America's coming civil war -- makers vs. takers Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/op

[Avatar4321]

Mosiah 3 and 4 contradict your beliefs. He clearly stated that it was the peoples duties to take care of their neighbors. We the People represent the peoples' interests and did King Benjamin represent the peoples' interests. The scriptures clearly do not teach as you suggest, and Christ's admonition on "to Caesar's what is Caesar's" is exceptionally clear. I am sorry, you are clearly and completely wrong on this issue.

Yes. He taught that it's the duty of individual citizens to take care of their neighbor. He didn't say it's the governments job to take care of you.

In fact, the scriptures cite the fact that he hadnt burdened the people with heavy taxes and labored with his own hands for his support and taught the people to do so as the reason he was a good king.

If was the wicked King Noah who burned the people with an excessve 20% tax (Which would be a nice cut from our current rates). He was the one who used tax money to build building and provide government programs. And it was under him that the people were wicked and abdicated their responsibilities.

The contrast between Benjamin and Noah was a very strong point Mormon was making in the Book of Mosiah. One encouraging individuals to give of themselves and to help one another. The other taxing the people with a heavy burden to glut of himself and his friends while justifying it through building things to "help" the people.

It's not a coincidence that the righteous rulers were the ones who unburdened the people and encouraged individual responsibilities while the wicked ones were the ones who taxed the people and spend their money to "help" as a justification for their gluttonous actions.

 

[Listening]

Mosiah 3 and 4 contradict your beliefs. Benjamin clearly stated that it was the peoples duties to take care of their neighbors. We the People represent the peoples' interests and King Benjamined represent his peoples' interests. The scriptures clearly do not teach as you suggest, and Christ's admonition on "to Caesar's what is Caesar's" is exceptionally clear. I am sorry, you are clearly and completely wrong on this issue.

The scripture is clear that you and Listening to not interpret the worthiness of the needy: that it is not part of your mortal assignments.

Avatar obviously is no gospel doctrine teacher. He cannot even somewhat adequately explain Mosiah 3 and 4, and how those chapters inform poltics, theocracy, and duties of citizens to other citizens. I have even had LDS scholars review some of his comments, and every one of them agree that Avatar4321 is an extremist reactionary following cult principles instead of the LDS gospel principles. Avatar4321, outside of this cult obsession, however, is a truly neat person, whom I like a lot.

So because we are encouraged, even commanded, as individuals to help other people, you presume that means we should outsource that responsibility to the government where, instead of giving of ourselves, we take from our neighbors in an effort to "help" causes we want?

I don't care how you try, but the scriptures don't teach that. The scriptures teach that we are to voluntarily give of our own free will. And when we voluntarily serve others, we serve God. They teach us to minister to the needs of our neighbor, not to have someone else take care of others with someone elses money.

The responsibility to take care of others is not the government's. It's the Individual's responsibility to take care of their neighbor.

But this must be done with a willing heart and a willing mind. Otherwise, it counts for nothing. The ends are not as important as the means.

And for that reason Utah is swimming in social programs.

Oh wait......

 

[Listening]

The elections of 1860, 1896, 1900, 1912, 1916, 1932, 1936, 1940, 1948, 1960, 1964, 1968, 1972, 2001, 2004, and 2008 demonstrate how wrong you are in the modern age.

Both parties are large, statist progressive parties: one to the left and one to the right being the only difference.

Hamilton turned out to be quite a liar.

He wrote what he thought people wanted to hear and then turned around and did it differently.

The election of 1800 shows you just how much people wanted a strong central government NOT.

Yep! They didn't call it the "Revolution of 1800" for nothing.

We are not talking modern age.

Please don't jump in the middle if you don't know where you are at.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Avatar must have forgotten to put in my final sentence, so I am helping him out here.

It is such a shame such a good person cannot understood the fullness of Christ's nature and gospel.

Mosiah 3 and 4 contradict your beliefs. He clearly stated that it was the peoples duties to take care of their neighbors. We the People represent the peoples' interests and did King Benjamin represent the peoples' interests. The scriptures clearly do not teach as you suggest, and Christ's admonition on "to Caesar's what is Caesar's" is exceptionally clear. I am sorry, you are clearly and completely wrong on this issue. //// The scripture is clear that you and Listening to not interpret the worthiness of the needy: that it is not part of your mortal assignments.

Yes. He taught that it's the duty of individual citizens to take care of their neighbor. He didn't say it's the governments job to take care of you.

In fact, the scriptures cite the fact that he hadnt burdened the people with heavy taxes and labored with his own hands for his support and taught the people to do so as the reason he was a good king.

If was the wicked King Noah who burned the people with an excessve 20% tax (Which would be a nice cut from our current rates). He was the one who used tax money to build building and provide government programs. And it was under him that the people were wicked and abdicated their responsibilities.

The contrast between Benjamin and Noah was a very strong point Mormon was making in the Book of Mosiah. One encouraging individuals to give of themselves and to help one another. The other taxing the people with a heavy burden to glut of himself and his friends while justifying it through building things to "help" the people.

It's not a coincidence that the righteous rulers were the ones who unburdened the people and encouraged individual responsibilities while the wicked ones were the ones who taxed the people and spend their money to "help" as a justification for their gluttonous actions.

 

[Steelplate]

It doesn't discourage it though....as you said earlier. so basically...because you're not willing in heart and mind to support social programs...God doesn't want us to do it....the Gospel of Avatar 1:1.

Where is it written that the government is the only place "social programs" or good work with people can be accomplished.

And, if you can be shown where government programs have gone bad (specifically because they are government programs which are subject to the politics of re-election), does that hold any water with you.

I don't get why you would accuse anyone of being less Christian than you simply because they, like the founders, are fearful of government power.

I don't accuse anyone of being less Christian than I am....far from it. I am a sinner...I admit that. I have done wrong, there are aspects of my life that I still do wrong, and I will probably fall short the rest if my life in one way or another. THAT'S why I try very hard not to judge....however....in the heated environment of the USMB? I fall short there too.

Your "fear" of government isn't fear....it borders on hatred. A free society's government is only as good as it's constituents. We have the power to change things. We have the power right at our fingertips every November. Your fear is unfounded thus far.

btw...no where is it written that government is the only place that good things can be accomplished....Show me one place that I said that. However...I dispute Avatar's claim that God doesn't want it. I believe that God DOES support the idea of social justice and a country that strives for it is helping to do God's work.

 

[Listening]

It doesn't discourage it though....as you said earlier. so basically...because you're not willing in heart and mind to support social programs...God doesn't want us to do it....the Gospel of Avatar 1:1.

Where is it written that the government is the only place "social programs" or good work with people can be accomplished.

And, if you can be shown where government programs have gone bad (specifically because they are government programs which are subject to the politics of re-election), does that hold any water with you.

I don't get why you would accuse anyone of being less Christian than you simply because they, like the founders, are fearful of government power.

I don't accuse anyone of being less Christian than I am....far from it. I am a sinner...I admit that. I have done wrong, there are aspects of my life that I still do wrong, and I will probably fall short the rest if my life in one way or another. THAT'S why I try very hard not to judge....however....in the heated environment of the USMB? I fall short there too.

Your "fear" of government isn't fear....it borders on hatred. A free society's government is only as good as it's constituents. We have the power to change things. We have the power right at our fingertips every November. Your fear is unfounded thus far.

btw...no where is it written that government is the only place that good things can be accomplished....Show me one place that I said that. However...I dispute Avatar's claim that God doesn't want it. I believe that God DOES support the idea of social justice and a country that strives for it is helping to do God's work.

I don't hate government. I really distrust the federal government. And that is totally founded.

I am involved in local government.

What you keep advocating are federal based programs.

What I am saying is that the founders said: that should take place at the state level.

What I truly detest is the unwillingness of the left to acknowledge that there might be better ways to do things.

And I think it was Jay who said that we will not always have good leaders.....so you don't want power centralized (the conclusion is mine).

 

[Pho_King]

It doesn't discourage it though....as you said earlier. so basically...because you're not willing in heart and mind to support social programs...God doesn't want us to do it....the Gospel of Avatar 1:1.

Where is it written that the government is the only place "social programs" or good work with people can be accomplished.

And, if you can be shown where government programs have gone bad (specifically because they are government programs which are subject to the politics of re-election), does that hold any water with you.

I don't get why you would accuse anyone of being less Christian than you simply because they, like the founders, are fearful of government power.

I don't accuse anyone of being less Christian than I am....far from it. I am a sinner...I admit that. I have done wrong, there are aspects of my life that I still do wrong, and I will probably fall short the rest if my life in one way or another. THAT'S why I try very hard not to judge....however....in the heated environment of the USMB? I fall short there too.

Your "fear" of government isn't fear....it borders on hatred. A free society's government is only as good as it's constituents. We have the power to change things. We have the power right at our fingertips every November. Your fear is unfounded thus far.

btw...no where is it written that government is the only place that good things can be accomplished....Show me one place that I said that. However...I dispute Avatar's claim that God doesn't want it. I believe that God DOES support the idea of social justice and a country that strives for it is helping to do God's work.

Yes. A government is only as good as its constituents. A good many of whom are either OWS parasites, or aare supportive Of those buttfucks. a good many who receive from our government far more than they give. A good many for whom success is a dirty word. Our government is as fucked up as its constituents. wants hose same Elle want to massively expand the scope and power of government. fuckin leeches.

 

[Steelplate]

Where is it written that the government is the only place "social programs" or good work with people can be accomplished.

And, if you can be shown where government programs have gone bad (specifically because they are government programs which are subject to the politics of re-election), does that hold any water with you.

I don't get why you would accuse anyone of being less Christian than you simply because they, like the founders, are fearful of government power.

I don't accuse anyone of being less Christian than I am....far from it. I am a sinner...I admit that. I have done wrong, there are aspects of my life that I still do wrong, and I will probably fall short the rest if my life in one way or another. THAT'S why I try very hard not to judge....however....in the heated environment of the USMB? I fall short there too.

Your "fear" of government isn't fear....it borders on hatred. A free society's government is only as good as it's constituents. We have the power to change things. We have the power right at our fingertips every November. Your fear is unfounded thus far.

btw...no where is it written that government is the only place that good things can be accomplished....Show me one place that I said that. However...I dispute Avatar's claim that God doesn't want it. I believe that God DOES support the idea of social justice and a country that strives for it is helping to do God's work.

Yes. A government is only as good as its constituents. A good many of whom are either OWS parasites, or aare supportive Of those buttfucks. a good many who receive from our government far more than they give. A good many for whom success is a dirty word. Our government is as fucked up as its constituents. wants hose same Elle want to massively expand the scope and power of government. fuckin leeches.

wow...judge much? walk a fucking mile....Move into someplace like Harlem or inner city Detroit without a job or skills to get one....nope, that won't work either...because you'd have to be brought up in it....School Districts that represent the poorest of neighborhoods with little local revenue to draw on....or extreme rural areas like Appalachia with much the same.

You guys are so easy to judge without any slight attempt at empathy or understanding. for every kid that makes it out of situations like that, there are hundreds that don't,.....and all you can say us shit like you spewed forth. you have no clue, nor do you care. so why comment?

 

[Steelplate]

Where is it written that the government is the only place "social programs" or good work with people can be accomplished.

And, if you can be shown where government programs have gone bad (specifically because they are government programs which are subject to the politics of re-election), does that hold any water with you.

I don't get why you would accuse anyone of being less Christian than you simply because they, like the founders, are fearful of government power.

I don't accuse anyone of being less Christian than I am....far from it. I am a sinner...I admit that. I have done wrong, there are aspects of my life that I still do wrong, and I will probably fall short the rest if my life in one way or another. THAT'S why I try very hard not to judge....however....in the heated environment of the USMB? I fall short there too.

Your "fear" of government isn't fear....it borders on hatred. A free society's government is only as good as it's constituents. We have the power to change things. We have the power right at our fingertips every November. Your fear is unfounded thus far.

btw...no where is it written that government is the only place that good things can be accomplished....Show me one place that I said that. However...I dispute Avatar's claim that God doesn't want it. I believe that God DOES support the idea of social justice and a country that strives for it is helping to do God's work.

I don't hate government. I really distrust the federal government. And that is totally founded.

I am involved in local government.

What you keep advocating are federal based programs.

What I am saying is that the founders said: that should take place at the state level.

What I truly detest is the unwillingness of the left to acknowledge that there might be better ways to do things.

And I think it was Jay who said that we will not always have good leaders.....so you don't want power centralized (the conclusion is mine).

that would be great if the Fed wouldn't keep cutting funding to the States...

well...the flaw in your conclusion is that there are avenues. There is impeachment and removal from office....and let's not forget...every two years for Reps, four years for Pres, 6 years for Sen. the wright's constant pearl clutching over a dictatorship is irrational.

 

[JakeStarkey]

A modern 21st century government must realize the infrastructure necessary for modern necessities, which means integration of communication, transportation, government, etc., at the national level.

To imply that the answer should be a libertarian national government, a la Calhoun in 1850, that gives back power to the states, which will immediately permit power elites to rule, does not reflect reality.

For one instance, the great majority of Americans will say flatly no, then enforce that no if necessary on any want to be libertarian elites.

 

[Listening]

I don't accuse anyone of being less Christian than I am....far from it. I am a sinner...I admit that. I have done wrong, there are aspects of my life that I still do wrong, and I will probably fall short the rest if my life in one way or another. THAT'S why I try very hard not to judge....however....in the heated environment of the USMB? I fall short there too.

Your "fear" of government isn't fear....it borders on hatred. A free society's government is only as good as it's constituents. We have the power to change things. We have the power right at our fingertips every November. Your fear is unfounded thus far.

btw...no where is it written that government is the only place that good things can be accomplished....Show me one place that I said that. However...I dispute Avatar's claim that God doesn't want it. I believe that God DOES support the idea of social justice and a country that strives for it is helping to do God's work.

I don't hate government. I really distrust the federal government. And that is totally founded.

I am involved in local government.

What you keep advocating are federal based programs.

What I am saying is that the founders said: that should take place at the state level.

What I truly detest is the unwillingness of the left to acknowledge that there might be better ways to do things.

And I think it was Jay who said that we will not always have good leaders.....so you don't want power centralized (the conclusion is mine).

that would be great if the Fed wouldn't keep cutting funding to the States...

Seriously,

Do you not see my point in the content of your own post.

The Fed has gotten the states by the "short hairs" and now forces them to do things the people in particular states don't like. But, the funding is much to much for politicians to let it go.....

In short, the states are hooked and the system is corrupt.

 

[Avatar4321]

Avatar must have forgotten to put in my final sentence, so I am helping him out here.

It is such a shame such a good person cannot understood the fullness of Christ's nature and gospel.

Mosiah 3 and 4 contradict your beliefs. He clearly stated that it was the peoples duties to take care of their neighbors. We the People represent the peoples' interests and did King Benjamin represent the peoples' interests. The scriptures clearly do not teach as you suggest, and Christ's admonition on "to Caesar's what is Caesar's" is exceptionally clear. I am sorry, you are clearly and completely wrong on this issue. //// The scripture is clear that you and Listening to not interpret the worthiness of the needy: that it is not part of your mortal assignments.

Yes. He taught that it's the duty of individual citizens to take care of their neighbor. He didn't say it's the governments job to take care of you.

In fact, the scriptures cite the fact that he hadnt burdened the people with heavy taxes and labored with his own hands for his support and taught the people to do so as the reason he was a good king.

If was the wicked King Noah who burned the people with an excessve 20% tax (Which would be a nice cut from our current rates). He was the one who used tax money to build building and provide government programs. And it was under him that the people were wicked and abdicated their responsibilities.

The contrast between Benjamin and Noah was a very strong point Mormon was making in the Book of Mosiah. One encouraging individuals to give of themselves and to help one another. The other taxing the people with a heavy burden to glut of himself and his friends while justifying it through building things to "help" the people.

It's not a coincidence that the righteous rulers were the ones who unburdened the people and encouraged individual responsibilities while the wicked ones were the ones who taxed the people and spend their money to "help" as a justification for their gluttonous actions.

Who is talking about the worthiness of the needy? Im not. Im talking about the fact that individuals are the ones that need to give willingly and government should not be compelling people to give with the use of force. Especially the government force is used mostly so politicians can glut on the work of the people.

 

[Avatar4321]

that would be great if the Fed wouldn't keep cutting funding to the States...

well...the flaw in your conclusion is that there are avenues. There is impeachment and removal from office....and let's not forget...every two years for Reps, four years for Pres, 6 years for Sen. the wright's constant pearl clutching over a dictatorship is irrational.

Cutting funding to the states? The Fed isnt supposed to be funding the states. How about we just prevent the Federal Government from taking our money to begin with and the people can do plenty with their own money at the local level without Washington becoming involved.

 

[JakeStarkey]

King Benjamin made clear he was the one telling the people what to do, as the political and priestly leader of the people.

We the People through our elected representatives tell you, me, and all citizens what are duties are to the lesser blessed among us.

That is the way it is.

 

[Avatar4321]

King Benjamin made clear he was the one telling the people what to do, as the political and priestly leader of the people.

We the People through our elected representatives tell you, me, and all citizens what are duties are to the lesser blessed among us.

That is the way it is.

Actually, no. King Benjamin spoke to the people the Word of God directed to Him by an Angel of the Lord. And then they people voluntarily gave themselves to God and did His will without the threat of government force.

Our representatives, represent us, not God. They speak to us their own words or the words of their special interests, not God's. They use force, they dont teach people to do the duties that God gave them, they tell them to trust the government in everything. And they use the threat of violence to get their way.

These are two totally different concepts. See we have more duties than just to take care of one another. We also have the duty to work for a living. We have the duty to support ourselves in every way possible. We have the duty to follow God. The government teaches us none of these things. Atleast not as it's currently constituted. They teach us to rely on the flesh. But the Word of the Lord teaches us not to rely on flesh, but on the Spirit.

The Lord wants people to willingly follow Him and serve others. The means are as important, if not more so, than the ends. The Government doesnt see it that way.

 

[MuadDib]

A modern 21st century government must realize the infrastructure necessary for modern necessities, which means integration of communication, transportation, government, etc., at the national level.

To imply that the answer should be a libertarian national government, a la Calhoun in 1850, that gives back power to the states, which will immediately permit power elites to rule, does not reflect reality.

For one instance, the great majority of Americans will say flatly no, then enforce that no if necessary on any want to be libertarian elites.

There's nothing wrong with returning power to the states which is where the Founders intended it to be. Problems are dealt with far more efficiently on the local level. What works for Kalifoornia or Nevada may not work well for New York or Virginia.

 

[gallantwarrior]

no...you make the mistake if reading into it what you want. and if the Federalist papers ARE the Constitution....why weren't THEY ratified? oh...that's right...because they aren't. they are a collection of essay pertaining to the Constitution but they are not ratified documents and shouldn't be treated as anything more.

You don't seem to understand what the The Federalist was. It was a collection of essays written to argue in favor of the adoption of the Constitution. Most of them were written by Madison, who wrote most of the Constitution.

As for Hamilton, he was the guy who favored a President for life and promoted heavy taxation and government subsidies. Aaron Burr could have saved us a lot of trouble if he'd shot Hamilton years earlier.

Hamilton turned out to be quite a liar.

He wrote what he thought people wanted to hear and then turned around and did it differently.

The election of 1800 shows you just how much people wanted a strong central government NOT.

Perhaps not so much a liar as a politician?

 

[JakeStarkey]

You don't even know your own religious scriptures?

Benjamin was telling the people the Word of God to them, that they were to take care of their neighbors. Benjamin was reinforcing that word as their Priest and Leader. This was not voluntary.

Try this nonsense with your priesthood file leadership, Avatar, and tell us what they say.

And give us something from lds.org that supports your silliness.

That you would put your political silliness over your religious scripture is amazing.

King Benjamin made clear he was the one telling the people what to do, as the political and priestly leader of the people.

We the People through our elected representatives tell you, me, and all citizens what are duties are to the lesser blessed among us.

That is the way it is.

Actually, no. King Benjamin spoke to the people the Word of God directed to Him by an Angel of the Lord. And then they people voluntarily gave themselves to God and did His will without the threat of government force.

Our representatives, represent us, not God. They speak to us their own words or the words of their special interests, not God's. They use force, they dont teach people to do the duties that God gave them, they tell them to trust the government in everything. And they use the threat of violence to get their way.

These are two totally different concepts. See we have more duties than just to take care of one another. We also have the duty to work for a living. We have the duty to support ourselves in every way possible. We have the duty to follow God. The government teaches us none of these things. Atleast not as it's currently constituted. They teach us to rely on the flesh. But the Word of the Lord teaches us not to rely on flesh, but on the Spirit.

The Lord wants people to willingly follow Him and serve others. The means are as important, if not more so, than the ends. The Government doesnt see it that way.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Certain of the states proved unworthy in their use of their federal power. The 14th Amendment and the Civil War ended much of their power. That will never change.

A modern 21st century government must realize the infrastructure necessary for modern necessities, which means integration of communication, transportation, government, etc., at the national level.

To imply that the answer should be a libertarian national government, a la Calhoun in 1850, that gives back power to the states, which will immediately permit power elites to rule, does not reflect reality.

For one instance, the great majority of Americans will say flatly no, then enforce that no if necessary on any want to be libertarian elites.

There's nothing wrong with returning power to the states which is where the Founders intended it to be. Problems are dealt with far more efficiently on the local level. What works for Kalifoornia or Nevada may not work well for New York or Virginia.

 

[Steelplate]

that would be great if the Fed wouldn't keep cutting funding to the States...

well...the flaw in your conclusion is that there are avenues. There is impeachment and removal from office....and let's not forget...every two years for Reps, four years for Pres, 6 years for Sen. the wright's constant pearl clutching over a dictatorship is irrational.

Cutting funding to the states? The Fed isnt supposed to be funding the states. How about we just prevent the Federal Government from taking our money to begin with and the people can do plenty with their own money at the local level without Washington becoming involved.

because...what do you do with Montana, North and South Dakota and all the other sparsely populated States? What you want is the Major League Baseball version of America...where there is a system of haves and have nots. What I want is an NFL version of America....where revenue sharing makes for a much more competitive product. There are still big market and small market teams, but if you run a solid bane plan....a small market team like my beloved Pittsburgh Steelers can compete every year.