 2021, 4:39 am I'm glad God doesn't care about those "Credentials" and "Qualifications."

He doesn't. But the responsibilities of those who have those credentials and qualifications are bigger. And God entrusts bigger things to those that make the effort to gain as much education as they can.

Totally false.

Wherefore, I call upon the weak things of the world, those who are unlearned and despised, to thrash the nations by the power of my Spirit;

Subcomandante wrote: ↑November 15th, 2021, 4:46 am

Reluctant Watchman wrote: ↑November 15th, 2021, 4:39 am I'm glad God doesn't care about those "Credentials" and "Qualifications."

He doesn't. But the responsibilities of those who have those credentials and qualifications are bigger. And God entrusts bigger things to those that make the effort to gain as much education as they can.

Subcomandante wrote: ↑November 13th, 2021, 4:38 pm

"Preamble of the Constitution" wrote:"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

Godislove wrote: ↑November 14th, 2021, 7:14 pm

Subcomandante wrote: ↑November 13th, 2021, 6:02 pm

Gadianton Slayer wrote: ↑November 13th, 2021, 5:57 pm

Korsgaard46 wrote: ↑November 13th, 2021, 5:40 pm Such a foolish statement from Oaks, especially since he pushes religious freedom. With this mind set governments slowly, through precedent, remove your freedoms. Oaks better hope the 1st Amendment is absolute otherwise the future of his religion may be in peril.

He literally says in the same talk that the first amendment isn’t absolute.

I think he is more qualified than most of us to say what the First Amendment says and doesn't say.

f7922e19b5aeec66c0de7834f04cbe4b.jpg

He also said we should each understand the constitution the way the founders meant it to be understood. I have seen so much gross misrepresentation of what the founders actually wrote....for example implying that 'promoting the general welfare' justifies the use of vaccine mandates.
Oaks is no better qualified on knowing what the first Amendment says than each church member who studies the constitution should be.

Subcomandante wrote: ↑November 13th, 2021, 9:54 pm President Nelson is perhaps the most powerful seer the Church has had since at least Ezra Taft Benson, if not David O. McKay.

Godislove wrote: ↑November 15th, 2021, 5:21 am

Subcomandante wrote: ↑November 15th, 2021, 4:46 am

Reluctant Watchman wrote: ↑November 15th, 2021, 4:39 am I'm glad God doesn't care about those "Credentials" and "Qualifications."

He doesn't. But the responsibilities of those who have those credentials and qualifications are bigger. And God entrusts bigger things to those that make the effort to gain as much education as they can.

Joseph Smith was quite uneducated yet God entrusted him with MUCH bigger things.

A. A person who has a juris doctorate at a prestigious law school, and who taught constitutional law for multiple years, clerked for a Supreme Court justice, was himself a state supreme court justice, and was considered by two presidents for a federal supreme court pick?

Godislove wrote: ↑November 15th, 2021, 5:21 am Joseph Smith was quite uneducated yet God entrusted him with MUCH bigger things.

Lizzy60 wrote: ↑November 15th, 2021, 5:29 am Totally false.

Mudflap wrote:agreed. I actually can't think of a scriptural example where this is true.

D&C 35:13 wrote: Wherefore, I call upon the weak things of the world, those who are unlearned and despised, to thrash the nations by the power of my Spirit;

Luke wrote:Subcomandante you are so wrapped up in thinking about your perceived greatness of those who “aspire to the honours of men” that you cannot see clearly

Subcomandante wrote: ↑November 15th, 2021, 11:15 am The Lord requires people that are specialized today

Subcomandante wrote: ↑November 15th, 2021, 11:15 am Truth of the matter is that today, the Lord operates in a different manner than what is found in the Scriptures

today, the Lord operates in a different manner

today, the Lord operates in a different manner

today, the Lord operates in a different manner

today, the Lord operates in a different manner

today, the Lord operates in a different manner

mudflap wrote: ↑November 15th, 2021, 12:33 pm

today, the Lord operates in a different manner

are you listening to yourself?

this sounds totally antithetical to the past....say.....6,000 years.

Subcomandante wrote: ↑November 14th, 2021, 6:17 pm

Robin Hood wrote: ↑November 14th, 2021, 1:38 pm

Subcomandante wrote: ↑November 13th, 2021, 6:02 pm

Gadianton Slayer wrote: ↑November 13th, 2021, 5:57 pm
He literally says in the same talk that the first amendment isn’t absolute.

I think he is more qualified than most of us to say what the First Amendment says and doesn't say.

Now you need to be "qualified" in order to understand the US constitution?
Maybe God was wrong then.

You guys should know what I mean when I say "qualified."

Robin Hood wrote: ↑November 15th, 2021, 1:28 pm

Subcomandante wrote: ↑November 14th, 2021, 6:17 pm

Robin Hood wrote: ↑November 14th, 2021, 1:38 pm

Subcomandante wrote: ↑November 13th, 2021, 6:02 pm

I think he is more qualified than most of us to say what the First Amendment says and doesn't say.

Now you need to be "qualified" in order to understand the US constitution?
Maybe God was wrong then.

You guys should know what I mean when I say "qualified."

We do... that's the problem.

mudflap wrote: ↑November 15th, 2021, 1:32 pm our brothers across the pond are cheeky...

Subcomandante wrote: ↑November 15th, 2021, 11:15 am

Godislove wrote: ↑November 15th, 2021, 5:21 am Joseph Smith was quite uneducated yet God entrusted him with MUCH bigger things.

Lizzy60 wrote: ↑November 15th, 2021, 5:29 am Totally false.

Mudflap wrote:agreed. I actually can't think of a scriptural example where this is true.

D&C 35:13 wrote: Wherefore, I call upon the weak things of the world, those who are unlearned and despised, to thrash the nations by the power of my Spirit;

Luke wrote:Subcomandante you are so wrapped up in thinking about your perceived greatness of those who “aspire to the honours of men” that you cannot see clearly

The greatest prophet to ever live among the Israelites, Moshe, was well trained in Egypt, being an (adopted) son of royalty, and the same could be said for Daniel in Babylon. Obviously, there was no university education back then as this concept is only a thousand or so years old and the Scriptures go back two to four thousand plus years ago. Paul's knowledge of the Roman system availed him many times during the course of his ministry.

Truth of the matter is that today, the Lord operates in a different manner than what is found in the Scriptures, for the following reasons:

1. The political situation is vastly different. The Bible is quite limited in its scope in that regard, with only a few nations represented. In the New Testament, the entire domain belonged to Rome. Same can be said for the Book of Mormon as there were two main groups of people. Today we have nearly 200 nations, and thousands of first-order subdivisions of those nations, each one with their different laws and machinations.

2. The level of education needed to move the world was vastly different then versus now. Most everything was do-it-yourself back then. In these days, licensing, certifications, and degrees are needed in many parts of the world. And if you want to influence heads of state to have the gospel preached in their lands, you are going to need to know the culture of the people that you wish to influence. Ammon did this correctly with Lamoni and his people, Aaron and his people did not. In the end, Ammon had to bail out Aaron and his people because of the influence that Lamoni had with the local ruler.

3. I can say on VERY confident grounds, that the Lord is not going to call a fisherman, a carpenter, or a mechanic to be one of His apostles in these days. A fisherman, a carpenter, or a mechanic will simply not have the wherewithal to be able to navigate the Church through all the different challenges of today. There's a reason why Joseph Smith is not the prophet today. There's a reason why Russell M. Nelson was not the prophet in the late 1800s.

4. (3) is NOT to make low the honorable professions of a fisherman that catches fish for his family and for his restaurant, or a carpenter that makes furniture and lumber, or a mechanic that fixes and repairs cars, trucks, aircraft, or machines. The Lord requires people that are specialized today, and He needs them now, not in five years or ten years or fifty years.

Lizzy60 wrote: ↑November 13th, 2021, 3:33 pm My husband has tried to defend the Brethren, although it’s becoming more difficult, and he has been working in his shop all day and knows nothing about this speech of Oaks. I just read him the statement posted above, and he immediately said, “That’s communism!”

Well said, sweetie.

Gadianton Slayer wrote: ↑November 15th, 2021, 6:47 am Seriously @Sub... when does God call on the “educated”???? As I recall, He typically speaks to the humble, the young, and often the poor.

Bizarre logic man, and completely unscriptural.

Atticus wrote: ↑November 16th, 2021, 11:02 pm

Lizzy60 wrote: ↑November 13th, 2021, 3:33 pm My husband has tried to defend the Brethren, although it’s becoming more difficult, and he has been working in his shop all day and knows nothing about this speech of Oaks. I just read him the statement posted above, and he immediately said, “That’s communism!”

Well said, sweetie.

What Oaks said isn't Communism.

The government does have the right and duty to restrict some rights to protect the safety of the majority of Americans.

The government has always done this. And in most cases it doesn't violate the constitution.

Niyr wrote: ↑November 17th, 2021, 9:36 am

Atticus wrote: ↑November 16th, 2021, 11:02 pm

Lizzy60 wrote: ↑November 13th, 2021, 3:33 pm My husband has tried to defend the Brethren, although it’s becoming more difficult, and he has been working in his shop all day and knows nothing about this speech of Oaks. I just read him the statement posted above, and he immediately said, “That’s communism!”

Well said, sweetie.

What Oaks said isn't Communism.

The government does have the right and duty to restrict some rights to protect the safety of the majority of Americans.

The government has always done this. And in most cases it doesn't violate the constitution.

100000% false. The duty and right? Show the specific enumerated delegated power listed in the Constitution. Just because government has done it in the past, doesn't mean it is constitutional. And no, they have not always done this.


"What has happened to Liberty in the last 252 years? We have allowed our FEAR to trump our LIBERTY. Our founders worked very hard to create a federal government that would be locked in a limited and defined box. We, their descendants, have turned around and handed the government the keys.

Exigent circumstances, roadside check points, national security, officer safety, are EXPANSIONS of government power; written by government paid lawyers, allowed by government paid judges, and used by government paid agents.

We have succumbed to the fear factor: Trading Liberty to keep us safe is the primary role of government. No, it is not. The primary role of government is NOT national security, it is, as the Constitution clearly mandates, Liberty Security, as in to “Preserve the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.”

“Necessity is the plea for every infringement of freedom. It is the argument of tyrants. It is the creed of slaves.” No truer words were ever penned by William Pitt. However, here we are today accepting the government’s argument of necessity. Out of ignorance and arrogance, fueled by fear, we do not see they are revealing themselves to be tyrants and we are allowing OURSELVES to be slaves."