Final Post: Why So Long, and Some Parting Statements

To the readers of the Mormons for Obama Blog:

No doubt my long silence has caused some concern and engendered some questions. My absence from the blog arose for a simple but sad reason: During the summer, my mother became very ill, and I went across the country to care for her. Regrettably, my best efforts were unavailing, and my mother passed away a little over two weeks ago.

I realize that this kind of story sounds like a more maudlin version of "the dog ate my homework." This is why I have made the difficult decision to drop my anonymity, so that if necessary people can verify the truth regarding the reason for my silence. My mother, Sophie Koltko, passed away at St. Vincent's Hospital in New York City on October 19; her death notice appeared in the issue of the New York Daily News appearing on Wednesday October 22. I am the son mentioned in that death notice: Mark Koltko-Rivera. I served a full-time LDS mission honorably, and have served in two LDS bishoprics and an LDS stake high council. I am an active, faithful, temple-attending member of the LDS Church (although of course I speak only for myself, not for the Church).


Putting my own private sorrow aside, let me address the current situation. As I write this, it is a few hours before dawn on election day. Can there be any good in my making a few more points regarding the campaign of Senator Obama? I think there is. I was stunned this evening to find that my e-mail account for this blog has hundreds of e-mails, many of them urging me to post further. Perhaps what I write here will make the tiniest of differences in this election; perhaps not even that. However, I have always strongly felt that what one can do to further the most important causes, one must do. Consequently, I will write a bit about the topics I had promised in my first post that I would address. Each topic will get just a few sentences rather than a full post, but even this might provoke some thought before a ballot is cast. So, below, I respond to some statements that I imagine a Latter-day Saint might say, in opposition to Senator Obama's candidacy.

“The Latter-day Saints, at least in Utah, have voted Republican for over half a century, partly for reasons of fiscal policy. How can Latter-day Saints vote for a tax-and-spend Democrat now?”

The Latter-day Saints have long had a tradition of frugality and living within our means. This is a good thing, and the result of prophetic inspiration and teaching. (Frankly, if everyone had listened to the advice of the prophets in this regard, we would likely not be facing the national mortgage and credit crises, and the international economic crisis that has resulted from those crises.) However, some politicians have manipulated the Latter-day Saints around the issue of frugality and living within our means. Two points should be made in this regard:

1) The fact of the matter is that we live in a complicated society with serious problems. It is not responsible for a Saint to say, "Well, what needs to happen is that everyone should live the gospel, and that would solve our problems." We must address the problems of our society today, not during the Millenium. Our society's problems are serious: the relatively poor educational achievement of our children in mathematics and science; our disastrous environmental situation; the need to retool our workforce for the 21st century; the 20% or so of our armed forces serving in Iraq and Afghanistan who have experienced a traumatic brain injury and/or clinical depression; the grim situation facing our homeless citizens, and families living in poverty -- this list could go on for some time. Addressing these issues is going to require serious money. Ignoring our problems will not make them go away. It is not a matter of 'tax and spend'; it is a matter of spending to address our problems in a responsible way.

2) The Republican Party, during the eight years of the current Presidential administration, has shown nothing in the way of frugality or financial restraint. It is worth remembering that President George W. Bush came into office after the national debt had been essentially erased during the Clinton administration. We now have the largest national debt in American history, a debt so large that it could not fit on the National Debt Clock. And what have we got for this expense? A stagnant war in Iraq that was started under false pretenses, a bottomless hole of a conflict that our children's children will be paying for; a national and international economic crisis, created in part by the loosening of government regulation over shady financial dealings in the mortgage industry and the world of investment banking. The Republican candidate for President has said nothing that indicates he disowns the policies that created these problems.

Senator McCain largely supported, and apparently still stands for, the presidential policies that got us into our problems. Senator Obama will take the measures necessary to get us out of these problems. We'll wind up spending money either way; it's a matter of who will spend the money productively.

“How about the oft-quoted comment by a now-deceased LDS General Authority, to the effect that no Latter-day Saint could, in good conscience, be a Democrat?”

Yes, we've all heard that, I'm sure. You will note that the current and immediately preceding First Presidency -- the living prophets of this generation -- have been trying to clean up that mess for many years, frequently stating that the LDS Church is strictly neutral in matters of partisan politics (with the exception of matters that are clearly moral in nature).

We forget too easily that General Authorities, being just human, have their own personal opinions; it is unfortunate that the Saints sometimes elevate these personal opinions to the status of doctrine -- a doctrinally unsound practice, I might add. Joseph Smith himself said that he was only a prophet when he was acting as such. The same applies to all the General Authorities who have followed him.

The LDS General Authorities are not known for being timid. You may be absolutely confident that if the First Presidency were to conclude that membership in a particular political party were a doctrinal or moral problem, they would be very clear about it, despite any other consideration. The fact that the First Presidency has not said anything remotely like this indicates that there is no impediment to a member of the LDS Church either being a Democrat or voting for one.

“The Democratic Party supports abortion rights, while the Republican Party favors greater legal restrictions on abortion. How can Latter-day Saints vote for a Democratic candidate, rather than a Republican one?”

Of all people, Latter-day Saints should have a vivid understanding of the dangers involved in compulsion, that is compelling others to behave in a way that we think to be good. After all, in our own uniquely LDS scriptures, we learn that there was a plan proposed before the world was created, wherein no one would be permitted to make a wrong choice; of course, this plan was proposed by Lucifer. (See, in the Pearl of Great Price, Moses 4:1.)

We live in a pluralistic society where people have very different ideas about when life begins. In this kind of situation, it would be wrong for us to compel others to follow the teachings of the prophets regarding abortion (or anything else, for that matter). We are to teach and persuade, but not to compel the human mind.

I note that the First Presidency has not made the matter of abortion rights a litmus test for electability. I would also note that single issue politics is, generally, bad politics.

Are there limits to this? Of course there are. Slavery is a good example of something that is way over the line of acceptability. The issue of when it is appropriate to compel behavior is a complex one that goes beyond what I can address here. However, abortion rights--an issue about which there are good people on both sides of the debate--does not seem to me to be within the circle of issues where compulsion is acceptable.

“The Democratic Party supports gay rights, while the Republican Party does not. How can Latter-day Saints vote for a Democratic candidate, rather than a Republican one?”

The same arguments apply here as in the preceding topic. We live in a pluralistic society. It is counterproductive and doctrinally perilous to try to compel people to live according to LDS standards.

"School prayer: the Republicans are for it, the Democrats against it. Doesn't that make it obvious, regarding for whom the Saints should vote?"

This issue -- prayer in public schools -- has been around for half a century. Here again, I think that the Latter-day Saints have been suckered into making this a litmus test for electability.

At the risk of repeating myself, we live in a pluralistic, even multicultural society. The United States was founded specifically in contrast to the European nations of the 18th century, most or all of which had state-sponsored churches. The United States was founded as a place with full freedom of religion (which of course includes freedom from religion). The United States was emphatically not founded as a specifically Christian nation, as any careful reading of the Constitution will demonstrate.

In this kind of situation, prayer in public schools will almost certainly violate someone's religious convictions, as well as the guiding principles of American democracy.

Understand, I am all for prayer. What I am not for is compelling someone to follow my religion. The kind of compulsion that is implicit in the notion of school prayer is really against the Latter-day Saint ethic of friendly persuasion, rather than the exploitation of a captive audience of schoolchildren.

"Some Republicans are in favor of teaching 'intelligent design' in public schools as an alternative to evolution. Democrats generally oppose this. Here again, is not the Saint's electoral choice clear?"

Various individuals in the Republican Party (notably President Bush) have called for the teaching of intelligent design in public schools. Some hope that this would become easier to do nationally or locally, under a Republican President. Here again, it appears that many Latter-day Saints have been enticed into thinking that teaching intelligent design in public schools is consistent with LDS doctrine. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

The issue here is not whether one believes that God created the heavens and the earth. The issue is, do we impress our beliefs on others? To do that would be to violate central tenets of LDS belief and philosophy.

Beyond this, the matter of evolution is a false problem. The fact of the matter is that many LDS scientists and thinkers have long recognized that there is no conflict between evolutionary theory and the Gospel. (Consider, for example, James E. Talmadge, B.H. Roberts, and John A. Widtsoe.)

Like anything in science, scientific theory is an attempt to explain the phenomena we encounter, but it is not an attempt to get at ultimate origins -- because ultimate origins lie outside the realm of science. Consider the statements that God stepped in and created the universe, formed the earth, created living things -- these are all religious statements, not statements that science can confirm or deny. And it should be this way, from an LDS point of view: God wants us to gain personal spiritual testimonies of the truth, which of course is outside the realm of science.

Here again, evolution is something on which good people -- including LDS General Authorities -- have long disagreed. However, what I think we can agree on is that we keep science for science class, and religion for religion class. This is all more likely under a Democratic administration than a Republican one.

"How can a Latter-day Saint in good conscience vote for a Muslim?"

This very question is so wrong on so many levels, it is hard to know where to begin. Let me keep this to two simple points.

First, Senator Obama is not a Muslim! He is a Christian who attends a Christian church! Yes, of course the name -- including his middle name, Hussein -- sounds Muslim. Yes, his father was Muslim. However, Senator Obama himself was raised a Christian, and as an adult attends a Christian church, as the responsible newspapers of this country have long reported. Do not be taken in by Internet rumors.

Second, people like the Latter-day Saints, who have been long persecuted for their religion, should not in turn persecute others for their religion. And, make no mistake about it, when someone implies that a Muslim is not good enough to be President, that is just what is happening: religious bias, religious persecution.

How odd it is that so many Latter-day Saints forget that on two occasions the American Congress refused to allow duly elected legislators to take their seats in Congress, simply because these legislators were Latter-day Saints. (Elder Smoot of the Twelve was ultimately seated in the Senate.) We who have been persecuted must not turn persecutors ourselves; to do so would be untrue to our faith.

Conclusion

I wish that the circumstances of my life had been different, and that I had been able to address these and other matters at greater length. Perhaps this offering will help make the difference, even at this late hour. In any case, I encourage all readers of this blog to vote for Senator Barack Obama as our next President.

Make SURE That Your Vote Counts

At the risk of mentioning the obvious, I would like to bring up some seemingly minor points that are tremendously important in reality:

Are you actually registered to vote? Can you prove that?

Below, I address these important issues, for the general voter, the student, the LDS missionary, and military personnel.

I have heard of many mishaps in recent years involving voter registration:

• In some jurisdictions, if a person has not voted in a certain number of elections, it is assumed that this person has died or moved, and so they cancel this person’s voter registration. Let’s say that some people, normally nonvoters, decide that this is the election in which they shall break their habit; they get down to the polling place, but with their voter registration cancelled, they cannot cast a ballot.
  
  
• In most jurisdictions, a person has to show official proof of registration in order to vote. This may be a card, or a letter, from the Board of Elections. Without this proof, a person may find it difficult or impossible to vote.
  
  
• After moving your residence, voter registration does not follow you around automatically. Even just moving across the street can put you in a different voting district. In some jurisdictions, there is a lengthy period after registration before one can actually vote. So, after a move, even a very short one, unwary voters may find themselves unable to vote.

Yes, in many jurisdictions (not all!), one can cast a provisional ballot if there is some uncertainty about one’s eligibility to vote. However, let’s face an unpleasant fact: certainly there were many stories in the 2000 and 2004 elections about the manipulation of questionable ballots. (Think of all those stories about disputes involving hanging chads, military ballots, absentee ballots, even misplaced and uncounted ballots.) Sorry as I am to say this, these questions were often resolved to the disadvantage of Democratic voters. Sure, if you absolutely have to, cast a provisional ballot. However, the best thing is to make your eligibility certain well ahead of time, so that you can cast a regular ballot in the regular way.

The point here is that, in this election of all elections, it is important for you to be registered to vote, and to have the necessary proof of that registration handy, well in advance of the election. I would therefore strongly suggest that the readers of this blog do the following very soon—certainly during the month of June:

• Verify your registration to vote with your local Board of Elections. (You can find them in your local telephone directory, or just call directory assistance.) Request written proof of your registration, if possible. If, in fact, you are not registered, then register immediately. If you run into a problem here, try giving the League of Women Voters a call; yes, they help men, as well. (Frankly, the League of Women Voters are unsung heroes of American democracy; they deserve medals and equestrian statues in the public squares of the nation.)
  
  
• Confirm with your local Board of Elections what proof of registration you must have in order to vote.

The elections of 2000 and 2004 were replete with stories of large numbers of voters—by far, mostly Democrats—who were not permitted to vote, for one reason or another. Let’s get out past this potential roadblock as soon as possible.

In addition, it may well be the case that you have friends and family members who agree with you that Senator Obama should be our next President, but who are not themselves registered to vote. You can make a great difference, and really leverage the power of your individual vote, by helping these people to register, and even arranging to help take them to their polling place (which may well be different than your own polling place), if they need transportation.

It is a matter of historical fact that a few hundred votes in one particular state—just a few hundred votes—would have swung the entire national election to Al Gore in 2000. Although I would like to think that the Obama candidacy will draw a comfortable margin by Election Day, there is no way of predicting that. Let’s start preparing now for the possibility that we will face a close election in November, by (1) registering to vote, or confirming our registration; (2) obtaining physical proof of that registration to vote; and (3) helping our like-minded friends and family to do the same.

Another point: Election Day is Tuesday, November 4, 2008. If you are going to be out of town—if you even think you might be out of town on that day—then arrange for an absentee ballot now. If you are disabled or a shut-in: get an absentee ballot now. Please note that absentee ballots have to be mailed in and delivered in advance of Election Day to be valid—sometimes well in advance of Election Day, depending on the jurisdiction. (Note: Although this is a national election, rules on issues like the deadlines for filing absentee ballots vary on a state-by-state basis.)

Special Case #1: Students

Students usually have the option of voting either at school or in their home districts. However, students—especially first-time voters—can get stuck in the College Student Calendar Catch, as I call it. By the time students show up at campus in the Fall, if the students have not registered to vote yet, it can actually be too late to register at school or at home in time to vote in November. Even if the student is registered at home, if that student wants to file an absentee ballot, the student has to request that absentee ballot in enough time that [a] it can be delivered to the student’s home (you usually can’t get it sent by the Board of Elections to your school address), [b] someone at home can mail it to the student at school, and [c] the student can mail it back to their home district’s Board of Elections, by the deadline—again, often well before Election Day.

The upshot of all this is that the student voter has to get things done in advance in order to vote. It doesn’t matter if you’re the kind of student who doesn’t get started on the paper due Tuesday until 11 p.m. Monday; it doesn’t matter if you started studying for your 10 a.m. final examination over breakfast; it doesn’t matter if you started preparing for the oral defence of your thesis on the walk to campus—for this election, you are going to have to make some advance prep in order to vote. Extensions shall not be given.

Make the decision now—like, this weekend—as to where you will vote, either at home (by absentee ballot) or at school. Where will your vote count most? Only you can tell. However, remember the key issue: it is all about votes in the Electoral College, not the popular vote. In light of that, here are my suggestions:

• Scenario #1: You are from a strongly Democratic state that will certainly go for Obama, and you go to school in a traditionally Republican state. Or: your home is in a traditionally Republican state, and you are going to school in a strongly Democratic state that will certainly go for Obama. Either way, vote in the Republican state: with enough of you, perhaps you can swing the state in an upset.
  
  
• Scenario #2: Both school and home states are strongly Democratic, and will certainly go for Obama. Or: both school and home states are traditionally Republican. Either way, vote in the state where the election polls show a closer race for Obama; your vote may help make the difference in a closer contest. If the two states are really equal in their support, then vote in the state that has the larger number of electoral votes.
  
  
• Scenario #3: Anything else. See Scenario #2.

If you plan to vote at school, then go through the registration process as soon as you can, by mail if necessary. (Call the Board of Elections in your school’s town to find out how.) If you plan to vote at home, then request the absentee ballot immediately (i.e., the day you read this, or the following business day).

Special Case #2: LDS Missionaries

A special point in relation to voter registration is the matter of those who serve as full-time LDS missionaries. I have heard people say that “the counsel of the Brethren” is that full-time LDS missionaries should focus on their missions and not give thought to voting in elections.

Oh, really?

I do not recall ever seeing such a policy in print. Let someone bring to my attention something in writing from the current LDS General Handbook of Instructions that supports such a policy (with date or edition, and page numbers, please), and then that will settle the matter for me. Something in writing as an official statement of policy from the Missionary Department would do as well, of course.

However, in the absence of such supporting evidence, then regardless of what someone thinks they heard, regardless of the policy of one’s former mission president, regardless of the opinion of any individual—no matter how high up in the administrative hierarchy—and certainly regardless of the tendency amongst our people to believe the occasional rumor, my counsel would be that people who are on or plan to be on missions over the next few months should arrange in advance for absentee ballots. Missionaries should not engage in politicking, political discussion, or even surfing this blog. However, voting takes but a few minutes. Voting does not detract from the spirit of a mission.

It is no exaggeration to say that the destiny of our nation hangs in the balance with this election, and that the entire future life of a missionary hangs in that balance, as well (given the possibilities of a military draft, and the continuation of the war.) If we permit our missionaries the time for recreation on “P Day,” then we can certainly permit them the time it takes to fill out an absentee ballot.

Special Case #3: Military Personnel

You may well have friends or family in the military, or be in the military yourself. Military personnel have to cast absentee ballots to vote in the presidential election. This should be arranged far in advance of the election, immediately if possible. You never know when military personnel might be called into action for weeks at a time, a period during which their eligibility to cast an absentee ballot may expire.

Conclusion

When it comes to arranging to vote, as with all good and virtuous enterprises, Latter-day Saints should follow the advice of one of our leaders of an earlier day: Let’s do it—now, and with a plan.

Let's Go Viral. Yes, We Can!

Let me be clear about my objectives here. My major objective: I would like the largest possible number of Latter-day Saints to vote for Barack Obama and elect him President of the United States, in November 2008. Given that the President is elected, not by the popular vote, but by the votes of the Electoral College, my sub-objective is the following: I would like the states of Utah and Idaho to deliver their electoral votes to Senator Obama in the 2008 presidential election. (Incidentally, this is something you can help to accomplish, even if you live in Maine or Florida or Hawaii or Alaska, and do not know a soul in Utah or Idaho, as I explain below.)

Yes, I realize that, at first glance, it might seem unlikely that Utah and Idaho would vote Democratic. However, let me invite you to consider some things with me:

• A mere five months ago, it seemed like Senator Hilary Rodham Clinton was a shoe-in for the Democratic nomination. As Senator Clinton’s concession speech proved less than a week ago, much can happen in a few short months. A lot of people—a lot of people—changed their minds, even on some long-held opinions, in the span of just a few months, making Senator Obama the Democratic nominee for President. Now we have just a little under five months to go to the general election. Many more people can change their minds over the next few months; it has happened, and it can happen again.
• Latter-day Saints in Utah and Idaho can see what the policies of the current presidential Administration have done to the country, both domestically and in terms of America's relationship with other nations. What Latter-day Saints in Utah and Idaho suffer from is “the traditions of their fathers,” to use a Book of Mormon phrase. They are used to voting Republican. However, as the Book of Mormon itself demonstrates, people can come to see through the false traditions of their fathers (and mothers). This is going to take work—but it can happen.

So, how can we spread the word about Senator Obama as a viable candidate from an LDS point of view? There are some obvious things that can help a candidate generally: working as a campaign volunteer, contributing funds, and so forth—all good things that I would encourage you to consider. Here, however, I would like to focus on something else. It is my belief that addressing the LDS issues raised by Senator Obama’s candidacy is key to gaining the electoral votes of Utah and Idaho, and may well play a role in gaining the electoral votes of other states where Latter-day Saints form a sizeable minority.

This blog can play a role in addressing those issues in a positive way. Thus, I would suggest that Latter-day Saints can help to further Senator Obama's candidacy by ‘taking this blog viral’ (by which I mean, bring this blog to the largest number of people possible). Herewith, a few suggestions, positive and negative, about how to do this:

• Absolutely, positively, do NOT post anything about this blog on the bulletin boards at your church building. Political announcements simply have no place whatsoever on the walls of an LDS church building. Yes, I know that ‘the other side’ often squeezes in some inappropriate air time, as it were—but we have to walk the higher path here. This is true both for ethical reasons—this is just the right way to operate—and for practical reasons. (Let’s face it: the congregation can hear five messages about how awful ‘the liberals’ are, and hardly anyone will even blink; one single public comment in a church meeting in favor of a Democratic candidate, and someone will complain to the Stake Presidency. I say this only half humorously, at most.)
• Carry around the URL of this blog—“http://MormonsForObamaBlog.blogspot.com/”—written on index cards. As you have conversations with other Latter-day Saints about the Obama campaign, share an index card with them. (Note: You must be careful to write the URL correctly—"MormonsForObamaBlog"—so as to avoid confusing this blog with other blogs that have similar names.)
• Lots of people will be traveling to family gatherings—Fathers Day this weekend, Independence Day or Pioneer Day in July, perhaps other family picnics over the summer—and, if one’s family members happen to be Latter-day Saints, these would be great occasions to share index cards about this blog, if the subject of the Obama campaign comes up. (And how can it not?)
• Although posting such an index card at the church building is inappropriate, there are other places where it would be very appropriate to post some index cards: a bulletin board on a college campus, a laundromat or restaurant or supermarket—anywhere that political announcements are explicitly permitted.
• Send a link to this blog by e-mail to some of your LDS friends and acquaintances. A brief message with the URL above will do just fine. (Of course, you would want to do this from home, not from work.)
• You can send an e-mail from within this blog itself, if you want to send the entire contents of one single post to anyone: I have activated the "send as e-mail" feature for each post on this blog. This means that if you click on the 'envelope' icon at the bottom and to the right of any blog post, you can send that one post by e-mail to anyone you wish. Because most of the posts on this blog are about a specific topic, this is a great way to answer Aunt Jane's or Uncle Bob's question about, for example, "How can we as good Latter-day Saints support a candidate who is against the war?": you can send them the whole post on this topic, if you wish. As the list of posts grow, you will have more topics to send out in response to specific questions.

To reiterate, I receive no personal compensation or reward from this effort. I do not permit advertising on this blog, so directing web traffic here does not bring me any money. I have no relationship, formal or informal, with the Obama campaign, so there's no money for me there, either. I don’t even get ‘status points’ in the world at large, because I am anonymous. This is all for the cause.

Incidentally, I do not wish to leave any readers of this blog with the impression that I am only trying to address LDS voters in Utah and Idaho. Consider this:

1. Every vote for Sen. Obama is important, anywhere in the United States. This is ground truth.
2. Even from the perspective of trying to get LDS votes in Utah and Idaho, the fact of the matter is that the LDS world is small: between 6 and 7 million people in the United States. If there are "six degrees of separation" in the country at large—that is, a chain of six acquaintances between any two people—then certainly there are no more than four or five degrees of separation in the LDS world. Even a Saint in states distant from historic 'Mormon country'—states like Maine, Florida, Hawaii, or Alaska; heck, even a Saint who lives outside the fifty United States altogether—likely knows Saints in Utah or Idaho. You can reach these people.
3. Even if you know not one person in Utah or Idaho, many other Saints you are acquainted with absolutely do know Saints in Utah and Idaho: family, former mission companions, friends from college. Reach the people you know, and they will reach the people you don't know.
   

So, let’s take this blog viral. And, given that we have less than five months to do this, let's get started immediately. By doing so, we can help to gain the votes of Latter-day Saints throughout the United States, which is of course important in any state. In addition, we can gain specifically the electoral votes of Utah, Idaho, and other states with sizeable LDS minorities. Yes, we can!

The War: “How Can a Latter-day Saint Support a Candidate Who Opposes the President and Opposes the War in Iraq?”

Senator Barack Obama, in his opposition to the war in Iraq, is clearly opposed to numerous authorities within the Bush administration (from the office of the President on down), who call for a continuation of the war. Where does this leave Latter-day Saints? After all, as we are taught in the Twelfth Article of Faith, “We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.” The incumbent President and Vice President have stated that those who take issue with their positions are not just wrong, but unpatriotic. Given that the President, the Vice President, and many of the Cabinet want to continue the war, how can Latter-day Saints take a contrary position and be true to our faith? How can we support a candidate who opposes the war in Iraq, thereby opposing the highest officials of our country?

Yes, we Latter-day Saints are certainly (and very appropriately) taught to uphold the law. However, we often confuse obedience to lawful authority with unquestioning obedience to authority, period. (Why do we do this? The reasons are rooted in LDS history; briefly, we reacted to the 19th century persecution of the Latter-day Saints by the Federal government, by becoming ultra-Americans in the 20th century.)

Obedience to lawful and moral authority is quite appropriate and 'saintly' (in the sense of being something that a Latter-day Saint should do). Unquestioning obedience to authority or authority figures—including the authority figures in the current Presidential administration who are pushing to pursue the war in Iraq—is not the least bit saintly; rather, unquestioning obedience to human authority is arguably un-saintly, unMormon, and unscriptural (beyond being just plain stupid).

In Ms. Peach’s comment to my first post, she brings up several incidents in which the U.S. government engaged in activities that were illegal (the bombing of Laos, for example) and/or immoral (training the officials of other countries how to use torture to stifle political dissent, for example). In my response to her comment, I bring up other such incidents (for example, the nuclear bombing of southern Utah [!] in the 1950s, as well as the COINTELPRO operation that attempted to disrupt the civil rights movement, and the MKULTRA mind control experiments on unwitting American civilians). Examples could be multiplied, well into the current day. My point is not to be anti-government, which I am not; rather, my point is to show that the U.S. government has conducted operations—some of them lasting for a decade or longer—that have been manifestly immoral and highly illegal. As the Lord himself declared, in connection with a discussion of governance under constitutional law: “Nevertheless, when the wicked rule the people mourn” (D&C 98:9).

The Latter-day Saints, of course, believe that the United States Constitution is divinely inspired (D&C 101:80). We need to remember that, under that Constitution, it is perfectly legal to engage in certain forms of protest against the government or its agencies (see the First Amendment to the Constitution, which specifically prohibits Congress from “abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”). This protest includes everything up to and including large, loud, and insistent but nonviolent demonstrations with a million people on the Mall in Washington, DC. Just because something is governmental policy does not make it sacred. The same sacred Constitution that gives our government its form also gives us, as citizens, the right to protest.

Put bluntly: Opposing the government is not a sin, nor is it a crime. In fact, one could argue from the scriptures that opposing the government is a moral responsibility, when the government is engaged in actions that are clearly immoral, and/or illegal. The fact that Senator Obama opposes the government regarding support for the war is not a problem from either a gospel perspective or a legal one. Rather, it is a matter of moral courage.

Mormons for Obama--The Independent Blog

Introduction

With the close of the primaries on Tuesday, June 3, and the concession of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton on Saturday, June 7, Senator Barack Obama has become the presumptive Democratic Party nominee for the office of President of the United States. The purpose of this blog is to explore some issues related to Senator Obama’s candidacy, specifically from the point of view of the Latter-day Saints, known popularly as ‘the Mormons.’

In my opinion, Senator Obama is clearly the preferable candidate for President, compared to the now-presumptive Republican nominee, Senator John McCain. There are many websites and other resources to consult in comparing the two candidates in terms of the usual issues (such as the economy, the war in Iraq, and so on). However, there are relatively few places that consider Senator Obama’s candidacy from the LDS viewpoint—and there are certainly issues raised for Latter-day Saints by Obama’s candidacy, both from the position of LDS history and the LDS faith itself. It is my intent here to consider those issues thoroughly in the blog format, inviting and responding to comment from readers.

This blog is not sponsored or endorsed or ‘vetted’ by any organization or group, including the Obama campaign, any other political organization, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, or any independent LDS-oriented group. This is the viewpoint of one Latter-day Saint, who happens to be somewhat well-versed in LDS history and doctrine.

There are other blogs that address these issues, most notably the “Mormons for Obama” page on Sen. Obama’s website (http://my.barackobama.com/page/group/MormonsforObama). However, there is an obvious advantage to publishing an independent point of view, hence this blog.

Who I Am

I choose not to disclose my personal identity as the author of this blog, for personal reasons. (There are some careers that preclude taking a partisan political stand in a presidential election). I also desire to focus less on personality and more on substance in political discourse. For this reason, I shall not respond to questions about my personal life, or inquiries that essentially hunt clues to my identity. I do have an e-mail account (mormons4obamablog@yahoo.com) for readers who must contact me off-line--on any topic other than my identity.

Suffice it to say that I am an active, temple-attending Latter-day Saint (i.e., a member of the 13+ million-member church, headquartered across the plaza from Temple Square in Salt Lake City, Utah).

Forthcoming Topics, and an Invitation

I plan to address the following topics in future blog posts. Please feel free to let me know which of these, if any, is especially interesting for you; in addition, please let me know what other topics you would like to see me address. Some forthcoming topics:

• “Obama wants to end the war in Iraq soon. As faithful Latter-day Saints who obey the law and cherish America, aren’t we supposed to support our troops?”
• “The Latter-day Saints, at least in Utah, have voted Republican for over half a century, partly for reasons of fiscal policy. How can Latter-day Saints vote for a tax-and-spend Democrat now?”
• “How about the oft-quoted comment by a now-deceased LDS General Authority, to the effect that no Latter-day Saint could, in good conscience, be a Democrat?”
• “The Democratic Party supports abortion rights, while the Republican Party favors greater legal restrictions on abortion. How can Latter-day Saints vote for a Democratic candidate, rather than a Republican one?”
• “The Democratic Party supports gay rights, while the Republican Party does not. How can Latter-day Saints vote for a Democratic candidate, rather than a Republican one?”
• School prayer.
• The teaching in schools of evolution versus creationism or intelligent design.
  

As you can see, I do not plan to duck any controversial issues here. My own analysis of the situation is that, on each of these issues, Obama’s stance is not only defensible, but is preferable to the stance of McCain—from the viewpoint of the LDS gospel.

I plan to make a major posting to this site once or twice a week, addressing some major topic like those above. I shall probably respond to comments more frequently. In addition to postings on major topics, I may also make postings regarding other blogs addressing these issues. Please join in the discussion.

Some Ground Rules

Readers are welcome to state their disagreement with me (or, for that matter, their agreement) in the most vigorous terms. However, I shall not tolerate the following:

• Profanity—not even the mild stuff. It is unnecessary, and I shall delete comments with profanity.
• Personal attacks. Disagree all you want with the idea that someone states on this blog (either me, or some person submitting a comment). Say something nasty about that someone (particularly some person submitting a comment), and I shall delete your comment immediately.

Make it a point to focus on the ideas, not the persons sharing them.

I look forward to discussing these important issues with you.