I was recently listening to a podcast (the exact one is not important for this conversation) where the host had recently returned from a trip to Australia. He said he visited some old friends that had moved for the USA 15 years ago, and are now citizens of Australia.
The friends said that once you are out of the US long enough, you realize that the major difference between the US and Australia, the UK, and even other countries like Spain is that so much in America is based on fear. For example, if you look at the gun debate, it is all based on fear. If you don’t ban guns, all school children are going to be shot, and if you do ban guns, the government will come and take away all your rights. The friends said it takes about five years to notice the difference, but once you are in it, it is so refreshing. They said the first time they knew they weren’t in the US anymore was when they bought their condo, and asked the doorman for a reference to a locksmith so they could get their locks changed. His one word answer was “why?”
Is it possible for religion to not be fear based? Could a religion thrive and grow, provide meaning to people’s lives that did not teach an eternal damnation for non-believers? Could a region thrive on just love for one another, and not the threat of being separated from your family if you don’t pay 10% of your income? Does religion require fear, or was religion born out of a fear of dying, giving comfort to the universal fear of death?
What about the Lord’s own words. Does that give us an reason to stop using fear?
“For behold, it is not meet that I should command in all things; for he that is compelled in all things, the same is a slothful and not a wise servant; wherefore he receiveth no reward.”
D&C 58:26
The word compel means “to bring about (something) by the use of force or pressure”. What is that force/pressure? It would be the fear of hell if you do not follow the commandments. The Lord is sill saying that some things require commandments (and the requisite compulsions due to fear), just not all things. So maybe this doesn’t work as a way to rid ourselves of our fear based foundation.
How about we just keep it simple and love one another?
Wheat & Tares 
We tend to be legalistic which frequently operates through fear. We could learn something from Martin Luther’s answer to law in a state of grace. When adding the word allein in his German translation of Romans 3:28 to read “faith alone,” Luther wrote this:
“A living, creative, active and powerful thing, this faith. Faith cannot help doing good works constantly. It doesn’t stop to ask if good works ought to be done, but before anyone asks, it already has done them and continues to do them without ceasing.”
That’s a way of living in the gospel and not in fear.
I have been thinking about fear as motivator recently. Ultimately I think fear fails at producing the desired goal of this life, which is to become good, kind, and loving like God. If you do things the “right” things out of fear of punishment, the change or development of your nature isn’t necessarily accomplished.
Today I attended a funeral in the heart of Mormondom and thankfully there was no mention of damnation although the deceased’s disdain for the institution was widely known.
Fear is what Pascal’s wager is all about. The calculation is that the potential negative consequences of not believing outweigh any downside of believing in a falsehood. Many of us have incorporated a version of this in our religious life.
Fear fear fear.
An important topic and I appreciate it. Fear is used to motivate by people in and out of the church. President Uchtdorf made a lot of good points in this same vein in April 2017 talk “Perfect Love Casteth Out Fear”. One of my favorite:
“It is true that fear can have a powerful influence over our actions and behavior. But that influence tends to be temporary and shallow. Fear rarely has the power to change our hearts, and it will never transform us into people who love what is right and who want to obey Heavenly Father.”
If only the church was what we were taught and/or thought it was in our head.
My parents mentioned the 1960’s as the Camelot years with people were more important than programs. I think as M Peterson, B Packard, JF Smith and now D. Bednar likes ………along with the lost balance of the DO McKay and H Brown types……they instilled into the church exactly what we were taught that made all the other churches NOT the church of Christ and about being in apostasy.
I despised the obedience type leaders of my youth, and now 90% of local leaders march to this drumbeat of fear. They have already cried wolf with the “last days” card on the past 3 generations, and that will no longer work
Where is the faith?
Funny thing I don’t pay my tithing out of fear I pay it out of desire for the best blessings I can receive. I don’t see the Church as a hell fire and damnation church. I see it as a love one another and because I love the lord, I do the things he asks of me, but I have never felt compelled by fear. We do not have to do anything we don’t want to in this church we are free to leave it if we want. Desire is what motivates us not fear. The church is true. Sadly, people Aren’t always true but the principles and covenants that have come down through the ages are true.
I think that the person who bases obedience to God on fear may have faith, but they don’t really feel God loves them. I think Martin Luther still got it wrong. It isn’t faith alone that saves us; it is love. Loving God is what redeems us and what makes us want to obey God and love others. And as scripture says, we love him because he first loved us. I have known too many people who claim faith in God, but their God is a God who loves us conditionally. President Nelson, I am looking at you. Conditional love doesn’t love first, but waits to see if the other is good enough. Just imagine if mothers did that with newborns. If the mother withholds her love from the baby until the baby loves her, obeys her, acts with kindness toward his siblings, the baby dies long before the mother gets around to loving him enough to feed the poor kid, or change his stinky diaper. The kind of love that President Nelson describes his God as having isn’t really love at all, but approval.
When I was a kid, my family would hold very unorthodox Family Home Evenings. One Monday, my parents gathered me and my siblings in front of the TV and we watched “World’s Wildest Police Chases”. We saw criminals cause even more catastrophic wreckage when there was drugs/alcohol in their system. After the show ended, my mom turned to us and said, “Do you wanna be in that situation? No? Then don’t do drugs. Amen”. It was short, yet effective.
So instead of fear, we should present information and acknowledge risks so that we can make more informed decisions. Is getting involved with an addictive substance worth wasted years, empty bank accounts, and hurting others through abuse? Is countless sexual hookups worth the risk of STI’s and broken hearts? I think that approach is far more effective than simple fear mongering.
Something motivates every decision we make. Some of the major motivators are fear, sense of duty, desire for a reward, and of course love. I don’t recall any GC talks about fear as a motivator, but I agree fear has been used at the ward/branch level by local leaders. I think fear of negative consequences used as a motivator does have its place, but primarily with younger children. Used in conjunction with desire for a reward, these motivators can be useful with children until they get more mature to understand better reasons for obedience.
Sense of duty is useful in the military and is also often used to encourage young men to serve missions. I’ve seen “desire for a reward” used to motivate members of the church to do certain things and make certain decisions. I’ve seen love used to motivate members of the church to do certain things and make certain decisions.
I’m not sure why the OP suggests that fear is the primary motivator used by the church. I see other motivators used much more often.
Most of my “fear conditioning” came from my years of released time seminary in junior high and high school. My experience was a radicalization based on shame and fear. It has taken years to reprogram from what I was taught.
Connie Lee Brower, while I appreciate and acknowledge your experience with the church, we do have to do certain things if we want to be a part of the community. There’s a reason I had 1 family member at my wedding in the temple. Also, perhaps it’s easy to say “we are free to leave it if we want,” but for those of us on the margins, constantly deciding whether to stay or go, it’s doesn’t feel like freedom.
Very thought-provoking post.
Connie lee Brower makes a good point – some people don’t need to be afraid to obey. I think this helps answer Bishop Bill’s question about whether religion requires fear. It doesn’t. There will be plenty of people who enjoy the community, believe they’re doing the right thing, and want to pitch in and be on the same team. That’s a great result for those who freely choose that. bwbarnett made much the same point – there are many different reasons someone might choose to obey Church leaders. The Church is a framework for faith in Christ for many people.
I used to love obedience (“Don’t you just love the commandments? Don’t you wish we had more of them?” – Mary Ellen Edmunds). But then my life fell apart and being obedient actually made things worse. Some people (a few of my bishops over my decade of falling apart) met my weakness with love, but many others (family) used fear-based motivators. I would ruin my mother’s happiness and our eternal family; my children would suffer; the Spirit would leave me and I’d be left without a loving Heavenly Father’s guidance; quitting tithing would lead to financial ruin. I believed that and attended church out of fear for several years. I still resent that; I let myself be manipulated by fear.
If you fit in and see benefits from obedience, then you’ll obey because it’s great to fit in and be blessed for your obedience. You have a feeling like all’s right with the world and you can trust God and your community. That’s a wonderful feeling and I hope anyone who feels like that can continue to feel like that their whole life.
It’s when you don’t fit in, and when obedience starts to cause self-hatred and despair, is when the fear pressure starts. It’s like people want to scare you into giving Church another chance. I couldn’t leave Church until the pain of staying outweighed the fear of leaving. Once I left, I realized there wasn’t anything to be afraid of. None of the fears materialized (yet – I’m still awaiting my eternal damnation).
The part where the Church shoots itself in the foot is when it makes leaving such a difficult choice. “You’ll ruin everything!” If they’d just let people do a soft withdrawal, it would be easier to come back. Let people disappear for a few years and teach other Church members to just accept periods of inactivity as part of the faith journey. My bishop called me in for an interview shortly after I quit, and after listening to me vent and cry my way through a dozen tissues, he just talked about how he was inactive for more than a decade and please feel free to contact him if I ever need anything. That was a brilliant way to handle it. I’ve talked to him several times since then. He didn’t demonize me or scare me.
The Church ought to abandon the fear tactics and just concentrate on making Church a place where people want to be voluntarily – out of love, community, excitement at contributing to the good in the world, habit, friends are there, feeling peace. Stop obsessing about growth, let the Church shrink a bit, and build the community and faith that flow without fear.
Thank you, once again, Bishop Bill.
The Apostle Paul in the NT teaches that the Mosaic Law was a schoolmaster to bring us to Christ. He also teaches that faith, hope, and charity are the highest Christian virtues. Mormon in the BOM teaches that charity is the pure love of Christ.
So it is a point of sadness to me that so many Mormons are so fixated on keeping ALL the commandments (which is impossible), that they seem, in my judgmental opinion, to not have enough energy left over to love their neighbor as they love themselves.
I have seen so MANY acts of above-and-beyond charity in the Church. But to be rule-obsessed is not good. For a period of about 5 years, I was a temple worker in the DC temple. We were taught in training sessions that temple ordinances were to be done with exactness—but that if that was not possible, then love and charity were to ALWAYS take first place. Most of the time, that happened, but not always.
I think the key issue is personality. Many people who obsess about making a mistake, or breaking a rule, are driven by fear.
Having worked as a professional translator for many years, and having taught hundreds of people, I can say with confidence that you will never learn a foreign language if you fear to make mistakes. Indeed, having the courage to make mistakes is a vital key in mastering a new language.
Same with the Gospel. Perfect love casteth out fear. Where there is fear, there is torment.
Fear is a personal conception, it is not factual. Danger is factual.
We are self-responsible for fear. To blame institutions or ideologies for “fear” is to make an external force the captain of your ship.
If a religion is based on authority, there will be fear. If religion is based on love, there is nothing to fear.
Yes Australia is less fearfull place, but also a more caring and Christlike society. When we vist America we are very aware of the number of people begging. We drove across middle America during the trump election campaign , and were struck by how much of what we thought was church culture was actually middle american conservative culture. So you Americans are swimming in it.
I was going to say, as a proud Australian, but a proud Australian is much less extreme, in practice, than a proud American. Americas politics are way further to the right than ours, and that so many religious people are out there on the extreme right where there is no love or caring is a big problem for America.
We have just had an federal election where a conservative government was removed. They were for universal healthcare, ok with abortion on demand, (so closer to democrat policies than republican) but faced a coordinated attack from professional women, on integrity, treatment of women, lack of action on climate change. After the election the labor government has 50% of its MPs and cabinet women, the opposition 20% of its MPs women. And 14 women and 2 men independents or greens on the cross benches.
The Australian churches generally are caring for those in need, pro LGBTI, not anti abortion, and support redistribution of wealth towards the needy, and support our indiginous community (which is the longest continuous civilization at 60,000 years). They also respect women. They are not associated with the right of politics. Their agenda is closer to the left of politics. Which contrasts with the American based churches, like ours, where most members think they have to be republicans.
It always amazes me that the same members who are obedience based (support regulation) at church, are for smaller government (oppose regulation) in politics, and ignore the inequality and harm this produces.
Faith is trust; there is no need to fear the One we trust. His laws are of a natural design; He doesn’t need to punish me for violating them, especially for eternity in a place so many Christians believe torment exists. If I choose the poison, being separated from Him, I will die, not the first death of sleep that happens to all of us, but the death that results from not being connected to the Life Giver. It would be my choice. And He would be proven true, after all that’s what He told our first mortal parents: you will surely die. He knows that if I fear Him in the earthly sense, then I will do what everyone does that fears Him, lose trust and become a rebel and join the accuser of Heavenly Father’ s children. Again as He said: do not be afraid, if you have seen me you have seen the Father.
“Funny thing I don’t pay my tithing out of fear I pay it out of desire for the best blessings I can receive.”
I find ways to help people with very real, very concrete needs. Currently, the dollar value exceeds 10% of my gross income.
I don’t think I will ever get anything in return. Ever.
Jesus asks us to look for such people and needs. Sadly, they are not difficult to find.
I think fear is often directly tied to value. I value freedom, therefore I do, for lack of a better term, fear losing it. I’m not shaking in my boots over it, but I work to maintain it. And while I do often speak in terms of fear, I’m also really emphasizing what it is I value. I see people emphasize the value only to get labeled as selfish, while others emphasize the fear only to be called a fear-monger. A lot of it just comes down to semantics and pure disagreement on value.
I feel like the comparisons between countries start to break apart on a number of levels. I served my mission in Denmark. The country is often labeled a socialist success story, but it’s not strictly socialist (from what I understand a lot of tax money is invested and used in ways more conducive to capitalism, but I could be wrong). Danes did often appear to value taking care of others through government above all else. Because of that, it seemed like they felt less of a need to care about their neighbor personally, which was always a turnoff for me. Aside from government power, I think the next big evil of soft socialism is the lack of ambition. After taxes, it often seemed the goal of most 20-40 year old Danes was simply to make it to the weekend, hit the club, get drunk, and possibly meet someone for the night. Ultimately, it doesn’t feel like a life I value, but I can see how others would. Talking to Danes who did have their own home, had even paid it off, and were somewhat enterprising in nature even with the taxes and bureaucratic red tape, I’d ask them why they did it. “Freedom” was the typical response. I love Danes, but when I see studies that list Denmark as the happiest country I just roll my eyes. I don’t think those studies take into account the inconsistencies of what different people and countries value. Danes are content with what they value, but even a slave who is well fed and provided for (and who may not even realize they’re a slave) can be content. Would you know any better? Yes, they’re a lot of terrible things going on in the United States, but a lot of the values are still there. Red states do donate more to charity. Many value freedom, but they also value the idea that there are few things government can do for others that individuals, small business, and religion can’t do better. And part of the beauty of the states is that each state can tailor what they value to themselves personally. I don’t think I ever met a Dane who spent more than a couple of weeks in the United States without coming back feeling it was a place they could both live and value. To be fair, I’d be lying if I didn’t say the idea of lazily outsourcing my charity to government, viewing the beautiful rolling hills, accessing mouthwatering pastry, or riding the endless bicycle lanes of Denmark wasn’t at all tempting for relocation.
There are a lot of things I value with this Gospel and this Church. I value my testimony and the Holy Ghost. I value the doctrine. I value my relationships with family, friends, and other members of the Church. I do think the Church is less fear-based than many others and I can’t think of a lot in the Gospel itself that evokes fears. I do think my Heavenly Father and Savior love me, but want me to change for the better. I value that idea and ability to change. I don’t fear how I compare to others, or the speed in which I move, and I value the Grace the Savior offers to aid me in those efforts. I deeply value the prospect of life in the Celestial Kingdom as God is, but learning what I have, I can’t say I’m greatly afraid of the lower kingdoms either, though I see less value in them. I’ll admit outer darkness sounds a little scary, and for the likely dozen or less who go there, I’m sure it probably will be.
Most of my leaders have taught me to value these things in both word and example. When word and proper example fail to help an individual choose the right, I’ve seen a few resort to using fear. And although I disagree with this tactic, I’ll admit I’m a little sympathetic to those who use it. When you value something so highly and see near universal application in it, what would you resort to in order to get others to see it if they couldn’t or wouldn’t see it initially for what it is on their own? I know “Fear” has a number of meanings and translations in the Old Testament, but I do think that for some people, fearing the Lord really is the beginning of wisdom, and a path to something greater. It’s definitely not true of everyone.
Interestingly enough, it was an Evangelical friend that pointed out to me that in the New Testament, the Savior Himself spends more time talking about Hell than Heaven. I suppose the reasons for that are worth pondering, especially in light of faith over fear.
For me, fear is a very real part of religion. I’ve stopped attend but I still have fear about being outed in my family and in my workplace. I’m frequently afraid that someone will notice and ask me about garments. I haven’t gotten up the courage yet to have a beer, or a coffee, or an iced tea when my Mormon coworkers are around. Even though it’s a completely normal thing to have a beer with your coworkers in celebration of a win. It took me a while to get up the courage to even try those things when they weren’t around. Fortunately I haven’t become a drunkard. I can still feel my conscience, I’ve got 40+ years of soda in my system so it’s not likely that coffee and tea are going to cause any real changes in me but I still have a deep sense of fear that if my coworkers saw my drinking something as normal as a cup of coffee our relationship would change. It’s a sad state of affairs but that’s what religion has bred for me. It’s enough fear that I don’t feel comfortable putting my real or digital signatures on this post.
I don’t mean to call out Connie lee Bower specifically, but her comments are representative. What’s the difference between choosing to give money to a multi-billion dollar corporation because you want to buy blessings and being afraid that if you don’t give money to the multi-billion dollar corporation you won’t be blessed? That seems like a semantic argument–a distinction without a difference. It seems impossible to not assume some amount of fear when one is primarily concerned with one’s own salvation and not the well being of others.
What does it say about the God the church worships that devotion is measured in $$$ because the organization has as much as it needs?
Missionaries don’t always get a full view of what happens in an area, and often get a picture of an economy based on a tiny snapshot filtered through a lens of biases they bring with them to the mission.
Danish members I have met give a very different view, and have expressed horror and sadness at the way the poorest and those without healthcare access are treated in our country. I want to serve my neighbor, but I don’t have the resources to help my neighbor with a $90,000 hospital bill, and those aren’t rare. Even people with all of their needs met need service from one another–a social safety net does not take that away, but actually can allow us to move to the levels of service that meet needs higher up on Maslow’s hierarchy.
Those who oppose safety net improvements will say that it’s not socialism that makes Scandinavian countries work, it’s the capitalism they incorporate. Yet when we suggest improvements to the safety net found in those countries, the opposition will call it socialism. I don’t think we have to have one or the other. We can take the best of both worlds as Scandinavian countries have done. Rather than giving incentives not to work, we free people to pursue projects and ideas–small tests of universal basic income have thus far yielded successes beyond the hopes of the researchers. People shut down their hopes and dreams for lack of opportunity, not lack of character.
Robert Reich wrote a book, Saving Capitalism, where he outlined changes that serve the interests of people on both sides of the political aisle. He is featured in a documentary on Netflix with that title and has spoken extensively on his ideas. He spoke at a bookstore in the DC area where he outlined his ideas and spoke of the places where views of people on both the right and the left are congruent–we share similar concerns and even, sometimes, similar ideas about how to change. It’s worth a listen, even if it challenges ideas one might hold.
(Robert Reich, “Saving Capitalism” posted to YouTube by Politics and Prose Bookstore)
Another YouTube linked below discusses the history of capitalism as well as concerns about late-stage capitalism if we do nothing to change widening economic inequality that is occurring in our nation.
(“HISTORY OF IDEAS – Capitalism” Posted to YouTube by The School of Life)
Also, I realize the graphic is meant to somewhat humorously make a point, but isn’t the last line of “From what I’m going to do to you if you don’t let me in” on the deceptive side?
As mortals, I think we tend to think of justice and mercy as man-made constructs because of our inability to administer them perfectly in mortality. What I gather from LDS theology is that they’re universal laws that God follows similarly to how gravity is for us. The difference is, God is able to administer those laws perfectly.
Even as a fan of mythology, I only recently learned about the British legend of Ginny Greenteeth, a water witch of sorts that would drag unsuspecting victims into the water and kill them (In the movie Legend, the character of Meg Mucklebones is based loosely on Ginny Greenteeth . The movie bombed, but her scene, IMHO, is one of the most fascinatingly well-crafted scenes in cinema history.). Many folklorists believe the legend started with parents trying to keep their kids from wandering too close to the water, slipping in, and drowning. When I read that, I wondered why the prospect of drowning wasn’t an effective enough deterrant in and of itself. Growing up, I think it was for me. I didn’t necessarily fear the water, but I valued my life and respected its presence and power.
I do think some leaders are guilty of Ginny Greenteeth tactics. But I’ve also seen children stoke fear and misconstrue consequences for other children where unnecessary, so I think both regular and disaffected members could also foot a lot of the blame. The Heavenly Father I believe in is doing absolutely everything in His power to bring us back into His presence, short of ripping away the veil, our faith, and agency. That leaves little room for fear.
C,
I really do sympathize with your fear, but I do think it goes both ways. I personally would not have a problem hanging out with someone who has left some of the beliefs and tenets of the LDS faith behind, but I do think many of us active members wonder how keen these people are on hanging out with us. If the Gospel fabric is still a very integral part of my true nature, do I impose that nature on another If I feel they’ve come to disbelieve or despise all that that lifestyle stands for, or do I give them space to be themselves? Would they really want to hang out with someone who still holds to faulty beliefs and a corrupt Church? I realize that’s probably irrational thinking, but I think it’s that thinking that largely makes up a substantial portion of the “shunners” found in our religion.
I’m going to pull out a line from Eli’s post and comment on it. No criticism, Eli, thanks for sharing your perspective, and you did hint that others may have a different opinion.
//Aside from government power, I think the next big evil of soft socialism is the lack of ambition. After taxes, it often seemed the goal of most 20-40 year old Danes was simply to make it to the weekend, hit the club, get drunk, and possibly meet someone for the night. Ultimately, it doesn’t feel like a life I value, but I can see how others would.//
About how others could value a life where you’re biggest ambition is to get to the weekend and then party … in my opinion, this does less damage to society than misdirected ambition. What if the people in the drivers seat in some of the megacorporations had been less ambitious? We would have more companies, smaller companies, and more competition. I think that would be a good thing. Personally, I wish certain powerful and influential people had just sat home and binged Netflix. At least their actions wouldn’t have hurt anyone.
A smaller example is how worthless some ordinary jobs are. Are we really happy with a society that forces people to get a job, even if that job is telemarketing for extended car warranties? Or selling Kirby vacuums door-to-door? Imagine a world with less consumerism – no one has to invent a useless product, pay for the marketing to convince us that we need this useless product, sell the useless product, and then watch it pile up in landfills. Less ambition would create fewer items to buy and less need to buy those items. Why do people do things like this to make money? Because they’re afraid of being jobless or homeless or not having health insurance.
There’s a spectrum and a pendulum swing between the idea of fear as a motivator vs having your needs taken care of. I feel like the USA is at one extreme end of the pendulum right now (fear) and maybe we could let the pendulum swing a bit towards being taken care of and see what society does with less fear. My personal opinion is that we’d be pleasantly surprised by what some people would do voluntarily.
Janey,
I realize you weren’t addressing me directly, but I thought those were all excellent points. And frankly, the libertarian-leaning aspect of my conservatism would love to see the U.S. move away from corporations and go back more to the idea of guilds. I think you’d still get a lot of the innovation and profit, but without the monopoly and power. Admittedly, doing that is easier said than done.
Even with legitimate discussions of privilege and oppression, I feel like America is still a place where most dreams can come true with more ease than other countries with larger government. I spent five years as a janitor and loved every minute of it. I was highly tempted to do it permanently, but I was going to school to be a technician. Overall, I enjoy being a technician now, and have no regrets. My life has improved because of it. I don’t doubt that someone who took my place as janitor can do similarly.
I thought your last line was interesting,
“My personal opinion is that we’d be pleasantly surprised by what some people would do voluntarily.”
Ironically, that’s a line I often hear uttered by libertarians.
I’ve decided that listening to General Conference, and by extension the entire church experience, is like an inkblot test. We all see different things.
For example, I hear Elder Holland telling missionaries they better not dare leave their missions early, or I hear President Nelson talk about empty seats in heaven, or I hear discussion of net vs gross blessings from paying tithing, or I hear the General RS President talk about how a simple cup of coffee led to this person’s children leaving the church, or I read The Miracle of Forgiveness, or I think back to church leaders teaching me as a missionary that my honest mistakes could lead to others not hearing the gospel, or I think about object lessons involving licked cupcakes and nail holes in 2×4’s, and to me the entire system seems baked in fear. Yet I’ve spoken to others who genuinely see it differently. I don’t get their perspective, and they don’t get mine, but we try to be respectful of people’s individual experiences nonetheless.
We each have this one life to live the way that works for us. I spent years trying to live my life in a way that I was told would work but never really did. Now I’m trying new things. Some things are working and some are not. But at the very least, I’m at least no longer afraid to make mistakes.
Geoff – Aus: you’ve done us a great favor by identifying where Kolob is (the place where God dwells – and everyone is a Saint) – who would’ve thought it was already here….on our own planet…….just down under….in Australia…..”the blessed land”; where no one goes hungry, where there is no evil nor strife….and everyone lives in Peace.
Matiw,
I either missed your earlier comment or else it got stuck in the queue. More good and interesting points. Made my way all the way through both videos. I did very much appreciate Reich’s efforts to find common ground.
I’m well aware of the fault of missionary lenses, but many of my impressions came from conversations with actual Danes, both members and nonmembers. Despite the call and directive to teach, I did make some rudimentary attempts to understand the culture. I realize it was still just scratching the surface.
My impression of Danish medicine was that it was at least 5-10 years behind the U.S., but catching up. The technology sector seemed pretty close to the U.S., but it often seemed it was because they were taking advantage of innovation pioneered here. I sometimes wonder where the “good” in more socialist countries would be if it weren’t for some of the good being exported from this country.
When it comes down to it, I don’t think there is any problem with Capitalism that can’t be solved (at least eventually) in a society and government where the Gospel of Jesus Christ is allowed to flourish freely (or even just its core principles). I think one could argue the same with the problems of Socialism, but historically, practically, and often intentionally, I don’t think religion flourishes to the same extent needed to eliminate those problems. Like a lot of things, peel back all the layers, and I think much of the discussion boils down to whether one believes in the Gospel of Jesus Christ and its ability to transform individuals, and eventually societies. I tend to be an optimist in those regards.
LHL, the story at the beginning of the post sets it out, but yes much closer to it than America. Even though it is the middle of winter here my wife and I have just returned from a walk on the beach. The beach we walked on is 50 miles long, all open to the public, and provided with free services,(parking, toilets, picnic areas, and showers and foot washing for the sand). It was 24c,(75f) a bit cool, but incredibly beautifull.
I lost a filling last friday and have an appointment to have it replaced within a week for free. Could have been sooner if I was in pain.
Eli, You say you value freedom. The greatest threat to Americas freedom is the part of the republican party that supports trump over democracy, so I expect you would be voting against republicans, especially those that support a man who refuses to support democracy?
The only people who think countries like Denmark, Australia and Canada are socialist are republicans. We all believe in capitalism but to varying degrees. Like everything it needs to be limited/controlled. We also believe that governments can provide, healthcare, and a social safetynet, roads etc more efficiently, and effectively than private individuals, or churches, because that’s what governments are for. It is not lazy to chooze the government where they are best it is a conscious collective choice. Because you would oppose it on ideological grounds does not make it lazy or even wrong. Perhaps you are wrong? The 35 million Americans living in poverty in the richest country in the world are evidence.
You roll your eyes when Denmark is close to the top of happiest countries. They believe they are happiest, and objective judgement says they are, but because they are not living by your republican standards they can’t be. They have more freedom, less fear, and are happier. You are wrong. The recent roe rulings bringing republican policy into reality should make this obvious to anyone.
You claim they live for the weekend to get drunk, and have sex. Alcohol consumption in Denmark is almost identical to USA, but Danes do marry in their late 30s, so could be out dating. They have had gay marriage since 2003 too. Perhaps Danes drink as part of enjoying life, and Americans to drown their sorrows, is that what you don’t approve of?
The prime minister of Denmark is a woman born in 1977, you probably wouldn’t approve of her either?
Your other observations are equality twisted by your right wing ideology.
Eli your last post was not up.
Would you agree life expectancy is an indicator of an effective health system. Life expectancy has been gradually increasing in first world countries.
US life expectancy averaged men and women 79.11
Danish 81.4
Australian 83.94
So no their healthcare is not inferior. Perhaps Americas healthcare is of a similar standard to Denmark or Australia, but all our citizens are entitled to it, whereas only those who can afford it get top care there?
It is great to think all things good come from your country but that doesn’t make it true.
Our last point about the Gospel of Jesus Christ. I vote for the left of politics because they most closely represent the teachings of Christ. To love, and therefore care for the needy. I see very little of Christ in the right side of politics (tax cut for big companies, and the rich so they don’t fund helping the poor. And the right wing of politics is so much further to the right in America than in other first world countries. That the religious in America are attached to republicanism is incomprehensible to those of usoutside America. The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the total opposite of Republicanism.
Tell me how Republicanism is in any way related to The Christs teachings.
//I think much of the discussion boils down to whether one believes in the Gospel of Jesus Christ and its ability to transform individuals, and eventually societies. //
I would suggest that it already has–look at countries that care about the poor among them and that give access to medical care to all. That’s where I see Jesus. It is unconscionable the way US society lets its poorest members suffer.
(Also, *many,* seriously so many of the advances we all enjoy in medicine as well as other areas come from countries other than the US.. America is not at all the only place where innovation occurs. As monopoly power and inequality grow in the US they stifle innovation, and we are likely to experience more of that if we don’t suppress monopoly power and address inequality.)
What even *is* religion? James 1:27 says it is to care for the fatherless and the widows. We don’t judge *why* they are fatherless or widowed. We just care for them. Any other religion is whited sepulchres.
Geoff Aus: While you’re loving on Australia and hating on America (again) – is it indelicate to point out what was done (and still being done) to Maori in Australia and New Zealand. While I quite like Holland and Denmark….I’m not buying the Socialist Utopia you love so much.
Matiw YES!
LHL
There was no hating on America. Pointing out the lies republicans believe is not hate. It is just fact; no emotion. Also not America just republican which are way more extreme than other right wing parties in first world countries.
If you vote for trump or his supporters you are voting for America to be a dictatorship the opposite of freedom. If you claim to love freedom as Eli does, you will vote against any trump supporter.
Maori are natives of New Zealand, and are equal and respected.
I pointed out Denmark is only socialist to republicans, and corrected some republican lies. But not utopia, just doing better than USA at distributing resources to those in need, in a Christlike way.
Geoff-Aus,
So many questions. I’ll admit it’s hard for me to know for sure which are sincere, rhetorical, or meant to make a point. I’ll try to error on the side of the first.
“ . . . so I expect you would be voting against republicans, especially those that support a man who refuses to support democracy?”
I will vote for the candidate I feel will lessen or slow the federal government and error on the side of liberty and local government. I’m 99.9% sure that won’t be Joe Biden, and about 70% sure he won’t be on the ballot.
“The only people who think countries like Denmark, Australia and Canada are socialist are republicans.”
I’m technically a Republican. I’m sorry if you missed the part earlier where I said Denmark is not strictly socialist. I’m pretty sure it is moreso than the U.S.
“We also believe that governments can provide, healthcare, and a social safetynet, roads etc more efficiently, and effectively than private individuals, or churches, because that’s what governments are for.”
That may be true of Australia. I don’t think it was why our government was created. And if Australia is so government-centric, do you even have many private organizations to compare it with anymore? With few exceptions, my experience is that private groups are much more efficient.
“It is not lazy to chooze the government where they are best it is a conscious collective choice.”
I’d concede “lazy” was a lazy choice of words. I’d take issue as to whether it’s truly a collective, and I do believe it’s still wrong.
“Perhaps Danes drink as part of enjoying life, and Americans to drown their sorrows, is that what you don’t approve of?
I’d imagine it’s both for both countries and I don’t see much value in either. You may have missed the part where I mentioned that I could see how others would find value in it.
“The prime minister of Denmark is a woman born in 1977, you probably wouldn’t approve of her either?”
I have no idea what would make you ask this unless I’m talking to the Australian who thinks of America and Republicans purely as some of the redneck comedy portrayed (often inaccurately) by Hollywood. The answer is no. I’ve voted for plenty of women, and hope to vote for more in the future. Much of my local precinct has always been led by women. Some of my favorite presidential primary candidates have been women. I don’t think you are any less inaccurate in your assumptions as you make my supposed assumptions out to be.
“Would you agree life expectancy is an indicator of an effective health system?”
Absolutely not. Danes do far more walking and bicycling, eat far less fast food, and take the concept of “hygge” and making time for it very seriously. These are all good things the U.S. could learn from Denmark (making good pastry could also be added to that list).
“Tell me how Republicanism is in any way related to The Christs teachings.”
I will, but I tend to think more in terms of ideals than political party. I do think Republicanism places greater value on the rights of the individual, and thinking in terms of the individual.
If you were in a room with four other people, three of which (including you) had five dollars, while one had ten, and the other had zero, would the four of you feel justified voting to take five dollars away from the guy with ten, and giving it to the person who only had zero, by force if necessary?
The validity of vaccines aside, if you felt everyone should be vaccinated and you were medically qualified to administer it, would you feel comfortable walking right up to an unvaccinated person and jabbing them?
If you would answer yes to the previous two questions, then I’d admire your consistent morality (immorality) but would realistically be wary of your sociopathic and criminal tendencies. If you would answer no to the previous two questions but would approve of governments doing it, then I’d call that hypocritical cowardice. I honestly don’t think you’re either of those things, so I’m going to go with well-intended but misguided. What would Jesus do in either of those situations?
Christ left the ninety and nine and went after the one. Everything about the Savior’s ministry seems tailored to the individual and meeting his or her needs. I don’t think he would have forced any group or individuals to help another group or individuals, nor would he have punished them for not doing so (at least not by law), but would have asked them to do so with great persuasion and their full consent.
I sincerely see a broad definition of liberty, no matter how imperfect that is until the millennium, as the most impartial platform for which Christ-like love and service can flourish to its fullest extent. By putting zero stipulations on one individual, they are free to help another individual without any stipulations and without any stipulations as to each other, other than the ones they agree upon themselves. That’s essentially the Golden Rule. In fact, you can take it a step further by stating that not only do you have the freedom to treat others as you would want to be treated, but by how they want treated. No collective is necessary other than the ones created privately and by full agreement. The number one job of the federal government is to protect the rights of the individual should other individuals and collectives infringe on him or her.
Look, I’m not trying to make the claim that the U.S. is Heaven on Earth. Far from it. We have a lot of work to do. I think we’re up for it. But History has told me that governments with the power to do a lot of good possess the same power to do a lot of bad. That’s not fear, it’s just a very real understanding of history. I don’t think there is any good those large governments can do that can’t be accomplished without it, and I think governments should stick to protecting the rights of the individual.
Matiw,
I did not mean to imply the U.S. was the sole exporter of innovation.
Taking every aspect of the Gospel of Jesus Christ into account, I really have a hard time believing the Savior would be more pleased with the people of these other countries than He is with the people of this country, but I would venture to guess He’s not very pleased with either at the moment.
Thankyou Eli, I have been trying to understand how conservative/republicans think, to understand how safe the free world is.
You have not reassured me greatly.
I too hope Biden has retired before 24 and allowed Kamala Harris to show she can do the job.
But if trump is running, who will not accept the result unless he wins, and attempted an insurrection in 20. Are you saying republicans like you will vote for a future without democracy, a dictatorship by trump, on the hope that he might reduce the federal gov in favor of state and local? Is there really a moral equivalence?
If America is not the leader of the free world, and instead is a dictatorship, china can not only invade Tiwan but Australia. Russia would get more resistance from Europe.
I did notice your qualification that Denmark had a capitalist economy.
The difference we have is that you seem to believe that Christ, would prefer a society of every man for himself and quote him going to find the one, where I see him bringing the one back to the 99 so thay can be a community and be each others keeper, love and support each other, and not have any poor among them.
I would change you example to there is one with $1000, 3 with $10, and 2 with $5.
Now the one with 1000, has accountants etc so pays no tax.
The 3 with 10 pay 3.50 tax each leaving 6.50 to live on
The 2 with 5 pay 2.50 tax leaving 2.50 to live on which is below the poverty line.
Surely the first one with 1000 should pay at least 300 tax? Leaving 700 to live on.
The big problem I see with your view is that the state and local governments do not control the main source of income and corporate tax.
Even if they were able to have tax there would be states where there was lots of wealth, and others with lots of poverty. I believe governments are to regulate, govern, and redistribute wealth. There was a conservative government that set things up so the the $1000 person above could avoid paying his share of tax. A more left wing government (which I would vote for) would ensure that person paid his share, and redistribute some of it to the $5 people, perhaps as services.
You seem to think that non government bodies are better at helping those in need. Trump redistributed wealth by reducing the top rate of tax on high income individuals who were already managing well. The top rate of income tax was 70% in 1960, it is now 20%. Wealth has been redistributed toward the wealthy.
Non government bodies can provide some help but they can not change the basics. If the government is creating systemic poverty non governmen bodies can only put band aids on.
The rest of the free world (except republicans) believe gevernment should provide universal healthcare so each individual, reguardless of wealth gets the heathcare they need, not the healthcare they can afford. It is actually cheaper for governments to do this, Americas for profit system costs twice as much as Australias universal system, and I suggest the higher life expectancies in countries with universal healthcare show they work better too.
Interesting discussion probably won’t change either of us though hopefully you might considder the consequences of your beliefs in action.
Well, against my better judgment, I will re-enter the comment thread.
I can’t say that I have enjoyed the “dialogue” between Eli and Geoff-Aus, because it seems to me that they are trying too hard to convert each other.
I think honest communication is most possible when each side is able to admit its own weaknesses and the negative results that come when their preferred policies are implemented. I don’t see helpful communication, here. I see two zealous true believers trying to wear each other down.
There is no solution that does not carry in it the seeds of a future problem. Conservatives and progressives, take note. Why? Because very few people know when to stop. They go too far, and then others react negatively, and the pendulum swings the other way. That is why we need periods of both progressivism and conservatism, to keep things in some sort of balance. Measured progress is much better that overly-rapid changes that cause worse negative reactions.
The most obvious example to me is with the recent overturning of Roe v. Wade. The people who overturned Roe v. Wade are now going after Obergefell and even Griswold. They will eventually go too far, and the pushback
will begin. The surprise of the Kansas abortion referendum is a glimmer of hope that the pushback has begun.
To try and get back to the original topic of what role does fear play in religion, I believe that if we push back against the common Church attitude that we won’t make it to the Celestial Kingdom if we don’t do all 7.122 commandments we have been given, and love each other as we are, and show by our own Christian behavior a better way, then the fears that Eli and Geoff-Aus have articulated so well, about the evils of conservatism and progressivism, will be eased.
And BTW, a few years ago (sorry, can’t remember source) an article was written saying that Denmark, with its social-democratic version of capitalism, and Utah, with its more carnivorous approach to capitalism, are two places that have a lot in common—because the populations enjoy higher levels of social trust and social capital.
TM,
Thanks for weighing back in.
”it seems to me that they are trying too hard to convert each other.”
I would admit I’ve stooped slightly below my standards on this thread, but I’d respectfully submit you’re wrong. I can’t speak for the motivations of Geoff-Aus, but I felt he was beyond conversion a couple of years ago. I have no doubt Geoff-Aus is working hard to live a Christ-like life, even if I disagree with some of his morals and methods. My issue is that Geoff-Aus has given me the impression that anyone who holds to ideals often associated with Conservatism and/or Republicanism is incapable of being Christ-like, and may actually prefer to revel in their evil practices. It’s enough for me to know that’s not true, but I was hoping Geoff-Aus could recognize it as well, and benefit from that perspective. In that, perhaps I did try too hard.
Geoff-Aus wrote:
“Are you saying republicans like you will vote for a future without democracy, a dictatorship by trump, on the hope that he might reduce the federal gov in favor of state and local? Is there really a moral equivalence?”
This is one of the things that sincerely baffles me about the liberal practice of associating Trump with Conservatism. It’s not about Trump. I don’t answer to him. I don’t worship him. I don’t hold to a candidate. I hold to certain ideals that I regularly question and evaluate. I’d prefer the candidate herself/himself emulated those values, but I’m to the point of settling for a Darius or Cyrus who just allows them to blossom on their own. That’s the attitude of most Trump supporters I know.
As far as dictatorships go, I think the U.S. is probably a little more robust than you might think. If fascism ever does make its way here, I think it will be more likely through liberalism, but I could be wrong. And if it does come from conservatism, it would be some of the most die hard “Trump supporters” that would be the first to rise up against it, even if it was the guy they voted for. I’m pretty sure of that.
“you seem to believe that Christ, would prefer a society of every man for himself”
I neither wrote nor implied anything of the sort. My knee-jerk reaction would be to call this a blatant misrepresentation, but I’m more inclined to say this is just a case of mistakenly seeing bad in something we’ve expected to see bad in for decades and decades.
Obviously we can and need to help people. I wrote as much. All these things can still be done without excessive government. Every month for family council, our family decides on a donation we’ll make outside the Church. This could be a neighbor, a cause, a charity, or any number of things. All my kids are now also about of age to make volunteering an entire family experience. I do not think the bureaucrats necessarily have a better feeling for things than my family and I do. If they know more about the struggling family down the street than we do, then we’re failing as human beings. It’s that simple. And yes, I have room for improvement. I do not think it’s always the best people in government—often it’s just those who will take the job. Many serve out of obligation, but many feel they can do more and be better outside of red tape, and I respect their opinions. Outside the very personal human services (military, law enforcement, social service, and education), I’ve been disappointed to learn many of my friends and associates got into government work “for the benefits” only. Despite my distaste for excessive government, I’ll admit I found that a little disappointing. If it’s the force for good many assert, I would have hoped there would have been more enthusiasm behind it. To be fair, you see that in the private sector as well.
As far as the original topic and discussion goes, I have been more and more convinced that fear is based in about two parts perception for every one part fact. I’ll fully admit I’m probably not immune to this.
BTW Geoff-Aus, I honestly am not trying to have the last word. I just have a pet peeve of seeing a commenter’s questions go unanswered, whether they’re my own or another’s. And since I occasionally struggle to differentiate between sincere, rhetorical, or point-driven questions, I try to answer them regardless. Forgive me if I missed some you really wanted answered. If you have more, I’ll answer them.
I’ll give you this though. You have somewhat renewed my desire to visit Australia at some point and it’s moved up on my list. Tell me this please, I’ve heard and read lots of good things about Tasmania. Is it worth a trip somewhat out of the way down there, or is it best to keep to the mainland to make time for other things if on a schedule?
I’ve moved recently so I haven’t been up to date on these threads, but it looks like Eli is still dabbling in semantic voodoo by responding to criticism of the current Republican Party with retorts about ‘conservatives.’ So disappointing to still see so many pixels taken up with such little content. To paraphrase him, “I’ve given up hope of him ever changing on this point.” It’s almost as if he believes the people who stormed the capital didn’t consider themselves ‘conservatives.’
Look Eli, you’re not helping your argument for libertarianism, Eli. You’re making yourself and the movement look remarkably obtuse. I mean, seriously, you write, “As far as dictatorships go, I think the U.S. is probably a little more robust than you might think. If fascism ever does make its way here, I think it will be more likely through liberalism, but I could be wrong. And if it does come from conservatism, it would be some of the most die hard “Trump supporters” that would be the first to rise up against it, even if it was the guy they voted for. I’m pretty sure of that.”
January 6.
What you just wrote is basically your own “What is Aleppo?” moment.
Among the many libertarian family members and friends I have, one of them, my best friend here in the Deep South is would never spout such nonsense. Repeatedly you seem either unwilling or naive about how much Trump’s fascist tendencies have ballooned inside the Republican base, who all consider themselves conservatives. Consequently, much of what your posting here is logically and semantically bonkers; and also quite out of touch with reality.
Eli,
I do not know what attracts you to Tasmania? It is 2500k south from where I live, and I have been there but did not think I would come from around the world just to go there.
I would recommend the Gold Coast. I would even meet you at Brisbane Airport, and show you round.
The other place I would recommend is Uluru in the centre of Australia 3000k west of us. This is an incredibly spiritual place, and sacred to the first nation people.
Brian,
Thank you for the feedback. I will work a little harder on being less obtuse.
Geoff-Aus,
Thanks for your response. I may actually take you up on your airport offer someday.