I agree that we need to treat the Obama family like children of God and show respect for them as people. However, you then used terminology that really violated the point of your article--the importance of civility. Terms like " leftist policies" and " social welfare elitists" do exactly what you said not to do. They apply emotional labels designed to make people feel instead of think. Such labels serve only to divide and do nothing to further the good of the country. The Church has asked us to talk about issues, not people, and it is possible to do so without manipulative labels. Having a different idea of how to take care of our nation doesn't make someone wrong. In his On-Faith blog, the Church's PR person said countries do have a responsibility to care for the welfare of their people. How is political--but governments are not exempt from the requirement to care for the sick, the poor and the needy. It is easy to say the government shouldn't--charity should. However, I think what that really means is that government should not have to. When we are meeting our personal responsibilities to the poor, the government can get out of the business. The need of the government to make sure the poor don't die from lack of health care or food just means we are failing in our mission to care for God's children. Not everyone who is poor is poor due to bad choices. Many of our prophets grew up poor, after all.
shellyApril 3, 2013
Very good article about not condemning all of a person because of some of their choices. However, you said, 'We have been advocating since the beginning of the movement that we prize family values, oppose abortion and favour traditional marriage. The Bushes, the Romneys and the Obamas all fit this definition...' Obama is a supporter of the eventual tear down of traditional marriage by supporting gay marriage. He has also, over and over again, supports a 'woman's right to choose' to take the life of the baby. He supports abortion. So 2 or your 3 points Obama fails miserably.
I agree that we need to take each action of individuals separately. If a criminal that likes to rob banks is also caught aiding an old lady to the car with her groceries we should acknowledge that kindness he/she did. But we must remember the bank robberies and hold them accountable for that, too.
I too am Republican and Conservative. It is getting more difficult to find those that will 'not be moved' from these values even in our own party or that will not be afraid to call a bad choice just that. We can love individuals without sanctioning the error of judgement or outright sin.
gripApril 3, 2013
I would add to the list of characteristics of families in the White House - they would want to pay their debts so they would want to and know how to do it for the nation and spare the hurt to future generations .
BeverlyApril 3, 2013
Although it may be true that they value their own family, it appears by the policies that they promote that they don't value others' families. If they truly value "family" their ideology would be different toward others' families.
shellyApril 3, 2013
Very good article about not condemning all of a person because of some of their choices. However, you said, 'We have been advocating since the beginning of the movement that we prize family values, oppose abortion and favour traditional marriage. The Bushes, the Romneys and the Obamas all fit this definition...' Obama is a supporter of the eventual tear down of traditional marriage by supporting gay marriage. He has also, over and over again, supports a 'woman's right to choose' to take the life of the baby. He supports abortion. So 2 or your 3 points Obama fails miserably.
I agree that we need to take each action of individuals separately. If a criminal that likes to rob banks is also caught aiding an old lady to the car with her groceries we should acknowledge that kindness he/she did. But we must remember the bank robberies and hold them accountable for that, too.
I too am Republican and Conservative. It is getting more difficult to find those that will 'not be moved' from these values even in our own party or that will not be afraid to call a bad choice just that. We can love individuals without sanctioning the error of judgement or outright sin.
Comments | Return to Story
Terrie Lynn BittnerApril 3, 2013
I agree that we need to treat the Obama family like children of God and show respect for them as people. However, you then used terminology that really violated the point of your article--the importance of civility. Terms like " leftist policies" and " social welfare elitists" do exactly what you said not to do. They apply emotional labels designed to make people feel instead of think. Such labels serve only to divide and do nothing to further the good of the country. The Church has asked us to talk about issues, not people, and it is possible to do so without manipulative labels. Having a different idea of how to take care of our nation doesn't make someone wrong. In his On-Faith blog, the Church's PR person said countries do have a responsibility to care for the welfare of their people. How is political--but governments are not exempt from the requirement to care for the sick, the poor and the needy. It is easy to say the government shouldn't--charity should. However, I think what that really means is that government should not have to. When we are meeting our personal responsibilities to the poor, the government can get out of the business. The need of the government to make sure the poor don't die from lack of health care or food just means we are failing in our mission to care for God's children. Not everyone who is poor is poor due to bad choices. Many of our prophets grew up poor, after all.
shellyApril 3, 2013
Very good article about not condemning all of a person because of some of their choices. However, you said, 'We have been advocating since the beginning of the movement that we prize family values, oppose abortion and favour traditional marriage. The Bushes, the Romneys and the Obamas all fit this definition...' Obama is a supporter of the eventual tear down of traditional marriage by supporting gay marriage. He has also, over and over again, supports a 'woman's right to choose' to take the life of the baby. He supports abortion. So 2 or your 3 points Obama fails miserably. I agree that we need to take each action of individuals separately. If a criminal that likes to rob banks is also caught aiding an old lady to the car with her groceries we should acknowledge that kindness he/she did. But we must remember the bank robberies and hold them accountable for that, too. I too am Republican and Conservative. It is getting more difficult to find those that will 'not be moved' from these values even in our own party or that will not be afraid to call a bad choice just that. We can love individuals without sanctioning the error of judgement or outright sin.
gripApril 3, 2013
I would add to the list of characteristics of families in the White House - they would want to pay their debts so they would want to and know how to do it for the nation and spare the hurt to future generations .
BeverlyApril 3, 2013
Although it may be true that they value their own family, it appears by the policies that they promote that they don't value others' families. If they truly value "family" their ideology would be different toward others' families.
shellyApril 3, 2013
Very good article about not condemning all of a person because of some of their choices. However, you said, 'We have been advocating since the beginning of the movement that we prize family values, oppose abortion and favour traditional marriage. The Bushes, the Romneys and the Obamas all fit this definition...' Obama is a supporter of the eventual tear down of traditional marriage by supporting gay marriage. He has also, over and over again, supports a 'woman's right to choose' to take the life of the baby. He supports abortion. So 2 or your 3 points Obama fails miserably. I agree that we need to take each action of individuals separately. If a criminal that likes to rob banks is also caught aiding an old lady to the car with her groceries we should acknowledge that kindness he/she did. But we must remember the bank robberies and hold them accountable for that, too. I too am Republican and Conservative. It is getting more difficult to find those that will 'not be moved' from these values even in our own party or that will not be afraid to call a bad choice just that. We can love individuals without sanctioning the error of judgement or outright sin.
ADD A COMMENT