Alternatively, “Confirmed: The Bloggernacle is in no way a reflection of what most Mormons think politically.”
Gallup has released a survey confirming the sharp conservative leanings of Mormons.
Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, or Mormons, are the most conservative major religious group in the country, with 59% identifying as conservative, 31% as moderate, and 8% as liberal.
Not too surprising but here are some interesting tidbits:
- “The data show that these lapsed Mormons are substantially different in ideology from their fellow Mormons who remain active in the church (as defined by attendance at church services). In fact, lapsed Mormons are essentially no different from all other non-Mormons in terms of their basic ideology.”
- Contrary to what I have assumed, Mormons seem to be generally of the same political stripe, whether they live in Utah or not. “The percentage of Mormons living in Utah who are conservative is little different from the conservative percentage among Mormons living elsewhere in the United States.”
These first point reiterates that indeed greater religious intensity suggests political conservatism. When church attendance and likelihood to marry are the biggest prognosticators of political affiliation, Mormons can’t help but be conservative.
(But don’t worry liberals, no one’s saying you can’t be a faithful member just because you aren’t on the big red bandwagon. Be a proud part of the 8%. Seriously, no sarcasm here.)
(Possibly) Related posts:
-
“Contrary to what I have assumed, Mormons seem to be generally of the same political stripe, whether they live in Utah or not.” I think your assumption is still correct, this poll notwithstanding. Remember that “conservative” is in the eye of the beholder. It doesn’t surprise me that Mormons, regardless of geography, identify as “conservative,” but that’s usually in contrast to their immediate surroundings, all of which are more liberal than Utah. In which case, if my logic stands up, it still stands to reason that Mormons outside Utah could be considerably less conservative than their Deseret brethren, which many people believe based on instinct and anecdote (myself included). The way to determine that would be to poll specifically on divisive issues like gay marriage, then see if a difference exists.
-
Shocker, indeed.
Some of the wackiest and most extreme politically conservative Mormons I have known have been in Maryland (and I was raised in one of the most liberal suburban counties in the country). And I have lived in Rexburg,Idaho, rural Utah, and Provo.
David, from the op-eds that your father-in-law writes in the D-News, I wasn’t even aware of who many of the hard-core conservatives were in Maryland.
-
I’m calling baloney.
This poll says that 79% of Mormons attend services every week. In which imaginary universe did Gallup do their so-called research? I realize that they are just going on self-reports, but holy cow, these Gallup people need to use their heads a little bit. I think that figure is probably double the real number.
-
They talked with 5800 Mormons. Not bad.
I don’t mind if Mormons are generally conservative, as long as they are educated enough not to be irrational about liberalism and everything else in the world. The fact that most conservative Mormons who I talk with simply lack an elementary grasp of knowledge on the things they are supposedly against, it makes it very hard for someone like me to associate himself with them. Over time, an intolerance builds because the same road has been trodden upon so frequently with the same arguments and the same results that I frankly don’t care to go through them again. Like recently I had a great conversation with my bishop as we were walking over to an apartment to help someone move in. We were talking about all sorts of subjects and landed upon economics. We discussed the differences between Google now and Microsoft in the 90s, and I mentioned that Microsoft was a monopoly which was not good for the computing market. He disagreed with labeling Microsoft a monopoly. My wall of frustration immediately went up because it seemed to me he fell into the politically defensive mode where you deny the obvious because it goes against your ideological beliefs. We ended the conversation not long after that, to be continued. We haven’t yet continued it. I tire of the modern conservative ideology. Too much of it is founded on lies. I demand a better opposing ideology.
-
Dan:
Funny that you should mention this: “Conservatives should be educated enough not to be irrational about liberalism. ” We conservatives view you liberals in the same light. We just cannot understand how you can be exposed day in and out to the same rhetoric and behavior of deceit, lies, blatant greed and corruption within the controlling party now and not be disgusted. We know you’re intelligent, but we can’t imagine where your heads are that you’d dismiss it and not be appalled.
But don’t misunderstand me. The Dems don’t have a monopoly on this corruption. It’s been stewing for a long time and is now becoming such a commonplace way to run our government that I’m unsure how we’ll ever get back on track.
You’ve generalized an awful lot. Perhaps you should widen your scope of acquaintances and talk with some conservatives who do have an adequate frame of reference to challenge your viewpoints. They’re everywhere.
Do you know what I’d find refreshing? To clean house in Washington and start over with representatives who actually LISTEN to their constituents and to have a dialogue with a liberal who confessed that he, too, thought this entire situation was unacceptable.
-
Molly,
The conservatives I tend to know are mostly, if not all, Mormon. And I know Mormons from California to Utah to Alaska to Boston and New York. Is there another batch of American conservative Mormons I am missing that would be any different than those found in those states and cities?
Now, the kind of critique I make actually does require a much longer post, because the definitions need to be clear, so I’m not exposed to charges of generalization. You try to compare by using the word “corruption.” That’s not my concern. Corruption can be found everywhere. I charge that too much of modern conservatism is founded on lies. One lie is that conservatism stands for family values, at the exclusion of other ideologies for standing for family values. In other words, modern conservatives have hijacked “family values” and believe they are the only ones who get to define what exactly “family values” means. Tied closely to this hijacking is just how well, or not, conservatives actually adhere to their own definitions of family values! Teen pregnancies are higher in conservative leaning states. Divorce rates are higher in conservative leaning states. Can’t tell you how many conservative leaders have been caught in embarrassing familial situations (Senator Ensign, Mark Sanford, yada yada). (Of course you can exclude Democrats from this list because, remember according to conservatives, liberals don’t have family values, so it should be expected that they cheat on their spouses). Take for instance the 2008 election. A debate arose over the amount of times certain candidates were married. One writer noted the Republican field:
Then again, the Republicans are fielding a motley crew right now: if you count Newt Gingrich, who’ll probably join the fray in the fall, the four leading candidates have had nine marriages among them: Giuliani three, Gingrich three, McCain two and Romney one. The Republican faithful are left with a devil of a choice: moderate candidates who live like liberals, or religious conservatives who talk like liberals.
Nine marriages between four candidates. Ouch! Another writer compared the Democratic field:
How many divorces have their been among the men — and women — in the Democratic field? Let’s run through them real quick, just for the fun of it. None of the following liberal Dem candidates has gotten divorced:
(1) Hillary: You know the story. No need to repeat it
(2) Obama: Married to Michelle, whom he met when she was just out of law school, for 15 years.
(3) Edwards: Married to Elizabeth since 1977; they’ve had four children, one of whom was killed in a car crash. As Andrew Sullivan recently observed: “Most couples never survive the death of a child. The Edwards family did — and went on to have two more.”
(4) Richardson: Married to his high-school sweetheart for 33 years.
(5) Biden: First wife killed in car accident in 1972; married to his current wife for almost 30 years.
Yeah, you have to really scrape your way to the bottom of the Democratic field to find divorces. The only Dem Presidential candidate with any kind of credible shot who has gotten divorced is…Chris Dodd, who divorced in 1982.
In fact, if you think about it, the entire field of Dems deemed credible boasts fewer divorces than Rudy Giuliani alone!
Well well, none of the liberal candidates have gotten divorced, and the entire field of Democratic candidates had fewer divorces than Rudy Giuliani alone! Wow. Family values indeed. Conservatives chose of their own free will, John McCain to represent their family values. This is the man who, when his wife was disfigured in a car crash, left her for a beautiful heiress. Ah, family values.
It can’t be left just with this point on family values. Let’s look at hard data from a state to state comparison. Liberal bastion Massachusetts vs conservative compound Texas. How does the divorce rate compare between the two states? How does teen pregnancy compare between the two states? How does the educational level of the children compare between the two states? In 2008, Massachusetts had 33,996 marriages and 12,992 divorces. In 2008, Texas had 179,451 marriages and 77,649 divorces. The divorce rate in Massachusetts is less than the divorce rate in Texas. One is just over 1/3 while the other is close to 1/2.
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr57/nvsr57_19.pdf
How about teen pregnancy rates? According to a study in 2000 Texas is the fifth highest state with teen pregnancies and Massachusetts the 40th. Now, just so you don’t think I’m picking on Texas, the state with the highest teen pregnancies is Nevada followed by Arizona, Mississippi, New Mexico, then Texas, Florida, California, Georgia, North Carolina, and Arkansas. On the other end, the states with the fewest teen pregnancies are North Dakota, Vermont, New Hampshire, Minnesota, Maine, Utah, South Dakota, Iowa, Wisconsin, Nebraska, and Massachusetts.
How about educational literacy? Surely that’s an important family value. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, when assessing the educational progress of Texas vs Massachusetts, we get the following results. On Grade 4 Math, we get for Massachusetts a score of 247 and for Texas 242. Grade 4 Reading, for Massachusetts 231, and Texas 219. Grade 8 Math, Massachusetts 292, Texas 281. Grade 8 Reading, Massachusetts 274, Texas 258. According to State Master’s website, the top five best educated states in the country are Vermont, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Jersey and Maine. Texas ranks 24th. Utah ranks 33rd. The worst states, from worst are Arizona, Mississippi, New Mexico, Nevada, California, Louisiana.
Now, if you compare the numbers of teen pregnancies to that of educational level, you’ll find an interesting parallel. Note that the states with the highest teen pregnancies also have the worst educational level in the country. Note also, they tend to be conservative leaning states. Poorer, less educated, hey at least they go to church.
Last one. Health care. Surely a priority for family values. Texas and southern states have significantly higher uninsured residents whereas New England and northern states have significantly lower uninsured residents according to the CDC.
You get the pattern that I am making here. What is the only thing that conservatism adds to family values that actually has any value? I was about to say abortion, but even that one has been so badly abused politically that it no longer has meaning. Conservatism stands on a lie when it comes to family values. It has hijacked a universal principle and tried to claim it for its own even though it brings nothing to family values to actually protect that sacred institution. You cannot claim it brings religion, because religion is irrespective of political ideology, as stated by our prophets. So you can see, my criticism of conservatism is based on researched facts. Do you have facts to back up your criticism of liberalism? I show you here that liberal leaning states do far better at protecting the family institution than conservative leaning states. Those who get married in liberal leaning states do better at staying married. Most likely because they had more choice in the matter. They didn’t impregnate their girlfriend in high school and feel the religious pressure to “do something about it” only to later divorce that girl and move on to another. Conservative ideology does not match reality because it is founded on too many lies.
-
Dan:
I’m not quite sure where to begin. There’s so much wrong with your response. Let me try.
It’s interesting that you seem to equate family values such as teen pregnancy and the divorce rate with partisan politics. I don’t know that I’ve ever seen this done. But if you want to go tit for tat, let’s do give a few moments of reflection to Bill Clinton, sitting President, and his indiscretion with Monica. More recently, let’s do take a look at John Edwards. Now talk about family values…his wife was battling cancer during his affair and ultimate fatherhood of yet another out of wedlock child in this country.
As far as scraping the way to the bottom of the Democratic field to find divorces…well, yes, I can understand completely how Hillary Clinton stuck by her man even though he was diddling around at the White House. Her actions are admirable. And John Edwards…what an egotist. I’m willing to bet it was less their commitment to their marriages than their commitment to their political futures. It’s no feat or accomplishment to remain in an abusive marriage. Any self respecting woman wouldn’t do it. Heavenly Father wouldn’t require it or expect it.
I could go on, but hopefully, you get my point. It’s useless to point to one party or another and say, “yes, they are the reason our family values, teen pregnancy, and divorce rate has sky-rocketed.” It’s an insane stance. Family values are courted from within the family structure.
If anything, the family structure has been more harmed because of the free social programs we’ve implemented. They replace the idea that we have to work hard and earn a living and have the respect for ourselves that is the very foundation of our family.
If you’re interested in reading the psychology of diminishing family values as related to our every basic need being met by government, why not do some research on how the Japanese American families disintegrated and their values eroded when we interned them in camps during WW11. It’s enlightening.
I’m aligned with the party that most closely respects my political beliefs as a Mormon. The current political experiment toward socialism that Dems are promoting doesn’t meet my needs.
Your argument that somehow these errant family values are the result of families and communities voting conservative or liberal are not even credible.
Your ’surface’ arguments
-
sorry. I didn’t cut completely on those last two phrases..my bad.
-
Molly, what are you talking about? What programs (name them) harm the family structure? How come Massachusetts has a lower divorce rate than Utah? There is no social safety net. If you lose your job, you’ll end up homeless. Welfare is a thing of the (rather distant) past. What in the random non offensive word are you talking about? Facts, please.
And how dare you justify your bigotry by suggesting that throwing whole families in jail (which is what happened when the Japanese were interned) has something to do with your cruel and simply incorrect politics? what are you saying? I mean really? Of course taking people’s property, throwing them into prison, denying them medical treatment, etc. is a bad thing. What does this have to do with liberalism? I mean really. Fact up.
-
Sigh. At Church, I’m too liberal. At Work, I’m too Conservative. The sum effect is to teach me to shut up.
The conservative bent at church bugs me immensely. Yet, I’m am as active a Mormon as any other (and then some… temple recommend in use, actively serving in callings, attend each and every Sunday, kids on mission/at byu-i, pay tithing, have family prayer/scriptures/home evening, personal prayer, etc.)
The whole poll makes me feel like there’s something wrong with me.
-
Molly,
I think you’re treading on thin ice here.Conservatives have used “family values” like Bill Clinton’s cheating to sling mud on “liberal” candidates no end. While cheating on their own wives. Hypocritical? You decide.
—My motto is: I am liberal in what I allow others, but conservative in what I allow myself.
I think that is a fairly Christan attitude — IOW, it’s something that condenses Christ’s teaching very well, IMO.
I do not say this to condemn anyone. If someone feels a prick of conscience, look in the mirror: Am I really a good example of what I represent? (Already mentioned people like Gingrich, Billy Clinton, Giuliani, McCain; myself)
I think it’s true that pundits often go on very little evidence, or when they have the evidence, they cherry-pick it from facts that aren’t comparable or compatible. (It would take too long to explain, but have you looked at factcheck.org, for example, even out of curiosity? AFAIK, they expose all lies there that they find (not perfect!), not just conservative ones. Politicians tend to say what they think is a good-sounding sound bite, without caring how well the facts behind it are checked.)
Anyway, yes, it is conservative to think that sex belongs to a marriage. I think civil unions for same-sex couples should be accepted by both sides.
Or look at abortion debate. Some want abortion to be completely banned, totally unavailable (there are lots of campaign sites archived that argue for that). I don’t want the government telling me what to do! That’s a conservative view, but ideologues are fine with gov’t control as long as it’s their party that controls the gov’t.
Let’s hope I closed all tags correctly, or this’ll look wierd.
-
Yeah, I missed two opening tags.. shoot. That’s life…
-
Molly,
I am not sure how you are supporting your statements. You do not seem to agree that less teen pregnancy, divorce, and higher education is not in line with “family values”. I guess then I need to know what you mean by family values. Perhaps the Democrat and Republican ideas are different. Do conservatives think that such ideas mentioned above are not good for the family? Regardless if family values are courted in the home, what then are families in liberal states doing different in their homes that conservatives say in Texas are not doing as a whole? I am not sure I follow what you mean?
As for welfare and social programs, are you saying that people on welfare are satisfied with the little that they get from social programs so they do not want to work hard? Last I check people on welfare are still poor, so why would they not want to trade that for something more? Could there be issues of sicknesses, handicaps, and social and economic problems that keep them from succeeding to getting a job? I am confused as to why you correlate having wealth, (in this case having a job to support you family) as a measurement of working hard? Does a min. wage worker who still needs social programs, work as hard as a CEO? I am not sure if work ethic and even self respect can be measured one’s ability to create wealth? -
David,
That article is a joke. While I don’t doubt the accuracy of the data they gathered, I seriously question the wisdom of reporting all Christian denominations together except Mormons and Catholics. Seriously, are they suggesting the Unitarians and Baptists are similarly conservative?
I would like to see that group broken out more and then see where the Mormons stand as a group.
-
Molly,
I could go on, but hopefully, you get my point
No actually I don’t. The only thing the Clintons and the Edwards do is cancel out the Ensigns and the Sanfords from the conservative field. You have yet to counter the statistical facts which show conservative leaning states (where you get conservatively run governments) doing poorly at key family value points. Counter that please. If you can.
If anything, the family structure has been more harmed because of the free social programs we’ve implemented. They replace the idea that we have to work hard and earn a living and have the respect for ourselves that is the very foundation of our family.
How does that actually harm the family unit? Secondly, if we say it did, exactly what kind of harm does it do to the family unit? I show you statistics indicating more divorce rates and higher teen pregnancy rates in conservative leaning states. Show me how these “free social programs” impact the family in a negative way.
Your argument that somehow these errant family values are the result of families and communities voting conservative or liberal are not even credible.
You’ve failed to counter my arguments, Molly, and as such, your concluding point falls short of its goal.
-
dJinn:
“And how dare you justify your bigotry by suggesting that throwing whole families in jail .” I object to your saying I am a bigot. I never said I agreed with this internment. As a matter of fact, I think it was deplorable. No one should be subjected to what these people endured.
I’m saying this: Entitlements increase social problems and do undermine the family structure. Steven Thayn, an Idaho representative wrote an excellent paper on family providing social services vs the government providing them. I’ll try to find a link and post it.
Velska:
Other than I’m skating on thin ice, I don’t disagree with much you’ve said. We all pick and choose.
Adam:
“You do not seem to agree that less teen pregnancy, divorce, and higher education is not in line with “family values”. You’re wrong, I do. What I said was that I don’t believe a family’s political preference has anything to do with the destruction of the family unit. The family unit erodes from within.
“Regardless if family values are courted in the home, what then are families in liberal states doing different in their homes that conservatives say in Texas are not doing as a whole?” Perhaps it’s as simple as we lean toward a political base that we believe most closely affirms our family values, i.e. if our family values are geared toward less stringent work ethics, perhaps we might be more apt to vote for a party that provides more for our well being and vice versa. Just an example.
I’m not saying this is the rule. It’s just something to think about.
“Could there be issues of sicknesses, handicaps, and social and economic problems that keep them from succeeding to getting a job?” Absolutely. In no way would I ever dream that these situations not warrant help from some source.
“I am confused as to why you correlate having wealth, (in this case having a job to support you family) as a measurement of working hard?” I don’t. Why would you think that?
I believe our social programs have been set up to become abused, and they ARE being abused. I am not talking about instances where the support is truly needed, as you pointed out, Adam.
This is my thought: When we provide every basic necessity for those who are capable but unwilling to work, we set up a system of failure. This failure translates into destruction of family values. I see it happen. Women bear children simply to cash in on welfare support. If you don’t believe this happens, come to Georgia. This statement doesn’t make me racist, a bigot or anything of the sort. It makes me think we should reevaluate how we distribute support.
My entire thought, except for the Japanese American statement, which on second thought I used in error, was based on the thought that we cannot provide everything to everyone and expect that the family unit not change for the worse.
Dan’s thought process that choice of political parties erodes family is, in my opinion, wrong. Perhaps it’s that family values have much to do with our choice of party and, like Velska said, what we deem important when we pick and choose.
-
Molly,
Entitlements increase social problems and do undermine the family structure.
Can you show evidence of this please.
This is my thought: When we provide every basic necessity for those who are capable but unwilling to work, we set up a system of failure. This failure translates into destruction of family values.
How does it translate into “destruction of family values?”
Dan’s thought process that choice of political parties erodes family is, in my opinion, wrong.
That’s not what I say. I say that modern conservative ideology bases its belief in family values on a lie, thus not helpful to the family. I prove it with facts. You make statements without backing them up. Com’on Molly.
-
oh and speaking of divorce rates, Nate Silver at Five Thirty Eight discovered a fascinating trend. States that have banned gay marriage have a higher divorce rate among heterosexuals and states that have not done anything to ban gay marriage have a lower divorce rate among heterosexuals.
Since 2003, however, the decline in divorce rates has been largely confined to states which have not passed a state constitutional ban on gay marriage. These states saw their divorce rates decrease by an average of 8 percent between 2003 and 2008. States which had passed a same-sex marriage ban as of January 1, 2008, however, saw their divorce rates rise by about 1 percent over the same period.
You can see, once again, which states have the lowest divorce rates through this method. Rhode Island, Maine, Massachusetts, New Mexico, New York. And from the worst, Alaska, Colorado, Nevada, Kansas, Utah. Texas is somewhere in the middle.
-
Try these sources, guys.
http://www.cato.org/pubs/catosletters/cl-12.pdf
http://nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/keeping-americas-edge
http://www.accd.edu/sac/gov/kaupert/flex/Lectures/poverty.pdf
Families and the Key to a Prosperous and Compassionate Society for the 21st Century
-
And you can download this in pdf: http://www.jeffhead.com/familysolution.htm
Neal A. Maxwell, Ensign, October 1978; “The Prohibitive Costs of a Value-free Society”
Harold B. Lee, Conference Report, October 1941, p.111
“When you get the Latter-day Saints to agree on any point, you may know it is the voice of God.” ~Joseph Smith
-
Wow, this post has devolved quickly.
-
Molly,
The first one is a fairly lame polemic, not offering much of an actual argument. The second one is much better, though, I’m not sure this writer gets it. He says:
Perhaps the best illustration of these pressures — to innovate and deregulate without coming apart at the seams — is found in widening economic inequalities. It has often been noted that American society has become increasingly unequal in economic terms over the past 30 years.
Does this writer not get that this economic inequality that we have seen over the past 30 years is a direct result of Reagan Economics? I mean, seriously, it’s not that hard to see. When you cut the tax rate of the richest Americans, they tend to get richer at the expense of the rest of the nation. However, his concluding remarks about how to proceed forward are not bad. If only conservatives thought this way.
The last piece is yet another polemic, however, at least these guys understand:
So far, we have discussed the ideal classical liberal world in which entitlements would be entirely absent.16 In the real world, however, such programs are all too common, which furnishes us with the opportunity to engage in further analysis. To wit, given the fact that entitlement programs exist, how should the moral agent act in regard to them?
At least they understand that there is a difference between the fantasy world of the “classic liberal” and the real world.
-
I am Mormon and I consider myself a conservative. I have been reading some of what Dan has said and am amazed at the shallowness that he is exuding in many of his posts. Just because you hold an ideal to be true does not mean that your life will manage to follow in that unadulterated way of life. Just because Divorce is a travesty to the family does not mean it is unhealthy for many individuals who partake of it. On the contrary I have met several people where it has greatly enhanced their lifestyles in the short term, but by the same token there is something to be said when both partners in any union work on themselves to form a more perfect support system. In other words when you have two individuals who are willing to lay down their egos, their wants, their priorities to understand and help each other a new unite is formed and allowed to move forward. This is what Mormons who are married are supposed to learn. Do they? Sometimes. But the opposite can happen as well where one side gives and the other simply takes or dominates, it is easy to loose oneself in the others shadow.
You show a trend that is statistically insignificant in respect to baning Gay-Marriage. The odd thing is if the word was not marriage then I think no one would care. I believe currently a civil union in California gives all the same rights as marriage does it not ( I may be ignorant on this but it was my understanding ) and yet they push for marriage… why that word? You see in most peoples minds, Conservative or otherwise, when I have polled them about the word marriage they think of a religious ceremony that is also just happens to be recognized by the state. In other words even if the state did not recognize marriage Mormons would still get ‘married’ because it has a significance beyond what the ‘State’ has placed on them.
The only other fear that I know has been expressed by some is the all to willingness by a minority of others to take wording to a level where they can then sue others because of the language of the law. For instance if it is legal to get married then if a religious institution does not allow you to get married because they disagree with binding under their religious laws then can they be sued as being discriminatory? The problem is that by going in this direction of calling it marriage you blur the boundary.
You may call it whatever you like, I have never cared how people choose to live their lives, it is between them and their god. I wish them well in their journey and am more then willing to share why what they do does not jive with me and my God. To some the fact that I feel that being gay is bad makes me a bigot… however I also feel that being unfaithful to a spouse is just as wrong… You may not equate the two but that is because you have a fundamental different belief on the issue then I do.
To some this means I am provincial and ignorant, when in reality I am a well adjusted, fairly tolerant human being that simply has a different fundamental belief then you do. This is caused by experiencing not a lack of ideas or thoughts, rather it comes from a plethora of experiences that perhaps you or others have never had.
To me it is the person who believes that being gay is fine that is ignorant of those experiences. Now again as I stated before, I am more then willing to allow any person the chance to live in a nondestructive lifestyle to myself the chance to do so ( I believe things like drunk driving are NOT okay since allowing this DOES endanger my life )
Also Dan you are wrong about Microsoft being a monopoly. It wasn’t though it did have aggressive policies that kept people from competing in areas that were to be honest, non vital as far as software goes. On the other hand Apple IS a monopoly and should not be allowed to do what it does providing both software and hardware, but it does not have enough market share to really justify calling it a monopoly. Google is moving in the direction of being a monopoly but has not gotten there yet, but that is to be expected with any successful monopoly in the end it will stop short and be muck like Microsoft is now.
Again you may feel I am simply ignorant but I promise I have a very wide breadth of education. I have considered the political and philosophical ramifications of my beliefs many times over and frequently ask the question why to not only what I believe but why I believe it. In the end being a conservative is not about being willing to move forward, I think the true problem is that the philosophies of the left actually are more an impediment to growth and learning then you may understand them to be.
-
It made me so sad to read not only YOURS but the responses to what you had to say. I was raised in a loving, kind, non-judgmental Mormon family, but for the last 25 years have visited churches of every denomination. Why? Because I have brothers and sisters in ALL of them, and, (not just because Jesus TOLD US TO DO SO, but because it is truly the way I feel), I LOVE my neighbor as myself… or even more. That is the point you’ve been missing! When you TRULY love others, you don’t JUDGE them but you DO CARE how they think and how they behave. You care because you want them to find eternal life and joy beyond Earthly description, and I can tell you that FIRST HAND – because twice in my life, I’ve died… and been brought back; once as a 6 year old, (who had NEVER even been to church) and again as a young adult. I won’t plug my book here because that has nothing to do with my point… but I have spent my entire life, especially since my visit to the other side of the veil, getting MORE joy from seeing the happiness of others than I could possibly get from my own. I am not only an inspirational poet/songwriter/author, but just a “cheerleader for the people”… a comforter and someone who loves them, good or bad, right or wrong. But LOVE cares enough to TEACH… and that’s what I do.
ONE SHORT EXAMPLE, (out of hundreds), is when I was a world champion athlete. I made my living, and raised two very young children as a single mother, playing on a tour where money, (not ego) was the real prize. But something happened after I returned from the “other side of the vel”… the place I refer to as “home”. I finally understood what Jesus meant when He said, “love your enemy”… in fact, love everyone. When I was there, the absolute and overwhelming love I felt for EVERYONE was soul filling and like nothing we are able to experience here on Earth – not even as I held my newborn baby in my arms for the first time and thought I would NEVER feel a love so great as he grasped my finger with his perfect little hand. As I stood there, (at home), realizing how amazing and wonderful that love was – and that we ALL felt that way about each other, I understood that we would someday “mourn the loss” of every single person who didn’t return “home”… friend or enemy, family or stranger. So, when I was told it “wasn’t my time yet” and forced to return to Earth, I NEVER forget that love, and suddenly, I found myself cheering for my opponant. I was already a world champion, and even though I NEEDED the money to provide for my two sons, if the person I was competing with WON, they would be jumping up and down for joy because THEY HAD BEAT THE WORLD CHAMPION, with friends cheering them on and family taking pictures. So much joy – and a memory they would never forget. But if I won, it would be just another match, another tournament, and another opponant that I probably wouldn’t even remember in a few days. So “that one event” could produce a GREAT amount of joy, (if they won – and of course, I shared their joy as I felt their happiness, so we BOTH felt great), or a much smaller amount of joy if I won, and they walked away head down, sad and feeling like a failure. TRUE CHRISTIANITY isn’t about “self”… it’s about LOVE! I wanted THEM to win – because (other than the money), I got to share in their joy, like a father or mother shares the joy of a 7 year old Little League player who hits his first home run. I was just as happy for them as they were – if not happier. And that, my friends, is LOVE. (And also, why I retired from competition.) So yes, if you believe in Jesus, and that what HE said in the Bible is true… then we MUST love our neighbors as we love ourselves, which means you can’t say, “I don’t care what anyone else believes. That’s between them and God.” Well… yes it is – but when you love someone, and you KNOW what wonders are waiting for them someday… for ETERNITY, you just plain HAVE to care. I am ultra-conservative SINCE my death experiences, and it had absolutely nothing to do with what church I attend, (or if I attend church at all). It’s about “not shedding innocent blood”, (abortion). It’s about the abomination of men/men and women/women sexual partners and/or marriage partners. It’s about taking GOD out of our every day lives, from the schools, public places and now even coins… and IT’S ABOUT LOVING everyone so much that you are willing to devote your entire life to helping others discover that JOYOUS moment when you realize that you truely DO love others every bit as much as you love yourself. (Jesus knew what he was talking about!!) I have many friends who commit abominations, like homosexualilty, adultry, abortion, etc., and I LOVE THEM ALL. I love them so much that I forgive them, (as I would my own family member) and yet do everything I can to SAVE them from what I KNOW, (from personal experience), is our eternal future. Is ANYTHING on this planet; anything at ALL, worth risking eternity for? And as Christians, whether Baptist, Luthern, Methodist, Mormon, Mennonite, etc…. WE NEED TO STICK TOGETHER and quit quibbling over the details. Study your Bible, because Jesus gave us the perfect “instruction book” to find our way HOME again. Prayer, praise and study… no matter your religion, because if we just do as Jesus told us to, follow the example HE set for us, and be obedient to the rules He gave us… (like we give to our children because we love them), WE ARE ALL BROTHERS AND SISTERS IN CHRIST. And for those who aren’t? Pray for them! Love them! Don’t judge them – but set a good example for them, and let them know that they are headed in the wrong direction… out of LOVE not judgment. Believe me, when people see what unbridled joy you have; when they see the light that literally shines from within, they want it to. God bless everyone reading this, (if anyone), and remember, someday YOU will have to stand before God and explain why you voted for someone who stands for ANYTHING God sees as an abomination. I can hear it now, “But God, I like their economic policiy.” One thing… that’s all it takes, and I’d hate to have to explain why I went against what I KNEW Jesus taught us because of… what? There will be no excuse in God’s eyes and eternity is a long time to live with regret. With Love, from Abigayle… your sister whether you know it or not!
24 comments
Comments feed for this article
Trackback link: http://asoftanswer.com/2010/01/11/shocker-mormons-most-conservative-major-religious-group-in-u-s/trackback/