Mitt Romney is a Socialist ComMormon!

[BrainGlutton]

Does America really know anything about this man’s LDS Church and its history?!

Law of Consecration:

In the Latter Day Saint movement (also known as Mormonism), the term law of consecration was first used in 1831 by Joseph Smith and was a doctrine of covenanted Christian communalism.

The Law of Consecration, as practiced by the Latter Day Saints, was for the support of the poor (Doctrine and Covenants 42:30). Latter Day Saints were asked to voluntarily deed (consecrate) their property to the Church of Christ, and the church then would assign to each member a “stewardship” of property “as much as is sufficient for himself and family” for his “needs, wants, family, and circumstances.”[1][2] If consecrated property became more than was sufficient for the assigned steward, the “residue” was “to be consecrated unto the bishop” kept for the benefit of “those who have not, from time to time, that every man who has need may be amply supplied and receive according to his wants.”[3]

Origins

On February 4, 1831, Smith claimed to receive a revelation calling Edward Partridge to be the first bishop of the church.[4] Five days later, on February 9. 1831, Smith claimed to receive another revelation detailing the Law of Consecration.[5]

It’s good to be the Prophet . . .

United Order:

In the Latter Day Saint movement, the United Order (also called the United Order of Enoch) was one of several 19th century church collectivist programs. Early versions of the Order beginning in 1831 attempted to implement the Law of Consecration, a form of Christian communism, modeled after the New Testament church which had “all things in common”. These early versions ended after a few years. Later versions within Mormonism, primarily in the Utah Territory, implemented less-ambitious cooperative programs, many of which were very successful. The Order’s full name invoked the city of Enoch, described in Latter Day Saint scripture as having such a virtuous and undefiled people that God had taken it to heaven.[1] The United Order established egalitarian communities designed to achieve income equality, eliminate poverty, and increase group self-sufficiency. The movement had much in common with other communalist utopian societies formed in the United States and Europe during the Second Great Awakening which sought to govern aspects of people’s lives through precepts of faith and community organization. However, the Latter Day Saint United Order was more family and property oriented than the utopian experiments at Brook Farm and the Oneida Community.

Membership in the United Order was voluntary, although during a period in the 1830s it was a requirement of continued church membership. Participants would deed (consecrate) all their property to the United Order, which would in turn deed back an “inheritance” (or “stewardship”) which allowed members to control the property; private property was not eradicated but was rather a fundamental principle of this system.[2] At the end of each year, any excess that the family produced from their stewardship was voluntarily given back to the Order. The Order in each community was operated by the local Bishop.

The United Order is not practiced within mainstream Mormonism today; however, a number of groups of Mormon fundamentalists, such as the Apostolic United Brethren, have revived the practice. The United Order was also practiced by a liberal Mormon sect called the United Order Family of Christ.

Yeah, right, they’ll tell us that, but we know they haven’t really changed. Everybody’s gonna hold Islam responsible for Muhammad’s child-brides?! Well, this stuff goes back only 180 years, yesterday by religion standards, so there!

LDS Church leaders stated that under the United Order, private property was not abolished. The sharing of goods, often cited as communalism, was voluntary. Members of the church who chose to participate in the United Order voluntarily deeded their properties to the church, which would then, give all or a portion of it back to the original property owner as a stewardship. The “residue”, or property which was over and above what the owner and his family required for themselves, was used by the church to provide to the less fortunate, who would be required to pay it back either monetarily or by labor. The private property owner was not forced to participate in the Order nor was his property forcefully confiscated. Private property owners were free to join or leave the orders and were in control of their stewardship. J. Reuben Clark, First Counselor in the First Presidency explained:

“The fundamental principle of this system was the private ownership of property. Each man owned his portion, or inheritance, or stewardship, with an absolute title, which he could alienate, or hypothecate, or otherwise treat as his own. The church did not own all of the property, and the life under the United Order was not a communal life… The United Order is an individualistic system, not a communal system.”[2]

Lorenzo Snow, 5th President of the church also highlighted the United Order’s preservation of individual free will:

“In things that pertain to celestial glory there can be no forced operations. We must do according as the spirit of the Lord operates upon our understandings and feelings. We cannot be crowded into matters, however great might be the blessing attending such procedure. We cannot be forced into living a celestial law; we must do this ourselves, of our own free will. And whatever we do in regard to the principle of the United Order, we must do it because we desire to do it…”[16]

Voluntarism! Anarcho-Syndicalist tendencies!

Communism

This United Order was an attempt to eradicate poverty and promote a sense of unity and brotherhood within Latter-day Saint communities.[17] The LDS Church’s view is that the doctrine and the various attempts at practicing it should not be seen as part of the 19th century utopian movement in the United States,[18] and is distinct from both communism and capitalism.[19]

LDS Church leaders in the 20th century sought to make a clear distinction between communism and the Law of Consecration, teaching that the two practices’ differed as related to the topics of free agency, private property and deity.[20][21][22] The Law of Consecration and the United Order can be compared to Christian communism/communalism, presented in the New Testament as practiced by 1st century Christian saints.[3][4] LDS Church leaders have claimed that communism, communalism, and socialism are counterfeits of the Law of Consecration.[20][21] Nevertheless, communal unity and equality are central tenets of the Latter Day Saint doctrine of Zion as described in Moses 7:18, “And the Lord called his people Zion, because they were of one heart and one mind, and dwelt in righteousness; and there was no poor among them.”

See?! They’re not just Commies, they’re Dogmatic Orthodox We’re-The-Real-Thing Commies! They’re TheoTrotskyites! :mad:

Why, even their capitalism has communitarian and dirigiste roots!

HOW ARE WE SUPPOSED TO BELIEVE A MORMON CAN LOVE AMERICA?!!! :mad::mad::mad::mad:

Oh, thank you, “Bob,” this is going to be such a wonderful, fun election year . . .

[Oldeb]

Nobody cares. Really.

People on the left and many moderates don’t care about LDS any more than they care about Buddhism, Judaism, or Shinto. His being a Mormon is completely a non-issue. If they think about it at all it’s because of their anti-gay marriage lobbying in California, but since that’s already a plank in the Republican platform it’s not going to affect how they see Romney.

The Religous Right hates Mormons already. You don’t have to discuss LDS history or theology with them, in their opinion it’s a cult and Jesus wouldn’t stand for it. For the most part they’re not even interested in learning more anyway.

So nice rant or whatever. But the people who hate Mormons hate them already and then rest don’t give a shit.

[Buck_Godot]

They may have been commies once but they aren’t any more. Like Romney himself they can change their tenets at the drop of a hat. One day their pro-polygamy the next day their pro traditional marriage. One day blacks are inferior species marked by god the next day blacks are just like everyone else.

[Dogzilla]

I’ve been talking about the Law of Consecration with respect to Romney’s campaigns for years, but nobody believes me and acts like I’m talking about some tinfoil hat conspiracy and then they quote the Constitution at me about there shall be no religious test for holding public office. What the hell, the right to peaceably protest was officially rescinded this week, the Constitution is in tatters, but by golly, we’ve got to cling to this “religion doesn’t matter” thing.

[/rant]

I’m just glad this information is coming out from someone who isn’t an exmormon. If you have no axe to grind*, perhaps people will follow your links and listen to you.

• I don’t either, but I get accused of that because exmormons can’t possibly quote mormon doctrine without bias.

ETA: Upon reading the responses so far, I’m going to guess that nobody will listen to you either. I think it matters, but apparently, you and I are the only people who do.

[Sage_Rat]

Jesus was a commy as well. What’s written in the religious book has little to do with what people do or believe is written in their religious book.

[gamerunknown]

The reason it isn’t important to me at least is because it’s largely in concordance with the Gospels (Luke 12:33). The fact that Mitt Romney, like all the other candidates, largely ignores the tenets of their holy text (or the recorded practices of their prophets) unless they’re being used to oppress others should be encouraging. So I don’t see any criticism from the right wing on that front. Santorum’s opposition to pornography is a little worrying though, since he’s a white heterosexual male and so is every decent American and anti-pornographic legislation may inconvenience them slightly.

If the Democrats decide to run a smear campaign on a multi-millionaire because his ideology may promote communal property the two parties would be indistinguishable. Well, Obama may have to outsource his cabinet and all his assets* to gain confidence from the more business minded right.

• Someone was just arguing on another forum that immigrants sending cash home to their families is a drain on the economy…

[BrainGlutton]

@Dogzilla

ETA: Upon reading the responses so far, I’m going to guess that nobody will listen to you either. I think it matters, but apparently, you and I are the only people who do.

Ermm, no, just you. Are you familiar with the concept of parody? The point is that calling Romney a “socialist” for his Mormonism is as silly as calling Obama a “Marxist” for associating with old 1960s radicals in his college days. And the fact that the Mormons today are such an uber-capitalist culture makes it even funnier.

[Dogzilla]

Oh yeah, I got that point and I’m familiar with parody. I do see the humor there.

I guess my consternation arises from my prior knowledge of mormonism and having an understanding of what the Law of Consecration means to mormons, when and how they make a covenant to it and why. That’s what bothers me. I am unable to explain it in a way that doesn’t come off sounding like a wild-eyed tinfoil hat rant, so I’m left sounding like one of those conspiracy theorists. Active, believing mormons won’t discuss it because those covenants are sacred to them and I risk offending mormon Dopers by speaking out of class, so to speak. Exmormon Dopers might have hinted at sharing my concerns, but it appears to me that the only people concerned about Romney are exmormon nondopers.

So let’s all hope I’m dead wrong and you all just go right ahead and elect your mormon. I’ll be stocking up on the sponge.

[Voyager]

@Sage_Rat

Jesus was a commy as well. What’s written in the religious book has little to do with what people do or believe is written in their religious book.

I bet he was actually born in Kenya. I mean, did he ever produce his birth certificate? The long form?
I think not.

[BrainGlutton]

@Dogzilla

Oh yeah, I got that point and I’m familiar with parody. I do see the humor there.

I guess my consternation arises from my prior knowledge of mormonism and having an understanding of what the Law of Consecration means to mormons, when and how they make a covenant to it and why. That’s what bothers me. I am unable to explain it in a way that doesn’t come off sounding like a wild-eyed tinfoil hat rant . . .

Please, don’t let that stop you!

[BrainGlutton]

@Voyager

I bet he was actually born in Kenya. I mean, did he ever produce his birth certificate? The long form?
I think not.

Well, no, but he was registered with the Census . . .

[BrainGlutton]

@Dogzilla

Active, believing mormons won’t discuss it because those covenants are sacred to them and I risk offending mormon Dopers by speaking out of class, so to speak.

Really don’t let that stop you!!!

[Monty]

{Deleted by user.}

[Little_Nemo]

@BrainGlutton

Ermm, no, just you. Are you familiar with the concept of parody? The point is that calling Romney a “socialist” for his Mormonism is as silly as calling Obama a “Marxist” for associating with old 1960s radicals in his college days. And the fact that the Mormons today are such an uber-capitalist culture makes it even funnier.

And how does this help Obama? I’ve seen other people putting forth the argument that the left needs to start fighting back against the right using the same underhanded tactics the right has been using.

But here’s the reality: the right is a lot better at fighting underhanded than the left is. If it turns into a mudslinging contest, the right will win every time.

So the left shouldn’t be trying to beat the right at their own game. They should be trying to change the rules of the game.

[BrainGlutton]

@Little_Nemo

And how does this help Obama?

Indirectly. Same way Jon-Stewart-Doing-Glenn-Beck or Stephen-Colbert-Doing-Practically-Anything does.

[Try2B_Comprehensive]

@Dogzilla

the right to peaceably protest was officially rescinded this week

cite?

[Measure_for_Measure]

What gives me slight pause is that Romney wasn’t merely born into Mormonism, but he’s actually a man of the cloth. I’ve cited this before. The man has no clear principles - he shuttled back and forth between anti-abortion, pro-choice, then anti-abortion again. So what’s his hidden agenda? Is he a stalking horse? Has he denied that, even in a pro-forma manner? I’m not asking for Kennedy’s eloquence, just a brief statement. ::ponders for about 2 nanoseconds::

Then I read my cite and turn my attention away from such paranoid musings. I mean there are clearer and more present dangers: Romney’s proposals increase the national debt over the next 10 years, relative to Obama’s budgets as specified out in detail by the OMB. Or I consider the stuff that routinely tumbles out of Romney’s mouth like stripping Planned Parenthood of federal money, never mind that none of the support would go to abortion, and only about 3% of PP’s budget is devoted to abortion anyway. That’s what all the fuss is about: 3%! Most of what they do is STD screening, cancer screening and contraception. But now I realize that Republicans are up in arms about family planning and college education. Would Romney veto any of the Republican crazy? Has he ever stood up for anything? Not to my knowledge.

[Kolak_of_Twilo]

@Monty

{Deleted by user.}

Knowing that Monty is/was Mormon, I find this very intriguing.

[Sage_Rat]

@Voyager

I bet he was actually born in Kenya. I mean, did he ever produce his birth certificate? The long form?
I think not.

Jesus? I suspect that you’re doubting the veracity of my statement?

It’s certainly stated unambiguously by Jesus that you’re going to Hell for Eternity so long as you don’t give to those with less than you.

You might argue that that’s not Socialism, because no one is forcing anyone to distribute their wealth to others. But how can you make that argument, honestly, if you really believe in Hell and the afterlife? In the real world, you’re forced to redistribute your wealth on pain of jailtime. Unless you can somehow convince people that jail for 5 years is worse than roasting over an open fire in eternal agony, I’m pretty certain that God is forcing you to distribute your wealths to others until we’re all equal. The fact that people are ignoring that threat doesn’t make any less an attempt at forcing a Socialist economic model on people.

[Monty]

@Kolak_of_Twilo

Knowing that Monty is/was Mormon, I find this very intriguing.

For your edification, I am still a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The post I edited out was, simply, a short comment about paranoid musings of members of the public, without naming anyone or targeting anyone.

Hope that clears it up for you.