Being Good Citizens

[PaloAltoCougar]

Our ward appears to lag the rest of the Church a bit, but our Gospel Doctrine lesson this week is "Being Good Citizens," and I'd welcome some input from the rest of you. My class enjoys the occasional CUF quote or comment that I share, providing full if misleading credit, "As Jeff Lebowski once observed...", or "In the words of Art Vandelay...." And they think wuapinmon was an Athenian philosopher. I've also mentioned DDD but they assumed I was talking about a buxom stripper.

Back on point... We'll focus on D&C 134, although it's interesting that the manual, while discussing a number of verses in that section, skips over verse 9: "We do not believe it just to mingle religious influence with civil government, whereby one religious society is fostered and another proscribed in its spiritual privileges, and the individual rights of its members, as citizens, denied."

The manual also suggests discussing what it means to obey and sustain the law. In that regard, I'm wondering about discussing the role of civil disobedience. From the GC pulpit we've been told that civil disobedience is to be avoided, and yet it was frequently employed by Joseph Smith, Brigham Young and others. How to reconcile?

Anyway, any thoughts you have on the broader subject would be appreciated.

[myboynoah]

Our ward appears to lag the rest of the Church a bit, but our Gospel Doctrine lesson this week is "Being Good Citizens," and I'd welcome some input from the rest of you. My class enjoys the occasional CUF quote or comment that I share, providing full if misleading credit, "As Jeff Lebowski once observed...", or "In the words of Art Vandelay...." And they think wuapinmon was an Athenian philosopher. I've also mentioned DDD but they assumed I was talking about a buxom stripper.

Back on point... We'll focus on D&C 134, although it's interesting that the manual, while discussing a number of verses in that section, skips over verse 9: "We do not believe it just to mingle religious influence with civil government, whereby one religious society is fostered and another proscribed in its spiritual privileges, and the individual rights of its members, as citizens, denied."

The manual also suggests discussing what it means to obey and sustain the law. In that regard, I'm wondering about discussing the role of civil disobedience. From the GC pulpit we've been told that civil disobedience is to be avoided, and yet it was frequently employed by Joseph Smith, Brigham Young and others. How to reconcile?

Anyway, any thoughts you have on the broader subject would be appreciated.

Skip that and try to reconcile speeders and people that sample the grapes in the produce section.

Okay, that wasn't helpful.

[beefytee]

Although it didn't really come up in our discussion, I was thinking a lot about civil disobedience during the lesson, as well.

Obviously there is a place for civil disobedience or we wouldn't be calling the American forefathers inspired.

With reference to verse 5, it seem like the only time civil disobedience is acceptable is when the government is not protecting the "inherent and inalienable rights" of the people.

[YOhio]

Make sure you mention the LDS Church's activity in support of Proposition 8 on the 2008 California ballot.

[Fiyero]

Would making a career speaking out against the US President and perpetuating hatred against him qualify as civil disobedience?

Curious,
Elder Glenn Beck

[Fiyero]

the manual skips over verse 9: "We do not believe it just to mingle religious influence with civil government, whereby one religious society is fostered and another proscribed in its spiritual privileges, and the individual rights of its members, as citizens, denied."

I don't remember how many times I heard people say, "I'm going to vote for Mitt Romney because he's going to take the gospel to the White House! Every move the nation makes will be based on Mormon Doctrine!"

[pelagius]

I might spend some time discussing Elder Ballard's talk (2007, commencement address):

Using New Media to Support the Work of the Church

Now, to you who are graduating today and all other faithful members of the Church, as you graduate from this wonderful university, may I ask that you join the conversation by participating on the Internet, particularly the New Media, to share the gospel and to explain in simple, clear terms the message of the Restoration. Most of you already know that if you have access to the Internet you can start a blog in minutes and begin sharing what you know to be true. You can download videos from Church and other appropriate sites, including Newsroom at LDS.org, and send them to your friends. You can write to media sites on the Internet that report on the Church, and voice your views as to the accuracy of the reports. This, of course, requires that you, all members of the Church, understand the basic, fundamental principles of the gospel.

Talk about the implications particularly with respect to Elder Bednar's much more tepid response. There is a bit tension there. Plus, it can help justify your CUF involvement a little bit.

[Tim]

Would making a career speaking out against the US President and perpetuating hatred against him qualify as civil disobedience?

Curious,
Elder Glenn Beck

Don't say anything about Brother Beck... you'll upset JohnnyLingo.

[old_gregg]

joseph smith from the king follett discourse:

But meddle not with any man for his religion; and all governments ought to permit every man to enjoy his religion unmolested. No man is authorized to take away life in consequence of difference of religion, which all laws and governments ought to tolerate and protect, right or wrong. Every man has a natural and, in our country, a constitutional right to be a false prophet as well as a true prophet.

[Portland Ute]

I don't remember how many times I heard people say, "I'm going to vote for Mitt Romney because he's going to take the gospel to the White House! Every move the nation makes will be based on Mormon Doctrine!"

If i had a dollar for every time I heard that living here in Utah, well, I'd still have no dollars.

[fuegote]

Would making a career speaking out against the policies of the last two US Presidents and perpetuating hatred against their policies qualify as civil disobedience?

Curious,
Elder Glenn Beck

fixed it.

[Solon]

Our ward appears to lag the rest of the Church a bit, but our Gospel Doctrine lesson this week is "Being Good Citizens," and I'd welcome some input from the rest of you. My class enjoys the occasional CUF quote or comment that I share, providing full if misleading credit, "As Jeff Lebowski once observed...", or "In the words of Art Vandelay...." And they think wuapinmon was an Athenian philosopher. I've also mentioned DDD but they assumed I was talking about a buxom stripper.

Back on point... We'll focus on D&C 134, although it's interesting that the manual, while discussing a number of verses in that section, skips over verse 9: "We do not believe it just to mingle religious influence with civil government, whereby one religious society is fostered and another proscribed in its spiritual privileges, and the individual rights of its members, as citizens, denied."

The manual also suggests discussing what it means to obey and sustain the law. In that regard, I'm wondering about discussing the role of civil disobedience. From the GC pulpit we've been told that civil disobedience is to be avoided, and yet it was frequently employed by Joseph Smith, Brigham Young and others. How to reconcile?

Anyway, any thoughts you have on the broader subject would be appreciated.

A serious answer:

I think that teaching this lesson deserves nuance and tiptoeing between the tensions that marked the relations between early LDS and their various governments. On the one hand, in 1835 (when D&C 134 was received) the Mormons had already been kicked out of Jackson County, MO and had tried (in vain) to regain their possessions through legal means. The sense of betrayal felt towards civil authority comes through loudly in many of the D&C sections from this period. With this sense of betrayal came a mistrust of government, and a sense of the necessity of instituting a divine order of non-democratic government on earth.

Joseph Smith and the Secret Council of 50 is a good example of this - on the one hand, D&C 134 is often held up today as an imperative to support local governments - even if those governments are immoral, evil, repressive, etc. On the other hand, the anointing of Joseph Smith as king on earth in 1844 was a claim to secular - not spiritual - power. This can only be interpreted as treason against the Union.

Similarly, LDS defiance of Johnston's army and the practice of illegal polygamy put LDS on the wrong side of D&C 134.

Teaching only one side or the other is disingenuous, and disregarding the timeline along which these developments occurred undermines the evolutionary component of these forces and trends.

[Moliere]

"We do not believe it just to mingle religious influence with civil government, whereby one religious society is fostered and another proscribed in its spiritual privileges, and the individual rights of its members, as citizens, denied."

That sounds an awful lot like the first amendment.

Also civil disobedience can take multiple forms. It's not just yelling at senators at a town hall meeting. It could be as broad as someone hiding income and therefore refusing to report/pay income taxes. I would also include that the abuse or misuse of public funds by a government as civil disobedience.

[JohnnyLingo]

I don't remember how many times I heard people say, "I'm going to vote for Mitt Romney because he's going to take the gospel to the White House! Every move the nation makes will be based on Mormon Doctrine!"

Is it zero? Zero times?

Don't say anything about Brother Beck... you'll upset JohnnyLingo.

Keep on dishing it, Tim. I suggest talking to your buddy wuap if you need suggestions on how to try and get under my skin.

[UtahDan]

Although it didn't really come up in our discussion, I was thinking a lot about civil disobedience during the lesson, as well.

Obviously there is a place for civil disobedience or we wouldn't be calling the American forefathers inspired.

With reference to verse 5, it seem like the only time civil disobedience is acceptable is when the government is not protecting the "inherent and inalienable rights" of the people.

I agree with your reading of verse five. I think the caveat in that verse is of enormous importance and is rarely stated.

5 We believe that all men are bound to sustain and uphold the respective governments in which they reside, while protected in their inherent and inalienable rights by the laws of such governments; and that sedition and crebellion are unbecoming every citizen thus protected, and should be punished accordingly; and that all governments have a right to enact such laws as in their own judgments are best calculated to secure the public interest; at the same time, however, holding sacred the freedom of conscience.

So if the government does not protect your inherent and inalienable rights, you are not obligated to sustain and uphold it. It is only when you are "thus protected" that it is wrong to undermine the government. This makes sense, no? When the government is corrupt and does not secure the rights of its citizens, it should be overthrown. But when it does secure those rights, its citizens are obligated not to try to circumvent its machinations simply to get their way.

Of course, this really begs the question what your "inherent and inalienable rights" consist of.