The Book of Mormon Takes a Stand – for Obama

July 26, 2012

Guest Contributors

Guest Post by Steve Warren

We all know Mitt Romney is the Mormon in this year’s presidential race.  Therefore, we ought to be safe in assuming that Book of Mormon teachings more closely align with his views than those of President Obama.

Alas, if we made that assumption, we’d be wrong.

Let’s examine what the book says and where the candidates stand.

When it comes to the Book of Mormon’s central message—that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and Redeemer of the world—Obama, a member of the United Church of Christ, and Romney, who belongs to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, agree.

On other key topics, however, they part ways.

For example, the book prominently features wars and other conflicts.  The subject occupies around 170 of the book’s 531 pages.  Prophets often admonish Book of Mormon peoples never to “go up” to war against their enemies. Instead, they must wait until their foes “come down” to their land.  In other words, they may fight defensive wars but must never be aggressors.  As LDS scholar Hugh Nibley wrote, righteous principles “rendered aggressive warfare impossible and preventive warfare utterly unthinkable.”

In the Iraq War, we saw the United States “go up” to attack a nation that hadn’t attacked us.  Supporters of the war deemed it preventive or preemptive.  Romney strongly supported the war, favored increased U.S. troop levels as it dragged on and criticized Obama’s decision to end it.  Obama, on the other hand, opposed the war from the start. As president, he terminated U.S. troop involvement in December 2011.

The Book of Mormon also declares that righteous nations must treat prisoners of war humanely.  In Alma 62:27-29, prisoners not only were freed, they were given land and were welcomed into the society.  On another occasion, prisoners were allowed to depart promptly in peace after a bloody battle (Hel. 1:33). Centuries later, however, after both sides had rejected God, they abused and tortured their prisoners (Moroni 9:7-10).

In the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and in the war on terror, U.S. soldiers and our agents have engaged in a variety of abuses and torture of prisoners, including waterboarding. Among the most infamous sites of prisoner abuse has been Guantanamo.

Romney declines to renounce waterboarding, and his aides have said that he does not view it as torture. His support of “enhanced interrogation techniques” has drawn strong criticism from 2008 Republican presidential candidate John McCain.  Romney also has said, “Some people say we should close Guantanamo.  My view is we ought to double Guantanamo.”

Shortly after taking office, President Obama issued an executive order halting harsh interrogation techniques, including waterboarding. He has sought to close Guantanamo but has faced stiff resistance from Congress.

In terms of military spending, Nibley assures us that when the Nephites were righteous, their “military preparations were defensive—minimal—with God acting as their radar and warning system.”  Rather than “minimal” defense spending, Romney wants to restore American power and has pledged to boost the military budget by close to $2 trillion over the next 10 years, adding 100,000 soldiers.  (U.S. military spending is by far the world’s largest.)  Obama favors significant cuts to the military budget.

Clearly, it is Obama, not Romney, who heeds the counsel of Book of Mormon prophets on war. His actions prove that he regards Christ as the Prince of Peace rather than the Prince of Preemptive War.

Another yardstick measuring the uprightness of Book of Mormon peoples is how they treat the poor.

During the longest peaceful era in Book of Mormon history, the people established economic equality—“they had all things common among them; therefore there were not rich and poor” (4 Nephi 1:3). Earlier, a prophet rebuked those who neglected the poor and who allowed great disparities to develop between the haves and the have-nots (Alma 4:11-13). The practice of “oppressing” wage earners was condemned (3 Nephi 24:5).

The Book of Mormon stresses equity.  In Mosiah 18:27 we read that those with high incomes should give “more abundantly” and that for those with little, “little should be required” and “to him that had not should be given.” King Benjamin reminds his people that he has only sought to serve them “and have not sought gold nor silver nor any manner of riches of you.” Prophets denounced taxation that enriched the wealthy and those in power while burdening everyone else (Mosiah 11:3-6; Ether 10:5,6).

Romney deserves credit for leadership at Bain Capital that rescued some companies that might otherwise have gone out of business. But his actions widened the gap between the haves and have-nots, with people like himself and others at the top reaping multiple millions in income while many at the bottom lost jobs and saw jobs shipped overseas where it is legal to oppress wage earners by paying them below minimum U.S. wages. Romney favored a minimum-wage hike early in 2012 but then reversed his position. His proposed boost in the military budget would come at the expense of social programs that aid the needy. President Obama has supported hikes in the minimum wage and is often called a socialist for supporting programs that help lower-income and unemployed Americans.

Although both candidates can be viewed as wealthy, Romney’s 2010 tax forms, the latest he has released, show income of $21.7 million, 13 times greater than Obama’s $1.7 million.  But Romney paid federal taxes of only 13.9 percent while Obama’s federal tax rate was 26 percent. In order to reduce the gap between the haves and have-nots and help cut the deficit, Obama favors allowing the tax cut for people making more than $250,000 annually to expire. Romney would extend the tax cut for the wealthy, making it easier for high-income Americans to continue paying lower overall rates than those of modest income.

Another prominent Book of Mormon message is to beware of pride while remembering “your own nothingness . . . and humble yourselves, even in the depths of humility” (Mosiah 4:11). Prophets rebuke those who feel they deserve their riches and who claim “every man prospered according to his genius” (Alma 30:17).  Part of this pride among the Nephites also manifested itself in feelings of national superiority and boastfulness after military victories.

In his 2010 book “No Apology,” Romney lays out the case for American greatness. He vows to “never again apologize for America.” He has reminded critics of his income that America’s capitalistic system allows some to accumulate great wealth (“I’ve been extraordinarily successful”) and that those who are less successful should avoid “the politics of envy.” President Obama has apologized for American mistakes that have offended other countries, such as the burning of a Koran at a U.S. military base.  He has stated that no one achieves success alone but instead receives help every step of the way.

On immigration, the Book of Mormon offers a limited “open door” policy. If people are willing to be good citizens, the attitude is “y’all come.” For example, when believers among the Zoramites found themselves expelled from their country, they entered the land of Jershon. The people of Jershon, being righteous, did not say, “You don’t have proper papers, so self-deport yourselves back to where you came from.” Instead, Jershon “did receive all the poor of the Zoramites that came over unto them; and they did nourish them, and did clothe them, and did give unto them lands for their inheritance” (Alma 35:9).

Mitt Romney coined the phrase “self-deport” in saying those who lack citizenship papers should leave the country.  He has opposed the DREAM Act, which provides a pathway to citizenship for those brought to the United States as children. He also supports making English the country’s official language and has said Arizona and other states should be allowed to enact their own immigration laws.  Obama halted deportation of young undocumented immigrants in June 2012 and supports the DREAM Act. He also directed the Justice Department to pursue its successful challenge of Arizona’s “show me your papers” anti-immigration law.

With Mitt Romney’s positions so often contrary to the Book of Mormon, what shall we say to Mormons who support him? Perhaps a one-word answer is best. It’s a word that repeatedly pops up in the Book of Mormon: Repent!

, , , , ,


Subscribe to our RSS feed and social profiles to receive updates.

44 Comments on “The Book of Mormon Takes a Stand – for Obama”

  1. M. W. Daniel Says:

    Wow! It just hit me – Romney doesn’t want to release his tax returns because he doesn’t want the church to find out that he has not been tithing his full 10%.

    • Frank Stark Says:

      “Mitt and Ann Romney have released their 2010 tax return and an estimate of their 2011 return, thus offering extensive information about their personal finances.

      In approaching Romney’s taxes, a number of key points should be kept in mind.

      First, as a successful businessman, Governor Romney has not only added value to our economy through his investment and business activity, but he has paid millions in taxes every year to the U.S. government.

      Second, the Romneys take to heart “to whom much is given, of him shall much be required.” Accordingly, they have been extraordinarily generous in their charitable giving, donating over $7 million from 2010-2011, averaging over 16% of their income.

      Third, Mitt Romney has been scrupulous about observing the requirements of the tax code. His income is reported and taxed in full compliance with U.S. law, and he has paid 100 percent of what he has owed. His good name means everything to him. Throughout his life in this and in other matters, he has conducted his personal and business affairs so as to be beyond reproach.”

      The question is how many years back do you want to go? “There is no standard,” Joseph J. Thorndike, director of the Tax History Project at Tax Analysts, a nonprofit, nonpartisan publisher of tax information, tells “Some candidates have released a lot more returns, and others about the same number. It depends on the particular politics at the time.”

      Read more: He has fully complied with the law’s requirements. He is not required to submit to the merely curious or the those who are looking to find some imagined fault.

      • tim Says:

        Frank, you are missing the point. The post is not suggesting Mr. Romney has evaded paying taxes that were legally required of him. Instead, it is simply pointing out that he has benefited from and supports the continuation of tax policies which benefit the very wealthy, and posits that perhaps this is discordant with BOM teachings. Your comment only reinforces what many of us are concerned about: the tax code allows the very wealthy to carry a significantly smaller tax burden than the average worker. Romney’s reluctance to release tax returns are a legitimate concern but they are not the issue here.

    • JJbarn Says:

      hahahaha that was the most uneducated comment i have ever read, not to mention the most judgmental. Judge not so you be not judged. Are you his bishop? who are you to claim a man does or does not pay this tithing, in the words of he who wrote this article, REPENT.

      • Julian K. Says:

        Looks like someone is getting a little defensive…that’s usually a sign of guilt. Romney knows he is wrong and too greedy.

    • Ivan Says:

      How do you know that. Have you evidence for this claim: that he doesn’t pay 10 % tithing?

    • Eli Blake Says:

      I have no reason to doubt that he has paid his tithing. I do not believe that Mitt Romney is a bad man or an unworthy Mormon.

      I simply believe that his plan for the country is wrong, and that he himself (possibly through no fault of his own) can’t understand what it is like to have to choose between paying the electric bill to keep the lights on or taking your sick child to the doctor. He doesn’t understand it, because he’s never lived it, and he’s been surrounded since birth by people who haven’t lived it (and has probably been told more than a few times that the less fortunate are that way either because they are lazy or by choice.)

  2. Kathy Says:

    I think that as Latter-day Saints we all have a testimony of the Book of Mormon, and if we have studied it we can clearly see that it was written for our time. What absolutely boggles my mind is how people can read the Book of Mormon and come to any other conclusion. Great article!

  3. Vern Piso Says:

    You do know that many of the investors in Bain are Unions and CHARITIES. Right?

    Good points though Steve.

    As far as how we treat the poor Republicans and Democrats believe the same except how to execute the plan of taking care of the poor. Democrats believe we should all be forced to take care of the poor while the Republicans believe we should be free to give how we want to give (agency).

    I’m reminded of the plan of salvation and how the plan was to be carried out then another stepped forward and said he would save everyone by taking away agency and forcing the children of God to keep the commandments. Who would the glory go to under the way Satin wanted to do things. Not the Father.

    Who gets the credit for taking care of Americans who get help from the government? Not the Father. Do we want people to look to the government for help or do we want them to look to their fellow man through the church? Should we be forced to give, what good is the offering?

    • Eric R. Says:

      does this “agency” argument also apply to things like gay marriage and drug use, or only to helping hungry people have food? Just curious, when you make that argument, you ever have to watch your kids go to bed hungry?

    • tim Says:

      There are at least two problems with your position, Vern. First, the Republican plan of “agency” has historically been woefully insufficient to meet the needs of the poor. So this talk of “get the government out of the way so we can choose to be charitable” is nonsense. Aside from a few scriptural accounts, I am unaware of any case in history where individuals have cared for the poor more effectively than our current welfare system (which could still be improved upon a thousandfold). Second, a great number of our laws are also based on moral/religious principles that society values: truth (laws against dishonesty in all of its forms), life (laws against murder, violence and abuse), and property (not stealing in all its forms). Does this mean I’ve lost the agency to be honest because there are laws against perjury? You are confusing moral agency, the ability to choose right from wrong, and the legal requirements of the organized society you participate in. No one is trying to force anyone to be charitable–charity comes from the heart and God knows if you pay your taxes grudgingly. Taxing to help care for the poor is not forced morality then, it is an application of a moral value that society deems broadly beneficial just like laws against murder or stealing. You may disagree that this is the best way to care for the poor, but the agency argument doesn’t hold water. If a lack of laws compelling certain behavior is necessary for the righteous use of agency, then we might as well scrap laws altogether so we can finally start to work out our salvation.

  4. JJbarn Says:

    Terrible article really, reaching for controversy where it doesnt exist. How about a few bombs the the book of mormon strongly condemns, Gay Marriage, Abortions? How about one that we fought over in the war in heaven, freedom to choose for yourself. The Obama administration constantly denies the right that we have, given to us by your savior. It is mind blowing the hypocrisy that your articles contain. REPENT!

    • gina Says:

      While gay marriage and abortion are condemned by the lds church, they aren’t mentioned in the Book of Mormon, buddy. Nice try. And Obama is not giving me the right to choose? What? U r fine to criticise him but don’t go all over board.

      • JJbarn Says:

        wait what?! you dont think gay marriage and abortion is found in the book of mormon? Have you ever read even a small portion of the book of mormon? really, you jus lost all credibility. You cant be saved in your ignorance. REPENT! and read the book of mormon for once.

      • BDUB Says:

        JJ: are you being for real or just trolling? Where in the BOM does it drop the gay marriage “bomb” you mention?

    • Kathy Says:

      I really resented George W. Bush & Co. taking us into a preemptive war based on lies. If we were going to retaliate for the 911 attacks we should have gone after our allies, Saudi Arabia (who also has a terrible human rights record). Don’t like abortion? Exercise that free agency we fought so hard for in the preexistence and don’t have one! And gay marriage isn’t any less an abomination that any of Newt Gingerich’s or Rush Limbaugh’s marriages. As for having your free agency taken away, I’m assuming you’re referring to taxes–the helping the poor part of our taxes (for you certainly love military spending). Come on, YOU repent!!!

      • Steve Warren Says:

        Thanks for the comment, Kathy.

        When people like Vern say Democrats use the government to take our agency away by taxing us to fund social programs and other programs they don’t like, they are really saying that each of us should have the right to decide where we want our individual tax dollars to go — or whether to pay any taxes at all. What you’d end up with is each branch of government sending solicitations to “please contribute,” kind of like March of Dimes, the Cancer Society, etc.

        Some critics of government also say our agency is infringed by government regulations. Of course, deregulation and tax cuts were key contributors to the George W. Bush economic meltdown. Apparently, some Republicans would be happy returning to the minimal-regulation era of the late 1800s, when the robber barons accumulated huge wealth while subjecting working people to low pay and terrible conditions. Yes, the robber barons had lots of agency — to trample on everyone else. Thank goodness for the trust-buster Teddy Roosevelt. And thank goodness for labor unions and government for standing up for the rights of workers.

    • Steve Warren Says:


      I’d like to know the scriptural references for Book of Mormon mentions of gay marriage and abortion.

      Thank you.

    • mormonprogressive Says:

      Can you provide any scriptural references to gay marriage and abortion int he Book of Mormon? If you can, please include them I would love to read them. If not, perhaps you can kindly refrain from making attacks or statements that muddy the water without any support. Thank you.

      • DepechianSociety Says:

        @Steve Warren, @mormonprogressive, and @gina: Your attacking JJBarn for the words he used, but his point was really the credible thing you should be more concerned with. We don’t need the book of mormon to tell us that gay marriage and abortion is wrong. We have the Spirit of the Lord to do that, along with the latter-day prophets who have spoken loud and clear. If your only basing your presidential choice on the book of mormon, then you are spot on with gays and killing babies. Because it dont mention it once! No not once!!! Obama is for the gays and for abortion, plus he increased tremendously the war in Afghanistan. And Obama took away our choice to NOT buy health insurance. And de-funded NASA. I could go on but no one reads super longs posts.

  5. DANYS B. UNZAGA Says:

    I am very sorry about you brother, you really are very smart traying to convence Mormon to vote for Obama.I do not know Romney, but he is following Jesus, he is one of the member of his Church,he knows our Father in Heaven Plan, He knows what this Country need, no matter what he has done with his wealthy,I don’t doubt he has paid his tithings and offerings which is personnel, he has growing his children and they are doing the JOB OF GOD living his family to do a MISSION, he has a wonderful Family together. Nobody is perfect brother you need to understand that God is doing miracles even though GOD is apart of this games of politics,he can blessing men like Romney to get weathy and have qualities to become the next President of the United States of America . The only way a Mormon could compete becoming a Candidate is because he has prayed first and have lot of LOVE FOR HIS COUNTRY. This Country need a person with the PRINCIPLES which this Nation has been established: ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. This Nation need him who has the power of, praying before to change laws, This Nation need him who has the power to confront anybody with dignity, because Mitt Romney is an integrity human been , Let me tell you something BROTHER or People whom trust you:, THIS NATION IS UNIQUE ! The Book of Mormon testify that Jesus is THE CHRIST and is another testimony with the Bible MIT ROMNEY HAS THIS TESTIMONY!. WE NEED A NEW PRESIDENT ! MITT ROMNEY WILL BE IF THIS NATION EARN THIS OPPORTUNITY. . HAVING A MAN LIKE HIM.

    • Nita Caffrey Says:

      The problem isn’t Romney not giving to the poor and Obama giving to the poor, the problem is Obama is taking from the rich to give to the poor without their consent. Also he is forcing all of us to give without our consent!! What happened to free agency. America freedom is based on that and we are the great country we are because of those rich people. Why is Obama so down on the rich, they either worked for it or inherited it, so what?? I can’t believe you self righteous people are judging someone else in the church.I am glad I don’t live in your ward!! Religion shouldn’t be a part of this election. Vote how you want but quit condemning him because you don’t think he is a good Mormon! I am voting for him, not because he is a Mormon but because I like what he plans to do for our country, to keep it from going down hill anymore. Obama doesn’t even pray and has almost admitted that he likes the Islam religion. If you are going to bring in religion, when is the last time Obama went to church?? If you are going to talk War and BOM, you forgot to read the passages when Nephites were always preparing for war, we need to be ready, be prepared! And all our military help has helped free other people, I don’t think it is a waste to help countries less fortunate then us. So be a Mormon but don’t get all hung up on advertising that you are a Mormon, just vote for who you think will be best for our country. Who cares if you are a Mormon and voting for Obama!

      • Eric R. Says:

        I agree that suggesting you shouldn’t vote for Romney because he isn’t a “good” Mormon isn’t right. We all need to calm down and realize we are on the same side when it comes to eternal goals for all mankind.

        But I was surprised when you talked about objecting to Obama ‘taking away people’s freedom’ by forcing them to give to the poor. Do you also believe that the government shouldn’t be able to tell us who can and can’t be married? Should they be able to stop us from doing drugs if we want to? Or how about stoping us from driving as fast as we want on the freeway?

        My guess is that you (like all of us) believe it is completely appropriate for the government to force citizens to do the right thing when it is in the public good. Why can’t that apply to taking care of those who can’t take care of themselves? You know as well as I do that if all social programs relied on people doing the right thing of their own accord, it wouldn’t be enough.

        Is the freedom for rich people to keep their money (which was given to them by God and isn’t really even “theirs”, by the way) somehow more sacred than the commandment to cloth the naked, feed the hungry and shelter the homeless? Sounds like some pretty mesed up (and selective) interpretation of priorities to me. And that is why I am not voting for Romney.

      • Pat Says:

        Nita, Mormons like yourself really scares me.

  6. Frank Stark Says:

    Dear Kathy and Steve
    I resent GW Bush taking us into a war based on faulty intelligence without a declaration of war as required in the Constitution.
    I don’t like abortion because I believe what the Proclamation on the Family teaches, because of what the Prophets have taught about abortion. I have a responsibility to work against an evil, whether or not government is involved. It is not my job or responsibility to gossip about Gingrich’s, Limbaugh’s, Cruise’s or anybody else’s marriage/s. It is my job to make mine work and be a good example. That is difficult enough.
    As for having my free agency taken away, I refer to a lot more than taxes. I refer to the growth in federal regulation in general. In 1970, the Code of Federal Regulations had 54,000 pages. Today it runs to 165,000 pages. In 1970 I could put fill dirt in my back yard, and not worry about Federal agents coming to arrest me. People have been hounded by Federal regulators for just that in the past 10 years. Thomas Jefferson wrote that the U.S. Constitution gave Congress the power to criminally punish “treason, counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States, piracies, and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations, and no other crimes whatsoever.” Yet the federal criminal code today spans some 1,400 pages, over 2000 felonies and a literally uncountable number of other violations of the regulations.
    The tax code alone covers 17,000 pages and requires over 700 different forms. The IRS estimates that Americans spend 5.1 billion hours annually merely preparing their taxes. The Tax Foundation estimates that those wasted hours drain some $194 billion annually from the U.S. economy (BTW, Romney paid taxes at a lower rate than Obama because his income comes in a different form. Romney’s is from investments, Obama’s was from payroll…it’s the complications of the tax code!)
    A fairly recent study concludes that each Federal Regulatory job costs 98 private sector jobs. (Phoenix Center Policy Bulletin No. 28, It is not taxes per se that I dislike, it is the unfairness and complexity of the tax code, and that it is not the Federal government’s job to re-distribute what one person has earned to another person who has not earned it.
    You assume that I love military spending…I don’t. You assume that I am against helping the poor. I am not. Just don’t stick a gun in my face to make me do it. You assume that I hate government…I don’t, any more than I hate fire.
    What I do want is for the Federal Government to do what the Constitution says that it should do. Section 8 lists the 17 areas in which it is granted the powers to legislate. That is all that the Federal government should do. Everything else is to be done at the village, town, county or state levels. Every Latter Day Saint should know that document, as stated by Pres. Benson. It is considered to be inspired of God, and not to be trifled with.
    President Obama has no intention of returning the country to following the Constitution. (Neither did Bush or McCain) Romney, as president, may. At least he will try.

  7. Ivan Says:

    Addressing your remarks on the lack of preemptive strikes in the Book of Mormon: When Nephi killed Laban because “it is better for one man to perish than a whole nation to perish because of unbelief”… could that be seen as a preemptive strike? Someone else can write a clever article using the Book of Mormon to support Romney too. The point here is that you can rationalize ANY belief in the Book of Mormon. People have been using the bible for the same reasons for thousands of years. Your article was clever but based on YOUR OPINION! And thank God you live in a country where you have the freedom to give your opinion. But understand, THIS IS YOUR OPINION! You kind of look like a fool for condemning others for their opinions. I don’t need to repent if I believe Romney will make a better president.

    • MormonProgressive Says:

      I would be VERY interested in seeing if you can write such an article supporting Romney using the Book of Mormon. If you do, I would absolutely read it. However, I don’t think that will ever happen. You don’t even need to write an article, could you just come up with some examples? Also I would recommend you avoid logical fallacies in the article you write. For example the use of what is called the FALSE ANALOGY, killing a man is NOT the same as launching a preemptive war.

      • DepechianSociety Says:

        Ivan did not use a false analogy, he was simply asking a question as to whether killing Laban would be the same as a preemptive strike. Good question, I might add. And i dont know Ivan, but i’m sure he nor anyone else needs to write an article supporting Romney using the book or mormon, because that would be ridiculous, just as was this article in supporting obama using the book of mormon. I’m sure God does not want us using His word to further our political agendas. You should repent for that, just as I should repent for voting for Romney!

  8. Matt Says:

    When the Book of Mormon teaches for the rich to give abundantly to the poor it is talking about the rich giving to the poor not the rich involuntarily giving the government high taxes to be used on inefficient government programs.

  9. daveloper Says:

    Both Romney and Obama fail the pre-emptive war test listed here. How can any of you support either of them. Obama raided Libya when Libya posed no threat to the US. Obama murdered…that’s right murdered Abdulrahman. Romney is just as bad on all accounts.

    Both of these jokers love the Patriot Act and the indefinite detention provisions of the NDAA. Such a legal contrivance is nothing more nor less than a weapon to destroy us. So much for befriending the constitution. IMHO, the only way a Latter-day Saint can reconcile his faith and either of these two power mad megalomaniacs is to totally disregard 100% of D&C 98.

    I’ll let you all argue the point that if I don’t vote for YOUR candidate that I’m voting for the other…and I will ignore you. Instead of listening to your advice I choose to follow this instead:

    “…we shall have the sat­is­fac­tion of know­ing that we have acted con­sci­en­tiously, and have used our best judg­ment. And if we have to throw away our votes, we had bet­ter do so upon a wor­thy rather than an unwor­thy indi­vid­ual who might make use of the weapon we put in his hand to destroy us.” (Joseph Smith, Times and Sea­sons, Nau­voo, IV, 441. Cited also in Roberts, Com­pre­hen­sive His­tory, II, 208–209.)

  10. Thomas Dyches Says:

    I actually agree with some of your doctrinal points but its laughable that u don’t see what a warmonger and violator of BofM principles Obama is just like Romney. Are ye blind? The Left/Right paradigm of the party system is a favorite tool of the Secret Combinations. Awake to our awful situation & see both candidates for what they are: statists who serve the global banksters.

    • JJK Says:

      yes, i am blind. we are all blind. it is definitely the perfect way to look at things: when all are candidates are all wrong, then it is easier for you (and the illuminati – whatever that is) to be right. our situation is so awful in Amerika you should move to some other country that is not so frought with secret combinations. maybe jim jones knows the way to san jose.

    • Pete Says:

      I like your reasoning because you can’t say Romney is evil and then say Obama is not evil. Anyone with common sense could see that. I don’t however agree that Romney is evil though, just a liberal republican, nothing more

  11. Jaxx13 Says:

    King Benjamin said that leaders of the people should work to sustain themselves and not live off the people. He told the PEOPLE to care for the widow, the orphan, the sick, the poor. He is a king and spiritual leader od the people who says nothing of “give me your money and I’ll take a big salary, benefit package and decide what special interest group that supports me I should give your hard earned money to”.

    Captain Moroni went back to the Capitol and killed their “congress” because they were corrupt. The government expanded too big and cared more for their interests than those of the people.

    King Noah was surrounded by evil judges that twisted the laws to their advantage and suppressed the peopled and burdened them with taxes they could not bear.

    As latter day saints we support the prophet’s proclamation of the family, the right to life, living a debt free life, being self sustaining, caring for the needy through good works and most of all free agency. Our current leaders neither believe or support the values that all latter day saints should embrace and exemplify.

    Those who make poor choices will always try to justify their flawed reasoning.

  12. Pete Says:

    The Iraq war was not a preemptive strike. We were taking taking the fight to the terrorists, rather than fighting them on our own soil. The book of mormon does not say to protect your selves, family, faith, etc only by standing by, in your own land for the enemy to strike. It does not say that you cannot fight for your protection and your rights and your liberties in a foreign land. If that was the case, we should have have fought in WW1 or WW2, either. Very short-sighted comments using the book of mormon to support Obama, who is the most deceptive man who inhabited the white house. what does the book of mormon say about deception? This article does nothing more than make me want to vote for Romney even more.

  13. Pete Says:

    Steve, you are going to call me to repentance because I vote for Romney? That is the dumbest thing I’ve heard all day! Are you judging me? What do you know about my personal worthiness in the eyes of God. You can have your opinions, but i don’t think you have the right or authority to call anyone to repentance.

    • Steve Warren Says:

      Yes, my use of the word “repent” was tongue in cheek, something that appears to have not registered with a number of readers. You see, some of us get a bit tired of right-wing Latter-day Saints acting as though those of us who support Obama aren’t really in tune with the gospel, so I used the “repent” thing to give them a dose of their own medicine.

      And, to other posters, yes, I know Obama isn’t perfect, but I think his views are clearly more in harmony with the gospel than those of Romney. That includes on the issue of abortion, where the church’s position has been criticized as too liberal, because it permits abortions in four different circumstances. (Actually, I do favor Romney’s views on abortion–the ones he held when he ran against Ted Kennedy.)

      I look forward to Barack’n’roll with President Obama for four more years.

  14. BDUB Says:

    Half the people on this comment thread are calling people to repentance.

  15. Fred Rauback Says:

    Yes, the Book of Mormon (like the New Testament) says much about individuals helping the poor. But it says nothing about transferring that responsibility to Caesar (the government) to force their neighbors to be involuntary participants. What happened to agency and free choice?

    Nobody has mentioned Mosiah 18:27-28: “And again Alma commanded that the people of the church should impart of their substance, every one according to that which he had; if he have more abundantly he should impart more abundantly; and of him that had but little, but little should be required; and to him that had not should be given. And thus THEY SHOULD IMPART OF THEIR SUBSTANCE OF THEIR OWN FREE WILL AND GOOD DESIRES TOWARD GOD, and to those priests that stood in need, yea, and to every needy, naked soul” (emphasis mine).

    If you’re going to quote the Book of Mormon about helping the poor, these verses from Mosiah is the guiding principle. Anybody who thinks it is a Christians’ duty to appeal to the government to deny their neighbors the God given principle of free will and force them to take care of the poor is walking the wrong path. Is the Federal Government an extension of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?

    Nobody has mentioned where the Constitution fits in this argument. Is the Constitution important? According to the Lord, yes! He established it and one of the reasons was to enable every person to act in doctrine and principle, according to the moral agency he has given to us (see D&C 101:76-80).

    Looking at the Constitution, socialists refer to the welfare clause as justification for socialist legislation. But the welfare clause isn’t about creating new powers for the government, it’s about paying for the powers they already have. It about taxes.
    The “welfare clause” of the Constitution states: “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to … provide for the … general Welfare of the United States “(Article I Section 8).

    This provision did not give Congress the power to write legislation to give themselves a new power to redistribute the wealth of the people (i.e. no Social Justice programs), but only gave Congress the power to collect taxes to pay for the limited purposes already enumerated in the Constitution. A new power would require an Amendment (see Article V of the Constitution). But the Federal Government began to reinterpret the Welfare Clause as a blank check that would allow them to create legislation to mandate redistribution of the wealth in the form of various entitlements to preferred, special interest groups. The cost of these entitlements is now a staggering 60% of the annual Federal Budget, and our country is 16 trillion dollars in debt.

    Are these entitlements constitutional? No. According to Barack Obama, in an 2001 radio interview, they are not. In a criticism of the Constitution, Illinois State Senator Obama said:

    “If you look at the victories and failures of the civil rights movement and its litigation strategy in the court. I think where it succeeded was to invest formal rights in previously dispossessed people, so that now I would have the right to vote. I would now be able to sit at the lunch counter and order as long as I could pay for it I’d be o.k. But, the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society. To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as its been interpreted and Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can’t do to you. Says what the Federal government can’t do to you, but doesn’t say what the Federal government or State government must do on your behalf, and that hasn’t shifted and one of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was, um, because the civil rights movement became so court focused I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change. In some ways we still suffer from that”

    One of the primary and fundamental purposes of the Constitution was to prevent the Federal Government from becoming too big, to powerful, and too meddlesome. Therefore, the Constitution was a document of “essential restraints.” But it would have been pointless to enumerate and identify specific powers if the Founding Fathers had intended to give the congress a blank check to enact laws for anything and everything that could be branded as being for “the general welfare.” Such an interpretation would invalidate any restraints and make them moot.

    We have been electing Progressives to federal office, and they have been subverting the Constitution to “fundamentally change” our country into a Marxist state. Congress has no problem in passing socialist legislation, even thou socialism is incompatible with the Constitution. They may argue and bluster and bicker and make a great show, but they end up doing it, and our Presidents (even when they know it is unconstitutional) are pleased to sign it into law. They have betrayed their oaths of office and have betrayed the United States of America.

    Anyway, if you want to defend socialism and mock those who reject it, please do not conscript Jesus in your behalf.

    • Joseph Says:

      Fred, the problems with your argument are many – so I will just focus on a point or two; you must admit that the interpretation of “general welfare” is rather ambiguous. Therefore, it is well within the possibility that affordable health care might be included within the “general welfare” criteria. While this may not sit well with you, no amount of bluster or throwing around words like “socialism” and “marxist state” will sway those of us who support President Obama. Clearly he is not socialist. If he was, we’d be looking at something WAY different than the affordable health care act which leaves our current health care system completely in place.

      So please be civil in your comments; we might sit next to each other in Sacrament meeting one day, and I hope you wouldn’t mind passing me the tray of bread.

      And by the way, your comment is so long (maybe even longer than the original post?) I feel like you might want to begin your own website.

  16. Brad Porter Says:

    Steve missed an important Book of Mormon reference. Ether 8:25 – “For whoso buildeth it up seeketh to overthrow the freedom of all lands, nations, and countries”. In my view religious freedom is the most important issue of this election. There no new world to sail to this time. If we lose religious freedom here it could cost the blood of our children to get it back and there is nothing more important. That’s a message I get from the Book of Mormon. All partisanship aside, we can talk pros and cons of both parties’ past presidents, but the current administration is unusual. Obama has been extremely unfriendly to religious liberty of which the HHS mandate is just one example. No doubt he has faults, but at least Romney has said “On day one I will eliminate the Obama administrations rule that requires religious institutions to violate the tenets of their own faith.”

    Phyllis Schlafly in “No Higher Power: Obama’s War On Religious Freedom”, opens chapter three with the following statement: “Barack Obama has compiled a record of hostility to religion that is unmatched by any other president in American history.” Much of this chapter can be previewed at A message of the Book of Alma to me is that there is not a more important issue in this election.


  1. Mormons for Obama Say Kyle Blaine’s Article Doesn’t Represent Them | Mormons for Obama - July 29, 2012

    […] Kyle Blaine’s piece entitled, Mormons for Obama Say Romney Doesn’t Represent Them, gets at least one thing right: we do say that Romney doesn’t represent us.  Laura put it best when she said, ”just like Mitt Romney is not your average American, he’s not your average Mormon, he doesn’t represent every Mormon in America.”  In putting this website together, we wanted to demonstrate the diversity of the people, ideas, and opinions within the church, especially in regard to the upcoming election.  Our intention is not to get people upset (although you might wonder after seeing the comments posted after our last guest article by Steve Warren.) […]

  2. Talking with His Mouth Full | Mormons for Obama - August 17, 2012

    […] Reid’s accusations towards Romney by including the speculation we received from M.W. in the comment section of this website: “Wow! It just hit me – Romney doesn’t want to release his tax returns […]

%d bloggers like this: