Elder Oaks on churches and politics

[Sleeping in EQ]

From the Oct. 1992 Ensign, p. 60:

"When churches or church leaders choose to enter the public sector to engage in debate on a matter of public policy, they should be admitted to the debate and they should expect to participate in it on the same basis as all other participants. In other words, if churches or church leaders choose to oppose or favor a particular piece of legislation, their opinions should be received on the same basis as the opinions offered by other knowledgeable organizations or persons, and they should be considered on their merits. By the same token, churches and church leaders should expect the same broad latitude of discussion of their views that conventionally applies to everyone else’s participation in public policy debates. A church can claim access to higher authority on moral questions, but its opinions on the application of those moral questions to specific legislation will inevitably be challenged by and measured against secular-based legislative or political judgments.”

[SoCalCoug]

"Except when the issue is gay marriage."

[Solon]

Originally Posted by Sleeping in EQ

From the Oct. 1992 Ensign, p. 60:

"When churches or church leaders choose to enter the public sector to engage in debate on a matter of public policy, they should be admitted to the debate and they should expect to participate in it on the same basis as all other participants. In other words, if churches or church leaders choose to oppose or favor a particular piece of legislation, their opinions should be received on the same basis as the opinions offered by other knowledgeable organizations or persons, and they should be considered on their merits. By the same token, churches and church leaders should expect the same broad latitude of discussion of their views that conventionally applies to everyone else’s participation in public policy debates. A church can claim access to higher authority on moral questions, but its opinions on the application of those moral questions to specific legislation will inevitably be challenged by and measured against secular-based legislative or political judgments.”

That's a really interesting quote. On the one hand, it legitimizes churches' involvement in the legislative or policy-forming processes. On the other hand, it acknowledges the secular nature of the institutions that make these decisions.

I guess expecting a "broad latitude of discussion" doesn't really surrender any ground.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Solon

That's a really interesting quote. On the one hand, it legitimizes churches' involvement in the legislative or policy-forming processes. On the other hand, it acknowledges the secular nature of the institutions that make these decisions.

I guess expecting a "broad latitude of discussion" doesn't really surrender any ground.

Which is why the church didn't issue a one-liner stating, "God is against Prop 8." They actually laid out cogent moral arguments against it, to be considered "on their merits."

[Goatnapper'96]

Originally Posted by Tex

Which is why the church didn't issue a one-liner stating, "God is against Prop 8." They actually laid out cogent moral arguments against it, to be considered "on their merits."

I cannot wait until this goes away. It probably won't for sometime and my guess is California is just the beginning. We got "encouraged" by an ecclesiastical leader to have our business donate some cash. We met and discussed it and the partners voted 4-1 to donate. Oh the power of the desire to be promoted in the Kingdom of God! By golly it is good to know that despite my dissenting vote and the fact that it is likely that my Sisters in Law are not real likely to let me get too close to any of their kids for some period of time lest they be influenced by the rebellious one, the real decision makers will still believe me a "pillar!"

Obedience is better than sacrifice, boo ya!

It is a great vise the Church has when it wants it.