Monday, August 25, 2008

National Security Voters Guide

While I'm of the opinion that either way this presidential election goes the US is essentially screwed, I feel it is still our responsibility to make our voices heard on behalf of that which is right.

Article of Faith 13 states..."If there is anything virtuous, lovely, of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things."

While I find just about nothing virtuous, lovely or of good report about John McCain, he does seem committed to defending the rights of the unborn and to the defense of the United States of America. And, as we learn from the example of Captain Moroni:

Alma 46:12 "And it came to pass that he rent his coat; and he took a piece thereof, and wrote upon it— 'In memory of our God, our religion, and freedom, and our peace, our wives, and our children' —and he fastened it upon the end of a pole.
13 And he fastened on his head-plate, and his breastplate, and his shields, and girded on his armor about his loins; and he took the pole, which had on the end thereof his rent coat, (and he called it the title of liberty) and he bowed himself to the earth, and he prayed mightily unto his God for the blessings of liberty to rest upon his brethren, so long as there should a band of Christians remain to possess the land—"


Apparently these were the issues that mattered most to Moroni and so they should be for us...the "band of Christians [that] remain to possess the land".

Please take a moment to review the Family Security Matters National Security voter's Guide.

9 comments:

SJ Cooper said...

You are so wrong about John McCain. He will niether defend the unborn or this nation. Have you never heard of the North American Union, or its predessor the security and prosperity partnership? I find it hard to believe someone from Az ( as I myself am; but now living in VA) has not heard of it. Check out the John Birch society or eagle forum to learn more. McCain will hold no loyalty to the constitution or to defend and preserve our sovereignty. And I'm sure he will do nothing to help overturn Roe V Wade just as our recent " pro-life" president has done nothing. I so want to find the silver lining in this election too. By the way your blog is great.

Melinda Turner said...

Thanks for the feedback. I really appreciate it.

Like I indicated in my response to your previous comment, I don't expect McCain to overturn Roe or even to uphold the Constitution in any serious way. We are past that. Just like in Helaman, when Nephi gave up the judgment seat to go about preaching the gospel because the government was too corrupt--I believe we are there, too. The only way to change things is to change the hearts of the people--unfortunately, I think that will not be possible on a large scale until the Lord returns. But individually, we can effect renewal by helping others in our individual lives. My vote for John McCain is simply a vote to buy us some time to do just that. I believe the damage Obama would do to freedom of speech and every other liberty we have would be catastrophic. As much as I have to hold my nose to do it, I have to vote against him by voting for McCain.

SJ Cooper said...

Here's some food for thought...


Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost. (John Quincy Adams)

We engage in the election the same as in any other principle: you are to vote for good men, and if you do not do this it is a sin: to vote for wicked men, it would be sin. Choose the good and refuse the evil. Men of false principles have preyed upon us like wolves upon helpless lambs. Damn the rod of tyranny; curse it. Let every man use his liberties according to the Constitution. Don’t fear man or devil; electioneer with all people, male and female, and exhort them to do the thing that is right. (Hyrum Smith)

Carissa said...

Yes, John McCain seems committed to the defense of our country, but through the means of preemptive war. Are you comparing him to Captain Moroni? Here are some of Hugh Nibley's words concerning Captain Moroni:

"Nobody knows that better than Moroni, whose efforts to avoid conflict far exceed his labors in battle. His military preparations are strictly defensive, and he is careful to do nothing that will seem to threaten the Lamanites; all of his battles are fought on Nephite soil (see Alma 48: 8-10). We are repeatedly reminded that Moroni is "a man that did not delight in bloodshed" (Alma 48: 11). By him "the Nephites were taught to defend themselves against their enemies, even to the shedding of blood if it were necessary; yea, and they were also taught never to give an offense, yea, and never to raise the sword except it were against an enemy, except it were to preserve their lives" (Alma 48: 14). Any thought of preemptive strike is out of the question... Not only is a preemptive strike out of the question but Moroni's people have to let the enemy attack at least twice before responding, to guarantee that their own action is purely defensive."

Does this sound like McCain's strategy? I'd love to hear your thoughts.

I agree with sjcooper about voting your conscience (do what is right, let the consequence follow). I'd rather my vote be driven by principles rather than fear, but I respect your decision to do what you think is best.

Melinda Turner said...

Thanks for your comments, Carissa. I think you might have misunderstood my post. I was referring to McCain's stance in defense of the unborn, as well as, I believe he would most definitely have a stronger defense program than would Obama (these two being the only choices we now realistically have). And my reference to Captain Moroni was that we, as latter-day saints, should follow the great prophet and commander's example. In NO WAY do I mean to relate John McCain to Captain Moroni.

I simply mean that we must do as Moroni did and stand up for our liberties, defense, families, etc. A vote for anyone other than John McCain at this point is a vote for Obama. As much as I HATE to have to give my vote to McCain--in defense of my family and country I must do what I can to prevent an Obama presidency, which would mean drastic, unalterable losses of liberty and safety for Americans.

Carissa said...

"A vote for anyone other than John McCain at this point is a vote for Obama"

Are you speaking for yourself here or for others? Because this statement is not true at all for me. I would not be voting for McCain if I weren't voting third party. I probably wouldn't vote at all to be honest.

If your point is that we should follow Moroni's example, then WHY should we vote for someone who believes in preemptive war (a strategy contrary to Moroni's actions)? It seems that to bring this up only hurts your reasoning here. I agree with your assessment that we should do what Captain Moroni would do, and that is a huge reason why I'm voting for someone OTHER THAN McCain or Obama.

Melinda Turner said...

Carissa, I'm not speaking foranyone. I am simply stating that the realistic outcome of a vote given to anyone but John McCain is a President Barack Obama.

Obama is polling ahead. He has tremendous support from the media, academia, and very powerful groups like ACORN. The only way to defeat him is to support the only other candidate with enough support to do so. If you can't do that because of McCain's war stance (although that's a subject for another post ;-), of course that is your choice, but let's be real about the outcome if we all decide to vote third party or not at all. President Barack Obama--an uber-liberal socialist. I think we owe it to our country to try our best to prevent that. Just my opinion, of course.

Sometimes, honestly, I feel like "what difference does it really make? We're screwed either way. And then I think of Moroni who, even though he was fed up with his people's wickedness and knew that the outcome of his leading them where they wanted to go would mean total destruction, still did his duty anyway because it was the task given to him. I'm no leader, but I will do my part to slow our destruction to the best of my ability by opposing blatant evil when and where ever I see it. To know Barack Obama's background, associations, beliefs, and decisions from before he had to move far to the center to run for President is to know that what he intends for this country is evil and will do us great harm.

Just my humble opinion though.

Carissa said...

"let's be real about the outcome if we all decide to vote third party"

Yes, let's PLEASE be. If everyone who didn't really want McCain or Obama voted third party (and that is a LOT of people on both sides and in-between), there is a realistic chance that we could have a third party competing with the major two. That is a strategy worth pursuing if you don't like the status quo. We could continue your strategy of voting AGAINST someone, but then we never get what we really want, do we?

The mindset that you can't do it (without voting FOR the bad guy) is not helping our country or the democratic process. This social pressure of making people feel guilty for voting what they truly believe in is ridiculous, and as you can probably tell, I am so sick of it! It keeps people from doing the right thing. Our government is supposed to be run BY THE PEOPLE and we are not using our voices wisely if we don't send a message letting the parties know they are no longer representing us. Do you not see this?

I would argue that we are not doing our duty that is tasked to us if we don't vote for who we believe to be the "best" candidate out there. If we give in to fear or pressure by voting for someone we really don't want, THAT is evading our civic responsibility. Our vote is our voice. We should use it to stand FOR something rather than just against something.

You say you will do your part to oppose evil WHEREVER you see it. There is evil in the republican party and you are not opposing it there. You are only choosing to oppose some forms of evil, like socialism and abortion, and support others like pre-emptive war. Why not oppose ALL evil and trust God to the outcome? (Don't take my strong feelings personally- I am just very passionate about this subject)

I'd like to please hear your response to the quotes in comment #3 from Hyrum Smith and John Adams.

Melinda Turner said...

Carissa,
I appreciate your strong feelings and your willingness to have a debate on these issues. So many LDS people shun debating serious political issues in an effort to avoid contention. This does us as a people and individually a big disservice. I believe, like you (I presume) passionate defense of one's beliefs does not have to equate with contention. I sincerely thank you for expressing your thoughts here.

That said, I believe the time to vote for the candidate we really believe in was in the primaries. That is when we send our messages and give our support to the person who best represents us. But, as it stands now, WE THE PEOPLE have already spoken and like it or not, we now have to choose again between the remaining candidates who WE THE PEOPLE have chosen. A vote for a third party might indeed send a message, but at what cost? We already know the outcome of that brand of message sending--that's how we ended up with Bill Clinton.

I did NOT vote for John McCain in the primaries and it has been a long research-laden and introspective process which has led to my decision to give him my vote. The issue of abortion is very much at the heart of that decision, as we stand to lose 2 Supreme Court justices during the next President's term. As much as we may disagree with President Bush, we did get excellent SCOTUS justices from him. These are great men, who uphold the constitution and, with the addition of even one more conservative justice could tip the balance of power toward the reversal of Roe V. Wade which would send the decision back to the states to decide as it should have been from the beginning.

As to the issue of pre-emptive war--no offense, but it seems you've partaken of the media Kool-Aid there. In what instance has McCain supported pre-emptive war?

This nation was attacked. 3000 American civilians were murdered. The 19 perpetrators of the crime committed suicide. So our nation went after those who made the attacks possible: their sponsors, trainers, financiers and supporters. This was not a battle between warring groups who share borders, like the Nephites dealt with. Our enemies did not gather their army and come up against us in battle. After a series of violent attacks went unanswered by President Clinton--against our military installments (USS Cole, Khobar Towers, etc), our allies, and even here at home (1993 Trade Center bombing)--A small group of emboldened terrorists declared war on us. And to fight that war on our soil would mean that more American civilians would be slaughtered. So, President Bush (yes, with John McCain's, as well as Congress's support), in an effort to spare the lives of innocent Americans like you and me--took the fight to them. I hardly call that pre-emptive war. And if you're talking about the Iraq theater--at what point are we going to stop thinking Americans are the only people with the right to be free? We didn't nuke the people of Iraq. We didn't invade and force them to become an American state.

We overthrew a brutal dictator who sponsored our attackers, freed the Iragi people to govern themselves, rebuilt their infrastructure, are teaching and equipping them to defend themselves--AND we continue to give our blood and resources to do it. That hardly fits the description of war-mongering. And the only thing pre-emptive about it is that we pre-emptedANOTHER attack against us--our people, our lands, our friends and liberty itself.