Theft
Brigham Young taught:
“I am opposed to free education as much as I am opposed to taking away property from one man and giving it to another… Would I encourage free schools by taxation? No!” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 18 p. 357, General Conference 1877)
Why would he be against funding schools through taxes? How else could we ensure that the schools were funded and teachers paid? Since the main argument for funding education through taxation is to provide an opportunity for the poor, who would not otherwise be able to afford to pay for their education, I will treat the subject as another forced charity through taxation.
Regarding forced charity through taxation, President Benson said:
“Occasionally, we receive questions as to the propriety of Church members receiving government assistance instead of Church assistance. Let me restate what is a fundamental principle. Individuals, to the extent possible, should provide for their own needs. Where the individual is unable to care for himself, his family should assist. Where the family is not able to provide, the Church should render assistance, not the government. We accept the basic principle that ‘though the people support the government, the government should not support the people.’” (General Conference April 1977)
Elder Boyd K Packer added,
“If a member is unable to sustain himself, then he is to call upon his own family, and then upon the Church, in that order, and not upon the government at all.” (General Conference April 1978)
Shedding more light on this President Benson says:
“When you accept food stamps, you accept an unearned handout that other working people are paying for. You do not earn food stamps or welfare payments. Every individual who accepts an unearned government gratuity is just as morally culpable as the individual who takes a handout from taxpayers’ money to pay his heat, electricity, or rent. There is no difference in principle between them… The price you pay for “something for nothing” may be more than you can afford. Do not rationalize your acceptance of government gratuities by saying, ‘I am a contributing taxpayer too.’ By doing this you contribute to the problem which is leading this nation to financial insolvency.” (BYU 1977)
Here President Benson teaches that accepting government gratuities in any form is the same. Why is wrong to accept these government gratuities?
34. Behold, there are many called, but few are chosen. And why are they not chosen?36. That the rights of the priesthood are inseparably connected with the powers of heaven, and that the powers of heaven cannot be controlled nor handled only upon the principles of righteousness.37. That they may be conferred upon us, it is true; but when we undertake to cover our sins, or to gratify our pride, our vain ambition, or to exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness, behold, the heavens withdraw themselves; the Spirit of the Lord is grieved; and when it is withdrawn, Amen to the priesthood or the authority of that man.
From “Many Are Called, But Few Are Chosen”, recommended in General Conference April 1972:
“Men may exercise unrighteous dominion upon one another through the agency of government in just as many ways as they can when acting outside its framework. The most common method, however, is by denying or interfering with the right to own and control property, one of the elements of freedom.…applying the Golden Rule, put yourself in “A’s” shoes. He has already given all he desires to charity. Are you not violating his conscience when you compel him to give more? Would you enjoy having someone dictate how much you must give to your church, a hospital or college? Would not this be a plain case of theft? And if you pass a law and legalize the taking and the giving, have you really changed the essential nature of the act? Haven’t you merely legalized stealing?” -page 37
The principle being; even if I feel comfortable contributing my money towards something, no matter how noble the cause, I have no right to compel another to do so. To force another to support a cause or institution is unrighteous dominion and theft.
When this thought process rears its head in the discussion of educating Latter-day Saint children, this talk by President Benson is the first thing that pops into my mind.
“I would rather have my child exposed to smallpox, typhus fever, cholera, or other malignant and deadly diseases than to the degrading influence of a corrupt teacher. It is infinitely better to take chances with an ignorant, but pure-minded teacher than with the greatest philosopher who is impure.” (General Conference, October 1970)
The importance of having our children taught by Latter-day Saints was made clear by President John Taylor when he said;
“And then we want to study also the principles of education, and to get the very best teachers we can to teach our children; see that they are men and women who fear God and keep his commandments. We do not want men or women to teach the children of the Latter-day Saints who are not Latter-day Saints themselves. Hear it, you Elders of Israel?” (Journal of Discourses 20:179, General Conference April 1879)
Now before you are tempted to say, “Well, that was back then. Times have changed”, I would like to remind you that this was not taught in the vacuum of the 19th century. This exact phrase was quoted and taught again in General Conference of April 1958, and the principle continues to be taught today.
Not only are our children to be taught by Latter-Day Saints, President Taylor questions our ability as parents to enter the Celestial Kingdom if we deprive our children of that blessing;
“I am told in the revelations to bring up my children in the fear of God. Now we are engaged in building our temples that we may become united and linked together by eternal covenants that shall exist in all time and throughout eternity. And then when we have done all this go and deliberately turn our children over to whom? To men who do not believe the Gospel, to men who, according to your faith are never going to the celestial kingdom of God. And you will turn your children over to them. And you call yourselves Latter-day Saints, do you? I will suppose a case. You expect to be saved in the celestial kingdom of God. Well, supposing your expectations are realized, which I sometimes doubt, and you look down, down somewhere in a terrestrial or telestial kingdom, as the case may be, and you see your children, the offspring that God had given you to train up in his fear, to honor him and keep his commandments. And supposing they could converse with you what would be their feelings toward you? It would be, Father, Mother, you are to blame for this. I would have been with you if you had hot tampered with the principles of life and salvation in permitting me to be decoyed away by false teachers, who taught incorrect principles. And this is the result of it. But then I very much question men and women’s getting into the Celestial kingdom of God who have no more knowledge about principles of life and salvation than to go and tamper with the sacred offspring, the principle of life which God entrusted to your care, to thus shuffle it off to imbibe the spirit of unbelief, which leads to destruction and death.” Journal of Discourses 20:107
Elder Boyd K Packer pointed out the effects government schools have had, and the “why” he gives seems to add a lot of credibility to the words of President Taylor.
In 1996, President Packer said,
“In many places it is literally not safe physically for youngsters to go to school. And in many schools (and its becoming almost generally true) it is spiritually unsafe to attend public schools. Look back over the history of education to the turn of the century and the beginning of the educational philosophies pragmatism and humanism were the early ones, and they branched out into a number of other philosophies which have led us now into a circumstance where our schools are producing the problems that we face.” -Charge to the David O. McKay School of Education, December 1996
When we reject the words of the Lord, what else should we expect?
No comments:
Post a Comment