Free Republic

Read “Hound of the Baskervilles”. The media dog isn’t barking. And that’s something to be suspicious of.

This is a story by Robin of Berkeley, one of my favorite bloggers. She goes by a pseudonym to protect herself from harassment from the tolerant liberals of Berkeley.

I’m not a campaign finance law expert, but it seems to me that there is nothing standing in the way of donating to Reid’s opponents.

"proud - ok...I get it...you are mormon and you are upset because others aren’t."

I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that I'm "upset because others aren't." I said no such thing.

"...so what is it you want? You want FR to bow before Moroni?"

Not at all. Just trying to make a point about the state of our government from my own point of view and experiences. You don't have to accept (or attack) my religious beliefs to see that we're in trouble unless we all get unified and do something about it.

It was a gesture of common ground, of good will, to note that even though we may disagree theologically, we can agree to help each other fight a common battle against evil. But I guess all that's been accomplished here is to show that pretty much every time one tries to build a bridge, there will be trolls waiting to get under it so they can throw stones.

Freep members should abide by their own accepted rules of civility. Right here in the comments form it says "Please: NO profanity, NO personal attacks, NO racism or violence in posts."

I'm on your side, regardless of your hate for my beliefs. When the bad guys come knocking on your door, I'll be a loyal friend to stand up for your rights.

That old chestnut? Sorry if you misread the topic. It’s not about your opinion of the veracity of the Book of Mormon, it’s about what it actually has to say. Obviously, you didn’t read the links or the whole post.

Other than this clarification, post all you want, but I won’t be responding to your ad-hominem, unsubstantiated attacks.

Thank you goat granny. I thought I was among more friends than this on Freep, but I’m glad to see that there is someone who can see my real point and not just sectarian talking points.

I've been considering posting this particular post for several YEARS now. Please help me get it out there and comment and/or spread via your social networks. http://therightofthepeople.wordpress.com/2009/12/21/its-all-just-a-little-bit-of-history-repeating/

Hmm. Interesting, but as a practicing and faithful adherent to the religion nicknamed “Mormon” (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints), I have to disagree. I have met FAR more members who fully accept the Church despite a few perceived blemishes on its history, not because they are brainwashed, gullible, or just looking for comfort in a friendly society. They accept it because they have faith that God will reveal or has already revealed the reasons for things that appear suspicious or outright crazy to those outside of the Church.

Please don’t forget that your same arguments, and many like them, were used against Christians in the early Church. Was not Jesus accused of being a wine bibber, of improperly associating with harlots, and of casting out devils by Beelzebub by the Pharisees of His day? Was he not crucified for making the “outlandish” claim to be the King of the Jews, the very Messiah?

Early Christianity only looks acceptable and logical to us latecomers because we aren’t being burned out of our homes or impaled on stakes and lit on fire as decorations for the Roman Emporer’s banquet.

Here is the original post in case it gets canned by the Matthew 25 Network.

---

To be clear, I've joined this group not in support, but in protest so that I could submit my views on Matthew 25 to this group's supporters. My hope is that I will be able to help you to understand why many conservative Christians will find it difficult to take this "Matthew 25" organization seriously.

When I first read about this PAC on my Blackberry's feed reader before Sunday School today, I immediately turned to Matthew 25 to get a refresher on the topics discussed in that chapter.

While I can see how the Matthew 25 organization might feel justified in co-opting verses 35-40 in support of their supposedly "more charitable than thou" stance towards conservatives, I also had to keep from laughing out loud during Sunday School at how poorly this chapter could look being applied to the PAC in the eyes of the majority of the conservative Christians it is trying to court.

True understanding of the scriptures comes from reading the full context of what was recorded. So, let's break it down into smaller chunks of the whole chapter and see if the traditional interpretations of these verses still apply to conservatives or have somehow, today, become more relevant to liberals.

I'm using the King James Version (KJV) here because it is the most complete, and chronologically closest to the source, translation into English of the common Bible most people have today. If you happen to speak Greek, Aramaic, or Hebrew, I refer you to the representative or original source texts for comparison, but you will find that the KJV is quite faithful to those translations.

This is not meant to be a biblical spitting match, but a serious study in contrasts between how modern-day conservatives view these scriptures and how they might react to attempts from liberals to convert them to the idea that it applies to their ideologies (abortion, gay marriage, social handouts instead of hand-ups) as much as to those of conservatives.

Matthew chapter 25 is basically a bunch of parables. Jesus taught these as a way to hide truth from people who weren't yet prepared to accept Christ or who might ridicule or take issue with the boldness of what he was saying (and therefore might unjustly be condemned for rejecting truth given in plainness). Simultaneously, his purpose was also to speak clearly to those who had willing hearts and minds and were prepared to accept what Christ said, even if his teachings didn't agree with what they had been taught from a secular perspective. See Matthew 13 where it states:

10 And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables?
11 He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.
12 For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath.
13 Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.
14 And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive:
15 For this people’s heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.
16 But blessed are your eyes, for they see: and your ears, for they hear.
17 For verily I say unto you, That many prophets and righteous men have desired to see those things which ye see, and have not seen them; and to hear those things which ye hear, and have not heard them.

The first parable in Matthew 25 struck me as one that conservative Christians might take issue with in regards to liberals coming "late to the party" as per Christian values.

1 Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins, which took their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom.
2 And five of them were wise, and five were foolish.
3 They that were foolish took their lamps, and took no oil with them:
4 But the wise took oil in their vessels with their lamps.
5 While the bridegroom tarried, they all slumbered and slept.
6 And at midnight there was a cry made, Behold, the bridegroom cometh; go ye out to meet him.
7 Then all those virgins arose, and trimmed their lamps.
8 And the foolish said unto the wise, Give us of your oil; for our lamps are gone out.
9 But the wise answered, saying, Not so; lest there be not enough for us and you: but go ye rather to them that sell, and buy for yourselves.
10 And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came; and they that were aready went in with him to the marriage: and the door was shut.
11 Afterward came also the other virgins, saying, Lord, Lord, open to us.
12 But he answered and said, Verily I say unto you, I know you not.
13 Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh.

In other words, we've been standing here at the door as a church for about 1,972 years waiting for the Bridegroom (Christ) to come for His bride (the Church). We haven't been perfect at it, and we've gotten a lot of things wrong (blood soaked wars over doctrine or to "convert" people, etc.) but on the whole, the general tradition...arguably a conservative one...has withstood the test of time. Be prepared that conservatives will see the Matthew 25 PAC as a living example of the five foolish virgins in the parable above who procrastinated buying oil (testimony and belief in traditional Gospel principles) for their lamps until it was too late.

Next in Matthew chapter 25 comes the parable of the talents:

14 For the kingdom of heaven is as a man travelling into a far country, who called his own servants, and delivered unto them his goods.
15 And unto one he gave five talents, to another two, and to another one; to every man according to his several ability; and straightway took his journey.
16 Then he that had received the five talents went and traded with the same, and made them other five talents.
17 And likewise he that had received two, he also gained other two.
18 But he that had received one went and digged in the earth, and hid his lord’s money.
19 After a long time the lord of those servants cometh, and reckoneth with them.
20 And so he that had received five talents came and brought other five talents, saying, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me five talents: behold, I have gained beside them five talents more.
21 His lord said unto him, Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.
22 He also that had received two talents came and said, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me two talents: behold, I have gained two other talents beside them.
23 His lord said unto him, Well done, good and faithful servant; thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.
24 Then he which had received the one talent came and said, Lord, I knew thee that thou art an hard man, reaping where thou hast not sown, and gathering where thou hast not strawed:
25 And I was afraid, and went and hid thy talent in the earth: lo, there thou hast that is thine.
26 His lord answered and said unto him, Thou wicked and slothful servant, thou knewest that I reap where I sowed not, and gather where I have not strawed:
27 Thou oughtest therefore to have put my money to the exchangers, and then at my coming I should have received mine own with usury.
28 Take therefore the talent from him, and give it unto him which hath ten talents.
29 For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath.
30 And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Conservatives will take you to task on this parable as well. The traditional and, we feel, correct interpretation is that we are required to take all that the Lord gives us and to turn it into something profitable or of use to the world. The last servant did none of that, but squandered his opportunity to increase the investment capital he was given. You can see where this is going, right? Temporally speaking, if we look at it in a pure capitalist light, it is quite condemning of liberal policies and social welfare. The lord in this parable didn't say, "Ah well, here's your welfare. Now, run along." He sent the guy packing. Likewise, if we give people money and they view it as a handout to hoard rather than a hand up to invest and make something of themselves, we're going to be falling into the category of the slothful servant.

Spiritually speaking, the parable of the talents has reference to the good we're expected to do in the world with the abilities we've been given. That still plays into conservative hands on issues of abortion, challenges such as same-sex attraction and choosing to abstain rather than spread disease and misery, and anti-socialism/communism (all experiments thereto having failed spectacularly in every single instance).

31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:
32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:
33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.
34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:

Now, with those four verses, which precede the motto verses of the Matthew 25 organization, are just too obvious to pass up. Not only because it puts into question just whether people's motives and true characters will equal salvation for them in the end, but it also notably uses the directions "left" and "right" in dividing the goats from the sheep, respectively. I wouldn't presume to state that it will be divided quite so nicely between Republicans and Democrats. I know plenty of supposed conservatives who, through their hypocrisy, will probably be counted with the goats. Likewise, I know plenty of liberals who are very, very Christian, who are even against abortion and homosexuality, and just happen to support the Democrat ticket for other reasons (unions and social causes, for example). God is no respecter of persons and will judge us a) by our acceptance of Christ and b) by our works in support of Christ.

But "left" and "right" just stand out at me for some reason, partly because I know that the word "left" in Latin derives from "sinistre", which means just what it sounds like. I know that the terms "left" and "right" as applied to politics have a different origin. They are derived from the seating in the French Legislative Assembly in 1791. But in ancient times, the left hand was considered unclean, not fit to touch in a handshake, because of its use to clean one's nether regions and perform other hygenic tasks. To be on a ruler's right hand, rather than his left, was considered an honor because it represented cleanliness and purity. That's why Christ uses those terms in this parable, because that's how his audience would have interpreted it. Today's Islamofascist Muslims, to whom the radical parts of the left unabashedly pander, totally understand this reference because their languages are less corrupted from their ancient sources than ours. We conservatives find that to be the height of irony given that they support the left-wing (liberal) parties of most governments because of their "tolerance" and "understanding" for the "Muslim plight". But, it does fit with their stated goals to use the morally confused against themselves in order to dominate the world.

For conservatives today, the key verse in the 35-40 range cited by the Matthew 25 organization is verse 40, which states:

40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

Now, nobody can presume to claim the moral high ground on the treatment of their fellow man. ALL of us fall short of the ideal in verse 40. But when I consider what the Lord meant when he said "the least", I cannot exclude unborn children clinging to their mother's womb in a day and age when that new life is given no more respect than the "fetus" or "glob of tissue" or "product of conception" that Planned Parenthood considers it to be. Either an unborn baby is a life precious to Christ as "one of the least of these my brethren", or it is not. I would prefer we err on the chance that it is. If it is not, we will not stand accused at the judgment day because the woman who carried that child to term was inconvenienced and had to adapt to the consequences of her earlier choices. Mary was given a choice when the angel stated she was chosen to be the mother of Christ. "Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word." She knew it was going to be difficult to explain her pregnancy, but she chose to do so in spite of that. Can't we as a society build a culture that promotes a choice of life over a choice of killing a child who has no voice in the matter?

To be completely thorough in the foregoing enterprise, I would be remiss in not quoting and commenting on the application of the final six verses:

41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:
43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.
44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?
45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.
46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

Again, I'll admit that there are plenty of conservatives, rich, elite ones at that, who need to read this passage very carefully to personally evaluate where they stand. But there are plenty of elitist liberals who publicly shame conservatives for not reaching out to the poor while secretly rejecting the ideals they preach when it comes to handling their own financial and business affairs. There are plenty of examples as recently exposed in "Do As I Say (Not As I Do): Profiles in Liberal Hypocrisy" by Peter Schweizer and other notable journalists and skeptics who deconstruct the walls of the banner ideologues to expose their failures to live up to their own standards for others.

All of us have a mote in our own eyes that we need to cast out before we try to remove the speck in another's. Let's not use Matthew 25 or any other scriptures taken out of context as branding for political action committees. Whether you're conservative or liberal, you can probably agree that it's not a proper use of scripture as it has enormous potential to mislead people into voting for and supporting things they might otherwise object to based on other scriptural teachings.

I hear ya. Wasn't this supposed to be the United States of America? Less pluribus, more unum.

That's too bad. If you bought it at Sears, maybe they'll let you bring it back...then again, maybe not...

The Deseret News reports that tourism dollars are higher this year than last year. To quote from the article:

"Arthur Frommer hurt us a little bit in the early part of the season and then we rebounded," said Ted Hallisey, Kane County's tourism director. County lodging taxes totaled $371,903 for the 12-month period ending Oct. 31, compared to $348,839 for the same period a year earlier, Hallisey said Friday. In October alone, taxes were $36,600, up 58 percent, he said.

In typical liberal fashion, Frommer responded by denying cold, hard facts and making ad hominem attacks.

"These are just numbers. I don't think it means anything," he said Friday from his office in New York City. "I still have grave concerns. My own conscience does not permit me to vacation among people who are as intolerant as that City Council."

Yet another case of a vocal minority trying to sound like the majority and being proven wrong by the numbers.

I see your liberal quote and raise you this one:

"It is ironic how easily economically and educationally privileged people can disguise smug, judgmental elitism as progressive liberalism--and then accuse the 'unintelligent' masses of being closed-minded. Now THAT is irony in a democracy."

Thanks for the suggestion on the road blocks, but the officers there are quite busy with the drug traffickers that see Hwy 89 as the perfect drug corridor. They'll be too busy for meaningless morality checks. That's absolutely not what I'm suggesting and anyone can see that you're setting up a straw man here just to pick a fight.

Not that you'll care, but why is it that whenever someone says "Hey, you know, the world isn't working so good and I think it's because people are losing the types of values that used to contribute to stable societies." that the next conclusion made by liberals is that we want to start slapping chastity belts on everyone who passes through town and sending them around with "minders" to make sure they don't talk to the women-folk?

It's because conservatives of all stripes have been and are being deliberately vilified and marginalized (through the power of the media) because nobody likes to consider that maybe they're right and liberals might be wrong. It's not convenient for liberals to consider that the Right is, well, right because it would mean that people would have to actually look into their soul and wonder if the pursuit of happiness is the same as the pursuit of pleasure. Not exactly the path of least resistance they're looking for.

But if you were actually from Kanab, or spent more time there than just gassing up and leaving, you'd know that we know that Colorado City is NOT what anyone wants our town to become. However, they don't want it to be Boulder, Colorado either. Somewhere in the middle (which is what it currently is), but with a few more improvements is just fine.

I believe that the city council was simply making an attempt to make a statement about what's important to the _local_ majority in the town. Maybe they're wrong and the _local_ majority will vote them out...but in a free republic, that's for the _local_ majority to decide.

You want quotes? I got quotes.

"Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports." -- George Washington

"No people can be bound to acknowledge and adore the Invisible Hand which conducts the affairs of men more than those of the United States. Every step by which they have advanced to the character of an independent nation seems to have been distinguished by some token of providential agency; and in the important revolution just accomplished in the system of their united government the tranquil deliberations and voluntary consent of so many distinct communities from which the event has resulted can not be compared with the means by which most governments have been established without some return of pious gratitude, along with an humble anticipation of the future blessings which the past seem to presage...it would be peculiarly improper to omit in this first official act my fervent supplications to that Almighty Being who rules over the universe, who presides in the councils of nations, and whose providential aids can supply every human defect, that His benediction may consecrate to the liberties and happiness of the people of the United States...and may enable every instrument employed in its administration to execute with success the functions allotted to his charge." -- George Washington

"We do not rise to the level of our expectations. We fall to the level of our training." -- Author Unknown

"To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it." -- GK Chesterton

"And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God?" --Thomas Jefferson

"The great object of my fear is the federal judiciary. That body, like gravity, ever acting, with noiseless foot, and unalarming advance, gaining ground step by step, and holding what it gains, is ingulfing insidiously the special governments into the jaws of that which feeds them." -- Thomas Jefferson, Aug. 18, 1821

"Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men." -- David Ogilivy

Thanks! We'll appreciate it greatly. If you want to promote us to your friends, just search on "Kanab" in Google and you'll get a whole pile of great sites in the first two pages.

http://www.google.com/search?q=kanab

Also, if it doesn't look too much like a conflict of interest in this forum, here's a link to this article in my blog with bonus links at the bottom to help promote the area.

http://thewatsontribe.tripod.com/Rob/blogs/2006/03/regarding-httpwww.html

No problem. Glad to oblige. :) I actually like it when people ask about stuff like that because it gives me the opportunity to dispel stereotypes and misinformation. Any other questions, let me know.

I hear you. People keep trying to lump us in with the Colorado City/Hildale polygamists. There is no such connection and hasn't been for over 100 years. The reason is that when the LDS church abandoned polygamy before the turn of the 20th century, Colorado City/Hildale disregarded that and broke off into their own church. They haven't been associated with the LDS church, nor with Kanab, which is 40 miles away, for all that time.

In fact, when I was in Kanab as a youth, I was assigned to help the LDS missionaries go to Colorado City and convert them back to the faith (some of the wives there had invited us to try to end their cycle of misery). We were run out of town with threats of violence and I don't think we've been back since. One of our General Authorities, Vaughn J. Featherstone, once said that he would know that the Gospel had been preached to the ends of the earth when Colorado City became open to missionaries. That still hasn't happened yet, but Russia is pretty much wide open though.

Thanks! By the way, there's an "anti-Kanab" site at http://www.whatsupwithkanab.com. People in and out of Kanab are devoting a lot of time to this topic. We should too.

Thank you Jotmo and Bullion! I just discovered this site and hope to provide more to it.

It sure is. Please help me generate buzz about Kanab to other conservative audiences. I would love to make it a haven for conservative vacationers (can you believe that it was the only community to approve the resolution in UTAH of all places?!) We have to show those other communities what they missed out on by rejecting it.

Nothing wrong with singles at all. :) This resolution was targeted at the left, not at people who just haven't gotten married yet for whatever reason.