tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21924725823025865792024-03-12T21:21:41.465-06:00Latter-day Saint LibertarianFreedom works, and true principles of freedom are applicable and practical within any society. These principles of freedom and liberty cannot exist outside the scope of a Supreme Being, and it is the purpose of this page to show the link between our Creator and our inalienable liberty.
Read something here you like? Read something you hate, and you think I'm an insensitive and careless human being? Please, feel free to comment. I love discourse and the bantering of ideas.Shiloh Loganhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01232352679206328450noreply@blogger.comBlogger57125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2192472582302586579.post-54718131696970706012011-02-04T17:22:00.001-07:002011-02-04T17:23:34.816-07:00For Baby 'Zeke' Petersen<a href='http://www.pledgie.com/campaigns/14534'><img alt='Click here to lend your support to: For Baby Zeke... and make a donation at www.pledgie.com !' src='http://www.pledgie.com/campaigns/14534.png?skin_name=chrome' border='0' /></a><br /><br />Please visit the pledgie site and donate to the Petersen family!Shiloh Loganhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01232352679206328450noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2192472582302586579.post-2881785842750015672010-05-23T10:37:00.003-06:002010-05-23T14:01:05.124-06:00On Idle Faith and Idol Prophets<meta equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name="ProgId" content="Word.Document"><meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 12"><meta name="Originator" content="Microsoft Word 12"><link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CShiloh%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml"><o:smarttagtype namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="City"></o:smarttagtype><o:smarttagtype namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="place"></o:smarttagtype><link rel="themeData" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CShiloh%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_themedata.thmx"><link rel="colorSchemeMapping" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CShiloh%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_colorschememapping.xml"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>Normal</w:View> <w:zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:trackmoves/> <w:trackformatting/> <w:punctuationkerning/> <w:validateagainstschemas/> <w:saveifxmlinvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:ignoremixedcontent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:donotpromoteqf/> <w:lidthemeother>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:lidthemeasian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:lidthemecomplexscript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables/> <w:snaptogridincell/> <w:wraptextwithpunct/> <w:useasianbreakrules/> <w:dontgrowautofit/> <w:splitpgbreakandparamark/> <w:dontvertaligncellwithsp/> <w:dontbreakconstrainedforcedtables/> <w:dontvertalignintxbx/> <w:word11kerningpairs/> <w:cachedcolbalance/> </w:Compatibility> <m:mathpr> <m:mathfont val="Cambria Math"> <m:brkbin val="before"> <m:brkbinsub val="--"> <m:smallfrac val="off"> <m:dispdef/> <m:lmargin val="0"> <m:rmargin val="0"> <m:defjc val="centerGroup"> <m:wrapindent val="1440"> <m:intlim val="subSup"> <m:narylim val="undOvr"> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:latentstyles deflockedstate="false" defunhidewhenused="true" defsemihidden="true" defqformat="false" defpriority="99" latentstylecount="267"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="0" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Normal"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="heading 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 7"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 8"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 9"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 7"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 8"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 9"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="35" qformat="true" name="caption"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="10" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Title"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="1" name="Default Paragraph Font"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="11" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Subtitle"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="22" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Strong"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="20" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Emphasis"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="59" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Table Grid"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Placeholder Text"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="1" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="No Spacing"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Revision"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="34" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="List Paragraph"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="29" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Quote"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="30" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Intense Quote"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="19" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Subtle Emphasis"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="21" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Intense Emphasis"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="31" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Subtle Reference"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="32" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Intense Reference"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="33" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Book Title"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="37" name="Bibliography"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" qformat="true" name="TOC Heading"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if !mso]><object classid="clsid:38481807-CA0E-42D2-BF39-B33AF135CC4D" id="ieooui"></object> <style> st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) } </style> <![endif]--><style> <!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:"Cambria Math"; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:roman; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1107304683 0 0 159 0;} @font-face {font-family:Calibri; panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1073750139 0 0 159 0;} @font-face {font-family:"Palatino Linotype"; panose-1:2 4 5 2 5 5 5 3 3 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:roman; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-536870009 1073741843 0 0 415 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; margin-top:0in; margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:10.0pt; margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";} .MsoChpDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; mso-default-props:yes; font-size:10.0pt; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </style><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} </style> <![endif]--> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: left;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >Note:
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: left;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: left;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >I wrote this paper for a Philosophy of Religion class at BYU, and I have gone back-and-forth on whether I should post it here. On its surface, the relationship of the individual to the prophet may appear out of place on a seemingly political blog, but the more I have thought about it the more I have seen major connections in the mentality of people who idolize the prophet with those who reject principles for the conventional rule.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: left;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: left;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >This post shortly precedes another -- "The Need for Natural Law" -- that will argue for the necessary need of a universal and eternal principle amidst the social rejection of principles for conventional rules. With the future post in mind, I have decided to post this today.
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: left;">
<br /><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: left;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >********************************************
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: left;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: center;" align="center"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><span style="font-weight: bold;">On Idle Faith and Idol Prophets</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: center;" align="center">
<br /><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: center;" align="center"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: center;" align="center"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><span style="font-style: italic;">Introduction</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: center;" align="center">
<br /><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;color:black;" ><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;color:black;" >The personal and individual experience of “following the prophet” can only happen through having an active testimony in Jesus Christ. When a testimony of Jesus Christ suffers and a personal and individual relationship of continued revelation with God is decreased, the ability of the individual to follow the prophet is gone. Mere physical compliance to prophetic counsel is not enough to obey the command to “follow the prophet”; an active testimony and relationship with Jesus Christ is imperative. Otherwise, the relationship of the individual to the prophet becomes idolatrous. Faith can only exist in Jesus Christ, which in turn lends to trusting the words of his prophet. Without faith in Jesus Christ, the individual’s placement of faith solely in a man’s word becomes idolatrous. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;color:black;" ><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: center;" align="center"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: center;" align="center"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >Faith</span><b style=""><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: center;" align="center"><b style=""><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >Faith is the fundamental building block of any active relationship between man and God. Faith is not idle, but is “the moving cause of all action in… intelligent beings” (Smith 8). This is not to say that without faith all matter would cease motion. Rather, this denotes the substantial element of righteous action from other worldly and non-celestial endeavors. In other words, faith is the source of all <i style="">righteous</i> action in intelligent beings. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >Physical compliance and corporeal devotion alone to divine command does not denote faithful action. Obedience is a center point of faith. Logical obedience – the reasoned course of action based on a balance of actions, causes, and consequences – does not comprise faithful obedience. Only the man who does the will of the Father will enter the Kingdom, but action alone is not enough. As one man who had cast out devils and had done many mighty miracles learned, Christ only <i style="">knows</i> those who displace iniquity (<u>Holy Bible</u>, Matt. 7.21-23). Not only is the Lord concerned that the physical is in compliance and obedient, but to receive a knowledge of Christ the spirit must be contrite and obedient as well. Only in the course of repentance can mere physical movement turn into faithful obedience. If not, lip service is soon condemned (<u>Holy </u>Bible, Matt 21.28-31). <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >Faith leads the individual to repentance. In other words, faith leads to the changing of the mind and heart to view God more intimately and personally (“Repentance”). Repentance and faith are inseparably connected. Faith cannot exist without the individual perceiving God differently and within a more intimate relationship. At any point when repentance (the continual renewing of the self in relation to the divine) has ceased, faith in Christ has dwindled. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >Faith is established on truth and is only faith when it is in Jesus Christ unto repentance. Only faith in that which is true produces any fruit unto salvation. As Joseph Smith taught, “for faith could not center in a being of whose existence we have no idea, because the idea of his existence in the first instance is essential to the exercise of faith in him” (Smith 25). <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: center;" align="center"><b style=""><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: center;" align="center"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: center;" align="center"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >Testimony of Christ</span><b style=""><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: center;" align="center"><b style=""><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >Faith leads the individual to seek for truth in the process of learning more about that being in which he has faith. It is through faith unto repentance and learning that the individual develops a testimony. This testimony is knowledge or revelation of truth that comes from the Holy Ghost as it is sought in faith. The promptings of the Holy Ghost are only realized by those who place faith in Christ. It is through testimony that Christ becomes affecter to the individual. The individual’s subsequent actions, after receiving a testimony, are done through affection of Christ through the Holy Ghost. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >Testimony is only gained through faith in Jesus Christ unto repentance. As the individual learns to place more faith in Christ, his understanding is increased to comprehend truths beyond his own ability. While the mental faculties and reason of the individual assist him in learning eternal truths, only through the Holy Ghost can the individual come to a testimony of truth. Eternal truths are only made known “by the Holy Spirit of God” (<st1:place st="on"><st1:city st="on">Alma</st1:city></st1:place> 5:46), but reasoned argument for the existence of Christ alone does not constitute a testimony of Him. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >A testimony of Jesus Christ goes beyond any empirical reason or physical proof of his existence. It is through revelation by the Holy Ghost that we “have all things as a testimony” concerning the truth of his nature (<st1:place st="on"><st1:city st="on">Alma</st1:city></st1:place> 30:41). It is in testimony that we find ourselves as children of God, as we learn the nature and being of that God we call “Father”. Revelation through repentance establishes a new relationship with God wherein we discover our own individuality, and we learn of our place in this life in relationship to all creation. Without personal revelation from the divine, there is no testimony at all. Furthermore, the testimony that is given, if not continually exercised, is taken away “until [the individual] know[s] nothing of the mysteries” (Alma 12:9-11). As the Latter-day Saint Apostle Bruce R. McConkie taught, every <i style="">valid</i> testimony requires three things:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 1in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 1in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><blockquote>Three great truths must be included in every valid testimony: 1. That Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Savior of the world (D&C 46:13); 2. That Joseph Smith is the Prophet of God through whom the gospel was restored in this dispensation; and 3. That The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is “the only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth” (D&C 1:30). (McConkie 786)</blockquote><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><span style=""> </span>It is of note that the first two principles of a testimony are of Jesus Christ and the prophet. Every testimony thereafter stems from these three. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: center;" align="center"><b style=""><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: center;" align="center"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><span style="font-style: italic;">
<br /></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: center;" align="center"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><span style="font-style: italic;">Testimony of a Prophet</span></span><b style=""><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >By having a testimony in the prophet I mean to say that someone has received a witness of the Holy Ghost about that divine calling from the Lord. Following the prophet is rooted in the individual’s testimony of that prophet. Any testimony of the prophet as a mouthpiece of God originated from the primary testimony of Jesus Christ Himself; otherwise, any perceived testimony of a prophet is no testimony at all, but it is only the belief in the existence of a wise man. If God did not call the prophet, then he is no prophet at all. Without a testimony of Jesus Christ, there is no real testimony of a prophet.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >A perceived testimony of the prophet, without a previous testimony of Christ, is an accidental belief originating from a cognitive thought (e.g. “the prophet tells me true things, therefore, the prophet must be true”) and not from enlightenment of the divine (e.g. “the prophet speaks the word of God, which is true, therefore the doctrines of Christ are true”). A man who knows nothing of God may look on a prophet and be moved upon by the Holy Ghost to know that the prophet is a man of God; however, this new experience does not originate with the Prophet but with the Holy Ghost whose purpose is to testify of Jesus Christ. Indeed, such a man who knew nothing of God must indeed be impressed by the Holy Ghost to understand something of his God before he will receive a testimony of that prophet. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: center;" align="center"><b style=""><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: center;" align="center"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: center;" align="center"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >Follow the Prophet</span><b style=""><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: center;" align="center"><b style=""><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><span style=""> </span>
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" > When an individual follows the prophet, he is doing more than following the counsels of a wise man or of an interpreter of scripture. The prophet is more than an ecclesiastical leader. The individual sustains the prophet as a personal witness of Christ and an ordained priesthood leader, because the individual has a personal testimony of Christ. He follows his words with his heart, might, mind, and strength because they are God’s words, not the prophet’s. The testimony that Christ lives and directs His people today is strengthened by hearing His words – as relayed through the prophet – and then acting on those words. It is in this way that following the prophet becomes worship of Christ. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >Faith in Christ reveals that the individual can trust the prophet to speak His truths, and when one follows those words, one is showing Christ that one does have faith in Him. The individual follows the prophet because he has faith in Christ, unto a testimony that he can trust the prophet, not because of any merits the prophet might have on his own.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><span style=""> </span><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >It is because of this special relationship and of worship when following the prophet that one must follow in an active relationship with God. The individual knows he can follow the prophet because he knows God. He knows God has ordained the prophet. Whether he knows the prophet or not makes little difference, for if he knows God, and knows God has ordained that man – and that is enough to follow. This is how he faithfully obeys and follows the prophet. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><span style=""> </span><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >The prophet has his own relationship with God. Because of his ordination and special calling, his words are the same as God, and can be followed as if they were directly from God (Doctrine and Covenants, 1.38). This relationship cements the prophet’s role as a leader of Christ’s church, but says nothing regarding the relationships of the individual to God or the individual to the prophet. The individual’s relationship to the prophet in following him is determined by the relationship he has with God. In order to truly follow the prophet, he must follow God first.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: center;" align="center"><b style=""><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: center;" align="center"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: center;" align="center"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >Idolatry</span><b style=""><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: center;" align="center"><b style=""><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><o:p> </o:p><span style=""> </span>
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" > Idolatry occurs when actions comply with the words of the prophet, but the heart is not in line with God. Action is in accordance with the counsel and commands of the prophet, but outside of the relationship that should exist with God. The individual does not acknowledge Christ. He does not have faith in Christ. He does not have a testimony of Christ, nor of Christ’s relationship to the prophet. Therefore, he does not worship Christ when he complies with the words of the prophet. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><span style=""> </span>Without that faith in Christ to center one’s actions, the trust that one shows in the prophet becomes faith in the prophet. The prophet becomes the center of the individual’s testimony and his action of obeying the prophet’s words become worship of the prophet, not of God. The individual has then lost his faith in Christ and the Holy Ghost can no longer reveal truth unto him. Furthermore, his relationship with God has diminished, if not completely vanished, and his actions become those of an idolater worshiping a man based on his merits alone. Christ’s affection within that individual has ceased, and the individual is left alone to his own cognition. It is at this point that he is no longer following a prophet, but he is following a man, and caught in idolatry.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: center;" align="center"><b style=""><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: center;" align="center"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: center;" align="center"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >Conclusion</span><b style=""><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: center;" align="center"><b style=""><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><o:p> </o:p><span style=""> </span>
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >Once an individual has ceased to repent, or renew his personal relationship with God, he is no longer exercising his faith. That faith becomes dormant, or dwindles completely, and revelation through a personal relationship God has ceased. That individual has denied his relationship to God, denied revelation, and no longer has a testimony of Christ. Without that testimony, he can no longer recognize the prophet as an agent of God. At that point, the prophet – to the experience of the individual – becomes just a man, wise or otherwise it makes no difference, he is merely a man. When that individual then puts his trust in that man unto obeying his words, he is practicing idolatry. He is putting the prophet before God and making him an idol unto himself.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: center; line-height: 200%;" align="center"><span style="line-height: 200%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" ><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: center; line-height: 200%;" align="center"><span style="line-height: 200%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: center; line-height: 200%;" align="center"><span style="line-height: 200%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >Works Cited<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; line-height: 200%;"><span style="line-height: 200%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; line-height: 200%;"><span style="line-height: 200%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >McConkie, Bruce R. <u>Mormon Doctrine</u>. Salt Lake City: Utah, 1979.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; line-height: 200%;"><span style="line-height: 200%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >“Repentence.” <u>Bible Dictionary</u>. Salt Lake City: Utah, 1992</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; line-height: 200%;"><span style="line-height: 200%;font-family:";font-size:12pt;" >Smith, Joseph. <u>Lectures on Faith</u>. American Fork: Utah, 2005<o:p></o:p></span></p> Shiloh Loganhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01232352679206328450noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2192472582302586579.post-91273618249338228652010-05-01T16:59:00.001-06:002010-05-01T17:02:03.617-06:00LDS Liberty: The 12th Article of Faith<a href="http://ldsliberty.org/?p=279&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed:%20LdsLiberty%20%28LDS%20Liberty%20blogl">My LDS Liberty interview</a>:<br /><br />"Shiloh Logan – president of the BYU Freedom Society – discusses the 12th Article of Faith and the eternal nature of God. Shiloh gives amazing insight how the fundamental knowledge of Heavenly Father and His ways leads us to a better understanding of Liberty. This is a must listen!"Shiloh Loganhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01232352679206328450noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2192472582302586579.post-72132095245631882082010-04-17T10:52:00.002-06:002010-04-17T11:00:24.045-06:00Silent Enim Leges Inter Arma<meta equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name="ProgId" content="Word.Document"><meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 12"><meta name="Originator" content="Microsoft Word 12"><link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CShiloh%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml"><link rel="themeData" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CShiloh%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_themedata.thmx"><link rel="colorSchemeMapping" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CShiloh%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_colorschememapping.xml"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>Normal</w:View> <w:zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:trackmoves/> <w:trackformatting/> <w:punctuationkerning/> <w:validateagainstschemas/> <w:saveifxmlinvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:ignoremixedcontent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:donotpromoteqf/> <w:lidthemeother>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:lidthemeasian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:lidthemecomplexscript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables/> <w:snaptogridincell/> <w:wraptextwithpunct/> <w:useasianbreakrules/> <w:dontgrowautofit/> <w:splitpgbreakandparamark/> <w:dontvertaligncellwithsp/> <w:dontbreakconstrainedforcedtables/> <w:dontvertalignintxbx/> <w:word11kerningpairs/> <w:cachedcolbalance/> <w:usefelayout/> </w:Compatibility> <m:mathpr> <m:mathfont val="Cambria Math"> <m:brkbin val="before"> <m:brkbinsub val="--"> <m:smallfrac val="off"> <m:dispdef/> <m:lmargin val="0"> <m:rmargin val="0"> <m:defjc val="centerGroup"> <m:wrapindent val="1440"> <m:intlim val="subSup"> <m:narylim val="undOvr"> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:latentstyles deflockedstate="false" defunhidewhenused="true" defsemihidden="true" defqformat="false" defpriority="99" latentstylecount="267"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="0" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Normal"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="heading 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 7"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 8"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 9"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 7"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 8"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 9"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="35" qformat="true" name="caption"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="10" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Title"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="1" name="Default Paragraph Font"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="11" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Subtitle"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="22" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Strong"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="20" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Emphasis"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="59" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Table Grid"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Placeholder Text"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="1" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="No Spacing"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Revision"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="34" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="List Paragraph"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="29" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Quote"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="30" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Intense Quote"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="19" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Subtle Emphasis"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="21" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Intense Emphasis"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="31" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Subtle Reference"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="32" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Intense Reference"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="33" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Book Title"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="37" name="Bibliography"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" qformat="true" name="TOC Heading"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><style> <!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:SimSun; panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1; mso-font-alt:宋体; mso-font-charset:134; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-format:other; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:1 135135232 16 0 262144 0;} @font-face {font-family:"Cambria Math"; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:roman; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1107304683 0 0 159 0;} @font-face {font-family:Cambria; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:roman; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1073741899 0 0 159 0;} @font-face {font-family:Calibri; panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1073750139 0 0 159 0;} @font-face {font-family:"\@SimSun"; panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0; mso-font-charset:134; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-format:other; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:1 135135232 16 0 262144 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; margin-top:0in; margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:10.0pt; margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:SimSun; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:Arial; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi; mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN;} .MsoChpDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; mso-default-props:yes; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:SimSun; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:Arial; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi; mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN;} .MsoPapDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; margin-bottom:10.0pt; line-height:115%;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </style><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} </style> <![endif]--><meta equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name="ProgId" content="Word.Document"><meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 12"><meta name="Originator" content="Microsoft Word 12"><link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CShiloh%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml"><link rel="themeData" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CShiloh%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_themedata.thmx"><link rel="colorSchemeMapping" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CShiloh%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_colorschememapping.xml"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>Normal</w:View> <w:zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:trackmoves/> <w:trackformatting/> <w:punctuationkerning/> <w:validateagainstschemas/> <w:saveifxmlinvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:ignoremixedcontent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:donotpromoteqf/> <w:lidthemeother>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:lidthemeasian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:lidthemecomplexscript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables/> <w:snaptogridincell/> <w:wraptextwithpunct/> <w:useasianbreakrules/> <w:dontgrowautofit/> <w:splitpgbreakandparamark/> <w:dontvertaligncellwithsp/> <w:dontbreakconstrainedforcedtables/> <w:dontvertalignintxbx/> <w:word11kerningpairs/> <w:cachedcolbalance/> <w:usefelayout/> </w:Compatibility> <m:mathpr> <m:mathfont val="Cambria Math"> <m:brkbin val="before"> <m:brkbinsub val="--"> <m:smallfrac val="off"> <m:dispdef/> <m:lmargin val="0"> <m:rmargin val="0"> <m:defjc val="centerGroup"> <m:wrapindent val="1440"> <m:intlim val="subSup"> <m:narylim val="undOvr"> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:latentstyles deflockedstate="false" defunhidewhenused="true" defsemihidden="true" defqformat="false" defpriority="99" latentstylecount="267"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="0" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Normal"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="heading 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 7"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 8"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 9"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 7"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 8"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 9"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="35" qformat="true" name="caption"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="10" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Title"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="1" name="Default Paragraph Font"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="11" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Subtitle"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="22" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Strong"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="20" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Emphasis"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="59" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Table Grid"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Placeholder Text"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="1" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="No Spacing"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Revision"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="34" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="List Paragraph"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="29" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Quote"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="30" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Intense Quote"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="19" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Subtle Emphasis"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="21" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Intense Emphasis"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="31" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Subtle Reference"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="32" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Intense Reference"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="33" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Book Title"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="37" name="Bibliography"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" qformat="true" name="TOC Heading"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><style> <!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:SimSun; panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1; mso-font-alt:宋体; mso-font-charset:134; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-format:other; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:1 135135232 16 0 262144 0;} @font-face {font-family:"Cambria Math"; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:roman; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1107304683 0 0 159 0;} @font-face {font-family:Cambria; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:roman; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1073741899 0 0 159 0;} @font-face {font-family:Calibri; panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1073750139 0 0 159 0;} @font-face {font-family:"\@SimSun"; panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0; mso-font-charset:134; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-format:other; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:1 135135232 16 0 262144 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; margin-top:0in; margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:10.0pt; margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:SimSun; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:Arial; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi; mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN;} .MsoChpDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; mso-default-props:yes; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:SimSun; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:Arial; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi; mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN;} .MsoPapDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; margin-bottom:10.0pt; line-height:115%;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </style><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} </style> <![endif]--><meta equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name="ProgId" content="Word.Document"><meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 12"><meta name="Originator" content="Microsoft Word 12"><link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CShiloh%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml"><link rel="themeData" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CShiloh%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_themedata.thmx"><link rel="colorSchemeMapping" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CShiloh%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_colorschememapping.xml"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>Normal</w:View> <w:zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:trackmoves/> <w:trackformatting/> <w:punctuationkerning/> <w:validateagainstschemas/> <w:saveifxmlinvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:ignoremixedcontent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:donotpromoteqf/> <w:lidthemeother>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:lidthemeasian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:lidthemecomplexscript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables/> <w:snaptogridincell/> <w:wraptextwithpunct/> <w:useasianbreakrules/> <w:dontgrowautofit/> <w:splitpgbreakandparamark/> <w:dontvertaligncellwithsp/> <w:dontbreakconstrainedforcedtables/> <w:dontvertalignintxbx/> <w:word11kerningpairs/> <w:cachedcolbalance/> <w:usefelayout/> </w:Compatibility> <m:mathpr> <m:mathfont val="Cambria Math"> <m:brkbin val="before"> <m:brkbinsub val="--"> <m:smallfrac val="off"> <m:dispdef/> <m:lmargin val="0"> <m:rmargin val="0"> <m:defjc val="centerGroup"> <m:wrapindent val="1440"> <m:intlim val="subSup"> <m:narylim val="undOvr"> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:latentstyles deflockedstate="false" defunhidewhenused="true" defsemihidden="true" defqformat="false" defpriority="99" latentstylecount="267"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="0" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Normal"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="heading 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 7"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 8"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 9"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 7"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 8"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 9"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="35" qformat="true" name="caption"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="10" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Title"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="1" name="Default Paragraph Font"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="11" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Subtitle"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="22" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Strong"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="20" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Emphasis"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="59" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Table Grid"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Placeholder Text"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="1" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="No Spacing"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Revision"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="34" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="List Paragraph"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="29" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Quote"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="30" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Intense Quote"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="19" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Subtle Emphasis"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="21" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Intense Emphasis"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="31" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Subtle Reference"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="32" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Intense Reference"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="33" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Book Title"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="37" name="Bibliography"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" qformat="true" name="TOC Heading"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><style> <!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:SimSun; panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1; mso-font-alt:宋体; mso-font-charset:134; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-format:other; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:1 135135232 16 0 262144 0;} @font-face {font-family:"Cambria Math"; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:roman; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1107304683 0 0 159 0;} @font-face {font-family:Cambria; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:roman; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1073741899 0 0 159 0;} @font-face {font-family:Calibri; panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1073750139 0 0 159 0;} @font-face {font-family:"\@SimSun"; panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0; mso-font-charset:134; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-format:other; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:1 135135232 16 0 262144 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; margin-top:0in; margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:10.0pt; margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:SimSun; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:Arial; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi; mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN;} .MsoChpDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; mso-default-props:yes; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:SimSun; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:Arial; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi; mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN;} .MsoPapDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; margin-bottom:10.0pt; line-height:115%;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </style><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} </style> <![endif]--> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><b><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">Introduction</span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /><b><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">Over two thousand years ago, Marcus Tullius Cicero observed that “in times of war, the law falls silent”(<i>Silent enim leges inter arma</i>) (Cicero 17). Today, political philosophers, policy makers, and political leaders argue over this same topic: What laws, if any, are applicable during war? More specifically, what laws, if any, apply to war itself? These questions presuppose a shifting ethical relationship between individuals, societies, and states during a time of war that do not exist in peacetime. But the important question is whether Cicero is <i>necessarily</i> correct – can there exist a time and place where the law is not silent in times of war?
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<br /><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><i><o:p></o:p></i></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">For nearly as long as mankind has maintained written records, it has argued over the ethical actions of war – the idea of a <i>just war </i>is not a Western concept. The ancient Egyptians, Babylonians, and Chinese all discussed various forms of just war. The Egyptians were known for showing great moral restraint in battle (Wilkinson 274), and Laotse – a Chinese philosopher – argued that war is undesirable and should never proceed beyond a minimal objective (Laotse 154). The Babylonians, under Sennecherib, displayed the modern <i>jus in bello </i>notion of <i>distinction</i>, when they would not destroy innocent non-combatants but they would only fight against active soldiers (Friedman 3). Even the Bible establishes the Israelite rules-of-war against the Canaanites in Deuteronomy 20. These examples appear to negate any necessary claim to Cicero’s observation.
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<br /><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">Although Cicero’s statement might not necessarily advocate the alienation of law during times of war, it is still a worthy concept to explore for the times when he is correct. It is undeniable that throughout history governments have suspended and progressively interpreted domestic and international laws. Even American history demonstrates this fact. From President John Adams’ <i>Alien and Seditions Act </i>during an undeclared war with France and Abraham Lincoln’s suspension of <i>habeas corpus </i>during the US Civil War, to the previous Bush Administration’s supposed promotion of mistreatment and torture of terrorist enemy-combatants – the struggle to maintain a consistent principle of law both before and during war has proven quite difficult. While the law may not fall completely silent, it has certainly changed its mind on a few occasions. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><span style=""> </span>In 2004, US Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia argued in <i>Hamdi v Rumsfeld</i> that <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">Many think it not only inevitable but entirely proper that liberty give way to security in times of national crisis that, at the extremes of military exigency, <i>inter arma silent leges</i>. Whatever the general merits of the view that war silences law or modulates its voice, that view has no place in the interpretation and application of a Constitution designed precisely to confront war and, in a manner that accords with democratic principles, to accommodate it (Hamdi).<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">As Justice Scalia observed, there are many who believe that law is a relative quality during a time of national crisis (war), and that national emergency constitutes a silence of law. This legal realist approach to wartime policies carries some appeal in practical application; however, the legal idealist is left wanting – searching for another method where a principle is not sacrificed for perceived security. In the face of cold realism, the idealist searches for the shelter of principle to justify what Benjamin Franklin once observed that “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety” (Franklin 270). In this search for principle, the idealist can find partial refuge in the “father of <i>just war”</i> – St. Augustine of Hippo.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"> <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><span style=""> </span>While the concept of a just war precedes Augustine’s own theories, Augustine solidified the Western concept of just war beyond any method or idea that had previously existed. Augustine is regarded as the “father of just war” in the sense that “the whole Western just-war tradition that follows from the fifth century AD on, in both its Christian and secular varieties, traces its roots not to Plato or Aristotle, nor even to earlier Church Fathers, but rather to Augustine” (Mattox 2). Augustine’s influence is paramount in establishing a principle of just-war. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><span style=""> </span>It is my intention to examine Augustine’s theory of just war and to show that Cicero’s statement – given Augustine’s theory – is accurate insofar as positive law will ignore a moral principle. This paper is written in four parts. The first will examine the basic tenets of just-war: <i>jus ad bellum </i>and <i>jus in bello</i>. The second will examine some of the difficulties associated with Augustine’s theory of just-war, and will present the general aspects of this theory. Third, I will contrast Augustine’s theory of just war with current just war theories to find if Augustine’s ideas are still applicable. Finally, through these theories I will show Augustine’s influence on the modern perception of just war, and I will conclude by showing that Cicero’s statement is true when the positive law ignores a moral principle. I will rely heavily on John Mark Mattox’s book, <i>Saint Augustine and the Theory of Just War</i>, to help unify and clarify Augustine’s theory of just war.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><b><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">Just War</span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /><b><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">The <i>just war theory</i> is divided into two branches: <i>jus ad bellum</i> and <i>jus in bello</i>. <i>Jus ad bellum</i> posits the moral conditions wherein a country may justifiably <i>enter </i>war, while <i>jus in bello</i> defines the moral obligations that a state has <i>during</i> the war. Within these two branches of just war theory, each philosopher will distinguish himself from another. In each branch of just war theory there are sub-categories and justifications. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><i style=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">Jus ad bellum</span></i><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">There are nine basic premises of just war that Augustine posits within </span><i style=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">jus ad bellum</span></i><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">: just cause, comparative justice, right intention, competent authority, last resort, public declaration, reasonable probability of success, proportionality, and peace as the ultimate objective (Mattox 45-59). Through the successful argumentation of each premise, a state can morally justify entering in to war.
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<br /><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><i style=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">Jus in bello</span></i></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /><i style=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"></span></i><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><span style=""> </span>Once a country has entered into war, that country must maintain a standard of conduct. While nine basic premises satisfy the state’s ability to enter in to war, Augustine posits three basic </span><i style=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">jus in bello </span></i><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">premises: proportionality, discrimination, and good faith. These three premises are necessary to maintain a morality during war (Mattox 60-5). </span><i style=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><span style=""> </span></span></i><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><span style="">
<br /></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><span style=""></span><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><b><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">Augustine</span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /><b><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">Potential Problems and Background</span></i></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">The most difficult problem in solidifying Augustine’s theory of just cause is obscurity. Augustine never presented an absolutely systematic treatise of just cause for war. This, however, does not show that Augustine did not have a theory in mind. Maddox argues that <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">Although when viewed separately, his just-war statements may appear fragmentary, when woven together, they constitute a remarkable tapestry. Upon careful inspection of that tapestry, one cannot but be struck by the unity that is readily apparent in his just-war thought. … The consistency evident in his expression of these varied but related ideas leads fairly to the assumption that Augustine’s just war statements arise from a consistent set of premises, which guide him to his conclusions; in other words, they reveal the presence of an underlying, if unstated, <i>theory</i> (Maddox 5). <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">There is, therefore, no doubt concerning Augustine’s intended meaning. However, the task of examining Augustine’s theory, when it is scattered throughout his written record, is a difficult one.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">Augustine was not the first to propose a theory of just war in the Western world. In fact, Plato had already argued that the state must be prepared for violent struggle in a disorderly world, and he assigned specific wartime roles to the citizens and the state. Even Socrates argued that Greek civilians and non-combatants were not targets of war, and that the vanquished should not be brought into slavery (Mattox 1). To help better understand his theory, it is important to examine two primary influences on Augustine’s justwar philosophy: Cicero and Ambrose.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">Cicero’s Just Cause and Proportionality</span></i></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"></span></i><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">In his <i style="">Confessions</i>, Augustine claimed that Cicero’s <i>Hortensius</i> turned him away from his sinful life towards a life of God and philosophy – it gave Augustine a “different purpose and desire” (Augustine 58-9). Cicero was one of the first philosophers to distinguish between <i>jus ad bellum</i> and <i>jus in bello </i><span style="">principles of war</span>. However, while Cicero posits the same three premises of <i>jus in bello</i> as Augustine, Cicero only addresses five premises for <i>jus ad bellum</i>: just cause, comparative justice, right intention, public declaration and last resort, and peace as the ultimate objective. The importance of Cicero’s influence on Augustine, however, comes primarily with his argument concerning <i>just-cause</i>. In the face of realism, Cicero boldly asserted an idealistic proposition that “a war is never undertaken by the ideal State, except in defense of its honor or its safety” (<i>De Re Publica</i> III.xxiii). Cicero’s statement, argues Maddox, “preserved by Augustine, reveals much of importance about Cicero’s most fundamental views on war… there is no other premise that binds Augustine more securely to Cicero than this one” (Maddox 15).
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<br /><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">In addition to his influence on Augustine’s theory of just cause, Cicero made another bold statement concerning the <i>jus in bello</i> premise of proportionality – so bold, in fact, that it is just as revolutionary in our own day. Cicero argued that <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">There are certain duties that we owe even to those who have wronged us. For there is a limit to retribution and to punishment; or rather, I am inclined to think, it is sufficient that the aggressor should be brought to repent of his wrong-doing, in order that he may not repeat the offence and that others may be deterred from doing wrong (<i>De Officiis </i>I.xi). <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">Cicero’s argument for <i style="">jus in bello </i>proportionality has certainly made its mark on history, as Augustine clearly adopted this argument as his own.
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><i style=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">Ambrose</span></i></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /><i style=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"></span></i><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><span style=""> </span>While Cicero affected Augustine by the written word, Ambrose – Augustine’s Bishop in Milan – affected Augustine by example. It was Ambrose who baptized Augustine and who helped him<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">Acquire an appreciation of the interiority of the Gospel precepts – a notion that will later figure so prominently in Augustine’s own just-war theory specifically and will pervade his theology in general… In terms of laying the philosophical groundwork for Augustine’s treatment of just-war theory, Ambrose represents an advance beyond Cicero inasmuch as Ambrose considers just war in the context of Christianity (Maddox 19).</span>
<br /><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">Augustine’s influence on the Christian conceptual understanding of just-war is directly attributable to Ambrose. It was Ambrose who instilled in Augustine the belief that Rome and the Catholic Church stood side-by-side (perhaps even as the same entity) to bring to pass the salvation of man (Russell 715) – a view that Augustine would later reject when he witnessed the fall of Rome. Although Augustine rejected the idea that Rome stood hand-in-hand with the Catholic Church for the Salvation of man, he later argued for the possibility of a Christian State (Mattox 29-30). Augustine’s absolute influence on just-war came from this mixture of Cicero’s rational secularism and Ambrose’ religious doctrines – there had never before been such a philosophical marriage in the context of just-war.
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><span style=""> </span>Interestingly enough, among the works we have of Ambrose, the only <i style="">jus ad bellum </i>justifications he gives are just cause and peace as the ultimate objective for war; however, traces of Augustine’s three premises <i style="">jus in bello</i> are found in pieces throughout Ambrose’ theology.
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><i style=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">The Development of Augustine’s Theory of Justice, War, and Peace</span></i></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /><i style=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><span style=""> </span>Augustine lived in a very peculiar time. Whereas Cicero lived in a prosperous Rome, Augustine was witness to Rome’s fall. Whereas Cicero saw Rome expand through military conquest, Augustine saw Rome give way to the Vandals. Various differences separated Augustine from Cicero, and these differences – mixed with Augustine’s life-changing encounter with Christianity – gave way to differing interpretations of justice. To Augustine, “justice is love serving God only, and therefore ruling well all else” (<i style="">Of the Morals of the Catholic Church</i> XV.25, NPNF IV). This reflected Augustine’s notion that justice is also “giving every man his due” (Mattox 25).
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><span style=""> </span>Having a working knowledge of justice, Augustine advances an interesting theory concerning war itself. For Augustine, war is inevitable. Because God created all things <i style="">ex nihilo</i> (matter formed out of nothing) – for war to even exist -- God had either initially ordained war, or God had willfully given man his agency to wage war himself (Maddox 32). After all, God uses war to punish the wicked (those who do not follow God). As Augustine argues, God can decide “either to afflict or console mankind, so that some wars come to an end more speedily, others more slowly” (<i style="">City of God</i></span><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">V.22, 216, 217). </span><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><span style="">
<br /></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><span style=""></span><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><span style=""> </span>It is important to note that Augustine’s concept of <i style="">jus in bellum</i> originated during a time when the Roman military was busy suppressing political uprisings. As the Roman army fought to restrain dissent, Augustine witnessed the need for rules of conduct during wartime.
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><span style=""> </span>Once Augustine presents a theory of justice and war, he moves towards the discussion of peace. After all, war requires an end, and for Augustine, the just war is always fought to secure peace. Augustine gives no evidence that he believes that mankind will naturally triumph over its fallen disposition (which fallen disposition may be a cause in man starting war to begin with), yet the hearts of man must turn from the “havoc of disruption” and “lawless pleasures” (<i style="">Confessions</i></span><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"> II.I) to find a peaceable rest with God (<i style="">Confessions </i>I.I).<span style=""> </span>Mattox interprets Augustine as saying that “as long as Man’s fallen nature remains, even this divine help will not enable humans entirely to overcome the opposition between spirit and body… the tension that typifies war is merely the social counterpart to the spirit-body tension that typifies every individual person” (Mattox 38).
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><i style=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">Augustine and Just War</span></i></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /><i style=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><span style=""> </span>The influence that Augustine still wields over the just-war theory is evident in Augustine’s premises for <i style="">jus ad bellum </i>and <i style="">jus in bello</i>. All of these premises are still used today to discuss just-war. Before proceeding, we will briefly examine the most popular of these categories.
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><i style=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">Jus ad bellum</span></i></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /><i style=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"></span></i><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><span style=""> </span>Augustine, like Cicero, argues that paramount to all <i style="">jus ad bellum </i>premises is <i style="">just cause</i>. Just cause, for Augustine, has several positive and several negative aspects. For instance, Augustine argues that “material compensation for property unjustly taken or destroyed” (Mattox 46) constitutes a just cause for war; however, Augustine negatively defines just cause through emotional responses that negate this premise: love of violence, lust for power, revenge, cruelty, or wild resistance (Mattox 47).
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><span style=""> </span>The concept of <i style="">comparative justice </i>is not heavily discussed by Augustine, and <i style="">right intention </i>is nearly treated as an arm of <i style="">just-cause</i>. Augustine argues that a rightly intended war is “waged by the good in order that, by bringing under the yoke the unbridled lusts of men, those vices might be abolished which ought, under a just government, to be either extirpated or suppressed (<i>Letter </i>138.14).
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><span style=""> </span>No rogue citizen is justified in declaring a <i>war </i>on his neighbor, nor is any social leader justified in waging armed conflict against another faction of society. Augustine argues that a <i>competent authority</i> is necessary, although the state cannot force a person to act in opposition to his will (<i>In Answer to Letters of Petilian, the Donatist, Bishop of Cirta </i>2.98.224). The goal of competent authority is to seek for <i>peace as the ultimate objective for war</i>. As Augustine wrote, <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">God, to whom the secrets of the heart of man are open, knoweth that it is because of my love for Christian peace that I am so deeply moved by the profaned deeds of those who basely and impiously persevere in dissenting from it. He knoweth also that this feeling of mine is one tending towards peace, and that my desire is not, that any one should against his will be coerced into the Catholic communion, but that all who are in error of the truth may be openly declared, and being by God’s help clearly exhibited through my ministry, may so commend itself as to make them embrace and follow it (<i>Letter </i>34.1, <i>NPNF </i>I, 262). <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">Augustine appears to adhere to the concept expressed by William Godwin that “if he who employs coercion against me could mold me to his purposes by argument, no doubt, he would. He pretends to punish me because his argument is strong; but he really punishes me because he is weak” (Kraut 205). The competent authority must strive for peace and reason, and he must not seek to use force to convert people.
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">Jus in bello</span></i></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"></span></i><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">In studying Augustine’s theory of <i>jus in bello </i>principles, an interesting pattern emerges. Augustine writes more concerning <i>jus ad bellum</i> than <i>jus in bello</i>. However, there is a sense that Augustine does not find it necessary to explicate every specific instance wherein each individual should already have a moral sense of right and wrong in war. Maddox picks up on this theme and quotes Tolstoy: “A father who exhorts his son to live honestly, never to wrong any person, and to give all that he has to others, would not [find it necessary expressly to] forbid his son to kill people on the highway” (Tolstoy 101). It appears, to a certain degree, that Augustine takes man’s inner morality for granted, as he accepts that men should already have a sense of decency.
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<br /><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">In the case that such moral certainty requires explication, Augustine posits three premises for <i>jus in bello</i>: proportionality, discrimination, and good faith. The premise of proportionality is built on the most basic of human feelings: respect and love of one’s neighbor. Given all the atrocities associated with war – in accordance, it seems, with the <i>jus ad bellum </i>premise of peace as the ultimate end – the state and individual must contemplate upon the evils of war with sorrow. Otherwise, the hardened individual has “lost all human feeling” (<i>City of God </i>XIX.7,544). Augustine argues, “let necessity, therefore, and not your will, slay the enemy who fights against you” (<i>Letter </i>189.6, <i>NPNF </i>I, 554).
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<br /><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">Augustine’s second <i>jus in bello </i>premise, discrimination, is as contemporary today as when he first expressed his theory. Today, differentiating between non-combatants and religious clerics during a time of war is a highly promoted aspect of just-war. Under the premise of discrimination, Augustine also finds a moral justification for a soldier who is commanded to kill. Augustine claims that <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">When a soldier kills a man in obedience to the legitimate authority under which he served, he is not chargeable with murder by the laws of his country; in fact, he is chargeable with insubordination and mutiny if he refuses… Thus, he is punished if he did it without orders for the same reason that he will be punished if he refused when ordered (<i>On Free Choice of the Will</i> IV.25,9).</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<br /><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><span style=""> </span>Finally, Augustine argues for good faith. Can an army use deception on the battlefield to gain advantage in the war? Augustine answers affirmatively. Mattox points out that Augustine used scripture to justify good faith. Since God commanded Joshua to ambush his enemy and take control of the City of Ai, Augustine is confident in this theory (Maddox 64). <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><span style=""> </span><span style=""> </span>This teaches us that such things are legitimate for those who are engaged in a just war. In these matters the only thing a righteous man has to worry about is that the just war is waged by someone who has the right to do so because not all men have that right. Once an individual has undertaken this kind of war, it does not matter at all, as far as justice is concerned, whether he wins victory in open combat or through ruses (<i>Questions on the Heptateuch </i>6.10).
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in;">
<br /><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><b><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">Augustine Today: a modern adaptation</span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /><b><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">The influence that Augustine has had on the modern interpretation of just-war theory is undeniable. A quick look at the most common interpretations of just war includes nearly ever premise for which Augustine argued.
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<br /><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">In a world that is experiencing democratization faster than ever before, there are certainly expected modifications to Augustine’s theory. In “Just Cause for War,” a well known article concerning just-war theory, Jeff McMahan borrows and amends many of Augustine’s original ideas. Interesting enough, through all the changes and amendments to just-war theory, the premise of just-cause has remained consistent.<span style=""> </span>McMahan argues alongside Augustine to show that the recovery of goods lost to prior aggression is, indeed, a just-cause for war.
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<br /><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">In a move that amends Augustine, McMahan evaluates the current social pressures of today’s world to construct a new theory of just-war. McMahan includes the following premises in his just war theory: humanitarian intervention, prevention of future aggression, just war as a type of morally justified war, deterrence, and democratization.
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<br /><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">While Augustine may have accepted many of these premises, he might certainly have taken issue with others. In almost unquestionable terms, Augustine posited defensive strategies for his just war theory. However, current interpretations of just-war, like McMahan’s own, advance moral justification for preventive and preemptive wars in cases of deterrence and democratization. It is difficult to determine whether Augustine would agree with this. This much is certain: Augustine would likely appeal to scripture to continue the legacy of a just war.
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<br /><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><b><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">Conclusion: Augustine on Cicero</span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /><b><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">How do we now interpret Cicero’s statement that “</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">in times of war, the law falls silent” (<i>Silent enim leges inter arma</i>)? Is it true? Cicero himself purported a type of just war theory that was later adopted and amended by Augustine. However, Cicero still makes this claim. The answer is that while the principle may be discussed in politics, the law may not always respond according to principle.
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<br /><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"></span><b><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">Augustine once observed in </span><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">De Libero Arbitrio </span></i><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">(1.5) that “It is the case that a law, which is not just, is not a law at all” (lex inuista non est lex). In Augustine’s opinion, the law must necessarily reflect a moral principle; otherwise it is not a law. If a law is enforced, despite moral principle and reason having shown the injustice of the law, the government has failed at the principle of establishing peace. If a just law has fallen silent, then the system itself is unjust; however, if the unjust law, in violation of a moral principle, is no longer a law, then justice is maintained.
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<br /><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">As Justice Scalia’s words have shown, Cicero’s observation is still applicable. In times of war, when the law falls silent, it is the duty of every idealist to maintain a principle. In establishing and maintaining a moral law concerning the just war theory, legal idealists can find current and applicable reason in Augustine’s just war theory. Indeed, it may surprise many modern just war theorists to find that after more than 1,500 years of political and wartime theory, St. Augustine of Hippo is still our contemporary. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-align: center; text-indent: -0.5in;" align="center"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p> </o:p></span></p><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-align: center; text-indent: -0.5in;" align="center"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">Works Cited <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">Augustine, and R. S. Pine-Coffin. <i>Confessions</i>. Harmondsworth, Middlesex, England: Penguin, 1961. Print. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";" lang="IT">Cicero, Marcus Tullius. <i>Pro Milone</i>. Torino: Paravia &, 1969. Print. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";" lang="IT">Franklin, Benjamin, William Temple Franklin, Henry Colburn, Charles Pye, John Swaine, Sidney Hall, Henry Stevens, and Francis Bedford. </span><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">Memoirs of the Life and Writings of Benjamin Franklin ...</span></i><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"> London: Printed for Henry Colburn, 1818. Print. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">Friedman, Leon. <i>The Law of WarH a Documentary History</i>. New York: Random House, 1972. Print. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">Hamdi v Rumsfeld, 542 U.S. 507. United States Supreme Court. 28 June 2004. Print. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">Kraut, Richard. <i>Aristotle: Political Philosophy</i>. Oxford England: Oxford UP, 2002. Print. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">Laotse, Yutang Lin, and Zhuangzi. <i>The Wisdom of Laotse</i>. New York: Modern Library, 1948. Print. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">Mattox, John Mark. <i>Saint Augustine and the Theory of Just War</i>. London: Continuum, 2006. Print. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">McMahan, Jeff. "Just Cause for War." <i>Ethics & International Affairs</i> 19.3 (2005). Web. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">Russell, Frederick H. "’Only Something Good Can Be Evil’: The Genesis of Augustine’s Secular Ambivalence." </span><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";" lang="IT">Theological Studies</span></i><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";" lang="IT"> 51 (1990). Web. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">Tolstoy, Leo. <i>My Religion</i>. London, 1889. Print. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";">Wilkinson, John Gardner, and Samuel Birch. <i>The Manners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians.</i> London: Murray, 1878. Print.</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></p> <span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Cambria","serif";"></span><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif";"></span>Shiloh Loganhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01232352679206328450noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2192472582302586579.post-46563267684189000732010-04-11T23:38:00.003-06:002010-04-11T23:42:22.227-06:00Natural Right, Natural Law, and Positive Law: Aristotle’s Influence on St. Thomas AquinasIntroduction<br /><br />Since Thomas Aquinas, most arguments concerning natural right and natural law find their way back to Aristotle. Indeed, Aristotle pioneered a new concept of rights that were never discussed before his time. Whereas Plato bound the individual to his duty within the organ of the state, Aristotle argued that the individual deserved the right to enjoy an equality based society (Miller 87). Each individual had rights that existed within nature by definition (natural law). In addition to the discussion of natural law, Aristotle is credited for giving a detailed account of positive law as well.<br /><br />Many common interpretations of Aristotle’s theory on natural right, natural law, and positive law are seen through the eyes of Aquinas; however, this approach has drawn much criticism. There is no question that Aquinas was heavily influenced by Aristotle, but there are several convincing arguments that question whether an accurate view of Aristotle is seen through the lens of Aquinas’ interpretation; in other words, “we must be wary of reading back into Aristotle Aquinean doctrines” (Shiner 188).<br /><br />In this paper I intend to examine whether the Aquinean interpretation of Aristotle’s concept of natural right, natural law, and positive law is adequate to quell harsh criticism. I will do this by first addressing Aristotle’s concepts of natural right, natural law, and positive law. Second, I will explain how Aquinas defined natural right, natural law, and positive law. Third, I will show how Aquinas was influenced by Aristotle, and how – although Aquinas was influenced by Aristotle – he varied from Aristotle’s idea. I will conclude that while Aristotle is credited for helping to form the foundation of natural right, natural law, and positive law, these legal ideas cannot fit perfectly into the Aquinean interpretation without some adaptation.<br />Aristotle: Natural right, natural law, and positive law.<br /><br />While the difference between natural law and positive law is a relatively easy distinction, there are often common misunderstandings between Aristotle’s concept of natural rights and natural law. The differences are often subtle, but there are differences nonetheless. To understand these I will include a variety of definitions that are associated to Aristotle’s understanding of natural right, natural law, and positive law, and then I will show how these theories fit together.<br /><br />Natural Right<br /><br />There are many competing theories concerning what Aristotle meant by natural rights. While some claim that Aristotle argues that a natural right is a type of inherent or “inalienable right” (as expressed in the American Declaration of Independence), others argue that a natural right comes into existence through the state. There is even a third theory that defines natural rights through an interpretation of natural justice and says that rights are “‘founded on the nature of man’, in distinction from merely conventional rights” (Miller 88). Bernard Yack defines Aristotle’s concept of natural right as “the idea that for every particular situation there exists one inherently just state of affairs against which we can measure the justice of our actions and opinions” (Yack 216).<br /><br />While one argument denies that Aristotle has a distinct theory for natural rights and another argues that Aristotle has a working theory of natural rights – neither side disagrees on any substantive issue of interpretation (Miller 88-9). This said, I will argue that Aristotle had no concept of a natural right in connection with an “inalienable right,” but that, for Aristotle, the state, as a natural entity, determines men’s natural rights in establishing justice: “But justice is the bond of men in states, for the administration of justice, which is the determination for what is just, is the principle of order in political society” (Pol. 1253a37-9). Through just action, the state determines the natural right of the individual in maintaining order in political society. Because man is given natural rights through the state, this does not contradict Aristotle’s claim that man has rights that exist by nature – for the polis itself is a natural entity.<br /><br />Natural Law<br /><br />To Aristotle, the law is a type of justice (Pol. 1255a21-3). In defining natural law, Aristotle wrote that the “Universal law is the law of nature. For there really is, as every one to some extent divines, a natural justice and injustice that is binding on all men, even on those who have no association or covenant with each other” (Rhet 1373b6-9). The natural law is that which defines what is inherently just. However, in saying this, we encounter another problem. Bernard Yack argues that<br />Nature provides us with a standard to determine which individuals should participate in political communities. It has equipped human beings (or at least some human beings) with capacities that lead them to develop communities in which they rely on one another’s judgments bout the intrinsic merits of their actions. It has not, however, equipped them with a final standard against which to measure those judgments (Yack 217).<br /><br />In one sense, it appears that Aristotle argues that nature itself directs the individual toward a moral imperative; however, Yack argues instead that Aristotle is not defending the existence of natural, inherently correct standards of justice. “[Aristotle] is, instead, arguing that the need for citizens to make and argue about judgments of the intrinsic justice of their actions is something that develops naturally within political communities” (Yack 216). Therefore, to Yack, natural law is the naturally occurring principle that originates within the polis, when the state inherently questions the intrinsic justice of its actions in the political community.<br /><br />Positive Law<br /><br />Aristotle argues that it is necessary to make a complete classification of just and unjust actions, and we do this “by observing that [actions] have been defined relatively to two kinds of law” (Rhet. 1373b1-3). We already know that one of these kinds of law is the natural law, but Aristotle will now define his positive (particular) law. “Particular law is that which each community lays down and applies to its own members: this is partly written and partly unwritten” (Rhet. 1373b4-6). The positive, or ‘particular’, law is that law that is expressly defined by the community. This law may be a written rule, or it may be a social expectation.<br /><br />Everything Together<br /><br />I have already argued that the state determines the natural right of the individual in maintaining order in political society, but is this accurate? Is this Aristotle’s intended argument? If man is by nature a political (social) animal (Pol. 1253a1-2), then what else comes to man by nature? As Yack argued above, nature provides a standard for determining how individuals should participate in political communities, and nature has equipped some human beings to develop communities; however, nature has not provided a final standard of moral judgment (Yack 217).<br />As the state defines the ultimate standards of just judgment (natural right), the state will continue to establish justice through law (natural law). However, not all social questions are answerable through an appeal to justice. Natural justice, for instance, cannot answer whether it is more just to drive on one side of the road than another, such an instance is a matter of conventional law – or, rather, positive law. Customs, traditions, and other written rules that are not specifically identified with natural law or justice are matters of positive (conventional) law and justice.<br /><br />Aquinas and Natural Right, Natural Law, and Positive Law<br /><br />Natural Right<br /><br />Rather than considering the topic of a ‘right’, Aquinas wrote primarily concerning the term jus. A person can translate jus through Latin to mean a ‘right’; however, the political concept and use of ‘right’ was not in Aquinas’s lexicon (Lisska 228).<br />The Aquinean version of natural right – as contrasted with the modern philosophical concept of rights – is given through an objective/subjective distinction. “Aquinas’s account of jus entailed that a matter of fact was determined to hold; from that factual situation, moreover, a certain relation in terms of justice comes about”; in other words, “jus means, so Aquinas suggests, ‘that which is right’, which in turn means ‘that which is just’. Thus, jus refers to an objective state of affairs” (Lisska 229). This is distinguished from the modern concept of a right that “refers to a subjective ‘claim’ which a person might assert regarding something due to the person” (Lisska 229).<br /><br />In Aquinas’s own words he explains that “jus – which is the same as the just – is a certain work which is proportionate to another according to some method or mode of equality” (Summa Theologiae, I-II q. 57, a.2). In short, Aquinas’s use of jus was not an external relation of two or more persons on the basis of things, but is the basis of external relations (Lisska 231).<br /><br />Natural Law<br /><br />According to Aquinas, every creature that has an end also has a nature whose fulfillment is in their nature. This is to say, for example, that man, who is made to find the good, finds happiness in the fulfillment of his nature. Man makes moral judgments to naturally achieve an overall good. Aquinas repeats Aristotle’s concept that man is a social animal; however, Aquinas did not speak of a social contract, but that we are born into social networks and political systems. The moral rule – or natural law – consists in behaving well in these networks and systems (McInerny).<br /><br />Positive Law<br /><br />For Aquinas, the positive law is the human law. The positive law must find some root within the natural and justified law; otherwise, Aquinas harkens back to Augustine who argues in De Libero Arbitrio (1.5): “It is the case that a law, which is not just, is not a law at all” (lex inuista non est lex). Man may admonish each other and establish rules of conduct to maximize justice according to the rules of reason; however, once a positive law is found in contradiction to justice (natural law), then that human law is null-and-void.<br /><br />Aristotle’s Influence on Aquinas and Their Differences<br /><br />Christopher Martin once noted concerning Aristotle’s influence on Aquinas that “St. Thomas is an Aristotelian. His basic concepts and categories are those of Aristotle, and when they are developed beyond the point at which Aristotle left them, they are developed in an Aristotelian manner” (Martin 4). There are many similarities between Aristotle’s concepts of natural right, natural law, and positive law; however, it is important to acknowledge the differences. Wrote Paul E. Sigmound,<br /><blockquote>In this description of the natural law Aquinas takes a number of Aristotelian concepts and combines them in a way which is different from the way that Aristotle himself used them. Whether or not he was faithful to the spirit of Aristotle may be argued, but a comparison of Aquinas discussion of natural law with the relevant passages in Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics and Politics reveals that Aquinas has combined quite disparate elements in Aristotle… into a new synthesis that makes the determination of natural ends a central consideration in the development of Aquinas’s theory of natural law (Sigmound 69).</blockquote>Differences in Aristotle and Aquinas<br /><br />Between the two philosophers, Aristotle is more positive than Aquinas. Whereas, for Aquinas, the moral imperative and sense of justice within natural right and natural law exists in a universal ethereal realm, Aristotle’s concepts of natural right and natural law are rooted in a systematic process naturally dictated from the governing body. Whereas Aquinas’s version of positive law requires a strict adherence to an ethereal moral and just code in natural law, Aristotle’s sense of justice is lawfulness.<br /><br />For Aristotle, there is no sense of an unjust law that is not a law (lex inuista non est lex), for the just person is lawful – even if the law he is following is unjust. To Aristotle, “there are such things as unjust laws, and so lawfulness cannot provide a standard of what is just. Even if we obey the law, we may be doing what is unjust, because the law itself may be unjust” (Kraut103). This interpretation of Aristotle’s rejects the non-est-lex concept behind Aquinas’ relationship between natural law and positive law – for Aquinas believes that once the moral law is known, any human laws in violation of the natural moral law are invalid and non-binding (as though they never existed).<br /><br />Conclusion<br /> <br />While it is tempting to interpret Aristotle in terms of “natural law” and “positive law” – because of Aristotle’s talk concerning the “unwritten law” and “natural justice” – these concepts are not the same types of reason. Natural law and positive law are concepts born out of medieval legal theory – namely, these concepts find philosophical refuge in the words of Thomas Aquinas. While Aquinas was unarguably influenced by Aristotle, we cannot juxtapose Aquinean natural law with Aristotle’s natural justice (Shiner 188).<br /><br />This paper has superficially covered certain necessary points to show that Aristotle’s connection between ‘law’, ‘convention’, and ‘nature’, are not synonymous with Aquinas’s concept of natural law and positive law. Aristotle’s views on ethics, law, and politics are primarily organic – with the citizens and state, and their enacted laws and social decisions – and are a part of the “natural” world (Shiner 189).<br /><br /><br />Works Cited<br /><br />Finnis, John. Natural Law and Natural Rights. Oxford: Clarendon, 1986. Print.<br /><br />Kraut, Richard. Aristotle: Political Philosophy. Oxford England: Oxford UP, 2002. Print.<br /><br />Lisska, Anthony J. Aquinas's Theory of Natural Law: an Analytic Reconstruction. Oxford:<br />Clarendon, 1996. Print.<br /><br />Martin, Christopher. The Philosophy of Thomas Aquinas. London: Routledge, 1988. Print.<br /><br />McInerny, Ralph. "Aquinas, Saint Thomas." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Web. 06 Apr. 2010. <http: edu="" entries="" aquinas="" natlaw="">.<br /><br />Miller, Fred D. Nature, Justice, and Rights in Aristotle's Politics. Oxford: Clarendon, 1995. Print.<br /><br />Sigmound, Paul E. "Thomistic Natural Law and Social Theory." Calgary Aquinas Studies (1978). Print.<br /><br />Yack, Bernard. "Natural Right and Aristotle's Understanding of Justice." Political Theory 3rd ser. 18 (1990): 216-37. JSTOR. Web. 2 Mar. 2010. <http: org="" stable="" 191342="">.<br /><br /></http:></http:>Shiloh Loganhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01232352679206328450noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2192472582302586579.post-72915060788676026002010-04-09T13:17:00.002-06:002010-04-09T13:21:42.586-06:00"Power that does not come from the barrel of a gun."<meta equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name="ProgId" content="Word.Document"><meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 12"><meta name="Originator" content="Microsoft Word 12"><link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CShiloh%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml"><link rel="themeData" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CShiloh%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_themedata.thmx"><link rel="colorSchemeMapping" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CShiloh%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_colorschememapping.xml"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>Normal</w:View> <w:zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:trackmoves/> <w:trackformatting/> <w:punctuationkerning/> <w:validateagainstschemas/> <w:saveifxmlinvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:ignoremixedcontent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:donotpromoteqf/> <w:lidthemeother>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:lidthemeasian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:lidthemecomplexscript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables/> <w:snaptogridincell/> <w:wraptextwithpunct/> <w:useasianbreakrules/> <w:dontgrowautofit/> <w:splitpgbreakandparamark/> <w:dontvertaligncellwithsp/> <w:dontbreakconstrainedforcedtables/> <w:dontvertalignintxbx/> <w:word11kerningpairs/> <w:cachedcolbalance/> </w:Compatibility> <w:browserlevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> <m:mathpr> <m:mathfont val="Cambria Math"> <m:brkbin val="before"> <m:brkbinsub val="--"> <m:smallfrac val="off"> <m:dispdef/> <m:lmargin val="0"> <m:rmargin val="0"> <m:defjc val="centerGroup"> <m:wrapindent val="1440"> <m:intlim val="subSup"> <m:narylim val="undOvr"> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:latentstyles deflockedstate="false" defunhidewhenused="true" defsemihidden="true" defqformat="false" defpriority="99" latentstylecount="267"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="0" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Normal"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="heading 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 7"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 8"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 9"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 7"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 8"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 9"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="35" qformat="true" name="caption"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="10" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Title"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="1" name="Default Paragraph Font"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="11" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Subtitle"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="22" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Strong"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="20" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Emphasis"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="59" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Table Grid"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Placeholder Text"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="1" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="No Spacing"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Revision"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="34" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="List Paragraph"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="29" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Quote"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="30" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Intense Quote"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="19" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Subtle Emphasis"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="21" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Intense Emphasis"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="31" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Subtle Reference"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="32" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Intense Reference"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="33" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Book Title"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="37" name="Bibliography"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" qformat="true" name="TOC Heading"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><style> <!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:"Cambria Math"; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:roman; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1107304683 0 0 159 0;} @font-face {font-family:Calibri; panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1073750139 0 0 159 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; margin-top:0in; margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:10.0pt; margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} .MsoChpDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; mso-default-props:yes; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} .MsoPapDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; margin-bottom:10.0pt; line-height:115%;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </style><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} </style> <![endif]--> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><u><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">Introduction</span></u></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /><u><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></u></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">Of the many atrocities committed and the genocides performed throughout the 20<sup>th</sup> Century, few cases rival the stories that have come from of the Cambodian “killing fields”. Between 1970 and 1979, an estimated 1.2 – 2.2 million Cambodians were killed by the Khmer Rouge (Genocide). The barbaric nature of slaughter, the torture committed on innocent civilians, and the beliefs that fueled this genocide is a surprising combination of the accidents of history, ideological extremism, blundered US foreign policy, and clandestine US militarism. In reviewing the history of Cambodia, the horror of this mass-genocide appears to establish a universal and moral mandate on mankind to ensure that something like this will never take place again. An important question to ask is concerning how the United States may have failed to keep the killing fields from happening. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">Today, college classrooms still discuss the killing fields to determine the ethical dilemmas of foreign interventionism. Questions seek to determine the ethical nature of a call-to-action, and it is becoming more consistently apparent that good questions are necessary to extract good answers. Today’s questions of an international moral ethic must necessarily root themselves in an international understanding of political, economic and social history, and within the social context of cultural diversity; otherwise, the wrong questions will be asked, and the solutions will only serve to fester in the wound of international tragedy and turmoil. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">In the philosophies regarding international ethics are two prominent and competing political theories that fight for the international limelight of political policy. These theories are <i style="">idealism </i>and <i style="">realism</i>. From these theories, states have waged and deflected wars, established international courts and laws, and have seen the emergence of a new global community. These two philosophies have had an interesting courtship, as both have tried to take the lead in the dance of political power and policy; however, since it appears that it “takes two to tango”, we may assume that it takes both a realist and ideological philosophy to cover all the necessary grounds to make an appropriate policy. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><u><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></u></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><u><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">Outline of Paper and Thesis<o:p></o:p></span></u></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">This paper is written in four sections. Each section is quite different in content from the next, but these seemingly unrelated sections are necessarily interrelated (as will be shown). The first section of this paper will address the short but necessary problems in the history of Cambodia that led to the travesties of the killing fields. The second section of the paper will give a short synopsis of idealism and realism in the 20<sup>th</sup> Century, and it will discuss various elements of these theories in matters pertaining to international ethics. The third section will address certain natural laws theories of international politics concerning just war and interventionism, as proposed by St. Thomas Aquinas and Samuel von Pufendorf. We will use these philosophers to lay a foundational ethic for moral action. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">The pendulum of political policy swings between realism and idealism. When the harsh reality of power politics is too much to bear, then political policy returns to a more gentle and thoughtful sense of idealism. On the same token, when idealism has made the state too soft and complacent, then realism is eager to establish a common sense approach to political policy. Whereas, in the 20<sup>th</sup> Century, there were a small handful of follows after a type of ‘pragmatic-idealism’, the realist doctrine of power-politics gained the lead in the dance of political policy. It is reported that Mao Zedong once said that </span><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">"Power comes from the barrel of a gun”; however, this paper will address an alternative theory of idealism in coping with the issues of international ethics. Finally, this paper will show that in its rejection of a moral idealism, an extreme American realism helped billow the fire of the communist revolution in Cambodia, and that moderate realism helped perpetuate the burning atrocities that were committed in the killing fields of Cambodia.<span style=""> </span><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><u><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></u></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><u><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">History of Cambodia and Conflicts to Solve<o:p></o:p></span></u></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">The last 100 years of history in Cambodia is replete with European colonialism and domestic struggles for independence. France formally colonized Cambodia in 1863, and it was a protectorate of Cambodia until 1953 (History). The French had assumed nearly all but ceremonial powers from the Cambodian monarchy, until Norodom Sihanouk came to power in 1941. France was reluctant to give up influence of Cambodia; however, coupled with the national stresses caused by the Japanese occupation during World War II and Sihanouk’s work to free Cambodia from any outside influences, Cambodia gained its independence from France in 1949. After taking control of Cambodia, Sihanouk took advantage of the French-Indochinese War, and he gained military control of the country. He later abdicated military power to his own father, but he remained in control of the government until 1960 when he became the chief of state without ever returning to his thrown (Cambodia).<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">Sihanouk took an expected anti-western approach to politics. After nearly three quarters of a century under western colonization, Cambodia was in no hurry to align itself with its perceived foreign aggressors. As such, through the 1960’s, Cambodia took a strict neutral stance to all parties involved in America’s Vietnam War. However, during this time, North Vietnam used parts of Cambodia (along the Ho Chi Minh Trail) as a place of refuge from American forces, and a communist group in Cambodia, called the Khmer Rouge, became increasingly troublesome to the neutral Sihanouk. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">In addition to perceived American military aggression, the Khmer Rouge charged the United States for overthrowing Sihanouk from power. In 1970, Lon Nol took control of </span><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">Phnom Penh</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"> through a military coup while Sihanouk was in China. The United States backed the Sihanouk’s overthrow because of Lon Nol’s adamant stance against Communism – even though it was known that Lon Nol governed with an iron fist. This perceived use of naked aggression gave the Khmer Rouge more fuel for the fire, as the Khmer easily recruited country peasants to their war against the west; after all, what loyal citizen would not join a locally established resistance group to fight against the same perceived colonial-type powers that were just rejected nearly two decades before (Talbott)?</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<br /><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"> <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><i style=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">Khmer Rouge</span></i></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /><i style=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">While the Khmer Rouge is often touted as a group of ideologically driven Communist extremists, current evidence shows that this is probably not as true as initially reported. While many leaders of the Khmer Rouge were ideologically driven, most of the initial sparks and recruiting power came from uneducated peasant workers who experienced a collateral effect from the Vietnam War (Johnson 12-3). This is to say that the individual recruiting efforts were anti-American, as opposed to pro-Communist. The borders of the Vietnam War were not as neatly drawn as we like to think they were. After months of American airstrikes and carpet bombing of the Cambodian portion Ho Chi Minh Trail (in search of hiding Viet Cong), innocent Cambodian casualties started adding up. It did not take much effort for the Khmer’s to convert the poor and uneducated people to a cause that was strictly anti-western. The political hydra was at work – for every Viet Cong communist the Americans would kill along the Ho Chi Minh Trail in Cambodia, two Cambodian peasants would take up the banner of Communism with the Khmer Rouge. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">Pol Pot, the leader of the Khmer Rouge, was a French educated Cambodian who had belonged to the French Communist Party (PCF). In 1975, Pol Pot’s Khmers finally gained control of Phnom Penh and ousted Lon Nol from power. During this time, Pol Pot sought to return the people to a purely agrarian society, and tried to throw off all forms of westernization that had seeped into Cambodian life. From 1975 – 1979, the Khmer Rouge killed millions of Cambodians for being too westernized. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><i style=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></i></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><i style=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">The Killing, Torture, and Social Programming</span></i><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"><span style="">
<br /></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"><span style=""> </span>The Khmer Rouge killed every Cambodian that was perceived to have received western training or education. Cambodians who spoke English, wore glasses, or who had any advanced education were perceived as ‘westernized’ and were promptly killed. Often, the prisoners were tortured, raped, or dismembered before being savagely slaughtered. In his famous auto-biography, <i style="">Survival of the Killing Fields</i>, Haing Ngor spoke of his personal experience of being crucified over a bed of hot coals, and he spoke of the searing pain of his blistered feet as they burst open when he was finally cut down able to walk (Ngor 262-67).<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"><span style="">
<br /></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"><span style=""> </span>Children were taken from their families and programmed to become child-soldiers for the Khmer Rouge; furthermore, in many cases child soldiers were programmed to kill their own family members (Jackson). They were taught to defend the Communist ideal and to give their life for it. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><u><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></u></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><u><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">Evaluation of International Realism and Idealism in the 20<sup>th</sup> Century</span></u><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"> <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"><span style="">
<br /></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"><span style=""> </span>It is difficult to determine which theory came first – idealism or realism? There is no doubt the troubled relationship shared between these two theories, but it is important to give a short synopsis of both theories so that we can determine how they apply to an ethical analysis of the killing fields. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><i style=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></i></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><i style=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">Idealism</span></i><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">Idealism, in part, signifies the natural right and natural law theories as derived from an Aristotelian concept of ‘the good’ that evolved through Aquinas, and then later through the philosophers of the Enlightenment. Idealism, in many cases, posits man’s innate goodness and moral imperative. It is in idealism that man questions whether there is a moral and universal absolute, or whether our moral imperative changes according to social, economic, and natural pressures. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">There is an important argument in idealism that questions whether the same rules that apply in a moral relationship between individuals as also applies to the moral relationship between states. There is no definitive answer to this question, but the arguments on either side are compelling. While John Westlake argues that “The duties and rights of states are nothing more than the duties and rights of the men who compose them” (Westlake 78), Michael Walzer argues that <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">State rights are not constituted through a series of transfers from individual men and women to the sovereign or through a series of exchanges among individuals… The moral standing of any particular state depends upon the reality of the common life it protects and the extent to which the sacrifices required by that protection are willingly accepted and thought worthwhile. If no common life exists, or if the state doesn’t defend the common life that does exist, its own defense may have no moral justification (Walzer 54).
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<br /><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">These two quotes apply a different concept and source of morality for both the individual and the state. While Westlake argues that the state can only have as many duties and rights as the people who compose the state, Walzer argues that the moral standing of the state is dependent on the nature of common life that the state protects. Every state, says the idealist, has valid ideas that deserve to be heard and examined thoroughly. <span style=""> </span><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><i style=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></i></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><i style=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">Realism</span></i><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"><span style="">
<br /></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"><span style=""> </span>In contrast to idealism’s moral imperative, realism makes no such absolute claim to any such imperative. This is not to say that realism rejects every moral virtue; however, as idealism’s primary focus is to uphold the moral virtue itself (for the moral virtue’s sake), the realist’s primary focus is to use a moral imperative to advance the state’s <i style="">power </i>(for the power’s sake). Realism is only concerned about a few things, but it calls for us to address and see things for as they are (and not to worry about how things <i style="">ought </i>to be). While idealism argues that states have a moral imperative, realism claims that states act in their own self-interest and power. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"><span style="">
<br /></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"><span style=""> </span>In his book <i style="">The Twenty Years Crisis</i>, E.H. Carr argues that a utopian idealism must eventually give way to a practical form of realism (Carr 71). Carr expresses his concern that idealism alone is not sufficient to address the growing needs and situations of international politics; furthermore, Carr argues that “in both physical and political sciences, the point is soon reached where the individual stage of wishing must be succeeded by a stage of hard and ruthless analysis” (Carr9). This is to say that idealism must give way to the realist’s “ruthless analysis” of the world. That said, Carr is no fan of the cold and stark reality that extreme realists had brought to the table of political policy, but Carr argued that we should advance a more moderate form of realism that addresses the relative morals of society when engaging in power politics (Carr 19). <span style=""> </span>This form of moderate realism is certainly at play in today’s engagement of political policy. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><u><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></u></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><u><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">Idealists in Action: Thomas Aquinas and Samuel von Pufendorf</span></u><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"> <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"><span style="">
<br /></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"><span style=""> </span>While the venerable St. Thomas Aquinas receives praise for his involvement in perpetuating natural law and the Aristotelian traditions, Samuel von Pufendorf has shared relatively little attention in comparison. In determining the basic understanding of these philosopher’s arguments concerning international conflict and war, it is difficult to ascertain a perfect correlation between the philosophy and the events of the Cambodian killing fields. To find the natural law, we must first discover the principle wherein these philosophers spoke; afterward, we will try to more accurately use their philosophy and ideas to determine an appropriate course of ethical action. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><i style=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></i></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><i style=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">Aquinas </span></i><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">For Aquinas, any act of war or aggression, even if it is by nature an intervention, must be <i style="">iusta causa</i> (i.e. there must be a ‘just cause’). No just cause is given unless those we attack are guilty of some wrong which they refuse or fail to rectify (<i style="">ST </i>II-II q. 40 a. IC). Aquinas’s discussion of just war focuses primarily the decision to initiate war; that is, for Aquinas, there is no necessary <i style="">causa </i>in self-defense (Finnis 285). Aquinas stipulates that legitimate authority, just cause, and proper intentions are necessary in declaring any war. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">What Aquinas does exclude from this theory of war is the “take no prisoners” policies “or any other policies making the killing of enemies and objective—say, to terrorize other soldiers, or put other psychological pressures on enemy leaders” (Finnis 287).<span style=""> </span>Furthermore, as a matter of natural law, Aquinas universally rejects the “killing of innocents” (<i style="">ST </i>II-II q. 65. a. 6). <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><i style=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></i></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><i style=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">Pufendorf<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">Unlike Aquinas, Pufendorf spends a good amount of time discussing individual and state wars. For Pufendorf, the reasons for a just war are <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">to preserve and protect ourselves and our things against others who are trying to hurt us or to take away or destroy these things; to assert ourselves when others, by whom we are owed anything from a perfect right, refuse to furnish it of themselves; and, finally, to obtain reparation for harms by whose infliction we have been injured, and to wrest from one who has previously hurt us a guarantee that he will not attack us in the future (Pufendorf 258). <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">We must always maintain that our wars, especially the offensive wars, have a strict, clear, and definable cause. We should always use these three rules to determine a rational response, as opposed to “flying in to war” (Pufendorf 258). <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"><span style="">
<br /></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"><span style=""> </span>While there are just reasons for entering war, Pufendorf addresses certain unjust reasons as well.<span style=""> </span>In hearkening back to Grotius’s work, <i style="">On the Law of War and Peace</i>, Pufendorf argues that <i style="">fear </i>of our neighbor’s strength and power is no justification for war. While we are allowed to defend and equip ourselves in times when we feel threatened, we have no moral authority to lash out in these cases. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"><span style="">
<br /></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"><span style=""> </span>For Pufendorf, the theory of proportionality is not as evolved as it is in the 20<sup>th</sup> and 21<sup>st</sup> Century. Pufendorf argues that it is not “always unjust to repay a greater evil for a smaller”, and that once someone has attacked me “by declaring himself my enemy grants me the license to exert unlimited force against him, or as much as seems appropriate to me… The end of war, be it offensive or defensive, cannot be obtained with this license” (Pufendorf 259). <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"><span style="">
<br /></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"><span style=""> </span>In accordance with his general principle of war, that peace is the only justifiable end for war, Pufendorf argues for a time when waging war in the defense of another is appropriate and justifiable. This type of warfare, however, is only justifiable when those we are protecting are bound to us by treaty or are “subjects” of the state. Pufendorf gave several natural limits on helping those who we are in treaty with, because no state should be at the military whim of another state’s disposition to wage war (Pufendorf 260). <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><u><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></u></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><u><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">The Realist Problem<i style=""><o:p></o:p></i></span></u></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">It is too overly-simplistic to say that the United States was the sole or primary catalyst for the Khmer Rouge’s successful recruiting and genocide in the late 1970’s Cambodia. This does not, however, dismiss the United States from certain accountability. During the late 1960’s, the United States bombarded the Ho Chi Minh Trail in Cambodia and blanketed the regions with bombs, missiles, and other bombardments during, and after, the Vietnam War. This heavily realist approach helped spark Cambodian resentment against US military involvement along the Ho Chi Minh Trail; furthermore, the US military’s involvement in overthrowing Sihanouk through a military coup did not settle well with the residual of anti-western feelings that Cambodians still held after three-quarters of a century under French colonialism. If the United States’ proactive realist policies in Cambodia were not the sole catalyst for helping the Khmer Rouge to come to power, these blundered policies certainly helped the Khmers to find a foothold. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">In addition, once Pol Pot’s Khmer Rouge had ousted Lon Nol and began the genocide of its own people in 1975, the United States was quick to dismiss any charges concerning its tampering in Cambodia’s affairs (either concerning the bombings or concerning the assisted coup); furthermore, the United States sought to distance itself from Cambodia, because it could not afford for the American people to suffer any more wartime discontent than what residual suffering the people already endured from the unpopular Vietnam War. This moderate-realist approach only furthered to cement the United States’ hypocritical and aggressive reputation in South East Asia. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><u><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></u></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><u><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">The Idealist Solution and Conclusion<o:p></o:p></span></u></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><i style=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></i></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><i style=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">Interventionism<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">As already addressed, Aquinas posits that <i style="">legitimate authority</i>, <i style="">just cause, </i>and <i style="">righteous intent </i>are necessary to wage any justifiable war. In his argument for just cause, Aquinas quotes Augustine who says that “A just war is customarily defined as one which avenges injuries” (<i style="">Quaestiones in Heptateuchum</i> 4:10)<i style="">.</i> However, a mere justification for avenged injuries is not enough for Aquinas to argue for interventionism. The just war is fought with a righteous intent and decreed by a legitimate authority, but beyond this we are left speculating how, when, and why our personal moral imperative transitions to state action. Aquinas gives no expressed principle for why the state cannot assume a moral imperative for protecting other states. If we desperately desire to find such a theory in Aquinas, it is necessary to create a hybrid-theory between Aquinas and another philosopher – but this does not guarantee our desired outcome. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">Pufendorf, unlike Aquinas, <i style="">does </i>give us a stated principle for state interventionism. Pufendorf argues that the state can protect a third party, if the third party is subjected to the state or if the third party is in treaty with the state. While his premises for just war vary from Aquinas’s, Pufendorf does assert a rather Aquinian concept that peace is the ultimate end of war. This said, there is still no determinable principle for us to gauge a moral imperative in the situation concerning the killing fields of Cambodia. While possible US military action may be somewhat justified in an Aquinian interpretation a <i style="">righteous intent</i>, no principle of Aquinas addresses the moral imperative of the United States after its perceived long standing abuses in Cambodia (the bombing of the Ho Chi Minh Trail and the overthrow of Sihanouk). Furthermore, Pufendorf’s justification for interventionism does not apply to the Cambodian situation. Cambodia is neither subjected to the United States, nor was the Khmer run Cambodia in treaty with the United States. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><i style=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></i></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><i style=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">The Answer and Conclusion</span></i><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"><span style="">
<br /></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"><span style=""> </span>During the Vietnam War, supposed anti-communist idealisms hid the extreme and moderate realist practices of US militarism. These realist practices denied the fundamental principle of just war as addressed by Thomas Aquinas and Samuel von Pufendorf. Cambodia was not our intended target, and thousands of innocent Cambodians lost their lives due to the overstretched arm of US military involvement from Vietnam. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"><span style="">
<br /></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"><span style=""> </span>In this particular situation, the United States violated the just war theories of Aquinas and Pufendorf. According to Aquinas’s argument, the United States had no injuries to avenge against the Sihanouk led Cambodian government (thus negating any US claim to just cause), nor was there a specified ‘righteous intent’. According to Pufendorf, the Sihanouk led Cambodia was not trying to attack or take control of America; in fact, Sihanouk proclaimed a neutral policy. There are some reports that Sihanouk was sympathetic to Communist doctrines, but there is little-to-no evidence that shows he <i style="">acted</i> against the United States in supporting North Vietnam. Furthermore, Cambodia did not negate on any debts or obligations to the United States, nor did the United States have any claim to reparation from Cambodian mistreatments and injuries. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"><span style="">
<br /></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"><span style=""> </span>In these cases, the United States stands accountable for its actions that spurred a violent revolution and genocide. The United States is not inherently accountable for every life destroyed or person tortured in the killing fields, but it is accountable for a blundered foreign policy that denied a natural principle and gave rise and unintended sympathy to a violent ideology. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br />What is our moral imperative concerning genocide? The realist approach taken by the United States, in this particular instance, proved incompatible to address the real problems present in the ideological movement in Cambodia. It has been said that ideas are bullet-proof, and it takes more than guns and missiles to destroy a thought. By the time the killing fields started, the United States had already failed in its moral imperative.
<br />
<br /></span><meta equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name="ProgId" content="Word.Document"><meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 12"><meta name="Originator" content="Microsoft Word 12"><link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CShiloh%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml"><link rel="themeData" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CShiloh%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_themedata.thmx"><link rel="colorSchemeMapping" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CShiloh%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_colorschememapping.xml"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>Normal</w:View> <w:zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:trackmoves/> <w:trackformatting/> <w:punctuationkerning/> <w:validateagainstschemas/> <w:saveifxmlinvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:ignoremixedcontent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:donotpromoteqf/> <w:lidthemeother>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:lidthemeasian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:lidthemecomplexscript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables/> <w:snaptogridincell/> <w:wraptextwithpunct/> <w:useasianbreakrules/> <w:dontgrowautofit/> <w:splitpgbreakandparamark/> <w:dontvertaligncellwithsp/> <w:dontbreakconstrainedforcedtables/> <w:dontvertalignintxbx/> <w:word11kerningpairs/> <w:cachedcolbalance/> </w:Compatibility> <w:browserlevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> <m:mathpr> <m:mathfont val="Cambria Math"> <m:brkbin val="before"> <m:brkbinsub val="--"> <m:smallfrac val="off"> <m:dispdef/> <m:lmargin val="0"> <m:rmargin val="0"> <m:defjc val="centerGroup"> <m:wrapindent val="1440"> <m:intlim val="subSup"> <m:narylim val="undOvr"> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:latentstyles deflockedstate="false" defunhidewhenused="true" defsemihidden="true" defqformat="false" defpriority="99" latentstylecount="267"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="0" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Normal"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="heading 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 7"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 8"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 9"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 7"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 8"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 9"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="35" qformat="true" name="caption"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="10" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Title"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="1" name="Default Paragraph Font"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="11" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Subtitle"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="22" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Strong"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="20" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Emphasis"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="59" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Table Grid"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Placeholder Text"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="1" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="No Spacing"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Revision"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="34" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="List Paragraph"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="29" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Quote"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="30" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Intense Quote"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="19" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Subtle Emphasis"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="21" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Intense Emphasis"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="31" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Subtle Reference"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="32" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Intense Reference"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="33" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Book Title"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="37" name="Bibliography"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" qformat="true" name="TOC Heading"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><style> <!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:"Cambria Math"; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:roman; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1107304683 0 0 159 0;} @font-face {font-family:Calibri; panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1073750139 0 0 159 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; margin-top:0in; margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:10.0pt; margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} p.MsoHeader, li.MsoHeader, div.MsoHeader {mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-link:"Header Char"; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; tab-stops:center 3.25in right 6.5in; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} span.HeaderChar {mso-style-name:"Header Char"; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-locked:yes; mso-style-link:Header;} .MsoChpDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; mso-default-props:yes; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} .MsoPapDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; margin-bottom:10.0pt; line-height:115%;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </style><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} </style> <![endif]--> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-align: center; text-indent: -0.5in;" align="center"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">Works Cited <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">"Cambodia History Facts & Timeline." <i>Facts About!</i> Web. 09 Apr. 2010. <http://www.facts-about.org.uk/history-and-events-timeline-cambodia.htm>. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">"Cambodia." <i>Infoplease</i>. Web. 8 Apr. 2010. <http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/a0107378.html>. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">Carr, Edward Hallett, and Michael Cox. <i>The Twenty Years' Crisis, 1919-1939: an Introduction to the Study of International Relations</i>. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave, 2001. Print. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">Finnis, John. <i>Aquinas : Moral, Political, and Legal Theory</i>. Oxford [England]: Oxford UP, 1998. Print. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">"Genocide - Cambodia." <i>Peace Pledge Union</i>. Web. 09 Apr. 2010. <http://www.ppu.org.uk/genocide/g_cambodia1.html>. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">Johnson, Chalmers A. <i>Blowback: the Costs and Consequences of American Empire</i>. New York: Henry Holt, 2004. Print. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">Pufendorf, Samuel, and Craig L. Carr. <i>The Political Writings of Samuel Pufendorf</i>. New York: Oxford UP, 1994. Print. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">Talbott, Strobe. "America Abroad: Defanging the Beast." <i>Time</i>. 6 Feb. 1989. Web. 09 Apr. 2010. <http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,956883-1,00.html>. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">Walzer, Michael. <i>Just and Unjust Wars: a Moral Argument with Historical Illustrations</i>. New York: Basic, 2006. Print. </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";">Westlake, John. <i style="">Collected Papers</i>. ed. L. Oppenheim. Cambridge: England, 1914. Print.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<br />Shiloh Loganhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01232352679206328450noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2192472582302586579.post-56376649439709875432010-03-03T09:00:00.002-07:002010-03-03T09:08:41.069-07:00Live Your FreedomA few years ago a reporter asked a well-known Congressman's opinion concerning the arrest of two "tax-evaders" in Florida. He responded that it was his opinion, as based on historical precedence and on basic foundational American philosophies, that the ability of the people to practice civil disobedience is their right -- so long as they accept the consequences and do so peacefully without violating anyone else's life, liberty, or property. The reporter was shocked and asked the Congressman what would happen if <i>everyone </i>just woke up one day and decided not to pay their taxes -- wouldn't mass anarchy follow?! To this the Congressman calmly said "no", but that if all the people banded together in one issue like that, then, in a Constitutional Republic, the government would have to listen and change its policies and laws to reflect 'We the People's' rights.<br /><br />People naturally seek for order -- chaos is not within our nature as it was when there was merely matter unorganized. The fear of <i>anarchy </i>is a poor tactic used by politicos and academics to create a fictitious monster that does not even exist in nature -- if man naturally seeks for order by his eternal nature, then anarchy itself is merely an abstract concept outside of man's natural state-of-being. However, when man's association with his neighbor (government) enters the sphere of injustice, it is requisit under a divine and eternal imperative for man to adjust his relationship with his neighbor to promote justice and equity. This is easier said than done, and, as Thomas Jefferson observed: "all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed" (Declaration of Independence). This is to say, that injustice between men is most often allowed, until things become so bad that neither can endure the yoke of injustice.<br /><br />The question is: when does it get so bad that people feel they need to change? When do we individually "abolish the forms to which [we] are accustomed"? It is my experience that the fear in most people is that of <i>relativism</i>: what makes <i>my </i>truth any better than someone elses, and what happens if everyone just abides by the laws they want to abide by? These are natural questions that initially arise and keep people in a relationship of injustice between their neighbor. The foundational belief -- the basic premise -- behind these question presupposes that everyone's natural disposition is towards anarchy and not order. This basic premise supposes that men are evil and do not seek the good of their neighbor naturally. In essence, this basic premise derives from the conceptual and basic philosophies of socialism -- that men cannot be trusted to perform their duty in freedom and that they must be coerced from the state.<br /><br />This notion of relativism presupposes that reason and good-will towards man is not inherently within men. It is within coercion that men make their strongest arguments; however, as Godwin observes, the opposite is true.<br /><br /><blockquote style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 6.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;" class="gmail_quote"></blockquote><blockquote style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 6.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;" class="gmail_quote">"If [my neighbor] who employs coercion against me could mold me to his purpose by argument, no doubt he would. He pretends to punish me, because his argument is strong; but he really punishes me, because his argument is weak" (Godwin).</blockquote><br /><br />So, now, the question arises again -- when do we know the line has been crossed? Our founders rejected tyranny and oppression, and from the basis and understanding of freedom and liberty they organized a country according to the natural order of things. They declared <i>their </i>independence, and what happened? What was the result? Was it chaos? Was it anarchy? When men rejected tyranny and lived their freedom, what happened?<br /><br /><blockquote style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 6.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;" class="gmail_quote">"If, however, We the People believe ourselves incompetent to judge when that line has been crossed, then we will continue to find no shortage of political masters eager to carry on Lincoln’s legacy of contempt for our Constitution, and violent suppression of self-government" (<a href="http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig11/eboch1.1.1.html" target="_blank">Josh Eboch</a>).</blockquote><blockquote style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 6.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;" class="gmail_quote"><br /></blockquote><div><br />The question will be answered in a myriad of ways -- each way depending on the level of freedom each individual is willing to live and obtain. However, it is important that we always keep in remembrance our fathers.<br /><br /><blockquote style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 6.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;" class="gmail_quote">5 And behold, after that, they were brought into bondage... yea, I say unto you, they were in captivity, and again the Lord did deliver them out of bondage by the power of his word; and we were brought into this land, and here we began to establish the church of God throughout this land also.<br />6 And now behold, I say unto you, my brethren, you that belong to this church, have you sufficiently retained in remembrance the captivity of your fathers? Yea, and have you sufficiently retained in remembrance his mercy and long-suffering towards them? And moreover, have ye sufficiently retained in remembrance that he has delivered their souls from hell?<br />7 Behold, he changed their hearts; yea, he awakened them out of a deep sleep, and they awoke unto God. Behold, they were in the midst of darkness; nevertheless, their souls were illuminated by the light of the everlasting word; yea, they were encircled about by the bands of death, and the chains of hell, and an everlasting destruction did await them.<br />8 And now I ask of you, my brethren, were they destroyed? Behold, I say unto you, Nay, they were not.<br />9 And again I ask, were the bands of death broken, and the chains of hell which encircled them about, were they loosed? I say unto you, Yea, they were loosed, and their souls did expand, and they did sing redeeming love. And I say unto you that they are saved. (<a href="http://scriptures.lds.org/en/alma/5" target="_blank">Alma 5: 5 - 9</a>)<br /></blockquote> </div><br />This country has a rich heritage and a divine birthright of freedom. Each of us has a part to play, and we are all called to the work to preserve our liberty and freedom. We know that the war in heaven is <i>not </i>over, but that we are continuing on more fervently than ever before -- it was over the principle of agency that divided us before we came to this life, and it may well be the same principle that will divide us again. We choose how much freedom we want to enjoy, and it is according to our faith in God and our tenacity that we live that freedom. The example is before us, those founding fathers <i>lived their </i>freedom and they were saved. I wonder if we can stand heir to as great blessings of freedom except through as much cost as our founders went through -- something tells me that our sacrifice must be nearly as great in order to be justified: <span class="postbody">"Heaven knows how to put a proper price upon its goods; and it would be strange indeed, if so celestial an article as FREEDOM should not be highly rated" (Thomas Paine </span>).There is a very high price we must pay for our freedom, and a debt of gratitude we owe to our founders.<br /><br /><object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/xUci8dhvWYM&hl=en_US&fs=1&"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/xUci8dhvWYM&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object><br /><br />"Oh, posterity.You will never know how much it cost us to preserve your freedom. I hope that you will make a good use of it. If you do not, I shall repent in heaven that I ever took half the pains to preserve it."Shiloh Loganhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01232352679206328450noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2192472582302586579.post-81534961097826313332010-01-16T00:17:00.004-07:002010-03-09T11:52:20.349-07:00Term Limits: A Ridiculous Policy<meta equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name="ProgId" content="Word.Document"><meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 12"><meta name="Originator" content="Microsoft Word 12"><link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CShiloh%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml"><link rel="themeData" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CShiloh%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_themedata.thmx"><link rel="colorSchemeMapping" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CShiloh%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_colorschememapping.xml"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>Normal</w:View> <w:zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:trackmoves/> <w:trackformatting/> <w:punctuationkerning/> <w:validateagainstschemas/> <w:saveifxmlinvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:ignoremixedcontent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:donotpromoteqf/> <w:lidthemeother>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:lidthemeasian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:lidthemecomplexscript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables/> <w:snaptogridincell/> <w:wraptextwithpunct/> <w:useasianbreakrules/> <w:dontgrowautofit/> <w:splitpgbreakandparamark/> <w:dontvertaligncellwithsp/> <w:dontbreakconstrainedforcedtables/> <w:dontvertalignintxbx/> <w:word11kerningpairs/> <w:cachedcolbalance/> <w:usefelayout/> </w:Compatibility> <m:mathpr> <m:mathfont val="Cambria Math"> <m:brkbin val="before"> <m:brkbinsub val="--"> <m:smallfrac val="off"> <m:dispdef/> <m:lmargin val="0"> <m:rmargin val="0"> <m:defjc val="centerGroup"> <m:wrapindent val="1440"> <m:intlim val="subSup"> <m:narylim val="undOvr"> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:latentstyles deflockedstate="false" defunhidewhenused="true" defsemihidden="true" defqformat="false" defpriority="99" latentstylecount="267"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="0" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Normal"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="heading 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 7"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 8"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 9"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 7"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 8"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 9"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="35" qformat="true" name="caption"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="10" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Title"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="1" name="Default Paragraph Font"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="11" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Subtitle"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="22" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Strong"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="20" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Emphasis"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="59" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Table Grid"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Placeholder Text"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="1" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="No Spacing"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Revision"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="34" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="List Paragraph"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="29" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Quote"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="30" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Intense Quote"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="19" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Subtle Emphasis"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="21" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Intense Emphasis"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="31" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Subtle Reference"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="32" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Intense Reference"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="33" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Book Title"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="37" name="Bibliography"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" qformat="true" name="TOC Heading"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><style> <!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:SimSun; panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1; mso-font-alt:宋体; mso-font-charset:134; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-format:other; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:1 135135232 16 0 262144 0;} @font-face {font-family:"Cambria Math"; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:1; mso-generic-font-family:roman; mso-font-format:other; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:0 0 0 0 0 0;} @font-face {font-family:Calibri; panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1073750139 0 0 159 0;} @font-face {font-family:"\@SimSun"; panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0; mso-font-charset:134; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-format:other; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:1 135135232 16 0 262144 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; margin-top:0in; margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:10.0pt; margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:SimSun; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:Arial; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi; mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN;} p {mso-style-priority:99; mso-margin-top-alt:auto; margin-right:0in; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; margin-left:0in; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN;} .MsoChpDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; mso-default-props:yes; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:SimSun; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:Arial; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi; mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN;} .MsoPapDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; margin-bottom:10.0pt; line-height:115%;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.5in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --></style>The failing economy has turned many Americans into ‘garage-politicians’: people who become political and economic experts by religiously watching Glenn Beck or Keith Olbermann. Many of these garage-politicians are blaming their legislators for their apathy, laziness, or indifference towards their constituency’s economic and financial needs. This heated view of their elected officials has led many Americans to support a policy change that would flush out the legislature and allow the American people a new start with a fresh set of legislators. This new policy is<i> term limits</i>. This change in policy is ridiculous, because our Republic has built-in term limits: <i>voting</i>. <p style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in; line-height: 115%;"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<br />Some Americans argue that imposing term limits will save the country from the political ravishing of <i>career-</i>politicians who care more for reelection than in performing their duties as entrusted by their constituencies. While it may be true that some legislators care more for reelection than in adhering to the Constitution, this point is irrelevant for enacting term limits. The bedrock of our country is the ability of the people to elect new leaders when they dislike or disagree with the job their leaders have performed. Voting reflects the beliefs, biases, knowledge, ignorance, desires, and social temperance of the people. If the people like the results of their leaders, the voters will reelect them into office – regardless of the personal motives of the leader. If the people cannot vote out their elected Representative who is violating the Constitution, what safeguard will term-limits provide from the people reelecting another scoundrel who will violate the Constitution?
<br /><p style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in; line-height: 115%;"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<br />Further arguments promoting term limits seek to protect the voting minorities. By reducing the amount of time an elected-leader can serve in office, the minority-voters can be given a greater chance of electing a candidate that reflects their views. This is preposterous. Voting reflects the will of the majority, and, in a society that openly accepts Democracy, the voting citizen should maintain consistency by showing little interest to the losing minority. The minority has never been graciously granted the win. Even if term limits were applied, the majority would continue to elect the new legislator.
<br /><p style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in; line-height: 115%;"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<br />By voting in <i style="">career</i>-politicians, a larger social problem is observed than what term limits will solve. Voters should concern themselves with the motives of their legislators, not just the results the leaders can produce. Reelecting politicians that only care about their occupation shows the apathy and carelessness of the people electing them into office. Changing the face of a <i style="">career</i>-politician every few terms will not solve the issues of an apathetic and careless society, nor will term limits have any positive influence on an interested and careful society. In fact, term-limits will only provide the illusion of protection, as the people more ignorantly trust term-limits to save them from Constitution violating legislators instead of their own scrutinizing gaze. The people are the problem, not the politicians. Our Republic has a built in term limit policy that is directly connected to the will of the people, and it should stay that way.
<br />
<br />****************
<br />Update: March 9th, 2010
<br />****************
<br />
<br />I had a recent conversation with a fellow who argued that our elections systems were corrupt and that the voting polls were fixed. He had several convincing examples to illustrate his point. He used these examples to reason that we should support term limits: to get the corruptly elected officials out of office!
<br />
<br />While this sounds reasonable, I am still left wondering why this guy thinks that if -- perchance -- our voting system is so corrupt that a candidate was elected through fraud (without being caught), then what made him believe that hosting <span style="font-style: italic;">another </span>election would produce a different type of candidate? Wouldn't the same group who successfully/fraudulently got the last man in to office also have the ability of doing it again after term of years? Term limits would do nothing to solve this problem.
<br />
<br />If any particular group has hijacked our elections systems, term limits are the least of our concerns.
<br />Shiloh Loganhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01232352679206328450noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2192472582302586579.post-582257928890763572010-01-15T15:27:00.007-07:002011-07-24T18:09:21.861-06:00"A Republic, If You Can Keep It."The longer I am involved in the political scene, the more I see the need for a consistent understanding of the basic philosophical difference between Democracies and Republics. The necessary distinction is often confused by so-called 'constitutional authorities' who loosely throw around terms like <span style="font-style: italic;">Democracy </span>or <span style="font-style: italic;">democratic Republic</span> without realizing the harm they are causing newcomers to the philosophy of liberty. This post is intended to dispel many false notions concerning the foundation of our country, and to reestablish a consistent and fundamental understanding between the two forms of government. There is much to write concerning this issue, and this post is not intended to be all-inclusive; however, as time permits I will edit and add to the post to constantly make it more comprehensive.<br /><br />********************<br /><br />As he stepped out of Independence Hall, it is said that a woman asked Benjamin Franklin what kind of government we were given. His response, "A Republic, if you can keep it."<br /><br />Whether this story actually happened is irrelevant, it carries a necessary truth -- that a Republic was the form of government intended by the founders, and that they knew it would take hard work and eternal diligence to maintain it.<br /><br />What does this mean? What <span style="font-style: italic;">is</span> a Republic? Today we hear all about <span style="font-style: italic;">Democracy</span> or a <span style="font-style: italic;">democratic Republic<span style="font-style: italic;">, </span></span>but we don't hear much concerning a <span style="font-style: italic;">Republic</span>. Are these forms of government synonymous? Are they different? If so, how are they similar and different?<br /><br />The only <span style="font-style: italic;">guarantee </span>in the U.S. Constitution is for a "Republican form of government" (<a href="http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#A4Sec4">Article IV, Section 4</a>). This is certainly not to be confused with the <span style="font-style: italic;">Republican Party</span>. What does it mean "a Republican form of government"? The answer is actually more important than most give credit for.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Confusion</span><br /><br />I grew up in a very political and pious home where the principles of liberty and freedom were common discussion. Yet, even in my youth I remember hearing my mother speak of our 'democratic Republic'. Once I set on my own path to discover the truth of our American foundation, I constantly asked myself -- why didn't the Constitution include anything concerning our 'democratic Republic' or 'Democracy' in the text? Why did it only include the one word <span style="font-style: italic;">Republic</span>?<br /><br />It is all too often that those who are steeped in the ill-gotten traditions of our fathers will perceive this country in such a way that denies the glorious heritage that was bestowed upon us. Good people with sincere intent often promote inconsistent philosophies that necessarily tear-down the very freedom and liberty they seek to maintain. No wonder why the Latter-day prophets and authorities have told us that it is not enough for us to be sincere in what we support -- we must be <span style="font-style: italic;">right</span> (President Marion G. Romney, October General Conference 1960).<br /><br />Amidst all the confusion, what is the answer? What is the difference between a Republic and a Democracy -- or are there any differences at all?<br /><br />The answer is found in a discussion of <span style="font-style: italic;">law</span>.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Origination and Source of Law<span style="font-style: italic;"> </span></span><span><span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">Democracy</span><br /><br />In a Democracy, the only source of law and rights is a majority's rule -- nothing more, nothing less. The minority has no protection in a Democracy except what society's conventions will permit, because <span style="font-style: italic;">rights </span>and <span style="font-style: italic;">law </span>themselves are a fabrication of the majority; furthermore, there are no inherent and inalienable rights in a Democracy, because the majority decides what rights everyone has. This, by its very nature, makes individual rights alienable at the whim of the majority.<br /><br />Any perceived security the minority has is merely the social acceptance of society at large. While this system of government and source of law may work in times of peace, the founders were nervous for times of national excitement, fear, and panic (e.g. after 9/11, regarding instances of "illegal" migration, etc.) -- those times when people do not think rationally and are apt to give up their rights for perceived security.<br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">Republic</span><br /><br />A Republic founds all government action on law -- even before it turns to the social will. Even if 99.9% of the nation accepts the infringement of .1% of the populace, a Republic looks to the law first before ever addressing the desires of a majority. The majority may want to lynch a thief before the rule of law may be enacted, but a Republic protects the rights of the individual until he is found guilty (or innocent) by due-process of law.<br /><br />The necessary question here is <span style="font-style: italic;">who</span> exactly <span style="font-style: italic;">makes</span> the law? Is law simply a rule that society must obey, or is the law a representation of reality? If the law is merely a rule derived from the majority, the distinction between a Republic and a Democracy is futile. This is why a <span style="font-style: italic;">democratic Republic </span>is a worthless phrase. Any Republic that stipulates that the law is merely derived from the majority's consent (i.e. a democratic Republic) is merely a Democracy in hiding. Any Republic that is built on the understanding and belief that the law is merely at the whim of the majority is inherently flawed and will necessarily fail.<br /><br />There is no universal political dictionary that stipulates what a Republic <i>is </i>and how it should operate. Yet, the basic philosophical foundations of a Republic is that law reigns supreme. But what is this <i>law </i>that a Republic should adhere to that makes a Republic distinguishable from a Democracy? This necessarily supposes the discussion of legal positivism and natural law, but I will refrain on speaking of that in depth here and direct readers to a <a href="http://libertarianthink.blogspot.com/2009/12/natural-law-positivism-civil.html">previous post</a> concerning the issue.<br /><br />Although the Declaration of Independence is not considered a 'legal document', it clearly shows the intent of the founders (if nothing, Jefferson and Franklin's ideal) to appeal to and establish a government according to the "Laws of Nature and of Nature's God." The Declaration of Independence proclaims the foundation of law wherein our Republic was built: the natural law.<br /><br />Why is this important? Because a Democracy is at the whim of social frenzy and excitement -- i.e. the will of the masses. In a Democracy the people surrender their rights in a heightened and emotional state, as they combine into a mob against the minority in feeling that they can abdicate their rights for perceived security. However, our Republic negates such a frenzy by adhering to a law that is outside the majority's scope and ruling power -- a universal moral ethic that transcends emotionalism: the Laws of Nature. </span></span><div><span><span><br /></span></span></div><div><span><span>In our Republic, all positive (human) law is required to bind itself down to a natural moral law; however, this is not necessary in a Democracy. Whereas the will of the majority <span style="font-style: italic;">is </span>the moral law in a Democracy, the law in a Republic (as seen through the Declaration of Independence) is independent of any frenzied majority. The law in a Republic must find cause to move within the "laws of nature" to pass positive rules upon society. The majority, in a Republic, may act, it is true, but the majority's action is limited by a codex of universal realities and principles that transcend a majority's opinion. Government, through a majority, is not the source of rights, but we are 'endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights' -- this is to say that our Republic is built on the idea that God is the source of a moral law.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Digression </span><br /><br />If the people are not aware, our Republic can easily slip into a Democracy (in fact, <a href="http://libertarianthink.blogspot.com/2009/05/republics-democracy-prop-8-civil-unions.html">I argue that it already has</a>). This can only happen through the ignorance of the people. When the people believe that their voting power is all that is necessary to grant them their position, then the people have necessarily supposed that might makes right and that a majority is all that is necessary to create <span style="font-style: italic;">law </span>and <span style="font-style: italic;">rights</span>. This is expressly against natural law and against the intended course of our Republican form of government as established by our founders. The people are to be moral and ethical, it is true. However, when the people believe that they can turn their moral behavior onto society at large (outside the scope of the direct infringement of life, liberty, and property) then the people accept Democracy at the expense and death of our Republic.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Conclusion</span><br /><br />It is necessary to distinguish between the two forms of Government and to realize why we have a Republic. If anything, we have a <span style="font-style: italic;">constitutional Republic</span> -- but I still prefer the words of the Constitution itself: "a Republican form of Government".<br /><br /></span></span></div>Shiloh Loganhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01232352679206328450noreply@blogger.com27tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2192472582302586579.post-27057797632413577672009-12-31T22:49:00.003-07:002011-04-19T09:24:40.114-06:00How To Win An ArgumentTaken from a sign posted outside a philosophy professor's office.<br /><br />***********<br /><br />I argue very well. Ask any of my remaining friends. I can win any argument on any topic, against any opponent. People know this, and steer clear of me at parties. Often, as a sign of their great respect, they don't even invite me. You can win arguments too. Simply follow these rules.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Drink Liquor<br /></span>Suppose you're at a party and some hotshot intellectual is expounding on the economy of Peru, a subject you know nothing about. If you're drinking some health-fanatic drink like grapefruit juice, you'll hang back, afraid to display your ignorance, while the hotshot enthralls your date. But if you drink several large shots of Jack Daniels, you'll discover that you have STRONG VIEWS about the Peruvian economy.You'll be a WEALTH of information. You'll argue forcefully, offering searing insights, and possibly upset furniture. People will be impressed. Some may leave the room.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Make Things Up</span><br />Suppose, in the Peruvian economy argument, you are trying to prove Peruvians are underpaid, a position you base solely on the fact that YOU are underpaid, and you're damned if you're going to let a bunch of Peruvians be better off.<br /><br />DON'T say: "I think the Peruvians are underpaid." Say: "I think Peruvian's salary in 1981 dollars adjusted for the revised tax base is $1,452.81 per annum, which is $836.07 before the mean gross poverty level." (NOTE: Always make up exact figures.) If an opponent asks where you got your information, make THAT up too. Say: "This information comes from Dr. Hovel T. Moon's study for the Buford Commission established May 9, 1982. Didn't you read it?" Say this in the same tone of voice you would use say, "You left your soiled underwear in my bath house?"<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Use Meaningless but Weighty-Sounding Words and Phrases</span><br />Memorize this list:<br /><ul><li>Let me put it to you this way</li><li>In terms of</li><li>Per se</li><li>As it were</li><li>Qua<br /></li><li>So to speak</li><li>Well, any-who</li></ul>You should also memorize some Latin abbreviations such as "Q.E.D.", "e.g.", and "i.e." These are all short for "I speak Latin, and you do not." Here's how to use these words and phrases. Suppose you want to say: "Peruvians would like to order appetizers more often, but they don't have enough money." You never win arguments talking like that.<br /><br />But you WILL win if you say: "Let me put it in this way. In terms of appetizers vis-a-vis Peruvians qua Peruvians, they would like to order them more often, so to speak, but they do not have enough money per se, as it were, Q.E.D." Only a fool would challenge that statement.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Use Snappy and Irrelevant Comebacks</span><br />You need an arsenal of all-purpose irrelevant phrases to fire back at your opponents when they make valid points. The best are:<br /><ul><li>You're begging the question</li><li>You're being defensive</li><li>Don't compare apples to oranges</li><li>What are your parameters</li></ul>This last one is especially valuable. Nobody, other than mathematicians has the vaguest idea what "parameters" are. Here's how to use your comebacks.<br /><ul><li>You say: "As Abraham Lincoln said in 1873..."</li><li>Your opponents says: "Lincoln died in 1865."<br /></li><li>You say: "You're begging the question.."</li></ul>OR<br /><ul><li>You say: "Liberians, like most Asians..."<br /></li><li>Your opponents say: "Liberia is in Africa."<br /></li><li>You say: "You're being defensive..."<br /></li></ul><span style="font-weight: bold;">Compare Your Opponent to Adolph Hitler</span><br />This is your heavy artillery, for when your opponent is obviously right and you are spectacularly wrong. Bring Hitler up subtly. Say: "That sounds suspiciously like something Adolf Hitler might say" or "You certainly do remind me of Adolf Hitler."<br /><br />You now know how to out-argue anybody. Do not try to pull any of this on people who generally carry weapons.Shiloh Loganhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01232352679206328450noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2192472582302586579.post-36942913547504210162009-12-30T10:51:00.005-07:002010-01-08T09:27:12.894-07:00In Response to a Democrat's "Manifesto"<p>Update: January 8, 2009</p><p>Gabrielle has <a href="http://www.theinmomniac.com/blog/i-have-made-a-very-personal-decision-to-leave-the-lds-church/#comments">decided to leave the LDS Church</a>.<br /></p><p>**********************<br /></p><p>There has been a small stir concerning a response I made a few days ago to a blog maintained by a "Mormon Democrat" concerning health-care. This was originally posted <a href="http://www.theinmomniac.com/blog/in-conclusion-to-the-debates-regarding-my-manifesto/comment-page-1/#comment-445" rel="nofollow">here</a>, in response to Gabrielle's home-blog, and then <a href="http://www.connorboyack.com/blog/a-new-year-for-patriotism">here</a>, in response to Gabrielle's comments on Connor Boyack's blog. I usually target so-called and self-professed 'conservatives' for their own socialist hypocrisy, but this time I decided to go for the self-professed liberal socialist.<br /><br />**********************<br /><br />The “law of the land which is constitutional” is that law that supports the “principle of freedom in maintaining the rights and privileges” to all mankind (D&C 98:5) and “to each individual the free exercise of conscience, the right and control of property, and the protection of life” (D&C 134:4). According to the liberal/socialist argument, the ‘protection of life’ may be obtained at the expense of my ‘control of property’ through coercive taxation. Furthermore, according to this same argument, one of Christ’s commandments of providing for the poor is followed at the expense of breaking another commandment of stealing and coercion.</p> <p>The only way this argument is right is if the people are wicked. Scripturally, wickedness is first identified by the refusal to help the poor, the downtrodden, the sick, the afflicted, and the widow and fatherless. Such a refusal to help the poor is repugnant to the Lord; in fact, Hugh Nibley argues that such a refusal to help the poor was the foundational sin that caused Sodom and Gomorrah’s destruction. How, then, has the Lord commanded us to go about fixing such a problem? When social inequality exists, how does scripture tell us to fix the problem? Alma, as the High Priest to the Church and the Chief Judge to the Nephite people (thus leading both the religious and political organizations), gives us an excellent example when he saw the great social inequality among his people.</p> <p>“Yea, he saw great inequality among the people, some lifting themselves up with their pride, despising others, turning their backs upon the needy and the naked and those who were hungry, and those who were athirst, and those who were sick and afflicted. Now this was great cause for lamentations among the people, while others were abasing themselves, succoring those who stood in need of their succor, such as imparting their substance to the poor and the needy, feeding the hungry, and suffering all manner of afflictions, for Christ’s sake…” (Alma 4:12-3). Does this sound familiar? Are we currently having great ‘lamantations’ in our own country and among our own people over those in need? Certainly.</p> <p>Because he led both organizations, Alma was able to either politically or religiously act. I ask, what did he do? Did he pass more laws that chained the people down with heavy taxes? No, such is discussed throughout the Book of Mormon as a condition detested by the Lord. Did he pass laws that tried to create more ‘equality’ among the people? No. Did he do anything politically to extend the arm of government into the affairs of the people to force them to take care of their moral imperative and duty? No. In fact, he completely gave up the judgment seat altogether! What did he then do? He went to preach the word of God!</p> <p>Before we ridicule this and laugh at such a proposition that preaching the word of God is more influential in changing society than is passing political laws that coerce the individual, first examine WHY he did this.</p> <p>“And this he did that he himself might go forth among his people, or among the people of Nephi, that he might preach the word of God unto them, to stir them up in remembrance of their duty, and that he might pull down, by the word of God, all the pride and craftiness and all the contentions which were among his people, seeing no way that he might reclaim them save it were in bearing down in pure testimony against them” (Alma 4:19). What was Alma’s point? To “stir them up in a remembrance of their duty”. How influential was preaching the word of God as opposed to inflicting artificial ‘equality’ within society through coercion?</p> <p>“And now, as the preaching of the word had a great tendency to lead the people to do that which was just – yea, it had had more powerful effect upon the minds of the people than the sword, or anything else, which had happened unto them — therefore Alma thought it was expedient that they should try the virtue of the word of God” (Alma 30:5). What lead the people to do that which was just? What awakened and stirred the people’s remembrance of their individual duty? Was it positivist law? Was it forced equality? Was it forcing one man into his duty? No, the Lord’s way is established — God will force no man to perform his moral duty.</p> <p>“Know this, that ev’ry soul is free, to choose his life and what he’ll be; For this eternal truth is giv’n: That God will force no man to heav’n. He’ll call, persuade, direct aright, And bless with wisdom, love, and light, in nameless ways be good and kind, but never force the human mind. Freedom and reason make us men; Take these away, what are we then? Mere animals, and just as well the beasts may think of heav’n or hell. May we no more our pow’rs abuse, But ways of truth and goodness choose; Our God is pleased when we improve His grace and seek his perfect love.” Of a truth, the Lord is pleased when we obey the commandments and take care of those in need; however, he is particular in how we obey such commandments.</p> <p>Alma’s example shows us that the power of a testimony in Christ can convert the soul to do that which is just by its own inner moral duty. Socialism’s entire structure denies this real possibility of changing the course of humanity through the gospel of Christ to allow man to be morally responsible without being coerced into such duty. Was this not the fault of the very people who killed the Christ? Did not the Pharisees and Sadducees of Christ’s day believe that the ‘Messiah’ would come to rule in political matters? Yet Christ’s real message was for the individual to morally act and take personal accountability and thus throw of their own chains. While the Pharisees and Sadducees looked to man’s government as their solution, Christ changed people’s hearts who then took themselves out of their own bad situations. After all, this is a message continually taught by our own Church leaders: The world takes a man out of the slums, but the gospel of Christ takes the slums out of the man who then takes himself out of his own slums. There are several examples in the Book of Mormon alone that re-illustrate this exact principle. It is beyond contest.</p> <p>So, here we are. A national dilemma where we have great social inequality. One side is admittedly prideful and doesn’t want to be bothered, the other side is admittedly open to thievery to achieve their ideological ends. Tell me, in this system, where is the spirit of God? I contend that both sides are wrong, and I side with the principle of freedom and liberty. Where in all this debacle is the spirit of God that influences by “persuasion, long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned, by kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile” (D&C 121:41-2)? This is the way to provide for the poor, the sick, and the afflicted. Where are the members of the Church, on the right and left political spectrum, who are out bearing-down testimony and providing for the poor, the sick, the afflicted, and all those in need? What happened to ‘every member a missionary’? As President Benson (the most hated Apostle and Prophet among most liberal members, and even some conservative members) said,</p> <p>“Now part of the reason why we do not have sufficient priesthood bearers to save the Constitution, let alone to shake the powers of hell, because, I fear, unlike Moroni, our souls do not joy in keeping our country free, and we are not firm in the faith of Christ, nor have we sworn with an oath to defend our rights.”</p> <p>Interesting. We lack the spirit, trust, and testimony necessary to do what Alma did. We lack the ability to stand up like Moroni. All we’re left with now is the ability to stand up and use the majority to obtain our moral objective through force! When we have an inner-moral compass, we’re capable of acting individually within society to promote the best interests of those in need. Yet, when we are incapable of standing up like our exemplars in the Book of Mormon, what is left us? Elder Christofferson perhaps said it best in October General Conference this year, “We would not accept the yoke of Christ; so now we must tremble at the yoke of Caesar.” Sobering words, and certainly not words I want eternally associated to my spirit — to have been one who openly wanted the ‘yoke of Caesar’ to supposedly obtain the purposes of God. This is certainly deceit in its most subtle form — to use Lucifer’s tactics to achieve the Lord’s purpose. Ironic, isn’t it?</p> <p>So, what of government? For any person who has taken the time to actually read the Constitutional Convention Notes (or even an abridgment of the notes), they would readily see the lengths the founders went to ensure the individual from ever finding a relationship with the federal government; after all, the original Constitution only allows for ‘the people’ to vote for their Congressmen — the Senate, the President, and the Supreme Court were all elected outside the direct scope of the people. The federal government was never intended to coerce and be in relationship with the individual, but to deal with the states directly — this fact is beyond contest. A Constitution, per our founder’s understanding, was not a limit upon the people, but was the people putting a limit on the government. The Constitution granted no rights whatsoever, but was a declaration of completely free and individually sovereign people telling their government exactly what it could (and implicitly could not) do. I say ‘implicitly’ because of the 9th and 10th Amendments. The government can grant absolutely NO rights whatsoever, because it is an entity and fabrication of the people — government can have absolutely no power greater than its creator, the people. Our Declaration of Independence openly states that our rights are derived from our Creator. Among all the rights granted by our Creator are the three which government action is to be limited to: life, liberty, and property.</p> <p>The stated purpose of government — as per scripture, prophetic utterance, and our own American founders — is to establish the greatest amount of justice possible within society. In the course of establishing justice within society, there are some issues wherein government cannot rule without imposing inequality and social INjustice. Health-care is one of these. By securing the ‘needs’ of the few, the rights of the many are infringed — this necessarily creates injustice. Even Dr. Martin Luther King and Abraham Lincoln observed that you cannot destroy the freedom of one without destroying the freedom of all. Even Aristotle’s theory of social justice observes the obvious problem when the wealthy’s property is attacked by claims from the poor man’s rights, and that the poor man’s rights are attacked by the wealthy’s interest in their own property. There is a solution, but forcing ‘equality’ within society is not just.</p> <p>Our government was not meant to “force” anyone. The only time ‘force’ was ever applied was when an individual actively and directly violated the life, liberty, or property of another individual. Coercion is therefore used to incarcerate the individual who actively, intentionally, and directly infringed on his neighbor’s life, liberty, and property.</p> <p>I am truly sorry for one’s tragic surgery that cost $50,000 that ruined the family’s credit and made them lose their house for that one month they did not have health insurance. I too have been in that situation, when my son was born 6 weeks premature and our hospital bills amounted to over $250,000. I am still paying bills on this debt, but this debt is MINE — not yours. I have never taken a government penny for any of my three children (or anything else for that matter — and, yes, I mean ANYTHING else), and as a token to my Creator that I would never make “the people” pay for my children I named my first daughter ‘Liberty’ — I will not allow her birth or her life to financially enslave the workmanship of another man’s hands or property, regardless of what is socially accepted and regularly taken from mine.</p> <p>One may use his or her agency to financially enslave the populace to be compelled to pay for their point of view, but that particular view is spoken of in scripture. Remember that in a representative government, the principle of government may be broken down into the relationship of a man/woman and their neighbor. Do I individually have the power to make my neighbor pay for my health care, even when I am sick and afflicted? If I were to come to their home at gun-point and extort money from them under threat of incarceration if they did not pay, I would be instantly thrown in jail — regardless of my condition. However, somehow, magically, when I send my representative (government) to do this job for me, it is suddenly okay? Remember the words of our founders, our prophets, and our Constitution, that the government can only act specifically in the powers the people delegate to it — and the people, being given all their rights from their Creator, cannot fabricate rights ex nihilo to delegate to government something that they do not have. Before we believe we can delegate all aspects of our life to government to legislate in our behalf, we must remember that government can only justly rule in matters of life, liberty, and property when we are directly and intentionally targeted and infringed upon. The founders called government action outside these bounds “tyranny” and “usurpation” — yet, today, we call this “the living document” theory.</p> <p>Sure, the Constitution is a ‘living document’. It was designed this way to constantly move and counteract dangerous trends in society that sought to destroy freedom and liberty. As society grew, and the following generations lost sight of their forefather’s sacrifice for the principle of liberty and freedom, we are given the ability of securing our freedom and liberty against encroachments by unprincipled, dishonest, or merely misguided individuals. In fact, as I addressed at the beginning of this post, our own scripture states that a ‘law’ is only a ‘constitutional law of the land’ when it supports ‘that principle of freedom’ (D&C 98:5). The principle of freedom cannot be justly or legitimately legislated away — it being a gift of the Creator. There are those who state that the health-care bill will necessarily violate freedom, but that this is necessary to take care of those in need. Certainly, government will pass positive (human) law that will violate the ‘principle of freedom’ — we have seen this in our own Church history. Of these laws that violate the principle of freedom we are told that “as pertaining to the law of man, whatsoever is more or less than [the constitutional law of the land that supports the principle of freedom] is evil… And I give unto you a commandment, that ye shall forsake all evil and cleave unto all good” (D&C 98:5,11). Does this mean anarchy? No. This means that we are only to support those measures that — in relationship to government — first maintain the principle of freedom before any other principle; otherwise, whatsoever is more or less than this is evil.</p> <p>People have the ability of using their free-agency to murder, rape, plunder, steal, and do horrible things, but Democrats and Republicans alike should take note that a majority’s acceptance of these atrocities does not make it right. It simply means that the punishment for these crimes will be saved for a heavenly court, not a corrupt earthly one. When my very life is made illegal unless I come into compliance with a ‘law of man’ like it will if the ‘mandatory health-insurance’ measure is passed (and it IS a ‘law of man’ because the ‘principle of freedom’ is violated), then I openly argue that this bill murders freedom, rapes the soul, plunders the property of the individual, and steals the livelihood of hard-working Americans.</p> <p>In the meantime, however, I will continue to support and donate to the many private organizations that provide free medical care to as many as cannot pay or do not have insurance, such as the LDS Primary Children’s Hospital, the Shriner’s Hospitals, and to the St. Jude Hospital and Cancer Research Center (located in my hometown of Memphis, TN). I believe in the goodness of people — I have seen it consistently in my lifetime. I know the hardships of watching a personal family member who suffers from mental disorders become homeless and a transient. Yet I see the blessings of private organizations — especially those of the Church — who have taken over in areas where government constantly and completely fails (and will inherently continue to fail, because it is inherently incapable for government to act in certain matters). I have seen the active hands of those members of the Church who drove hundreds of miles and dedicated thousands of hours to rebuild the homes after Katrina. We yell about the delayed help given to Katrina victims, but we fail to see that this is an inherent problem within government bureaucracy — problems that do not exist in private help. The Church was on the ground providing water days before FEMA organized — furthermore, private corporations like Wal-Mart and Home Depot had trucks and supplies loaded up and headed into the area long before the government got its act together. This is not an isolated incident. this is the rule. Government is best when it is restricted to the limited duty of ruling in matters of the direct violation of life, liberty, and property — it is wholly inadequate for any other and necessarily creates social injustice.</p> <p>Hopefully, before we use the fallacy of emotion to promote the unjust and coercive hand of government in matters it was never intended to, we will evaluate and practice our own theocratic teachings that show us how to deal with social inequality and social injustice: preaching the gospel of Christ has more of an effect on the hearts and actions of man to do good than any other means — even the sword of coercion. Man is good and will provide for his neighbor; only the adversary’s plan argued otherwise in justifying coercion to provide for moral action. Government ultimately digresses into tyranny and coercion to obtain its objectives, but this was not how our Constitution was intended. Indeed, John Adams was right, our Constitution was made for a religious and a moral people, and it is unsuitable for any other. Why? Because it takes a religious and a moral people to act individually for the betterment of society, and once government is used to obtain, coerce, and force the moral duty of the individual — social injustice reigns supreme. </p>Shiloh Loganhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01232352679206328450noreply@blogger.com8tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2192472582302586579.post-7810807418247399562009-12-13T00:40:00.008-07:002009-12-13T01:26:08.653-07:00The Proper Role of Government: Analysis of Locke and Benson<span style="font-weight: bold;">Proper Foundation</span><br /><br />This paper presents the arguments given by John Locke and Ezra Taft Benson for what constitutes the proper role of government. Locke asserts a primary state of nature wherein all men are at perfect liberty to act according to the laws of nature, and that it is government’s responsibility outside the state of nature to maintain the principle of life, liberty, and property. Benson agrees with Locke and promotes the ideals of Frederic Bastiat that explicate the necessary principle of individual rights and duties wherein all government power originates. This paper will show the harmony of Locke’s ideals with those held by Benson, and will also present a short critique and response to the concept of a principled based government.<br /><span style="font-weight: bold;"><br />Government Po</span><span style="font-weight: bold;">wer and Its Proper Role</span><br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhgOj5agObGttrhTAQtjbkJC71XOY6kfTbYhFZKRXMTIbG9urThe7PrO0rsM5xHT0JsVCvK30QTYRSnlUNks9WVWKlIaSV665DmqRWzsDN35onhcB79240XxKB9FHI7Z5n34OGlXW9gLeg/s1600-h/locke.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; cursor: pointer; width: 148px; height: 195px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhgOj5agObGttrhTAQtjbkJC71XOY6kfTbYhFZKRXMTIbG9urThe7PrO0rsM5xHT0JsVCvK30QTYRSnlUNks9WVWKlIaSV665DmqRWzsDN35onhcB79240XxKB9FHI7Z5n34OGlXW9gLeg/s200/locke.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5414628963772632114" border="0" /></a>There are several powers that Locke argues belong to government. It is first stipulated that all positive law must first gain authority in natural law (2nd Treatise §134). Government is created to secure to the individual his own property (2nd Treatise §124), and it is within the power of government to establish laws that regulate the property “between the subjects one amongst another”; in addition, government has the power to lay taxes to function within the duty that the individual has delegated to it (2nd Treatise §139). Government is also given power and authority to rule in matters of offense and to address injuries, and to legitimately punish the offender for crimes committed against another (2nd Treatise §87, 88). Negatively, government cannot assume a power unto itself, but it must always gain its power from the people (2nd Treatise §136).<br /><br />The beginning of Locke’s government is in a state of nature where “every man hath a right to punish the offender, and be executioner of the law” (2nd Treatise §8). Every man exists fully within his rights and may do as he pleases, although he does not have the license to destroy himself (2nd Treatise §6). Man is then at natural liberty to establish the bounds of society, “by agreeing with other men to join and unite into a community, for their comfortable, safe, and peaceable living one amongst another” (2nd Treatise §95). This men do in order to “secure enjoyment of their properties, and a greater security against any that are not of it” (2nd Treatise §95). Because man is not able to destroy himself, he is then incapable of allowing society to destroy the individual – society being made of individuals. As Locke states, “any number of men may [establish society], because it injures not the freedom of the rest; they are left as they were in the liberty of the state of nature” (2nd Treatise §95). In other words, the establishment of government should not restrict the liberty found in the state of nature.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Ezra Taf</span><span style="font-weight: bold;">t Benson and The Proper Role of Government</span><br /><br />It is Ezra <a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgK0PoZmeebH-ePG0qFRy1CyibErxmCrp2E6AlKd-SWK1aEaXhaBAUf0p96vuiJM_ZIvuKvPRe8itByG6z4vE2y3pRJ4NO5o-LLvIJxZ6jBG8aRBBU3HFjT6s9tET8hkLyHa0AdpUe1V7c/s1600-h/14-Ezra-Taft-Benson.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; cursor: pointer; width: 137px; height: 200px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgK0PoZmeebH-ePG0qFRy1CyibErxmCrp2E6AlKd-SWK1aEaXhaBAUf0p96vuiJM_ZIvuKvPRe8itByG6z4vE2y3pRJ4NO5o-LLvIJxZ6jBG8aRBBU3HFjT6s9tET8hkLyHa0AdpUe1V7c/s200/14-Ezra-Taft-Benson.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5414629263730406962" border="0" /></a>Taft Benson’s purpose to show that a type of natural law exists wherein government must base its positive law. Contra a legal positivist’s concept of rules, Benson forms a principled foundation for law and government. Every political decision, he argues, “should be based upon and measured against certain basic principles regarding the proper role of government. If the principles are correct, then they can be applied to any specific proposal with confidence” (Benson 126). But what is this <span style="font-style: italic;">proper role of government</span>? The proper role of government is rooted in the concept that life, liberty, and property exist eternally in a state of nature, and that the individual is the strict source of all political power.<br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgEQZzIgZoE765JK204KsSkIluBhQtHWtPrUPlvmDMT30olOp8Lh1rjlM_0uXVNglqzIfSi6PlXCMhH82itayFG5q9tb9KytAen0iiHRNM216VxdVi3fMsCE8F5hn0mRigBA0yF4d730gE/s1600-h/bastiatfrederic.png"><img style="margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; float: right; cursor: pointer; width: 153px; height: 179px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgEQZzIgZoE765JK204KsSkIluBhQtHWtPrUPlvmDMT30olOp8Lh1rjlM_0uXVNglqzIfSi6PlXCMhH82itayFG5q9tb9KytAen0iiHRNM216VxdVi3fMsCE8F5hn0mRigBA0yF4d730gE/s200/bastiatfrederic.png" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5414633626426439362" border="0" /></a><br />While holding a very Lockean concept of government, Benson actually quotes more from Fredric Bastiat’s <span style="font-style: italic;">The Law</span> than he does from Locke’s Treatise. Benson’s fundamental principle of law holds the concept expressed by Bastiat that “life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place” (Bastiat 2). To Benson, government is a creation of man that was built to secure the eternal and natural right of life, liberty, and property – the same basic belief held by Locke.<br /><br />Benson further elaborates that government has no power but what the people may delegate to it. As Benson expressed,<br /><blockquote>The important thing to keep in mind is that the people who have created their government can give to that government only such powers as they, themselves, have in the first place. Obviously, they cannot give that which they do not possess. So, the question boils down to this. What powers properly belong to each and every person in the absence of and prior to the establishment of any organized governmental form? A hypothetical question? Yes, indeed! But, it is a question which is vital to an understanding of the principles which underlie the proper function of government (Benson 130). </blockquote>To Benson, government is nothing but a delegation of duties from the individual to government. If the individual may not act personally in a particular instance, then he has no ability to grant that power for government to act in his stead. This appears to be what Thomas Paine had in mind as well,<br /><blockquote><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjXT9KaH-Q7MS1DXAv8UUr6cknarMSZuT99uXpKDGRcCeeyEwx9DGfUADg_hUUKTg5AMN1gbb5AbuIGr0sShSwPsVpDvql7j8UreeNuMttqibDXEDysPfhu2aM2bRr07zLFX2sz9Ab7COg/s1600-h/paine.jpeg"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; cursor: pointer; width: 120px; height: 167px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjXT9KaH-Q7MS1DXAv8UUr6cknarMSZuT99uXpKDGRcCeeyEwx9DGfUADg_hUUKTg5AMN1gbb5AbuIGr0sShSwPsVpDvql7j8UreeNuMttqibDXEDysPfhu2aM2bRr07zLFX2sz9Ab7COg/s200/paine.jpeg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5414629507569471506" border="0" /></a>"All power exercised over a nation, must have some beginning. It must be either delegated, or assumed. There are no other sources. All delegated power is trust, and all assumed power is usurpation. Time does not alter the nature and quality of either...<br /><br />"Government is not a trade which any man or body of men has a right to set up and exercise for his own emolument, but is altogether a trust, in right of those by whom that trust is delegated, and by whom it is always resumable. It has of itself no rights; they are altogether duties" (Paine 285, 289).</blockquote>Locke, Paine, Bastiat, and Benson appear to have the same overall concept. Namely, that government is a creation of man necessary to protect life, liberty, a property. As Benson says, “the most important single function of government is to secure the rights and freedoms of individual citizens” (Benson 126). Any actions committed beyond these duties and functions in protecting natural rights constitute usurpation and tyranny. The government cannot take from one person to allocate wealth to another, because – at the basic individual level – an individual has no power to take of his neighbor’s excess of goods to redistribute them to someone in need . As such, the individual cannot then grant to government a duty he does not himself possess.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Revolution</span><br /><br />Locke accepts revolution on specific grounds. Whenever government “attempts, exercising a power the people never put into their hands (who can never be supposed to consent, that any body should rule over them for their harm) do that which they have no a right to do,” then there are no “positive laws of men” that can make “a man so to abandon himself, as to neglect his own preservation” (2nd Treatise §168). Simply stated, once government has acted outside of its constituted bounds, the people are no longer required to abide by a positive law that violates their life, liberty, or property. However, people typically suffer the abuses of government beyond a single instance of usurpation. Generally speaking, the people must suffer substantial abuse before a revolution is a viable possibility.<br /><br />Thomas Jefferson wrote in the Declaration of Independence that,<br /><blockquote><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg2UCJahkqNMYmTr4hle_O6hLeoapdoAwLYA7v3z7_alY2CjCpmiXm66qlqGm9u8IGNul_F2FY9JqOI4_mSERDILm8gvYd45VSi1IAvP9BnAY1sMT8X5QtE1yZcL2sfWlb5BdS-zUgJ1OM/s1600-h/jefferson.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; cursor: pointer; width: 115px; height: 161px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg2UCJahkqNMYmTr4hle_O6hLeoapdoAwLYA7v3z7_alY2CjCpmiXm66qlqGm9u8IGNul_F2FY9JqOI4_mSERDILm8gvYd45VSi1IAvP9BnAY1sMT8X5QtE1yZcL2sfWlb5BdS-zUgJ1OM/s200/jefferson.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5414631112030444018" border="0" /></a>"all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."<br /></blockquote>This is a very Lockean concept of revolution. The individual is apt to bear the wrongs of government for a long while, before he ever attempts revolution. As Locke says, “revolutions happen not upon every little mismanagement in public affairs” but after a “long train of abuses, prevarications, and artifices” that have secured in the public mind any hope of ever changing government’s usurping and tyrannical course (2nd Treatise §225). In short, when government is recognized by the public at large to fail in its function to fulfill its ultimate duty of protecting the individual’s property, then revolution is appropriate.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Objections and Arguments</span><br /><br />Legal positivists reject this principle theory presented by Locke and Benson. Political theorists like H.L.A. Hart argue that there is no ethereal moral compass or principle wherein we should adhere to when establishing government or passing laws, but that basic societal adherence to accepted rules under a legal system constitute legitimate government (Hart). Unlike the principle of inherent and inalienable rights in natural law, legal positivism posits that individual rights are only what society accepts through scripted and codified law. So long as society accepts a law, it is legitimate – even if the end of the law violates the individual’s life, liberty, or property.<br /><br />I personally adhere to the Lockean concept of government – as well as to Benson’s proper role of government. More than just social acceptance, a principled foundation is necessary to maintain equal justice under the law. In other words, positive law is not sufficient on its own and must adhere to a moral natural law. By this I mean that just law is not merely obtained through a majority’s consent and adherence to a legal mechanism, but through holding law to a principle and higher moral standard. As the naturalist Ronald Dworkin argued, relying solely on scripted law is fool-hardy, especially when the foundation of government rejects any moral principle to guide the ship-of-state through times when the law is ambiguous or unjust (Dworkin). Law must necessarily adhere to a principle. In Benson and Locke’s case, that principle is the protection of the natural and individual right to life, liberty, and property.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Works Cited</span><br /><br />Bastiat, Frederic. The Law. Irvington-on-Hudson, N.Y: Foundation for Economic Education, 1998. Print.<br /><br />Benson, Ezra T. "The Proper Role of Government." Enemy Hath Done This. Salt Lake City: Bookcraft Pubs, 1992. 125-48. Print.<br /><br />Dworkin, Ronald. Taking rights seriously. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1977. Print.<br /><br />Hart, H.L.A. The Concept of Law. Oxford: Clarendon, 1961. Print.<br /><br />Paine, Thomas. Thomas Paine reader. Harmondsworth, Middlesex, England: Penguin Books, 1987. Print.Shiloh Loganhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01232352679206328450noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2192472582302586579.post-83536476993870181262009-12-05T22:47:00.005-07:002009-12-05T23:21:06.859-07:00Natural Law, Positivism, & Civil Disobedience: An Analysis of Counsel Given by General Authorities of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints<meta name="Originator" content="Microsoft Word 12"><link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CShiloh%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml"><link rel="themeData" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CShiloh%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_themedata.thmx"><link rel="colorSchemeMapping" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CShiloh%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_colorschememapping.xml"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>Normal</w:View> <w:zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:trackmoves/> <w:trackformatting/> <w:punctuationkerning/> <w:validateagainstschemas/> <w:saveifxmlinvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:ignoremixedcontent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:donotpromoteqf/> <w:lidthemeother>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:lidthemeasian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:lidthemecomplexscript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables/> <w:snaptogridincell/> <w:wraptextwithpunct/> <w:useasianbreakrules/> <w:dontgrowautofit/> <w:splitpgbreakandparamark/> <w:dontvertaligncellwithsp/> <w:dontbreakconstrainedforcedtables/> <w:dontvertalignintxbx/> <w:word11kerningpairs/> <w:cachedcolbalance/> <w:usefelayout/> </w:Compatibility> <m:mathpr> <m:mathfont val="Cambria Math"> <m:brkbin val="before"> <m:brkbinsub val="--"> <m:smallfrac val="off"> <m:dispdef/> <m:lmargin val="0"> <m:rmargin val="0"> <m:defjc val="centerGroup"> <m:wrapindent val="1440"> <m:intlim val="subSup"> <m:narylim val="undOvr"> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:latentstyles deflockedstate="false" defunhidewhenused="true" defsemihidden="true" defqformat="false" defpriority="99" latentstylecount="267"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="0" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Normal"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="heading 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 7"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 8"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 9"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 7"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 8"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 9"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="35" qformat="true" name="caption"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="10" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Title"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="1" name="Default Paragraph Font"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="11" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Subtitle"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="22" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Strong"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="20" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Emphasis"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="59" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Table Grid"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Placeholder Text"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="1" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="No Spacing"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Revision"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="34" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="List Paragraph"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="29" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Quote"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="30" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Intense Quote"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="19" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Subtle Emphasis"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="21" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Intense Emphasis"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="31" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Subtle Reference"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="32" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Intense Reference"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="33" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Book Title"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="37" name="Bibliography"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" qformat="true" name="TOC Heading"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><style> <!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:"Cambria Math"; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:roman; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1107304683 0 0 159 0;} @font-face {font-family:Calibri; panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1073750139 0 0 159 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; margin-top:0in; margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:10.0pt; margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} p {mso-style-priority:99; mso-margin-top-alt:auto; margin-right:0in; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; margin-left:0in; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} .MsoChpDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; mso-default-props:yes; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi; mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN;} .MsoPapDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; margin-bottom:10.0pt; line-height:115%;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </style><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} </style> <![endif]-->Note:
<br />
<br />This is the culmination of many, many hours of research, yet I am nearly and completely unsatisfied with it. I wrote this for the honors Philosophy 300 class (philosophical writing), and I presented it before the class last week. I hesitate to post this yet, because it is not remotely complete. First, I have a more thorough retort concerning the arguments I present against Natural Law than what I address herein. Second, many sections are inadequate and do not fully portray the idea intended. Third, I do not feel I adequately addressed how positivist law exists in Natural Law without existing as <span style="font-style: italic;">Positivism</span> itself. Fourth, I do not fully address Kretzman's argument against positivist claims against the <span style="font-style: italic;">non-est-lex </span>slogan. Fifth, I almost completely disagree with my conclusion. In reality, there is more than abundant evidence that illustrates whether the Church is more naturalist or positivist in its doctrine and policy -- I simply ran out of time before my deadline and I was lazy. When I get more time -- possibly in the next three years -- I will revisit it. I personally consider this a decent start in my life-long pursuit to find a logical, eternal, and spiritual understanding of the principles and philosophies of liberty.
<br />
<br />I am open to any and all suggestions and arguments. Please comment, if you can actually make it through all of this.
<br />
<br />-- Shiloh<span style="font-weight: bold;">
<br />
<br /></span><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;" align="center"><span style="font-size:100%;"><b style=""><span style="line-height: 115%;">Natural Law, Positivism, and Civil Disobedience: an Analysis of the Counsel Given by the General Authorities of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.<o:p></o:p></span></b></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;" align="center"><span style="font-size:100%;"><i style=""><span style="line-height: 115%;">Shall we be such fools as to be governed by [the government’s] laws, which are Unconstitutional? No! -- Joseph Smith </span></i></span><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >(Teachings)<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;"><b style=""><span style="line-height: 115%;">Introduction</span></b></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;">
<br /><b style=""><span style="line-height: 115%;"><o:p></o:p></span></b></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >Natural law theory has endured multiple revisions. From Aristotle’s <span style="font-style: italic;">natural </span><i style="">justice</i> to Dworkin’s <span style="font-style: italic;">theory of</span> <i style="">principles</i>, natural law has born the criticism and evaluation of the greatest philosophical minds. What <i style="">is</i> natural law? There is no absolute definition. One definitive thread that has endured in various forms since Aristotle is the <i style="">slogan</i> of natural law: <i style="">Lex Injusta Non Est Lex </i>(an unjust law is not a law)<i style="">. </i>In his paper, <i style="">Lex Iniusta Non Est Lex</i>, Norman Kertzmann explores the historical foundation of the natural law slogan to find its author. Kertzmann finds no absolute author, but he does find a way to solve the contradiction that critics say <i style="">non-est-lex</i> presents. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >The slogan of natural law finds sharp critics among legal positivists. H. L. A. Hart, a champion of positivism, uses the <i style="">non-est-lex </i>slogan to show the paradox of arguing for something that exists but does not exist. Positivism’s adherence to scripted — or <i style="">codified </i>— law rejects natural law’s claim to <i style="">non-est-lex</i>. If, in the severity of injustice, a positivist must rebel against enacted law, that individual must follow certain criteria for changing it. In positivism, even civil disobedience must follow certain rules. <span style=""> </span><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >The difference between naturalism and positivism makes the issue of morality difficult to evaluate, especially for religious organizations. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (the Church) has defined many of its own policies through interaction with natural and positivist laws. Many Church policies are naturalist, while others reflect positivist sentiments in exhorting its members in matters pertaining to government. While some counsel from the Church has appeared to support the <i style="">non-est-lex</i> slogan, other counsel is positivist.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >This paper includes three sections: (1) natural law and positivism, (2) civil disobedience, and (3) religious requirements of <i style="">non-est-lex</i>. In this paper I will define natural law under a broad political application, and will contrast it with legal positivism. I will address how these two philosophies treat <i style="">civil disobedience</i> in regards to unjust laws. This paper presupposes a distinct definition and understanding of what is <i style="">just</i> and <i style="">unjust</i> and what is <i style="">moral </i>and <i style="">immoral</i> – although such distinctions I do not discuss in this paper. I will answer whether civil disobedience is possible in natural law, and address what conditions are required for civil disobedience in legal positivism. It is not my intent to question whether natural law is an adequate foundation for jurisprudence but to answer whether the individual has a legitimate <i style="">non-est-lex</i> claim under natural law. Furthermore, I will evaluate various arguments from the Church leaders concerning obedience to the <i style="">law</i> and possible justification for <i>non-est-lex</i> in regards to the Twelfth Article of Faith. Finally, I will conclude that an absolute distinction in Church doctrine between naturalism and positivism is impossible.<span style=""> </span><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;"><b style=""><u><span style="line-height: 115%;">
<br /></span></u></b></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;"><b style=""><u><span style="line-height: 115%;">SECTION 1</span></u></b></span><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" > <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;"><b style=""><span style="line-height: 115%;">
<br /></span></b></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;"><b style=""><span style="line-height: 115%;">What is Natural Law?<o:p></o:p></span></b></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >Natural law is a theory explaining how universal moral laws exist by nature – even if not initially perceived by human understanding.<span style=""> </span>Naturalist philosophers have presented natural law differently. Most studies of natural law originate through Aristotle and Cicero; however, it was Aquinas’ arguments for natural law that were popularized and adopted by the Catholic Church. Aquinas categorized law into four types: (1) the eternal law (mind of God), (2) the divine law (the appearance of the eternal law to man), (3) the human law (man’s positive law), and (4) the natural law. Aquinas spoke of a natural <i style="">moral</i> law whereby all men are bound. This universal moral law, he argued, was perceivable through a divinely placed innate state of heightened reason. As such, <span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Aquinas argued that man by reason could demonstrate the existence of God and of his moral code. Because of the heightened state of reason that God gave man, revelation was unnecessary to perceive this universal moral law.</span><o:p style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >Sir William Blackstone argued that natural law was the moral basis of all law – political or otherwise. Positivist law, or statutory law, existed as an extension of perceivable natural law. All statutes were to be extracted and enacted on principles of natural law. When social problems arise and there is no perceived natural law to resolve the issue, statutory law has full power to rule in the matter; however, when natural law is perceived, any violating statute dissolves as though it never existed. <span style=""> </span><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;"><b style=""><span style="line-height: 115%;">
<br /></span></b></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;"><b style=""><span style="line-height: 115%;">What is Legal Positivism?<o:p></o:p></span></b></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >Legal positivism rejects natural law’s claim that there is a necessary moral basis for law, but asserts that laws are merely rules that man agrees to live by. John Austin coined the creed of positivism: “The existence of law is one thing; its merit or demerit is another” <span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">(Austin</span>). H.L.A. Hart, an advocate of positivism, argued that laws restricting theft, violence, and deception are necessary for any legitimate social structure; furthermore, any such social structure must also have a system for recognizing and enforcing those rules. Hart argued that any legitimate social structure has primary and secondary rules. Primary rules are laws that enforce individual obligations and duties. Secondary rules clarify any ambiguous or confusing primary rules. There are three secondary rules that accomplish this: <i style="">rules of recognition, rules of change, </i>and <i style="">rules of adjudication</i>. The<i style=""> </i>rules of recognition identify what primary rules are valid and give the primary rule authority and legitimacy. The rule of change allows new rules to reevaluate and take the place of old rules. The rules of adjudication define important legal concepts and give judges power to punish any violators of primary rules (Hart).<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >Positivism establishes legal legitimacy of government. Laws are rules that gain legitimacy through social recognition and obedience, through ability to change to social pressures, and through courts that interpret and render codified law. In Hart’s view, inalienable rights in natural law are, at best, ambiguous and, at worst, obsolete. <i style="">Rights</i> are granted by the government through the legal system, not through some individual claim to a higher moral authority. Because government’s legitimacy rests on society’s acceptance of scripted law, individual rights, in a sense, are at the whim of social approval. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;"><b style=""><span style="line-height: 115%;">
<br /></span></b></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;"><b style=""><span style="line-height: 115%;">Natural Law v. Positivism: Problems<o:p></o:p></span></b></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;"><i style=""><span style="line-height: 115%;">
<br /></span></i></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;"><i style=""><span style="line-height: 115%;">Problems with Natural Law</span></i></span><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" ><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.25in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.25in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >There are several arguments against natural law. In fact, many legal philosophers completely dismiss natural law. In acknowledging the unpopularity of natural law theory, Ronald Dworkin, a natural law theorist, observes that “one label. . . is particularly dreaded: no one wants to be called a natural lawyer. [Natural law] seems metaphysical or at least vaguely religious. In any case it seems plainly wrong” (Dworkin 175). In this paper I present the two of the most common objections to natural law, and offer possible solutions. The first objection concerns its <i style="">universality</i>. Gary North illustrated the universality problem that natural law faces:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p style="margin: 5pt 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-indent: 0.5in; line-height: 115%;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;">Natural law theorists have yet to come up with a solution to this inconvenient fact: reason, meaning the never-proven, always sought-for "right reason" of natural law theory, has not led masses of people to adopt the same system of philosophy, ethics, or religion. Yet the theory rests on the assumption -- never proven -- that rational people can agree on these issues sufficiently to enable society to function both ethically and predictably, meaning rationally (North).</span></p> <p style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in; line-height: 115%;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;">While natural law has yet to give a universal solution to any particular problem, the universality argument is empty. The universality problem hinges on the assumption that all universal facts or truths are apparent or that they are already known and can be demonstrated. This is ridiculous. Because the mind of man has not created the tools necessary to demonstrate the universality a particular moral law, it does not follow that a universal moral law does not exist. </span></p> <p style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in; line-height: 115%;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;">Natural law’s second major objection is its <i style="">ambiguity</i>. The moral centrist will blame the immorality of society for natural law’s inability to adequately define a universal moral ethic; however, this reeks of pompous self-appreciation and moral superiority. Natural law’s perceived ambiguity may stem from the universality objection. If nothing is physically or demonstrably universal, then universal moral law can be defined any way an individual or society sees fit. This argument may be the most convincing against natural law, especially in arguing against natural law within the political spectrum. Hart is right concerning ambiguous laws: The law, to be law, necessarily communicates what is required (Hart 92). Ambiguity is the death of any law – universal or otherwise.</span></p> <p style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in; line-height: 115%;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;">In answer to natural law’s perceived ambiguity, I offer no solutions. I propose, however, that until the universality of natural law can be shown, that natural law as an acting force remain as a standard for individual morality – a type of categorical imperative. </span></p> <p style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; line-height: 115%;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;"><i style="">Problems with Positivism<o:p></o:p></i></span></p> <p style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; line-height: 115%;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;"> </span><span style="font-size:100%;">Dworkin offers a famous critique of legal positivism in his response to H.L.A Hart’s paper, <i style="">The Concept of Law</i>. In <i style="">Taking Rights Seriously, </i>Dworkin lists three points of positivism that he claims are its primary <i style="">tenants</i>: (1) Laws are rules of the community that are legitimized by their <i style="">pedigree</i>, and not by their [moral] content; (2) Each law, when ambiguous, non-existent, or seemingly not applicable to a specific case, is given to the ruling <i style="">discretion</i> of the judge; and (3) that each individual is <i style="">legally obligated</i> in a way that requires the individual to act or be acted upon by society (“Taking”).</span><span style="font-size:100%;"> </span></p> <p style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in; line-height: 115%;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;">The first of these points addresses the necessary mechanism needed to establish legitimacy in government. While Dworkin believed a social moral <i style="">principle</i> was the best legitimate foundation for law, Hart’s positivist view establishes legitimacy in law and government through a previously chosen and socially accepted <i style="">legal system</i>. Laws are rules that gain legitimacy through social recognition and obedience, through ability to change to social pressures, and through courts that can render and interpret primary rules when needed. </span></p> <p style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in; line-height: 115%;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;">Dworkin’s second criticism of positivism attacks the positivist law itself. Even the finest and most intricately designed laws can be interpreted in various ways. Relying solely on scripted law is fool-hardy, especially when the foundation of government has rejected any <i style="">moral</i> compass to guide the ship-of-state through times when the law is ambiguous. Positivists offer no real solution to this critique except to lambast natural law for the same inherent problem of ambiguity. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in; line-height: 115%;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;">
<br /></span></p><p style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in; line-height: 115%;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;">The concluding argument against positivism rests in the individual’s legal obligation to society at large. Legal positivism requires the individual to follow certain rules and adopt certain behaviors within society. While the natural law can exist when it is not perceived, positivist law must be codified and publically known. Positivism requires absolute obedience to codified law. The moment society fails to recognize scripted laws, government loses legitimacy. This is why strict obedience to the law is so necessary within positivism, even if the laws are unjust. Furthermore, positivism defines what is socially acceptable but rejects any fundamental principle or moral behind the law. Dworkin argued for a <i style="">principle </i>behind legal actions, while Hart argued for a <i style="">rule</i> that reflected the social acceptance of the people; ironically, the result and public manifestations of these two competing philosophies are nearly identical.</span></p> <p style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; line-height: 115%;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;"><b style=""><u>
<br /></u></b></span></p><p style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; line-height: 115%;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;"><b style=""><u>SECTION 2<o:p></o:p></u></b></span></p> <p style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; line-height: 115%;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;"><b style="">
<br /></b></span></p><p style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; line-height: 115%;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;"><b style="">What is C<i>ivil Disobedience</i></b><i>?<o:p></o:p></i></span></p> <p style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in; line-height: 115%;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;">
<br /></span></p><p style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in; line-height: 115%;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;">Is there a moral obligation to obey <i style="">every</i> law, or are we only required to obey <i style="">some</i> laws? There are many cases for civil disobedience, but to understand these we have to define what civil disobedience is. John Rawls defines civil disobedience as “a public nonviolent, and conscientious act contrary to law usually done with the intent to bring about a change in policies or laws to the government” (Rawls 250). Civil disobedience requires conscious action to change public policy or law. We will first speak of civil disobedience within legal positivism, and then </span><span style="font-size:100%;"> </span><span style="font-size:100%;">see if civil disobedience is compatible with <i style="">non-est-lex</i>. </span><span style="font-size:100%;"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; line-height: 115%;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;"><i style="">
<br /></i></span></p><p style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; line-height: 115%;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;"><i style="">Legal Positivism<o:p></o:p></i></span></p> <p style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in; line-height: 115%;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;">
<br /></span></p><p style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in; line-height: 115%;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;">Positivism requires absolute submission to scripted law. Unlike natural law, positivism does not concern itself with what is <i style="">right</i> or <i style="">wrong, moral</i> or <i style="">immoral</i>, <i style="">just</i> or <i style="">unjust</i>, but only with what society will accept or not accept. This is not to say that society is necessarily amoral, but that the basis of scripted law is a reflection of what is socially acceptable. However, primary and secondary rules occasionally fail to provide just laws. In these rare cases, civil disobedience is justified; however, there are necessary steps to follow and objectives to achieve. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in; line-height: 115%;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;">
<br /></span></p><p style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in; line-height: 115%;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;">In <i style="">A Theory of Justice</i>, John Rawls outlines positivism’s requirements for civil disobedience. First, civil disobedience is <i style="">consciousness</i> of the act. Second, civil disobedience must be <i style="">political</i>. This is accomplished in three ways: <i style="">justification</i>, <i style="">audience</i>, and <i style="">goal</i>. The individual justifies his actions of for civil disobedience through changing society’s attitude toward an unjust law. Furthermore, this is only accomplished if the act of civil disobedience has a public audience. No justifiable civil disobedience is performed in secret. Finally, in awakening the moral sense of the people, the individual must remain strictly <i style="">non-violent</i> (Rawls). </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;"><i style=""><span style="line-height: 115%;">
<br /></span></i></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;"><i style=""><span style="line-height: 115%;">Natural Law</span></i></span><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" > <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >Naturalism follows a different course than positivism. Whereas civil disobedience is possible in positivism, it has no place in natural law<i style="">. </i>The slogan of natural law, <i style="">lex iniusta non est lex</i> (an unjust law is not a law), is a source of debate between positivists and naturalists. Three of positivism’s greatest defenders – Austin, Benthem, and Hart – ridiculed the <i style="">non-est-lex</i> slogan for the contradiction of saying something exists that does not: “For an unjust law is obviously a law – it is simply an unjust one” (Russell 435).<span style=""> </span><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >Norman Kretzmann, a naturalist, defended the <i style="">non-est-lex</i> slogan against positivist naysayers. Kretzmann showed both <i style="">evaluative</i> and <i style="">non-evaluative</i> inclusion conditions. This means that an <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-indent: 0.25in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >“unjust law may be a law in a merely technical sense, in virtue of meeting certain –non-evaluative inclusion conditions that are required for its promulgation as a law, but it may still fail to be a genuine instance of a law if it fails to meet certain evaluative inclusion conditions that are required of any genuine law” (Russell 436-7). <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >To a naturalist, ‘civil disobedience’ does not exist. The instant a statute fails to include all necessary metaphysical conditions of justice, the unjust law ceases to exist. There is no ‘disobedience’ to an unjust law, because an unjust law is <i style="">not</i> a law. Furthermore, it is nonsensical to a naturalist to see an individual act in ‘compliance’ with a law that does not exist, especially when that individual acts in violation of his own justice. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >The positivist finds necessity in making his civil disobedience public, but the naturalist has no such prerogative. While the positivist seeks to correct a form of injustice, the naturalist – in perceiving no unjust law – can only see the ignorance of an individual who will work against his own justice by following a law that does not exist.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >Positivism holds an intrinsically pessimistic view of society. Positivism presupposes that law is built on the assumption that society’s natural state is chaos. Codified law is the adhesive that binds a social structure together. However, natural law is inherently optimistic in its view of society, and builds on the assumption that society’s natural state is order – not chaos. While positivism looks on the <i style="">non-est-lex</i> slogan as the ultimate tool of social destruction by allowing the individual and masses to become a ‘law unto themelves,’ the naturalist appeals to <i style="">non-est-lex</i> as the building block of order and justice by creating a free-market of law and justice. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >Allowing <i style="">non-est-lex</i> within society will not prove society’s destruction; neither will it result in anarchy like the positivists say. Opponents to <i style="">non-est-lex </i>claim that it creates an arbitrary standard where every individual has the ability of doing whatever they please, but this is not so. Natural law is a universal code and standard. The Declaration of Independence promoted three inherent naturalist rights: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Under natural law, any violation of inherent rights is punished accordingly. There is no freedom in natural law to perform an unjust act. Only through injustice does a man become a law unto himself, and in his moment of injustice he loses his protection of the natural law. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;"><b style=""><u><span style="line-height: 115%;">
<br /></span></u></b></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;"><b style=""><u><span style="line-height: 115%;">SECTION 3<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;"><b><span style="line-height: 115%;">
<br /></span></b></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;"><b><span style="line-height: 115%;">The Twelfth Article of Faith<o:p></o:p></span></b></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" ><span style="">
<br /></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" ><span style=""> </span><i style="">We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying honoring, and sustaining the law.<o:p></o:p></i></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >The Twelfth Article of Faith is a Church standard regarding the members’ obligation to be subject to the laws of the country they reside in and to submit to their leaders. Many interpret this Article of Faith to mean absolute compliance to all laws enacted within a political mechanism, while others have used this article to justify a higher principle of justice and morality. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >Questions arise concerning whether the Twelfth Article of Faith gives any room for a <i style="">non-est-lex </i>philosophy or for civil disobedience. If the Twelfth Article of Faith offers room for these, how so and what are their limits? <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;"><i style=""><span style="line-height: 115%;">
<br /></span></i></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;"><i style=""><span style="line-height: 115%;">Positivist Interpretation<o:p></o:p></span></i></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >The positivist’s claim on the Twelfth Article of Faith calls for absolute obedience to all laws enacted by the political leadership. Disobedience to enacted laws is a strict violation of this Article. Unjust laws are legally repealed by the legislature. Unjust laws are not merely dismissed by an individual who disagrees with the enacted law. This interpretation is justified in light of the Doctrine and Covenants (D&C) 58:21-2: “Let no man break the laws of the land, for he that keepeth the laws of God hath no need to break the laws of the land. Wherefore, be subject to the powers that be. . .” This appears to contradict the naturalists’ slogan that an unjust law is not law at all. Positivists believe that members of the Church are commanded to obey the laws enacted their by government (laws of the land), and that in obeying the <i style="">law of the land</i> (even an unjust law) they will not break the laws of God – or a higher moral law. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >An analogy used by positivists to interpret D&C 58: 21-2 is that of a soldier who obeys an order to kill in a time of war. Leaders of the Church have declared that soldiers are not morally accountable for following orders to kill their enemies in a time of war, but that the accountability of an unjust command falls on the leader(s) who gave the order. As President Gordon B. Hinckley stated, “God will not hold men and women in uniform responsible as agents of their government in carrying forward that which they are legally obligated to do” (Hinckley 80). Positivists argue that the citizen – like the active soldier – has immunity for following an unjust order (law) legislated by his government. The individual’s accountability is to obey the scripted law, and it is the legislator accountability to enact just laws. The important thing is for the citizen to be honest and obedient to all established laws – good and bad – until the time comes when an unjust law can be changed legitimately through the political mechanism of government. At this time, the citizen becomes responsible for acting in such a way as to change the unjust law. Until then, the individual is justified in obeying an unjust law. In this strict obedience to the law, even an unjust law, the positivist finds himself obedient to the Twelfth Article of Faith and the laws of God. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;"><i style=""><span style="line-height: 115%;">
<br /></span></i></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;"><i style=""><span style="line-height: 115%;">Naturalist Interpretation <o:p></o:p></span></i></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" ><span style="">
<br /></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" ><span style=""> </span>Natural law has a different view of the Twelfth Article of Faith. To the naturalist, D&C 58:21-2 is qualified in D&C 134:5: “We believe that all men are bound to sustain and uphold the respective governments in which they reside,<i> while protected in their inherent and inalienable rights by the laws of such government</i>s; and that sedition and rebellion are unbecoming every citizen <i style="">thus protected</i>. . .” (emphasis added). While the naturalist recognizes the need to obey the law of the land and to be subject to the powers that be, he still recognizes that sedition and rebellion have their place when a government no longer protects the inherent and inalienable rights of the people. Furthermore, the naturalist must qualify and differentiate between a <i style="">just</i> and an <i style="">unjust</i> law. The naturalist member is concerned with differentiating between the two forms of law that represent just and unjust laws in D&C 98: the <i style="">law of the land</i> and the <i style="">law of man</i>.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >And that law of the land which is constitutional, supporting that principle of freedom in maintaining rights and privileges, belongs to all mankind, and is justifiable before me. . . <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >And as pertaining to law of man, whatsoever is more or less than this, cometh of evil. . .<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >And I give unto you a commandment, that ye shall forsake all evil and cleave unto all good, that ye shall live by every word which proceedeth forth out of the mouth of God. (D&C 98:4-7, 10-1)<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" ><span style="">
<br /></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" ><span style=""> </span>The naturalist further recognizes that the <i>law of the land</i> is <i style="">conditional</i> and based on the constitutionality of law that promotes the rights and privileges of all mankind. Anything more or less than that which promotes the rights and privileges of all mankind is the <i>law of man</i> and is <i>evil</i>. It is within the law of man that the naturalist finds <i>unjust</i> law. Furthermore, the command given by God, the ultimate principle giver, is to forsake <i>all</i> evil – even the law of man! This reading of D&C 98 is in line with Aquinas’ first principle of natural law: good is to be done and pursued, and evil avoided (Aquinas q94, a2, p. 47). The naturalist, in this sense, is obligated to avoid all evil – even if it is scripted law – if the enacted law violates the rights and privileges of all mankind. President Joseph F. Smith clarified this concept when he said, <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" ><span style="">
<br /></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" ><span style=""> </span>“It seems to me that this makes this matter so clear that it is not possible for any man who professes to be a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to make any mistake, or to be in doubt as to the course he should pursue under the command of God in relation to the observance of the laws of the land. [God] will hold [lawmakers] responsible if they will pass unconstitutional measures and frame unjust and proscriptive laws. . . If lawmakers have a mind to violate their oath, break their covenants and their faith with the people, and depart from the provisions of the constitution, where is the law, human or divine, which binds me, as an individual, to outwardly and openly proclaim my acceptance of their acts?” (Gospel 406)<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" ><span style="">
<br /></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >Both the naturalist and positivist believe that lawmakers are accountable for passing unjust and proscriptive laws; however, these competing theories vary in regards to the level of accountability ascribed to the individual when confronted with an unjust law. The positivist must maintain strict adherence to the law (leaving sole accountability to the lawmaker for passing unjust legislation, until the time comes when the individual may affect legislative change), but the naturalist takes upon himself a portion of accountability in how <i style="">he</i> responds to an unjust law. The naturalist will remain subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, and he will obey, honor, and sustain the law by only adhering to just laws that promote the freedom and liberty of all people. This appears to be in line with President John Taylor’s interpretation of D&C 98: 4-6. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >
<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 0.5in; text-indent: 0.5in;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" >“Taking this nation as an example, all laws that are proper and correct, and all obligations entered into which are not violative of the Constitution should be kept inviolate. But if they are violative of the Constitution, then the compact between the rulers and the ruled is broken and the obligation ceases to be binding. Just as a person agreeing to purchase anything and to pay a certain amount for it, if he receives the article bargained for, and does not pay its price, he violates his contract; but if he dos not receive the article he is not required to pay for it” (Taylor).<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" ><span style="">
<br /></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" ><span style=""> </span>This reading of President John Taylor carries the natural law slogan: an unjust law is not a law. If a codified law violates the purpose of the Constitution, then there is no obligation to obey – the obligation ceases to be binding. However, President Taylor, in keeping true with natural law principles, gives that all laws that <i style="">do</i> maintain the rights and privileges of all mankind must be followed. This reading is consistent throughout every passage of the Doctrine and Covenants presented in this paper. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;"><b style=""><span style="line-height: 115%;">
<br /></span></b></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:100%;"><b style=""><span style="line-height: 115%;">Conclusion<o:p></o:p></span></b></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" ><span style="">
<br /></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" ><span style=""> </span>The natural law and positivist philosophies may never come to terms. The philosophical battle concerning the direction of government and the legitimacy of law may never achieve a resolution. Natural law and positivism are polarized, and each rejects the other’s premise. The bi-conditional relationship of the individual to society is hotly contested. Does the individual have the ability to protest? While positivism gives stipulations for civil disobedience, natural law rejects the law outright as though it does not exist. Civil disobedience is impossible in natural law, because there is no disobedience to a law that does not exist. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;font-family:times new roman;"><span style="line-height: 115%;font-size:100%;" ><span style="">
<br /></span>The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints maintains political neutrality; however, the membership of the Church is often polarized. Whether the Church leadership intentionally presents doctrine in a naturalist or positivist way, the membership is quick to interpret it as such. The same latter-day scriptures and prophetic counsel are interpreted in two different ways. Therefore, it is indeterminable whether Church doctrine absolutely supports one theory or another</span>.
<br /></p><p class="MsoNormal" face="times new roman" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></p><p class="MsoNormal" face="times new roman" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;"><meta equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name="ProgId" content="Word.Document"><meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 12"><meta name="Originator" content="Microsoft Word 12"><link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CShiloh%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml"><link rel="themeData" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CShiloh%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_themedata.thmx"><link rel="colorSchemeMapping" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CShiloh%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_colorschememapping.xml"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>Normal</w:View> <w:zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:trackmoves/> <w:trackformatting/> <w:punctuationkerning/> <w:validateagainstschemas/> <w:saveifxmlinvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:ignoremixedcontent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:donotpromoteqf/> <w:lidthemeother>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:lidthemeasian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:lidthemecomplexscript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables/> <w:snaptogridincell/> <w:wraptextwithpunct/> <w:useasianbreakrules/> <w:dontgrowautofit/> <w:splitpgbreakandparamark/> <w:dontvertaligncellwithsp/> <w:dontbreakconstrainedforcedtables/> <w:dontvertalignintxbx/> <w:word11kerningpairs/> <w:cachedcolbalance/> <w:usefelayout/> </w:Compatibility> <m:mathpr> <m:mathfont val="Cambria Math"> <m:brkbin val="before"> <m:brkbinsub val="--"> <m:smallfrac val="off"> <m:dispdef/> <m:lmargin val="0"> <m:rmargin val="0"> <m:defjc val="centerGroup"> <m:wrapindent val="1440"> <m:intlim val="subSup"> <m:narylim val="undOvr"> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:latentstyles deflockedstate="false" defunhidewhenused="true" defsemihidden="true" defqformat="false" defpriority="99" latentstylecount="267"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="0" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Normal"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="heading 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 7"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 8"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 9"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 7"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 8"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 9"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="35" qformat="true" name="caption"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="10" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Title"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="1" name="Default Paragraph Font"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="11" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Subtitle"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="22" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Strong"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="20" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Emphasis"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="59" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Table Grid"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Placeholder Text"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="1" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="No Spacing"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Revision"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="34" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="List Paragraph"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="29" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Quote"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="30" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Intense Quote"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="19" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Subtle Emphasis"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="21" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Intense Emphasis"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="31" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Subtle Reference"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="32" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Intense Reference"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="33" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Book Title"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="37" name="Bibliography"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" qformat="true" name="TOC Heading"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><style> <!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:"Cambria Math"; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:roman; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1107304683 0 0 159 0;} @font-face {font-family:Calibri; panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1073750139 0 0 159 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; margin-top:0in; margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:10.0pt; margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} .MsoChpDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; mso-default-props:yes; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi; mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN;} .MsoPapDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; margin-bottom:10.0pt; line-height:115%;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </style><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} </style> <![endif]--> </p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-align: center; text-indent: -0.5in; line-height: 200%;" align="center"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">Works Cited <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in; line-height: 200%;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">Aquinas, Saint Thomas. <i>On law, morality, and politics</i>. Indianapolis: Hackett, 1988. Print. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in; line-height: 200%;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">Dworkin, Ronald. "Natural Law Revisited." <i>University of Florida Law Review</i> 34 (1982): 165-88. Print. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in; line-height: 200%;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">---. <i>Taking rights seriously</i>. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1977. Print. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in; line-height: 200%;"><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">Gospel Doctrine Sermons & Writings of Joseph F. Smith</span></i><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">. New York: Deseret Books, 1999. Print. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in; line-height: 200%;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">Hart, H.L.A. <i>The Concept of Law</i>. Oxford: Clarendon, 1961. Print. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in; line-height: 200%;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">Hinckley, Gordon B. "War and Peace." <i>Ensign</i> May 2003: 78-81. Print. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in; line-height: 200%;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">Rawls, John,. <i>Theory of Justice.</i> S. l. b Harvard University Press c 09/1999: Belknap of Harvard UP, 1999. Print. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in; line-height: 200%;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">North, Gary. "History: European -- Natural Law Theory." <i>Gary North -- Specific Answers</i>. 2007. Web. 13 Nov. 2009. <http://www.garynorth.com/public/2280.cfm>. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in; line-height: 200%;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">Russell, J.S. "Trial by Slogan: Natural Law and Lex Iniusta Non Est Lex." <i>Law and Philosophy</i> 4th ser. 19.July (2000): 433-49. Print. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-indent: -0.5in; line-height: 200%;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 200%;">Taylor, John. <i>Journal of Discourse</i>. Vol. 26. 1884: 350. Print. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <i><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif";">Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith</span></i><span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif";">. American Fork: Covenant, 2002. Print. </span>
<br /><o:p></o:p><p></p> Shiloh Loganhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01232352679206328450noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2192472582302586579.post-19032232490056419342009-12-04T11:09:00.004-07:002009-12-05T15:43:19.290-07:00“Have You Forgotten?” How Iconography and Nationalism May Have Blinded Us.<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjyP6wzUNH89RQVT0Gejb4zz6pS2bTY06lUqaQ2Lyufv5o_A1BTo0F_y_8ic0dyxHWbcc4wOcNq4vVzvdZCUuMUvm3wE1ObAUKlFEXqSNIJsLon_qYjNy8oJBiFEkkIwt806SyLVjUHR4k/s1600-h/9_2D11_20WTC_20falling_thumb.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; float: right; cursor: pointer; width: 138px; height: 202px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjyP6wzUNH89RQVT0Gejb4zz6pS2bTY06lUqaQ2Lyufv5o_A1BTo0F_y_8ic0dyxHWbcc4wOcNq4vVzvdZCUuMUvm3wE1ObAUKlFEXqSNIJsLon_qYjNy8oJBiFEkkIwt806SyLVjUHR4k/s320/9_2D11_20WTC_20falling_thumb.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5411807218296761202" border="0" /></a>Written: November 11, 2008<br /><br />Do you remember 9-11-2001? I do. I was glued to the television, and absolutely nothing could shake me from watching those horrific scenes. My country and my countrymen were under attack! I attended all the rallies, candle vigils, and flag waving groups that I knew of. I didn't know what to do, but I was doing all that I knew how to do -- and so was everyone else around me.<br /><br />Everywhere we looked we saw new slogans, new signs, and new flags waving. We beamed with pride for the goodness of America! The nationalism was remarkable! We were a unified country rallied against a common foe. We were fixated on the television -- every possible second -- to find new information. We knew <em>exactly </em>who had attacked us and<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiN-X1kCeO8W2OTS-85QcfO0AVx8ed9fV5VlYYZiVFakrwpYEm9K806h0EEpRp4Y1V74oYwmIRYqkIDd43LK9PaJs9QSDYZc-fhvMZEHlFpHO3nd_0GzApfBN9rHQ_0t4Q7bwFaqKyfVSI/s1600-h/flag+raising+firemen.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; cursor: pointer; width: 200px; height: 234px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiN-X1kCeO8W2OTS-85QcfO0AVx8ed9fV5VlYYZiVFakrwpYEm9K806h0EEpRp4Y1V74oYwmIRYqkIDd43LK9PaJs9QSDYZc-fhvMZEHlFpHO3nd_0GzApfBN9rHQ_0t4Q7bwFaqKyfVSI/s320/flag+raising+firemen.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5411807461183723106" border="0" /></a> <em>exactly</em> what we were going to do about it; in fact, the news reported on who attacked us within the second hour of the first tower being hit! That's American journalism for you -- quick on the spot with every substantial fact necessary to make completely accurate and specific conclusions. Even the left-wing celebrities booed unpatriotic dissenters who called for more information from the Bush Administration before we rushed into war! Bush's approval ratings were through the roof as he led our country forward in response to the most tragic attack of our lifetime.<br /><br />This heightened nationalism lasted over 18 months! We didn't need to question a thing, because we knew exactly what was going on. Government transparency was at an all time high. We knew the secret inner-workings of every major political institution and what they were going to do. We knew <em>who</em> attacked us, <em>why</em> they attacked us, and <em>what</em> we were going to do about it. We knew <em>why</em> we were preparing for war, <em>who</em> we were going to attack, and <em>how</em> we were going get the job done. We <span style="font-style: italic;"><span style="font-style: italic;">knew </span></span>it all!<br /><br />Talk of dropping the debris from the fallen towers from US Military Cargo planes on Afghanistan was heavily purported and met with national pride! Take THAT you fundamentalist-Islamo-fascists! You pissed off the wrong country! "Don't **** with the US of A"!<br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgbD6ep9auMLLu4jygNkOuiwWXUxwhKtvRiqxUw2rJlfF3XqN4yJAYRGbkxFPS2hmNfWLeaJC1XmBhlrg1y26VTkFlSOOOfrB6FEaYi_K15EmeOhVRyL_IRhjhZenArrFy2ckpAVsokpBM/s1600-h/freedom_fries.gif"><img style="margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; float: right; cursor: pointer; width: 159px; height: 174px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgbD6ep9auMLLu4jygNkOuiwWXUxwhKtvRiqxUw2rJlfF3XqN4yJAYRGbkxFPS2hmNfWLeaJC1XmBhlrg1y26VTkFlSOOOfrB6FEaYi_K15EmeOhVRyL_IRhjhZenArrFy2ckpAVsokpBM/s320/freedom_fries.gif" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5411810389824412946" border="0" /></a><br />Those damn-slobbery French bastards were cowards for not standing with us, and we knew they only stood against us! We cursed the name of anything "French". "Freedom" toast, "Freedom" fries, "Freedom" dressing, and "Freedom" bread -- we purged anything "French" out of our culture! We even put a bill before Congress to officially change the name of anything "French" to "freedom" in the United States! Take that you unpatriotic French scum! May the Taliban and Al-Qaeda kill you all in your sleep!<br /><br />When a few unpatriotic "Ameri-can'ts" questioned the war, we associated them with those who "<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfsUaTOvAkH2fwcI0UGc68FyH7zWgMBrg-t9qM0PA97zGjH9UGtoHONXHEsbCPNkEDGmIkCI2gRKVkZ82qKqhj61wbFsnXKbf4T2qmU_vIJpQbT1f37JwVHLhgwxd2Hu0J3-mXbCBEkrw/s1600-h/youre+either+with+us+or+against+us.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; cursor: pointer; width: 140px; height: 200px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfsUaTOvAkH2fwcI0UGc68FyH7zWgMBrg-t9qM0PA97zGjH9UGtoHONXHEsbCPNkEDGmIkCI2gRKVkZ82qKqhj61wbFsnXKbf4T2qmU_vIJpQbT1f37JwVHLhgwxd2Hu0J3-mXbCBEkrw/s200/youre+either+with+us+or+against+us.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5411811672398419218" border="0" /></a>denied the holocaust" and who "allowed Hitler to take over Europe". Of <em>course</em> Iraq attacked us! In fact, Saddam was pointing weapons of mass destruction at Israel and was going to sell these same weapons to others to use them against US. He had purged the Kurds and was laying waste to their people through torture and ethnic cleansing -- this was enough for us to know exactly what he was not only capable of doing, but what he was planning on doing. We never argued <em>with</em> the people dissenting (after all, it's ridiculous to argue with someone who obviously had dementia), but we argued at and around them. We just needed to show society how unpatriotic these people were for dissenting and the public would do the rest. How could <em>anyone</em> possibly question our legitimate claim to go after those people who attacked us?! Cowards all!! If they couldn't watch the television and arrive at the same conclusion we had, they're idiots anyway.<br /><br />Then, something happened. We all started learning something different than what we thought we knew<span style="font-size:100%;">. The 'Mission' <span style="font-style: italic;">wasn't</span> 'accomplished'</span><span style="font-size:100%;">. While the majority of 'conservative' mainstream media outlets continued to lambaste any 'unpatriotic' dissensions to the war, the exuberant nationalism and iconoclasm that existed for years subsided. Many Americans were left wondering, "What <span style="font-style: italic;">was</span> that?" What had America just endured? What was that emotion that guided America's actions through what was now so obviously a blunder?<br /><br /></span><span style="font-size:100%;">Iconography is a real thing. Fostering nationalism (the personal view of associating oneself with one's country) is a real problem that nations and states deal with in garnering support for political purposes. What is the definition of iconography? Simply stated, it is the <span style="font-style: italic;">promotion of nationalistic images</span>.<br /><br />The following activities are prefabricated nationalistic icons that are openly used to garner national support:<br /></span><ul><li><span style="font-size:100%;">Resurrecting or fabricating a glorious pre-colonial history (used during the mid-1900's as the world came out of the age of colonialism and entered <em>neo</em>-colonialism).</span></li><li><span style="font-size:100%;">Initiating a new educational system in which new national values are stress</span><span style="font-size:100%;">ed.</span></li><li><span style="font-size:100%;">Building the nation's military into a highly visible national symbol, and promoting the branches of the military as the most honored positions of any citizenry.<br /></span></li><li><span style="font-size:100%;">Instituting a national information service to carry the government's message through every possible medium to the people of the country and abroad (most often accomplished through political parties -- especially used in two-party systems).</span></li><li><span style="font-size:100%;">Developing national sectional organizations.</span></li></ul><span style="font-size:100%;">The most recognized forms of iconoclast are:</span><span style="font-size:100%;"><br /></span><ul><li><span style="font-size:100%;">Flags</span></li><li><span style="font-size:100%;">National anthems</span></li><li><span style="font-size:100%;">Heroic slogans</span></li><li><span style="font-size:100%;">The replacement of foreign names with domestic names</span></li><li><span style="font-size:100%;">Media (Any ve</span><span style="font-size:100%;">nue that will carry a nationalistic message)</span></li></ul><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgOLeOE_BM4_iKV0lN7ICITJq61tsb8XPxjuI0pPHhJHTzspXHmnl1zyW536u0fErxQ_h0-iplCOSPCTxnppByqvkddh7SNvXUQh9sqoGxbFCbUEqwh3ZKkQxJ17ISWDsvojKKYUJqtfro/s1600-h/proud+to+be+an+american.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; cursor: pointer; width: 185px; height: 174px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgOLeOE_BM4_iKV0lN7ICITJq61tsb8XPxjuI0pPHhJHTzspXHmnl1zyW536u0fErxQ_h0-iplCOSPCTxnppByqvkddh7SNvXUQh9sqoGxbFCbUEqwh3ZKkQxJ17ISWDsvojKKYUJqtfro/s200/proud+to+be+an+american.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5411812637039003762" border="0" /></a><br /><span style="font-size:100%;">Patriotis</span><span style="font-size:100%;">m is</span><span style="font-size:100%;"> nec</span><span style="font-size:100%;">essary for a state to progress and continue moving forward. However, we should question whether all types of patriotism are equal. We puff out our chests with the iconoclasm "<em>Proud</em> to </span><span style="font-size:100%;">be an American," but do Latter-day Saints question whether </span><span style="font-size:100%;">the Nephites used the same type of slogan? We are told, after all, that it was <em>pride</em> that proved the Nephite downfall. Of course, there are two uses of </span><span style="font-size:100%;">the word <em>pride</em>, right? One denotes a wholesome view of self-worth, and the other denotes a selfish and centric individual who is haughty and lacking humility, right? This almost seems convi</span><span style="font-size:100%;">ncing, until we read </span><span style="font-size:100%;">the words of the prophets.<br /><br />President Benson said this of pride:<br /><blockquote>Pride is a very misunderstood sin, and many are sinning in ignorance. (See <a target="_blank" href="http://scriptures.lds.org/mosiah/3/11"><span style="text-decoration: underline;color:blue;" >Mosiah 3:11</span></a>; <a target="_blank" href="http://scriptures.lds.org/3_ne/6/18"><span style="text-decoration: underline;color:blue;" >3 Ne. 6:18</span></a>.) In the scriptures there is no such thing as righteous pride—it is always considered a sin. Therefore, no matter how the world uses the term, we must understand how God uses the term so we can understand the language of holy writ and profit thereby (See <a target="_blank" href="http://scriptures.lds.org/2_ne/4/15"><span style="text-decoration: underline;color:blue;" >2 Ne. 4:15</span></a>; <a target="_blank" href="http://scriptures.lds.org/mosiah/1/3-7"><span style="text-decoration: underline;color:blue;" >Mosiah 1:3–7</span></a>; <a target="_blank" href="http://scriptures.lds.org/alma/5/61"><span style="text-decoration: underline;color:blue;" >Alma 5:61</span></a><span style="text-decoration: underline;">)</span>.<br /><br />Most of us think of pride as self-centeredness, conceit, boastfulness, arrogance, or haughtiness. All of these are elements of the sin, but the heart, or core, is still missing.<br /><br />The central feature of pride is enmity—enmity toward God and enmity toward our fellowmen. <em>Enmity</em> means "hatred toward, hostility to, or a state of opposition." It is the power by which Satan wishes to reign over us.<br /><br />Pride is essentially competitive in nature. We pit our will against God's. When we direct our pride toward God, it is in the spirit of "my will and not thine be done." As Paul said, they "seek their own, not the things which are Jesus Christ's."<br /><br />Our will in competition to God's will allows desires, appetites, and passions to go unbridled. (President Ezra Taft Benson)</blockquote>What is that spirit within us that creates "enmity" between us and God? Once we have it, how do we identify it? Can we be guilty of the same type of pride as the Nephites in putting so much weight in icons and symbols of nationalistic <em>pride</em>? Did the Nephites chant, "And I'm proud to be a <em>Nephite</em>, where at least I know I'm free -- and I won't forget, the men who died, who gave that right to me"? Was this their battle call when Moroni reported, "And now, because of this great thing which my people, the Nephites, had done, they began to boast in their own strength..."? (Mormon 3:9) How many times does the <em>Lord</em> tell us that <em>he</em> is the one that <em>makes</em> us free? (D&C 98:8) When we boast of our own strength, saying that we have – as men – made ourselves free, will the Lo</span><span style="font-size:100%;">rd long preserve us who grasp at such a nationalistic <em>pride</em>? In the Book of Mormon, this boasting of strength is usually accomplished through military power -- a national and iconic symbol<br /></span><br /><span style="font-size:100%;">Our flag is arguably the u</span><span style="font-size:100%;">ltim</span><span style="font-size:100%;">ate sym</span><span style="font-size:100%;">bol of our country, but what does it stand for? Surely, it will stand for different things </span><span style="font-size:100%;">f</span><span style="font-size:100%;">or different people. We might ask ourselves, however, whether wicked men have used national icons for wicked purposes to garner our support for their propaganda</span><span style="font-size:100%;">? We championed and heralded our heading off to war -- we thought the </span><span style="font-size:100%;">only way to meet the act of violence was with more violence. We didn't question <em>anything</em>, because the <em>media</em> told us exactly what to believe and think. We didn't bother asking if what we were doing was in line with true and correct principles (which preemptive wars are not (D&C 98:22-37; 3 Nephi 3:18-21; Mormon 4:4))?<br /><blockquote>And so it often seems to be with people, having such a firm grasp on things of the world—that which is telestial—that no amount of urging and no degree of emergency can persuade them to let go in favor of that which is celestial. Satan gets them in his grip easily. If we insist on spending all our time and resources building up for ourselves a worldly kingdom, that is exactly what we will inherit.<br /><br />In spite of our delight in regarding ourselves as modern, and our tendency to think we possess a sophistication that no people in the past ever had—in spite of these things, we are, on the whole, an idolatrous people—a condition most repugnant to the Lord.<br /><br />We are a warlike people, easily distracted from our assignment of preparing for the coming of the Lord. When enemies rise up, we commit vast resources to the fabrication of gods of stone and steel—ships, planes, missiles, fortifications—and depend on them for protection and deliverance. When threatened, we align ourselves against the enemy instead of aligning ourselves with the kingdom of God; we train a man in the art of war and call him a patriot, thus, in the manner of Satan's counterfeit of true patriotism, perverting the Savior's teaching:<br /><br />"Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which spitefully use you, and persecute you;<br /><br />"That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven" (Matt. 5:44–45).We forget that if we are righteous, the Lord will either not suffer our enemies to come upon us—and this is the special promise to the inhabitants of the land of the Americas (see 2 Ne. 1:7) —or he will fight our battles for us (D&C 98:37)to name only two references of many). This he is able to do, for as he said at the time of his betrayal, "Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels?" (<a target="_blank" href="http://scriptures.lds.org/matt/26/53">Matt. 26:53</a>.)<br /><br />We can imagine what fearsome soldiers they would be. King Jehoshaphat and his people were delivered by such a troop (see <a target="_blank" href="http://scriptures.lds.org/2_chr/20">2 Chr. 20</a>), and when Elisha's life was threatened, he comforted his servant by saying, "Fear not; for they that be with us are more than they that be with them" (<a target="_blank" href="http://scriptures.lds.org/2_kgs/6/16">2 Kgs. 6:16</a>). The Lord then opened the eyes of the servant, "And he saw: and, behold, the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire round about Elisha" (<a target="_blank" href="http://scriptures.lds.org/2_kgs/6/17">2 Kgs. 6:17</a>). (<a href="http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=f318118dd536c010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD&locale=0&sourceId=6a26ca99be2ab010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&hideNav=1">President Spencer W. Kimball</a>)<br /></blockquote>Exactly <span style="font-style: italic;">who</span> do we place our trust in?<br /><br />National symbols and icons are appropriate, so long as they represent a <span style="font-style: italic;">righteous </span>cause (e.g. Capt. Moroni's <span style="font-style: italic;">Title of Liberty)</span>; otherwise, we become as the people of Mormon who rely on our own strength and deny the power of the Lord. Iconography is a powerful tool, and it will be used on the American people again (Obama himself has already established himself as an icon). Internationally, our flag stands for imperialism and neocolonialism. Personally, I don't want to be associated to that symbol. I love my country and am willing to sacrifice everything I have for it, but I have to question how my flag and my country is associated to those ideas.<br /><blockquote>"Know ye that ye must lay down your weapons of war, and delight no more in the shedding of blood, and take them not again, save it be that God shall command you. Know ye that ye must come to the knowledge of your fathers, and repent of all your sins and iniquities, and believe in Jesus Christ, that he is the Son of God... This is written for the intent that ye may believe... and if ye believe this ye will know concerning your fathers, and also the marvelous works which were wrought by the power of God among them" (Mormon 7:4-5, 9).</blockquote>How jealous are we of our liberty and freedom? How quick are we to see the counterfeit from the substantive? Let us be sensitive to the Spirit of God that will always tell us that it is the Lord that has sacrificed all and that HE ALONE makes us free.<br /><br />Truly, our "fathers" were righteous men. They were men who the Lord had raised up for the very purpose that they fulfilled (D&C 101:80). We are <em>not</em> fighting the same cause they fought for! We have <em>not</em> remembered our fathers and their beliefs, their testimonies, their experiences, their persecutions and struggles, their hopes and dreams, their philosophies, or even the remembrance that they constantly called upon the name of God for their support!<br /><br /><blockquote>"And now behold, I say unto you, my brethren, you that belong to this church, have you sufficiently retained in remembrance the captivity of your fathers? Yea, and have you sufficiently retained in remembrance his mercy and long suffering towards them? And moreover, have ye sufficiently retained in remembrance that he has delivered their souls from hell?<br /><br />"Behold, he changed their hearts; yea, he awakened them out of a deep sleep, and they awoke unto God. Behold, they were in the midst of darkness; nevertheless, their souls were illuminated by the light of the everlasting word; yea, they were encircled about by the bands of death, and the chains of hell, and an everlasting destruction did await them.<br /><br />"And not I ask of you, my brethren, were they destroyed? Behold, I say unto you, Nay, they were not.<br /><br />"And again I ask, were the bands of death broken, and the chains of hell which encircled them about, were they loosed? I say unto you, yea, they were loosed, and their souls did expand, and they did sing redeeming love. And I say unto you that they were saved" (Alma 5:6-9).</blockquote><br /><br /></span><p></p>Shiloh Loganhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01232352679206328450noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2192472582302586579.post-27738815044752194422009-09-21T08:26:00.000-06:002009-09-21T08:27:38.702-06:00Glenn Beck is NOT a Libertarian (He's a Neocon)I haven't smiled this much in a very long time. It was about time someone called Beck out on a youtube video.<br /><br />Bravo! <br /><br /><object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/L6C6E6ayh4U&hl=en&fs=1&"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/L6C6E6ayh4U&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>Shiloh Loganhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01232352679206328450noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2192472582302586579.post-48282238799547196122009-08-23T19:32:00.000-06:002009-08-23T19:46:25.261-06:00The political Messiah is falling. What will save him?<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjhiFyQoMFsBEQsau7g_BY8TQVIqKdZEnROExVZHr5FuU91E3GJL-CrsniF6cV3Um4CBBZ12xji1yylp46By1u3s7CMaQiTlYQ3xGFu6R8H0BoT2jkGEbKLGcHgq0IRlwaQc2-RO2-xrJw/s1600-h/obama_index_august_23_2009.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; cursor: pointer; width: 320px; height: 240px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjhiFyQoMFsBEQsau7g_BY8TQVIqKdZEnROExVZHr5FuU91E3GJL-CrsniF6cV3Um4CBBZ12xji1yylp46By1u3s7CMaQiTlYQ3xGFu6R8H0BoT2jkGEbKLGcHgq0IRlwaQc2-RO2-xrJw/s320/obama_index_august_23_2009.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5373337868801623458" border="0" /></a><br />With Obama's approval ratings dropping, should the American people start questioning which catastrophic event will help bolster the citizen's support? 9/11 sure helped Dubya (<a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/Bush_poll_011609.pdf?tag=contentMain;contentBody">up to 90% approval in Oct of 2001</a>), what will save this presidential Savior?Shiloh Loganhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01232352679206328450noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2192472582302586579.post-72181032470421748822009-08-23T09:46:00.003-06:002010-03-24T18:16:23.366-06:00Obamacare is Dead: Romney is Our New Savior?<a href="http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/08/20/romney.health.care/index.html">http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/08/20/romney.health.care/index.html</a><br /><br />Forgive me for this surge of unprofessional emotionalism to say bluntly: This absolutely disgusts me in ways I find unfathomable and humanly impossible.<br /><br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjlftiu4KiVrzoB1-hsJa3yePjEB8aeuPjm5xeeNvq7vmDjCAcZ-fUf5_LoVFQmoueCi3ibhyqHZscXd2DeJBu1pv9OZacYxnQx582C80VNquasoAqImBSWdNcYvv1f9LOy3yK-5D8K6S4/s1600-h/Romney's+health+care....gif"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; cursor: pointer; width: 320px; height: 252px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjlftiu4KiVrzoB1-hsJa3yePjEB8aeuPjm5xeeNvq7vmDjCAcZ-fUf5_LoVFQmoueCi3ibhyqHZscXd2DeJBu1pv9OZacYxnQx582C80VNquasoAqImBSWdNcYvv1f9LOy3yK-5D8K6S4/s320/Romney's+health+care....gif" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5373195901236166786" border="0" /></a>For the last several years I have touched occasionally on the subject of Romneycare and its evolution from a Massachusetts' law to national implementation. As Governor of Massachusetts, Mitt Romney was the brainchild behind one of the most liberty and freedom destroying pieces of legislation ever enacted: Mandatory Health Insurance. As this CNN article states, Romney's plan mandates that "<a href="http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/08/20/romney.health.care/index.html">people in the state are required to buy private insurance, and the poor get subsidies</a>". Seriously? This is the conservative answer to socialism? Coercion and more justified socialism? The "socialist" system already subsidized the poor -- all Romney's plan effectively does is mandate and coerce those who can afford insurance to get it. Simply adding a little fascism to the mix does not kill socialism. His justification behind this: We do not consider it bad to mandate auto insurance, why should we feel unjustified in legally requiring everyone to have health insurance? Mr. Romney, I am not a car! I can choose not to drive, and therefore I can choose not to have auto insurance. I cannot, however, choose not to live! How is this possible in the land of the free? How is it that the state can make my very existence and life illegal unless I come into compliance with the laws of man (<a href="http://scriptures.lds.org/en/dc/98">D&C 98:7</a>)? How is this freedom? How is this liberty? This is disgusting!<br /><br />It didn't take much to forecast the following before it happened...<br /><br />So, here came the Holy Messiah "Obama". He came with a message of a "one-payer" health system that would start as a "public-option". In other words, the government would create its own health-care branch for people to buy as they would their own corporate and private insurance company -- or so he said. For the last two months, the media has blitzed the message of "socialism" and "fascism" everywhere! The media has reported on irate town-hall meetings where masses of Americans turned out to demonstrate and exercise their "American-ness" upon their elected Representatives. Finally, it appears all of this exercising has been worthwhile: Obamacare is quite nearly finished. Talks of completely dropping the <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_health_care_overhaul">public-option</a> and starting over have already begun, as the White House gives a half-rate performance to fight for a seemingly lost cause.<br /><br />Enter Mitt Romney.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqa9ivCK4jMBYMksx1SlPhzW0ueqisPeE1vNB5bn0i6iPM6yAgPV2aBeTFZcnBKV268DYMu8jhGFqLKtuSemGOtXyXVn3-poDks5F-JbuEagvJ27OJ5eLt3XtUsC0iTFztLT08aX1uoQA/s1600-h/Mitt+Romney+double+talk.gif"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; cursor: pointer; width: 264px; height: 205px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqa9ivCK4jMBYMksx1SlPhzW0ueqisPeE1vNB5bn0i6iPM6yAgPV2aBeTFZcnBKV268DYMu8jhGFqLKtuSemGOtXyXVn3-poDks5F-JbuEagvJ27OJ5eLt3XtUsC0iTFztLT08aX1uoQA/s320/Mitt+Romney+double+talk.gif" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5373194962887430530" border="0" /></a>With the "Holy One" now dropping in favor points among his sheeple, it wasn't hard to know that Romney was a step around the corner. Romney is already the media's GOP angel and one of the most -- if not the most -- quoted "conservative" leaders in writing op-ed pieces meant for the President. I'm sure the president is grateful and could not have gotten on without Mitt's counsel; however, considering the Massachusetts' law has not yet proven itself successful, but is actually showing severe signs of decay, I do a see a little hypocrisy in the <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/07/20/massachusetts-health-care-woes-cast-cloud-romney-bid/">pot</a> calling the <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&sid=aJ01reSCujDQ">kettle</a> black here (no pun intended).<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiVIJwbdJAY1rJBumN57Qj6sLplzOoI9lHdhBrbkFJ5wYVBEieZ-Pu7_zAfWbI6-v6G5Khwogdy9OLZERbXlBGtigLA0n3bjUtajrjdG4dbyeE8zqrd6NUPUMcC1rdljB5rWZKFhcnS4os/s1600-h/16mass_grph.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; float: right; cursor: pointer; width: 150px; height: 320px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiVIJwbdJAY1rJBumN57Qj6sLplzOoI9lHdhBrbkFJ5wYVBEieZ-Pu7_zAfWbI6-v6G5Khwogdy9OLZERbXlBGtigLA0n3bjUtajrjdG4dbyeE8zqrd6NUPUMcC1rdljB5rWZKFhcnS4os/s320/16mass_grph.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5373196424308124034" border="0" /></a> Proven conservative organizations, such as the Cato Institute, have written concerning the <a href="http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=10381">folly of Romneycare</a> for its obvious tax on the Middle-class.<br /><br />Romneycare was a national plan from the beginning. The fact that the GOP was crystal clear that Romneycare in Massachusetts was meant as the national "conservative answer" to the liberal-socialist mess makes me ill. The fact that the GOP used Massachusetts' citizens as its guinea pig makes me sick. That being said, the national-level implementation will not completely replicate the Massachusetts' plan -- it is actually more intrusive. As Romney's team stated during his run for president: "'<a href="http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZGRiYmJkZjdlODViYjc3NTY1YzQxYzkwZTE5ZTRlOGQ=">He would have greater powers in the White House' than he did as Govenor</a>".<br /><br />The promotion for Romneycare went something like this: <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/health/2005-07-04-health-insurance-usat_x.htm">Since socialism forces everyone to take care of one person, then it is more just to force the individual to provide for himself</a>. Americans typically hate socialism because it represents lost freedom and coercion. Ironically, the conservative movement today believes that coercion and lost freedom is better than socialism.<br /><br />If I remember correctly, America was founded by men who suffered if they refused to work, and communities that would rally around them <span style="font-style: italic;">willingly</span> if they were physically incapable of doing so. Those who founded our country -- early settlers and American founders -- didn't have the luxury of unemployment, social security, medicare, medicaid, or the other thousand socialist programs instituted by our government that are now considered "rights". They worked, or they went without. In a natural state of existence -- that is, in a state of liberty and freedom -- what coercion does a man need to govern himself and retain his own accountability? It is wholly unnecessary! Man, if left alone, is naturally required to take responsibility for himself. It does not take the tyrannical arm of government to force him -- this is merely despotic usurpation under a democratic oligarchy.<br /><br />The sudden shift in political tides was planned from the beginning. For Obamacare to phase out so perfectly and quickly as Romney enters so smoothly with his plan that fits into every little crack and nuance of Obama's purported plan is beyond coincidence. For as bad as Obamacare is to this nation -- and make no mistake that it would be excessively destructive -- Romneycare is just as heinous to American freedom, liberty, and prosperity.<br /><br />I, as <a href="http://www.monticello.org/reports/quotes/memorial.html">Jefferson</a>, tremble for my country when I reflect on the justice of God, and that his justice cannot sleep forever. To coerce and destroy liberty on God's promised land will have very quick and harsh consequences (<a href="http://scriptures.lds.org/en/2_ne/1">2 Ne 1:9-11</a>). Even worse, the eternal consequences of supporting such liberty and freedom destroying ideologies, we have already been told, will have many seeking for mercy in a day when mercy has passed them by; indeed, the day of mercy will pass by many (<a href="http://scriptures.lds.org/en/morm/2">Mormon 2:15</a>).<br /><br />Man is to live according to the principles of freedom, accountability, responsibility, and self-government; however, it is an ignorant man that lives in fear of these principles by believing they only exist in the vacuum of force and coercion.<br /><br />May we all stand up for principle against what the world will argue is "practical".<br /><br />May we all care only what the Lord thinks, and <a href="http://scriptures.lds.org/en/bd/r/23">turn over to him our own selfish understandings in humility and supplication</a>.<br /><br />May we all be wise to fight freedom and liberty destroying legislation, and that we can all determine and distinguish the face of a Saint from an enemy to the Children of God.<br /><br />Surely, as his own actions have proven, Romney is no friend to liberty.Shiloh Loganhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01232352679206328450noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2192472582302586579.post-49873098914417194152009-08-02T18:00:00.000-06:002009-08-02T18:05:50.407-06:00Freedom of Speech: Not So "Unalienable" After All...<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/YNoBLa7lhXY&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/YNoBLa7lhXY&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="425" height="344"></embed></object><br /><br />When you have to ask the government permission to act in your "unalienable right", there is something wrong.Shiloh Loganhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01232352679206328450noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2192472582302586579.post-16699997466067508132009-07-05T13:57:00.000-06:002009-07-05T14:16:24.711-06:00Ensign July 2009: A Quiet SiftingMy wife is a remarkable woman. She wrote this this morning, and I'm posting it here for you all. I fully support the principles she expresses herein.<br /><br />*********************<br /><br />Amidst many words of counsel in the July 2009 issue of the <i>Ensign</i>, came the message, in an insert called <i>Surviving Unemployment</i>, that members should "File for unemployment and other available government benefits". How can the church produce and distribute something so blatantly contrary to gospel principle and so offensive to the plan of agency, when the prophets have spoken specifically against this reliance on the arm of flesh? There is more to be said in that one phrase of the <i>Ensign </i>about the state of affairs in these latter-days than we realize. Let me explain.<br /><br />Exodus 32:<br />1 <span> And</span> when the people saw that Moses <sup>a</sup>delayed to come down out of the mount, the people gathered themselves together unto Aaron, and said unto him, Up, make us <sup>b</sup>gods, which shall <sup>c</sup>go before us; for <i>as for</i> this Moses, the man that brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we <sup>d</sup>wot not what is become of him. <div><a name="1224c78543a7b658_1224c1f4cdd5dead_2"></a> <div> 2 And Aaron said unto them, Break off the <sup>a</sup>golden earrings, which <i>are</i> in the ears of your wives, of your sons, and of your daughters, and bring <i>them</i> unto me. </div> </div> <div><a name="1224c78543a7b658_1224c1f4cdd5dead_3"></a> <div> 3 And all the people brake off the golden earrings which <i>were</i> in their ears, and brought <i>them</i> unto Aaron. </div> </div> <div><a name="1224c78543a7b658_1224c1f4cdd5dead_4"></a> <div> 4 And he received <i>them</i> at their hand, and fashioned it with a graving tool, after he had made it a <sup>a</sup>molten calf: and they said, <sup>b</sup>These <i>be</i> thy <sup>c</sup>gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt. </div> </div> <div><a name="1224c78543a7b658_1224c1f4cdd5dead_5"></a> <div> 5 And when Aaron saw <i>it,</i> he built an altar before it; and Aaron made proclamation, and said, To morrow <i>is</i> a feast to the <span>Lord</span>. </div> </div> <div><a name="1224c78543a7b658_1224c1f4cdd5dead_6"></a> <div> 6 And they rose up early on the morrow, and offered burnt offerings, and brought <sup>a</sup>peace offerings; and the <sup>b</sup>people sat down to eat and to drink, and rose up to play. </div> </div> <div><a name="1224c78543a7b658_1224c1f4cdd5dead_7"></a> <div> 7 ¶ And the <span>Lord</span> said unto Moses, Go, get thee down; for thy people, which thou broughtest out of the land of Egypt, have <sup>a</sup>corrupted <i>themselves:</i> </div> </div> <div><a name="1224c78543a7b658_1224c1f4cdd5dead_8"></a> <div> 8 They have <sup>a</sup>turned aside <sup>b</sup>quickly out of the way which I commanded them: they have made them a <sup>c</sup>molten calf, and have worshipped it, and have sacrificed thereunto, and said, These <i>be</i> thy gods, O Israel, which have brought thee up out of the land of Egypt. </div> </div> <div><a name="1224c78543a7b658_1224c1f4cdd5dead_9"></a> <div> 9 And the <span>Lord</span> said unto Moses, I have seen this people, and, behold, it <i>is</i> a <sup>a</sup>stiffnecked people: </div> </div> <div><a name="1224c78543a7b658_1224c1f4cdd5dead_10"></a> <div> 10 Now therefore let me alone, that my <sup>a</sup>wrath may wax hot against them, and that I may <sup>b</sup>consume them: and I will make of thee a great <sup>c</sup>nation. </div> </div> <div><a name="1224c78543a7b658_1224c1f4cdd5dead_11"></a> <div> 11 And Moses <sup>a</sup>besought the <span>Lord</span> his God, and said, <span>Lord</span>, why doth thy wrath wax hot against thy people, which thou hast brought forth out of the land of Egypt with great power, and with a mighty hand? </div> </div> <div><a name="1224c78543a7b658_1224c1f4cdd5dead_12"></a> <div> 12 Wherefore should the <sup>a</sup>Egyptians speak, and say, For mischief did he bring them out, to slay them in the mountains, and to consume them from the face of the earth? Turn from thy fierce wrath, <sup>b</sup>and <sup>c</sup>repent of this evil against thy people. </div> </div> <div><a name="1224c78543a7b658_1224c1f4cdd5dead_13"></a> <div> 13 Remember <sup>a</sup>Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, thy servants, to whom thou <sup>b</sup>swarest by thine own self, and saidst unto them, I will <sup>c</sup>multiply your <sup>d</sup>seed as the stars of heaven, and all this <sup>e</sup>land that I have spoken of will I give unto your seed, and they shall inherit <i>it</i> for ever. </div> </div> <div><a name="1224c78543a7b658_1224c1f4cdd5dead_14"></a> <div> 14 And the Lord <i>said unto Moses, If they will repent of the evil which they have done, I will spare them, and turn away my fierce wrath; but, behold, thou shalt execute judgment upon all that will not repent of this evil this day. Therefore, see thou do this thing that I have commanded thee, or I will execute all that which I had</i> thought to do unto <i>my</i> people.(JST)</div> </div> <div><a name="1224c78543a7b658_1224c1f4cdd5dead_15"></a> <div> 15 ¶ And Moses turned, and went down from the mount, and the two <sup>a</sup>tables of the testimony <i>were</i> in his hand: the tables <i>were</i> written on both their sides; on the one side and on the other <i>were</i> they written. </div> </div> <div><a name="1224c78543a7b658_1224c1f4cdd5dead_16"></a> <div> 16 And the <sup>a</sup>tables <i>were</i> the work of God, and the <sup>b</sup>writing <i>was</i> the writing of God, graven upon the tables. </div> </div> <div><a name="1224c78543a7b658_1224c1f4cdd5dead_17"></a> <div> 17 And when <sup>a</sup>Joshua heard the noise of the people as they <sup>b</sup>shouted, he said unto Moses, <i>There is</i> a noise of war in the camp. </div> </div> <div><a name="1224c78543a7b658_1224c1f4cdd5dead_18"></a> <div> 18 And he said, <i>It is</i> not the voice of <i>them that</i> <sup>a</sup>shout for mastery, neither <i>is it</i> the voice of <i>them that</i> cry for being overcome: <i>but</i> the noise of <i>them that</i> sing do I hear. </div> </div> <div><a name="1224c78543a7b658_1224c1f4cdd5dead_19"></a> <div> 19 ¶ And it came to pass, as soon as he came nigh unto the camp, that he <sup>a</sup>saw the calf, and the dancing: and Moses’ <sup>b</sup>anger waxed hot, and he cast the tables out of his hands, and <sup>c</sup>brake them beneath the mount. </div> </div> <div><a name="1224c78543a7b658_1224c1f4cdd5dead_20"></a> <div> 20 And he took the <sup>a</sup>calf which they had made, and burnt <i>it</i> in the fire, and ground <i>it</i> to powder, and <sup>b</sup>strawed <i>it</i> upon the <sup>c</sup>water, and made the children of Israel drink <i>of it.</i> </div> </div> <div><a name="1224c78543a7b658_1224c1f4cdd5dead_21"></a> <div> 21 And Moses said unto Aaron, What did this people unto thee, that thou hast brought so great a sin upon them? </div> </div> <div><a name="1224c78543a7b658_1224c1f4cdd5dead_22"></a> <div> 22 And Aaron said, Let not the <sup>a</sup>anger of my lord wax hot: thou knowest the people, that they <i>are</i> <sup>b</sup><i>set</i> on <sup>c</sup>mischief. </div> </div> <div><a name="1224c78543a7b658_1224c1f4cdd5dead_23"></a> <div> 23 For they said unto me, <sup>a</sup>Make us <sup>b</sup>gods, which shall go before us: for <i>as for</i> this Moses, the man that brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we wot not what is become of him. </div> </div> <div><a name="1224c78543a7b658_1224c1f4cdd5dead_24"></a> <div> 24 And I said unto them, Whosoever hath any gold, let them break <i>it</i> off. So they gave <i>it</i> me: then I cast it into the fire, and there came out this calf. </div> </div> <div><a name="1224c78543a7b658_1224c1f4cdd5dead_25"></a> <div> 25 ¶ And when Moses saw that the people <i>were</i> <sup>a</sup>naked; (for Aaron had made them <sup>b</sup>naked unto <i>their</i> shame among their enemies:) </div> </div> <div><a name="1224c78543a7b658_1224c1f4cdd5dead_26"></a> <div> 26 Then Moses stood in the gate of the camp, and said, Who <i>is</i> on the <span>Lord</span>’s side? <i>let him come</i> unto me. And all the sons of Levi gathered themselves together unto him. </div> </div> <div><a name="1224c78543a7b658_1224c1f4cdd5dead_27"></a> <div> 27 And he said unto them, Thus saith the <span>Lord</span> God of Israel, Put every man his sword by his side, <i>and</i> go in and out from gate to gate throughout the camp, and <sup>a</sup>slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbour. </div> </div> <div><a name="1224c78543a7b658_1224c1f4cdd5dead_28"></a> <div> 28 And the children of Levi did according to the word of Moses: and there fell of the people that day about three thousand men. </div> </div> <div><a name="1224c78543a7b658_1224c1f4cdd5dead_29"></a> <div> 29 For Moses had said, <sup>a</sup>Consecrate yourselves to day to the <span>Lord</span>, even every man upon his <sup>b</sup>son, and upon his brother; that he may bestow upon you a <sup>c</sup>blessing this day. </div> </div> <div><a name="1224c78543a7b658_1224c1f4cdd5dead_30"></a> <div> 30 ¶ And it came to pass on the morrow, that Moses said unto the people, Ye have <sup>a</sup>sinned a great sin: and now I will go up unto the <span>Lord</span>; <sup>b</sup>peradventure I shall make an <sup>c</sup>atonement for your sin. </div> </div> <div><a name="1224c78543a7b658_1224c1f4cdd5dead_31"></a> <div> 31 And Moses returned unto the <span>Lord</span>, and said, Oh, this people have sinned a great sin, and have made them <sup>a</sup>gods of gold. </div> </div> <div><a name="1224c78543a7b658_1224c1f4cdd5dead_32"></a> <div> 32 Yet now, if thou wilt <sup>a</sup>forgive their sin—; and if not, <sup>b</sup>blot me, I pray thee, out of thy <sup>c</sup>book which thou hast <sup>d</sup>written. </div> </div> <div><a name="1224c78543a7b658_1224c1f4cdd5dead_33"></a> <div> 33 And the <span>Lord</span> said unto Moses, <sup>a</sup>Whosoever hath <sup>b</sup>sinned against me, him will I <sup>c</sup>blot out of my <sup>d</sup>book. </div> </div> <div><a name="1224c78543a7b658_1224c1f4cdd5dead_34"></a> <div> 34 Therefore now go, <sup>a</sup>lead the people unto <i>the place</i> of which I have spoken unto thee: behold, mine <sup>b</sup>Angel shall go before thee: nevertheless in the day when I visit I will visit their sin upon them. </div> </div> <a name="1224c78543a7b658_1224c1f4cdd5dead_35"></a> 35 And the <span>Lord</span> plagued the people, because they made the calf, which Aaron made.<br /><br />We must start with a few things that we know. We know that Moses is a type of Christ. We know the tablets he brought down are the higher law or gospel of Christ. We know that Aaron was the High Priest and chief officiator in the Aaronic priesthood, which pertains to all things temporal. We know that Aaron was the spokesperson for Moses. Joshua is an Israelite military leader, close to Moses, and the one who took over at Moses passing to lead the Children of Israel through battle into their promised land. Egypt represents slavery, and the world's denial of agency. The idol, particularly a golden calf, is a direct representation of a god of salvation and protection.<br /><br />Now, let me recap the story in Exodus. Moses goes to talk to the Lord, where he receives the highest gospel law. The people went to Aaron and asked that they would make them gods because they did not know what had happened to Moses, the man who had delivered them from the Egyptians, why he had not yet returned. Aaron acquiesced and built an idol for the people to worship in Moses' absence. The people worshiped this idol, ate, drank, and were merry. The Lord told Moses to go down and see the people corrupting themselves with this false god. The Lord says he will destroy the people for their wickedness. Moses asks the Lord to stay His hand, that the Egyptians might not suspect folly and that the Lord may fulfill His promises regarding their posterity. The Lord tells Moses to go down execute judgment upon all those who will not repent. Joshua informs Moses as he returns that the people are becoming riotous, seeking for war. Moses, upon seeing the people's corruption, denies them the higher law by breaking the tablets. Moses destroys the idol. Moses asks Aaron what could have happened that Aaron would help them sin in this way. Aaron tells him that the people asked for the idol. Moses stood in front of the people and asked all those who are on the Lord's side to come unto him. Those who chose to stand with the Lord were told to slay some of the most wicked, of which their were 3000. Moses tells the people to dedicate themselves to the Lord and His law, from which blessings will follow. Moses goes to atone for the sins of the people. The Lord tells him that He will blot out the names of those who have sinned. The Lord commands Moses to continue in their journey, and He plagued the people because of the idol Aaron had made at their desire.<br /><br />Here are a few more things we know. The <i>Ensign </i>is in many capacities the spokespiece for the church. In its role as describing techniques to overcome physical hardships, as in losing one's job, it is describing actions that fall within the scope of the Aaronic priesthood. In light of this, and the other things I've mentioned that we know, let me point out a few things from my recap.<br /><br />The people do not understand where Christ is. They do not understand why He has not come back, or do not care what His is doing. They no longer want His higher law. Their hearts are far from His law and the blessings associated. Because they feel His absence, the absence of the One who has saved them, they ask the "church" to provide for them temporally, something that will make them feel more secure about their current position. The church not only allows such idolatry, but gives them a specific idol that represents Christ in His ability to save and protect, because the people asked. The church was not acting outside of its office, it was merely doing what the people wanted, which it has always done throughout our scriptures. Christ calls those who are on His side away from those who are not. The people are plagued because of their desires for this false god to provide for them and protect them. They have forgotten the Lord, their God. They have turned from Him to rely on the arm of flesh. The church, through the <i>Ensign</i>, has given them what they want. Those who are on the Lord's side know who they are, they know what to follow because they follow the Lord, and He has taught them better. This unconstitutional form of government which we now have, the great destroyer of true freedom, has been allowed, even sought for, by those who have even proclaimed to take upon them the name of the Lord. This is a false god they worship. A fleshy arm to which they look to heal, protect, and provide.<br /><br />That one seemingly benign phrase in the July 2009 <i>Ensign </i>is a great sifter. It has separated those who lean upon the arm of flesh from those who trust the Lord. It has separated those who trade their agency for temporal security from those who follow and live the higher ancient law of liberty. It has separated those asleep from those awake. It has separated those who deny through their actions the divinity of the Constitution from those who live by its just and holy principles. It has been prophesied that there will come a time when those who are awakened to a sense of their awful situation will arise and live by the truth they have not only received, but have accepted. They will do so in spite of worldly ways and false security. These, and only these, will be free. Moses did not go down and explain the truth to the people and THEN ask who would be found on the Lord's side. He simply asked and took those who were awakened and ready to go. There is a time for learning, a time for repentance, and a time for judgment. There is a time to respond to prophetic command, and a time to distinguish the wheat from the chaff. We have stoned the prophets. We have worshiped false gods. We have been caught in our pride and faithlessness. We have been quietly sifted. Let those with an ear to hear understand. Who is on the Lord's side?Shiloh Loganhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01232352679206328450noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2192472582302586579.post-61357099777977157132009-06-30T11:16:00.000-06:002009-08-23T12:38:42.051-06:00A Nation of Laws, or a Nation of Emotion?Well, I know I'm preaching the choir here, but I think this is worth reading. This was posted on an school associate's facebook page (Jeffrey Thayne), and he is the one who talked to Senator Bennett and wrote this. This just goes to show how far we have come as a nation away from <i>principle </i>towards<i> ill</i>-perceived <i>practicality</i>. Notice, as Jeffery stated, how Bennett changes mid-argument over the republic/democracy issue when it served his own needs! Nothing like prostituting and polluting the foundational premise of a Republic over a Democracy!<br /><br />I find it extremely poignant that at the end of this discussion with Senator Bennett a women interrupts their conversation using as strong a fallacy of appeal to emotion as I have ever read. Indeed, the logical fallacy of an <i>appeal to emotion</i> -- and its sibling fallacy, an <i>appeal to false dichotomy -- </i>are perhaps the strongest driving forces that keep failing socialistic programs running. Apparently, according to this women, either the government needs to take care of her or else she would starve. Are those <i>really</i> the only two choices? Starvation or government intervention? No, but an appeal to a false dichotomy is a strong argument when accompanied with an appeal to emotion -- regardless of the illogical assertion.<br /><br />After reading this, take a moment to realize that this Senator is a prominent "conservative" leader in the US Federal Government. And I wonder why people stare at me with blank faces when I tell them that there is little-to-no difference between the political right and left anymore.<br /><br />http://www.facebook.com/home.php?ref=home#/note.php?note_id=62295353155&id=671526513&ref=mf<br /><br />*********************<br /><br />Today, I went to a Q&A forum hosted by Senator Bennett. There were many thoughtful questions asked. My overall impression, however, is that Bennett never once justified a decision in terms of moral principles or principles of good government; rather, he justified his decisions in terms of political and economic expediency.<br /><br />Senator Bennett spent a large amount of time advertising his Social Security reform. According to Bennett, the changes would eliminate the present insolvency of the system. Not only that, but it would allow us to perpetuate the Social Security program down through the generations, "providing our children and grandchildren" with even more benefits than we receive today.<br /><br />I was the second to the last person to ask a question (after having my hand raised for nearly two hours). I said,<br /><br />"Senator Bennett, you've talked today about Social Security and entitlement reform. I would like to hear your perspective on this question: Where do you, as a senator, derive the Constitutional authority for these programs in the first place?"<br /><br />He responded:<br /><br />"I never really researched it. Social Security is as entrenched a program in the American public as there is, and so the issue has never been much of a concern for me. This is because even if the program were found to be unconstitutional, there is such an overwhelming public support for the program that a constitutional amendment would pass by a landslide. Also, no court has ever declared the program unconstitutional. Some early New-Deal programs were challenged in the courts, and they were deemed perfectly appropriate, so I have no doubt this one would be too. Beyond that, I've never thought of it, nor have I researched it, because it has never seemed relevant. The people have decided they want it, and that's all I need to know."<br /><br />After the meeting closed, my mom and I approached the senator and asked him some more questions. Here is my report of a portion of that conversation.<br /><br />My mom asked, "Are we so far gone as a nation, and so reliant on government support, that we can't even address whether we SHOULD have Social Security?" She explained herself, "I don't want my grandchildren to have Social Security. I don't want them to feel as though they have a RIGHT to taxpayer money and government benefits. I want them to learn about self-reliance, not government entitlement."<br /><br />Senator Bennett responded, "Well, I understand your position. However, this is a democracy, and the people have decided that they want Social Security."<br /><br />I said, "Actually this is a REPUBLIC, governed by law. If the Constitution doesn't give the government authority, then no matter what the people say, the government shouldn't do it."<br /><br />Bennett: "Actually, although we are structured as a Republic, we are accountable to the people. The preamble of the Constitution says that 'We the PEOPLE' are the source of government authority. Thus, the people can authorize the government to act according to their wishes, and we accountable to the voice of the people."<br /><br />Mom: "That wasn't the impression I got last fall, when you ignored the voice of your constituents by voting for the bail-out. Polls show that the majority of your constituents were against it, and pleaded with you to vote against it. Yet you voted for it, and encouraged others to vote for it."<br /><br />Bennett: "As you said, this is a Republic, not a Democracy. The people vote for me because they want me to use my brains, rather than just parrot the polls. They expect me to use the judgment and information I have to make an informed decision, rather than simply parroting the voice of the people. Otherwise, we would need no representatives, just polls."<br /><br />Me: "I believe that we should do our best to maintain the principles of self-reliance and small government this nation was founded upon, including principles of constitutional government. Government should never act outside of its constitutional authority."<br /><br />Bennett: "Unfortunately, the majority of people don't think that way. People want government benefits. We can't try to change everyone's mind... a campaign in favor of self-reliance isn't going to solve anything, because people have already made up their minds in terms of want they want from government."<br /><br />Me: "When you embark on a campaign in favor of self-reliance and small government, that is when I'll respect you as a senator. Those are the principles we need as a nation."<br /><br />Bennett: "I'm not going to try to overthrow the government."<br /><br />Me: "I'm not asking you to. I'm just asking you to stick to small-government principles."<br /><br />At this moment, a woman who was listening to our conversation interrupted us. She began to tell us all about how poor she's been her entire life. She described how she's lost six thousand in her retirement fund. She described how she's been a single mother for many years. She began to weep, and said, "Life has been so hard. Without Medicare, Social Security, and other government aid, I wouldn't have a home. I wouldn't have a life. I wouldn't have been able to care for my children."<br /><br />She was extremely emotional. Senator Bennett gave her hug, and said, "This is exactly why we will never get rid of Social Security. It helps everyone, especially people like you. That is why my Social Security reform needs to pass, so that future generations won't have the same worries as you do."Shiloh Loganhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01232352679206328450noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2192472582302586579.post-24236605568367831612009-06-19T23:53:00.001-06:002010-03-30T04:19:21.289-06:00Can the only truth be unlawful to speak?I was thinking about the concept of "unity" tonight, and a flood of ideas came. This concept of <span style="font-style: italic;">unity</span> has many ideas attached to this word, but what <span style="font-style: italic;">is</span> unity? The Lord said, "If ye are not one, ye are not mine" (D&C 38:27) and to "let every man esteem his brother as himself" (D&C 28:24). Today, we hear political slogans chanted and read on bumper stickers the phrase "United We Stand". The concept of "it takes a village to raise a child" has been mulled over to imply the concept that a community affects the mental cognition of the next generation, and that it is the community's responsibility to unite in rearing them (just for clarification, I disagree with the "village to raise a child" ideology). But what <span style="font-style: italic;">is </span>unity? In trying to solidify a good definition to "unity", I had the following thoughts...<br /><br />The Limits of Language<br /><br />Language is an interesting thing. For any person who has learned a second language, it is of no surprise that there are entire concepts, thoughts, and ideas that exist in one language, culture, or society that do not translate or even find place into another language, culture, or society. Why is this? Without trying to make an easy concept more complicated, the simple answer is that differing cultures and societies will grow to interpret ideas, beliefs, and meanings differently than another. Words offer the means to meaning, and a word is nothing but the associated symbols, ideas, and structures that we associate and give to it. Many words lose their meaning, as a society grows and finds new meanings to fit old concepts; in this way, absolute meanings in one generation often grow to mean something entirely different in the next generation.<br /><br />The Greeks<br /><br />Many of the Greeks after Aristotle, in their first philosophical quest to <span style="font-style: italic;">know</span> things for as they <span style="font-style: italic;">are</span>, used the first steps of syllogistic <span style="font-style: italic;">logic</span> to fulfill their quest. They used language to define, associate, and understand things for as they were. In scriptural language, they used logic to define truth. This process of inquiry had many benefits, but one particular great flaw: that because of their language, the Greeks could only ever define a substance by its attributes, and was never able to actually understand a thing for what it <span style="font-style: italic;">was </span>intrinsically. This limit of language (to only define a thing by its attributes) reduced the knowledge of a thing to its characteristics, and by so doing the absoluteness of truth was made variable by its perceived practicality within society. In this way, the Greeks ended up losing before they ever began! The question "What is gold?" was answered: Gold is a soft substance; God is metal; Gold is shiny; Gold is rare; Gold is a solid substance; etc. Never could the Greeks ever classify gold as an intrinsic substance for what it <span style="font-style: italic;">was</span>, but only for what it was perceived to be by its human usefulness and interpretation through its attributes. In short, language reduced the Greeks to only defining something from the outside looking in upon that substance.<br /><br />What does this have to do with anything? When such abstract concepts such as <span style="font-style: italic;">love</span>, <span style="font-style: italic;">faith</span>, <span style="font-style: italic;">hope</span>, or <span style="font-style: italic;">unity</span> are presented, this understanding of the Greek influence in our current society is quite important. It was the Greeks that first divided up <span style="font-style: italic;">love</span> into certain characteristics: eros (romantic), philia (brotherly love), and agape (the greatest characteristic of love that's not bound by perception). They could not comprehend love being something that existed as a whole, but they desperately found need to break it down into its perceivable parts. Accordingly, <span style="font-style: italic;">unity </span>has also gone through its own transformation of being reduced to its characteristics; this concept has gone through many categorical interpretations and social understandings to mean basically whatever anyone wants it to mean.<br /><br />The Hebrew Understanding:<br /><br />A <span style="font-style: italic;">logic</span> professor once told our <span style="font-style: italic;">intro deductive logic</span> class (Phil 205) that the Old Testament was "logically empty". There are, he said, absolutely no found cases of structured logic in the entire compilation. The New Testament, however, is engorged with cases of logic and structured arguments (especially in the books outside the four-gospels) that are influenced by the Greek philosophical thought. The ancient Hebrews did not study philosophy; they did not try to understand the world around them in terms of deduction or induction; they did not create elaborate and structured arguments to prove their points... In the Old Testament, <span style="font-style: italic;">truth (</span>knowing things as they <span style="font-style: italic;">are</span>) is not found through logic, but by and through direct revelation from God. Whatever God said made something so, and whatever <span style="font-style: italic;">was</span> was just that way because the Lawgiver said it was so. This difference in understanding gives light to the Lord's answer to Moses when he wanted to find out <span style="font-style: italic;">what </span>and <span style="font-style: italic;">who</span> God <span style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-style: italic;">was</span></span>. The Lord's response "I AM THAT I AM: and he said, This shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you." (Exodus 3:14) The Greeks would have had a field day with this, "You ARE what, God? You can't just say I AM! You 'AM' what? What do you DO? Who ARE you?" The Greeks would have sought to know God through His attributes, not by through his intrinsic substance and self. This answer, however, given to Moses was absolutely appropriate and in line with their understanding. Whereas the Greeks sought to know a thing from the outside looking in, the Hebrews believed in truth as revealed from God and looked at substance from the inside looking out.<br /><br />Lawful vs <span style="font-style: italic;">Un<span style="font-style: italic;"><span style="font-style: italic;"><span style="font-style: italic;"></span></span></span></span>lawful -- Equity and the Eternal Existence of Matter and Nature<br /><br />Law is merely the thing that defines the intrinsic substance of an element for what it <span style="font-style: italic;">is (</span>whether law is actually a <span style="font-style: italic;">thing</span> or not is irrelevant to this thread; it is merely important to note that it is law that defines). In other words, <span style="font-style: italic;">law defines truth</span>. There is an old Mormon ideology that gained much momentum through various LDS researchers in the mid-to-late 1900's that basically states that "God is bound by law, and he cannot go outside his law". This basic thought, however, is built on a false premise (here I go being all Greek). The concept of God being bound by law is only understandable within a Grecian philosophical paradigm; a paradigm that only perceives God through His attributes, and not through his actual intrinsic existence.<br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;">Independent Nature of Matter<br /></div><br />Nature exists independently, as does all matter (spiritual or physical). The Creator does not control or force matter into existence, but he -- in knowing the ultimate amount of joy of each intelligence -- can lovingly call forth on matter-unorganized to obey to his words in trust and faith that his call will lead each intelligence to the greatest amount of joy possible. It is not the <span style="font-style: italic;">being</span> of God to ever make something of that which it is not, but he uses law to perfectly define things as they <span style="font-style: italic;">are</span> and exist independently. By <span style="font-style: italic;">being</span> the "Lawgiver", this does not give the Creator the power to force things into compliance, but it is a key of Priesthood wherein He can with perfect and eternal clarity and knowledge define truth; in other words, He is capable of seeing the beginning from the end, and he knows how to define the actual substance for what it <span style="font-style: italic;">is</span> and not by its <span style="font-style: italic;">attributes</span>. This was yet another fundamental flaw of Lucifer's plan when he wanted the <span style="font-style: italic;">glory</span> (priesthood) of God. It was Lucifer's mistake to believe that by taking upon himself the role of the "Lawgiver" he could define things as he saw fit, and force nature to bend to his arbitrary outcome; Lucifer did not understand the actual <span style="font-style: italic;">being</span> of God or of the Lawgiver, in that this office of Priesthood did not force or make something out of nothing, but it only defined nature as it existed eternally (with that pure perception). God is not bound by a definition (law), but his <span style="font-style: italic;">being</span> will not act outside of its existence. There is a law that can define what type of being our Father IS, but it is still just a definition...<br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;">Chain God?<br /></div><br />As a tangent, I'll address a pet-peeve. The concept of "binding" God is often misunderstood. This idea of having "God hold up his end of the bargain" is ridiculous. The Lord's entire <span style="font-style: italic;">being</span> ("work and glory") exists to bless his children, and it is strange indeed for man to take the assumptive role of an expecting and childish brat waiting for a parent to give him the expected candy-reward for obeying a specific command -- as if the parent would think about withholding the said treat. That kind of thinking is absurd. The Lord knows the eternal nature of matter, light, and our intelligences; He knows the path wherein each and every molecule of our being will find ultimate joy; He has given us a blue-print to become as He is (commandments), and has shown us the way wherein our own light can become as His own; He has given us the tools and every opportunity to use them to gain more light and <span style="font-style: italic;">truth</span> (understanding things as they <span style="font-style: italic;">are</span>) in this life (and in the life to come); and, above all, we have our agency. Our perception is misplaced in thinking we can chain God down to his word, and this entire thought denies the absolute love of our Heavenly Parent. No, to say that God is bound when we do what He says is an analogy to know the absolute natural promise and surety that the path our Creator has given us will actually and <span style="font-style: italic;">naturally </span>lead us to ultimate joy and light... His call is to still "prove" him... I will not chain my God down to my ridiculous perception of what he owes me, but I surrender my will to his loving guidance.<br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;">Unlawful?<br /></div><br />Occasionally in the scriptures we read that something cannot be written or spoken because it is "unlawful". What does this mean? Shortly explained, it means that there are some ideas, concepts, and experiences that our failed language or natural state of existence cannot define. The <span style="font-style: italic;">law</span>, based on our spoken language, cannot define the experience -- it is impossible to communicate in such a crude mode of communication an experience of the spirit. Only those of a spiritual nature can comprehend, understand, and be in communication with that which is of a spiritual realm. There are things that exist in a spiritual realm (actual matter); otherwise, of what substance do we determine our spirit is actually made up of? Many of the early brethren talked extensively on the subject of spiritual matter. Parley P. Pratt, in his work entitle <span style="font-style: italic;">Keys to Theology</span>, spoke of spiritual matter. But what <span style="font-style: italic;">is</span> this spiritual matter? And can we even know what it <span style="font-style: italic;">is</span> -- based on the corruption of our language?<br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;">Equity<br /><div style="text-align: left;"><br />There is a concept in Hebrew language wherein our current idea and use of the word "equity" comes from. It is the Hebrew word "qav" which is actually the Hebrew name for what we call a "plum-bob". A plum-bob was used -- and still is in some less advanced places -- to find a perfect vertical line. A weight was attached to a string, and the top of the string was held on the desired location (such as a door-frame) and the weight at the bottom would show a perfect line up and down. It was an ancient vertical level. The <span style="font-style: italic;">qav</span> denoted "uprightness" and "straightness" in all things, and it was the basis of thought for what keeps man's actions in check.<br /><br />It is the spirit of man that controls his thoughts and from where all desire (or lack thereof) comes from. Descartes thought the spirit was actually physically connected to the brain; however, baring this resolution, we have been taught that "as a man thinketh <span style="font-style: italic;">in his heart</span>, so is he". The "heart" is an ancient symbol for the spirit of man, and was used to link the disposition of man's spirit in connection with his physical actions. When the heart was hardened, the spirit was dead (it had no life); but when it was softened, the spirit of man was alive and well. "As a man thinketh in his <span style="font-style: italic;">spirit</span>, so is he" is yet another way of clarifying the scripture.<br /><br />In the New Testament the following phrases are read: "Faith is the substance..." (Heb 11:1); "God is love" (1 John 4:8,16); and "if ye had the faith as a grain of a mustard seed" (Matt 17:20). It is argued in academics whether these are figurative or actual statements. Is God made up of a substance called "love"? Is faith an actual "substance"? Joseph Smith translated Heb 11:1 to read the "Faith is the assurance...", but also noted that while a substance, faith's outward and manifest characteristics is <span style="font-style: italic;">assurance</span>. And was Christ stating that if all the element/substance of faith that make up one's spirit would equal the size of a mustard seed that miraculous things would happen? This we know, however, that such spiritual characteristics of love, faith, and hope (as well as anything that can be defined as a <span style="font-style: italic;">being</span> verb: <span style="font-style: italic;">be</span> patient (patience), <span style="font-style: italic;">be </span>wise (wisdom), <span style="font-style: italic;">be </span>loving (love), etc.) constituted what was known as the <span style="font-style: italic;">qav</span> -- or our modern English translation of <span style="font-style: italic;">equity</span>. Equity (or, in other words, the spiritual elements of love, faith, hope, etc.) is the source of our desires; a spirit in possession of these spiritual elements will attract their own (love to love, faith to faith, etc), and will become the source of the desire towards the outward actions associated with each element of spirit.<br /><br />The absence of <span style="font-style: italic;">equity </span>constitutes a lack of physical desire to do "good" things. In Latin, the absence of a thing is characterized by placing the prefix "in" in front of the word. For instance, the absence of <span style="font-style: italic;">equality</span>, is <span style="font-style: italic;">in</span>equality. The absence of <span style="font-style: italic;">equity</span>, was written as <span style="font-style: italic;">in</span>equity, until around the 12-century when the (e)quity was conjugated to an (i)quity, and we now have the word "Iniquity". <span style="font-style: italic;">Iniquity</span>, therefore, literally means the absence of spiritual equity, and the absolute loss of desire to perform any good works; all things are done selfishly, and the heart has become hardened. Iniquity, we find through patterns in the scriptures, is the source wherein language becomes corrupted; it is the lack of desire to find actual and eternal joy, to substitute for it the false promises and securities of the carnal man.<br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;">What Does This Have To Do With Law?<br /><div style="text-align: left;"><br />Law defines truth, and truth (things are they are) is the study of equity. Just as gold exists independent of our definitions of its attributes, so do the elements of the spirit (love, faith, hope, meekness, humility, etc.). The problem becomes this: How do we define (by law) the characteristics of the <span style="font-style: italic;">spirit </span>(equity) in our Earthly realm of corrupt and fallen language? I can imagine Socrates pondering over this question for years, just repeating to himself "Love is... Love is... Love is..." without ever figuring out exactly what love really <span style="font-style: italic;">is</span> (ironically, his question "Love is...?" was his answer... Love just <span style="font-style: italic;">is</span>). This is the very thing the Greeks hated the most! They could not find out what something <span style="font-style: italic;">is</span>, so they had to start explaining what it <span style="font-style: italic;">does</span>. Herein we now have the fundamental understanding for why we have the different kinds of love! And in this very situation we have come back full circle! The Hebrews understood that "Love just <span style="font-style: italic;">is</span>..." (just as they understood that God just <span style="font-style: italic;">was</span>; after all, it was the Lord himself who said "I AM" without telling us exactly what that was, except for saying that He was spirit and we could know who He was through the spirit.) and that there are certain things that cannot be defined by mortal tongue (things that are unlawful); however, the Greeks had to fight on figuring out how to define love within our mortal sphere, and this is how we ended up with the various types and categorization of "love" (eros, philia, and agape, etc).<br /><br />What is Unity?<br /><br />The world defines unity by its characteristics, and there are many applications wherein the world can pigeon-hole the concept of <span style="font-style: italic;">unity</span>. As I stated, empty political slogans spoken of in bland-political discourse and as seen on nationalistic bumper stickers, the concept of "United We Stand" is a true statement, but carries a slew of sophist ideologies and false philosophies. I was raised on the principle that "One with God <span style="font-style: italic;">is </span>a majority", and on this principle I have learned that true equitable unity can only be found by adhering to the principles and precepts of Christ. To be "united" under false ideologies is nothing short of falling under the banner of Lucifer's pre-mortal and mistaken plan of trying to coerce an outcome that was not naturally sound. We must be united under the banner of righteousness and freedom; however, even the terms of "righteousness" and "freedom" have been distorted to mean so many various ideas, that there is no true or sound appeal to language anymore.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Can the only truth that can be said now be considered unlawful to speak?</span> Has our language become so corrupted that to find absolute truth, our relationship with God must be such that we are revealed truth through that mode and means by which -- in our current situation and society -- has become unlawful to speak of? As a prophet communicates the ideas of God through a language which has become so distorted and convoluted as to render any appeal to language moot, the only appeal to truth appears to be through that medium of the Spirit of God which will testify to the spirit (our heart, our equitable selves, etc.) those things that are unlawful (impossible to define) to say. Surely the Lord's prophets continue to speak for the Lord, but for whom? Those who have ears to hear, let them hear; those who have eyes to see, let them see... but how? Through the communication of the spirit that is impossible nowadays to define to the public... Of a principle, has truth become unlawful in our society?<br /><br />Perhaps we have not yet reached this point. But this certainly gives an interesting foundation to understanding why a Lord's mouthpiece has often been shut for the lack of belief of the people -- an event we are told will happen before the coming of the Lord again to this earth. I am reminded of a recent quote I found by Ezra Taft Benson:<br /><br />"Now, part of the reason why we do not have sufficient priesthood bearers to save the Constitution, let alone to shake the powers of hell (Alma 48:17), because, I fear, unlike Moroni, our souls do not joy in keeping our country free, and we are not firm in the faith of Christ, nor have we sworn with an oath to defend our rights."<br /><br />Where are those who understand the principles of the Spirit and Liberty that are taught within medium that is unlawful to speak?<br /></div></div></div></div>Shiloh Loganhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01232352679206328450noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2192472582302586579.post-70138881572201670882009-06-17T08:56:00.001-06:002009-06-17T08:56:53.036-06:00Our Judeo-Christian Nation<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/dpQOCvthw-o&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/dpQOCvthw-o&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object><br /><br />Well said...Shiloh Loganhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01232352679206328450noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2192472582302586579.post-76794467424644891162009-06-15T22:18:00.000-06:002009-06-15T22:20:05.796-06:00Freedom and the Book of Mormon<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/DOOonUiGOjs&hl=en&fs=1&"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/DOOonUiGOjs&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object><br /><br />"Now part of the reason why we do not have sufficient priesthood bearers to save the Constitution, let alone to shake the powers of hell, because, I fear, unlike Moroni, our souls do not joy in keeping our country free, and we are not firm in the faith of Christ, nor have we sworn with an oath to defend our rights." (Ezra Taft Benson)Shiloh Loganhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01232352679206328450noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2192472582302586579.post-30661397725723262232009-06-12T22:45:00.000-06:002009-06-13T15:32:12.004-06:00BYU Freedom Society Correspondence pt3Shiloh,<br /><br />... I believe that your paradigm is sound. Thank you for your insights. I hope you know that I am a sincere seeker of the truth. I almost hesitate to ask another question... though I appreciate every word, and every word is valuable in answering my question.<br /><br />Another question(s) then?<br /><br />What in natural law reveals to us that we are justified in removing from liberty him who does not respect the supposed natural law rights of another (while remembering that those natural law rights are determined by a constitutional republic interpreting the natural law as imperfectly as an individual might)? Does this involve the social contract idea, which you mentioned in the first letter, that it might be consistent with natural law that 'the people' can contract out some responsibilities to a government? If so, where do we find that the natural law condones such contracts?<br /><br />Can it not be argued that the 'natural law' demands that we coerce nobody, bad or good, for it appears to us that God himself does not do such?<br /><br />Further, if Christ says to judge not, to resist not evil, to turn the other cheek, and reminds us that God causes the sun to shine and the rain to fall on the just and unjust, and commands us to be perfect as He is perfect, and if the Book of Mormon shows that defense and force are necessary at times, perhaps especially against a secret combination (which could be interpreted to be socialistic anything), how have you found to draw the line between when to allow our enemies their liberty and when not to (all the time remembering that we are not perfect judges of right or wrong or the heats of men)? I ask this with many theories floating around in my head, and with the sincere desire to simply know what is right so that I may not offend God in my attempts at valiance, and without great expectations, however, as I have said, I see that you have thought these things out very well, and I thought I might try my luck.<br /><br />Thanks again,<br /><span style="color: rgb(136, 136, 136);"><br />Jared<br /></span><br />P.S. You have my permission to keep and use our correspondence and use it for any purpose you might deem proper (then your writing perhaps can benefit more people than myself).<br /><br /><br /><br />Jared,<br /><br />Please don't hesitate to ask as many questions as you like. With your permission, I have sent this email to a few people who I think would be edified by our conversation (for those others reading, you may want to start at the bottom of this email and work your way up). I understand those times when ideas are racing around and it's hard to connect the dots. I believe that those who really seek the truth as a life endeavor will eventually experience what Joseph Smith said was a "war of words and tumult of opinions". Indeed, this is the very thing we've been talking about: what do words mean, and what is the correct idea to those words?<u><br /></u><br /><u>Words and Their Power</u><br /><br />It has been said that words offer the means to meaning. Sadly, today, even the reading of the Founder's words leave people more confused than before, or -- even worse -- the new convoluted terms/words send them down the path of supporting ideas that will enslave them. As Goethe said: "None are more helplessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free".<br /><br />There has been a revision to the meaning of words today. The problem is that when the meaning behind a word has changed to include more than its original intent (or something completely and altogether different), what <i>word</i> takes the place of the old idea? The <i>restoration</i> of the correct ideas behind the words given through historical text and ancient scripture is a blessing that we are heir to through the restored gospel.<br /><br /><u>The Foundation of Natural Law</u><br /><br />The application of natural law appears to have many limits, and many people get hung up on certain details when studying natural law wherein they dismiss the entire principle. They do this, not because of a flaw in natural law or its natural force/power upon man, but because the definitions that they use conflict with natural law. We must not confuse the application of natural law for its foundation.<br /><br />Outside the scope of a Creator, natural law is nearly as arbitrary as Socialist-Democratic law that only follows the whims of the people's customs, norms, beliefs, and traditions. In defining the foundation of natural law, allow me the use of an example from the Book of Mormon.<br /><br /><u>Social Contract Theory</u><br /><br />Before I talk about the Book of Mormon, allow me to address a quick detail in your last email. The social contract theory is anything but absolutely understood. Which social contract theory do we adhere to? Hobbes, Locke, or Rousseau? I personally accept Proudhon’s version before Rousseau. No one really cares to qualify their absolute foundation of the Social Contract, and I have yet to hear anyone (including myself) that doesn't cross at least three or four contradicting philosophies and ideas when speaking of such things. Lysander Spooner gives excellent arguments against the Social Contract that I actually find very interesting.<br /><br /><u>Constitutional Republic Built on Natural Law Within the Book of Mormon</u><br /><br />The Book of Mormon is a masterpiece of political theory and government. Within the Book of Mormon, we see the proper role of government and the deterioration of government through the inability of the people to govern themselves. While I believe the idea true, it has been <i>falsely</i> attributed to James Madison to have said:<br /><br /><div style="margin-left: 40px;">"We have staked the whole future of American civilization not upon the power of government, far from it. We have staked the future of all our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self-government, upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments."<br /></div><br />This is what the Book of Mormon teaches. King Mosiah turned over to the people the accountability of self-government. There is a discourse that can be written concerning the paradigm of self-government under a monarchy, but suffice it to say that the people were accountable that if they were to "commit sins and iniquities they shall be answered upon their own heads" (Mosiah 29:30), "that the burden should come upon all people, that every man might bear his part" (Mosiah 29:34).<br /><br />As we stated before, a Constitutional Republic is based on law first wherein the majority must check and admonish itself before giving any type of ruling over the minority. This is what is type of government the Nephites were given. As King Mosiah told the people:<br /><br /><div style="margin-left: 40px;"> "Therefore, choose you by the <i>voice of this people</i>, judges, <u>that ye may be judged</u> <u>according to the laws</u> <i>which have been given you by our fathers</i>, <u>which are correct</u>, and which were <i>given them by the hand of the Lord"</i> (Mosiah 29:25). (emphasis added)<br /><br /></div>The voice of the people just check themselves against he laws given them by their fathers. What <i>law</i> had been given by the fathers as given by the hand of the Lord? We now see that the voice of the people must admonish themselves according to correct laws that had been given by the Lord, and that judgment within certain parameters <i>is</i> ordained of God while upon the earth (I also refer you to Doctrine and Covenants Section 134). Mosiah further elaborated:<br /><br /><div style="margin-left: 40px;">"And now if ye have judges, and they do not judge you according to the law which has been given..." (Mosiah 29:28)<br /><br /></div>What is this <i>law</i> that the judges must judge by? It is the "Laws of Nature and of Nature's God". The people, however, in wickedness and ignorance will redefine the proper role of government as given by the Lord: "My people are destroyed for a lack of knowledge" (Hosea 4:6). In warning the Nephite people against this ignorance and temptation for the majority to ignore the natural and correct laws that God had given the people through "their fathers" (prophets), King Mosiah stated:<br /><br /><div style="margin-left: 40px;">"Now it is not common that the voice of the people desireth anything contrary to that which is right; but it is common for the lesser part of the people to desire that which is not right; therefore this shall ye observe and make it your law - to do your business by the voice of the people.<br />"And if the time comes that the voice of the people doth choose iniquity, then is the time that the judgments of God will come upon you; yea, then is the time he will visit you with great destruction even as he has hitherto visited this land.<br />"...I desire that this land be a land of liberty, and every man may enjoy his rights and privileges alike, so long as the Lord sees fit that we may live and inherit the land, yea, even as long as any of our posterity remains upon the face of the land." (Mosiah 29:26-27, 32)<br /><br /></div><u>Who Decides the Application of Natural Law, and what are Statutes?</u><br /><br />One of the most confusing differentiations when speaking of natural law is to understand <i>statutes. </i>Natural law exists outside the will of the majority. For example, the entire population of the United States could unanimously vote to reject the natural law of <i>gravity</i>, but gravity -- in spite of man's <i>law</i> (definition) -- will still exist. Man cannot make law; if man could make law, then the majority's rejection of gravity would send us all spinning into space! What man may do, however, is <i>define</i> gravity (defining natural law), and then admonish each other in specific application to that new understand of law. God told Moses that he is a respecter of life (the natural law), and Moses admonished the people with a specific application to God's law: Thou Shall Not Kill. When man admonishes each other according to natural law, he must find application to that <i>law</i>; this particular application to God's law is called a <i>statute</i>.<br /><br />This confusion between laws and statutes is often what leads people into convoluted theories pertaining to coercion, force, and obedience to the laws of the land. Natural law exists regardless of man's acknowledgment of its existence or consequence, but how man admonishes each other according to that which is eternal is called <i>statute</i>.<br /><br />By what power do we <i>know</i> of a surety that we have defined natural law for what it <i>is</i> (not what we want it to be), and to establish admonish each other with statutes that are justified before the Lord? The answer is, the people have to be righteous and know their God, and only then will they know natural law. What is the blessing of the people in doing this? What is the consequence of the people in forgetting this?<br /><br /><u>Consequence of Remembering</u><br /><br />In the Book of Mormon it states:<br /><br /><div style="margin-left: 40px;">"Now it was the custom among all the Nephites to appoint for their chief captains, (save it were in their times of wickedness) some one that had the spirit of revelation and also prophecy; therefore, this Gidgiddoni was a great prophet among them, as also was the chief judge." (3 Ne 3:19).<br /></div><br />In this particular story in 3rd Nephi, the terrorist organization known as the <i>Gadianton Robbers</i> had established themselves in the desert and mountains. They had, for some time, come down from out of the mountains and caused great conflict, murder, and robberies amongst the Nephite people, and had become a severe affliction to them. In their desire for wanting to rid themselves from these Gandianton Robbers, the people came together under their Chief Captain, Gidgiddoni, to preemptively go up to the robbers and kill them in their own lands. Yet Gidgiddoni responds:<br /><br /><div style="margin-left: 40px;">"The Lord forbid; for if we should go up against them the Lord would deliver us into their hands; therefore will prepare ourselves in the center of our lands, and we will gather all our armies together and we will not go against them, but we will wait till they shall come against us; therefore as the Lord liveth, if we do this he will deliver them into our hands." (3rd Nephi 3:21)<br /><br /></div>It took the spirit of prophecy and of revelation to adhere to natural law and obedience to the knowledge of things as they existed. Gidgiddoni knew the workings of nature, because he knew the workings of God. He knew what the consequences would be should his people break this natural law. Furthermore, in this same example of preemption, the Lord has further revealed to us in these Latter-days the same principle that Gidgiddoni guided the Nephite people upon in the Doctrine and Covenants, Section 98. If you so desire, I will let you read that on your own and will not include that whole Section here. But suffice it to say that in Section 98 the Lord's ordained order has never advocated preemption, but the natural law -- as established by Nature's God -- has been revealed to us in plainness today.<br /><br /><u>Consequences of Forgetting</u><br /><br />The Book of Mormon also gives us the example of the people in forgetting that natural law can only be understood by the humble and penitent.<br /><br /><div style="margin-left: 40px;"> "And because of this their great wickedness, and their boastings in their own strength, they were left to their own strength; therefore they did not prosper, but were afflicted and smitten, and driven before the Lamanites, until they had lost possession of almost all their lands.<br />"Yeah, they began to remember the prophecies of Alma, and the words of Mosiah; and they saw that they had been a stiffnecked people, and that they had set at naught the commandments of God;<br />"And that they had altered and trampled under their feet the laws of Mosiah, or that which the Lord commanded him to give unto the people; and they saw that their laws had become corrupted, and that they had become a wicked people, insomuch that they were wicked even like unto the Lamanites." (Heleman 4:13, 21-22)<br /></div><br /><u>What is the Mental Transition from Remembrance to Forgetting the Source and Implication of Natural Law?</u><br /><br />How does a people who once adhered to and perceived natural law (through revelation and prophecy) reject it? Here again, the Book of Mormon provides a perfect illustration.<br /><br /><div style="margin-left: 40px;">"For as their laws and their governments were established by the voice of the people, and they who chose evil were more numerous than they who chose good, therefore they were ripening for destruction for the laws had become corrupted..<br />"Yea, and this was not all; they were a stiffnecked people, insomuch that they could not be governed by the law nor justice, save it were to their destruction." (Heleman 5:2-3)<br /><br /></div>Herein is the transition: While the people are righteous, they will know and adhere to natural law; however, when the people are wicked, they cannot perceive natural law and they are influenced by the adversary who seeks to use coercion unjustly upon man to fulfill his original pre-earthly plan of utopia.<br /><br /><u>End</u><br /><br />I hope this helped make more sense and connected a few dots. Liberty cannot be taken away except by God himself (and he gave himself as the ultimate sacrifice to ensure our liberty and agency); any perception of lost liberty can be more accurately explained in a paradigm where liberty is inalienable.<br /><br />Please feel free to answer back with any further questions, or to ask me again a question I may have been ambiguous in answering. Thank you for the correspondence.<br /><br />For further study, may I suggest some books/articles you probably have already heard about and read that I find are excellent primers for this topic of study:<br /><br />(1) The Law, by Fredric Bastiat (there are a few ideas that I argue <i>against</i>, however, this is an excellent primer).<br /><br />(2) Many are Called, But Few Are Chosen, by H. Verlan Anderson (out of date book, often found on Amazon or Ebay; also found in the BYU Library. Excellent book written by a later member of the Quorum of the Seventy that establishes the legitimacy of government coercion in limited areas.)<br /><br />(3) The Ancient Law of Liberty, by Hugh Nibley (available through google search)<br /><br />(4) Prophets, Principles, and National Survival, by Gerald Newquist (endorsed by President McKay in General Conference)<br /><br />(5) The Proper Role of Government, by Ezra Taft Benson (available through google search)<br /><br /><br />Sincerely,<br /><br />--<br />Shiloh LoganShiloh Loganhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01232352679206328450noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2192472582302586579.post-88381119545600004252009-06-12T22:41:00.000-06:002009-06-12T22:43:40.202-06:00BYU Freedom Society Correspondence pt2Shiloh,<br /><br />Thank you. You exceeded my expectations. I may not understand the delicacies of the interactions between self-government, Old Norse, and inalienable rights. May I ask a question to focus in on my confusion? Would you agree that the 'inalienable' right, although 'inalienable' in theory, because of Old Norse, in all practicality, in fact is alienable under law. The use of the terms 'rights' confuses me inasmuch as our theory pretends to inalienable rights but will restrict the inalienable right to what it deems is right (not wrong), which, to my mind, reduces it to the level of a mere law that is not to be broken. What is a right's value if it is subordinate to a law of right and wrong? What is its practical benefit to society? We have a right to free speech, as long as it is tolerable. We have a right to carry arms, as long as it meets with the demands of politicians, we have a right to live our religions, as long as it meets with social norms. My point is that, in the end, I have a right to keep the law, not a right to violate it - this hardly seems reassuring to me when it is men who decide where the line is drawn, the line where a right ends and begins - in practice. <br /> <br />I suppose the answer is that there would be utter chaos unless the law intervened on the 'misuse' of our rights. But who determines what a 'misuse' is? To me, it appears, in the end, that we are taken back to square one with a government that is not a protector, but a dictator of what is right and wrong. What is the use of 'rights' if we treat them the way we do?<br /> <br />Further, if my rights, in practice, end when I violate a law, then who of all of us really have any rights, for are we not all violators? I suppose this question points to Christ, and the parable of the certain king, and the unjust servant - but what does our temporal law do to fill this gap? <br /><br />Thank you,<br /><span style="color:#888888;"><br />Jared<br /><br /><br /><br /></span>Jared,<br /><br />Within our current political structure, I believe you're absolutely correct. What you are witnessing is the transition from what our Founders called a "Constitutional Republic" to what they feared most -- a "Democracy". In explaining this, allow me a few words to build a foundation.<br /> <br /><u>Original Foundation of Law</u><br /><br /><i>Law</i>, in its basic and generic sense within the parameters of nature, is defined: The entity or power that defines things as they <i>are</i>. The question that immediately arises is this: How <i>are</i> things? and <i>Who</i> is going to be the authority to define them?<br /> <br />When I throw a ball in the air and watch it fall to the Earth I ask myself, "what is that motion?". The <i>law</i> responds by saying, "That is <i>gravity</i>". This is overly simplistic; however, the point is that law defines how things are. We, as creatures of reason and thought, therefore have the ability of observing occurrences in nature and defining law. John Adams made an important distinction when he noted that <i>man does not make law -- only God makes law -- but man, because of his divine ability of thought and logic, can define and interpret the motion of natural law as established by the Creator.</i> God, as the Lawgiver/Creator, has set nature in motion, and we -- as his Children, having been given the divine spark of reason and logic -- work out our own salvation to find out what that order is.<br /> <br />But who defines the way things <i>are</i> for the rest of us? This is where things often become confusing. I interpret things differently than another man (we each adhere to a different <i>law</i>; or, in other words, we adhere to a different definition of the way things <i>are</i>), and who is to say that my definition is right or wrong? From a religious standpoint, this is what is known as the doctrine of <i>repentance</i>. The LDS Bible Dictionary defines repentance as the changing of the <i>heart </i>and <i>mind </i>to be in line with God's own heart and mind; or, in other words, repentance is the process whereby we define our law (interpret how things are) according to how God has decreed things are. Is it any wonder that Alma, when holding both the highest political position in the land and also the highest religious position in the land, decided to give up his political seat to preach <i>repentance</i> to the people suffering from gross inequality, irreligion, and persecution one from another? Government is a poor master when governing the hearts of man, and it is best left to the physical relationships of each sovereign <i>after</i> the infringement of life, liberty, or property has been violated.<br /> <br /><u>How is Law Interpreted Today?</u><br /><br />Today, law is no longer seen as the definition of how things exist naturally, but it is considered a list of rules and regulations fabricated by man wherein the masses are controlled into compliance. This revisionism of terms is at the heart of the transition from a Constitutional Republic towards Democracy.<br /> <br />This is a sad occurrence. Before the separation of America from Great Britain, the Founders looked for a foundation in law wherein they could make a legitimate claim for separation from the then considered "divinely called Monarch of England". When it appears that God himself has called the Monarch you are fighting against, what legitimate claim do you make to declare yourself <i>free</i> and <i>independent?</i> The Founders, as inspired men of God, knew the foundation of law wherein they must adhere: to "the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them". They appealed to the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God as their foundation of <i>law</i>. The Founders knew they could not make law, but they were capable of applying the laws of nature wherein they knew that God had made them free. Sadly, we no longer adhere to a concept of natural law as dictated by Nature's God; today, the majority may pass at will and take God's place as the Lawgiver to pass any legislation whatsoever they want.<br /> <br /><u>What Is a Constitutional Republic?</u><br /><br />A Constitutional Republic, like I mentioned in my previous email, is a government that is created by the people -- as independent sovereigns -- wherein they adhere to a codex of laws before a majority's consensus. What is this codex of laws? It was the Laws of Nature that we just addressed. Society may work according to the majority vote, but when the majority must check itself against the Laws of Nature -- that is, laws that exist outside the scope, power, and regulating parameters of the majority -- the minority is therefore protected from the onslaught and persecution of the majority.<br /> <br /><u>What is a Democracy?</u><br /><br />Democracy does not adhere to an outside codex of laws, such as the Laws of Nature. The majority decides what <i>is</i> law, and how it is applied to the minority. There are no inalienable rights in a majority, because it is the majority that granted rights in the first place, and what can be granted can be taken away. A Democracy is a majoritism, and it has no other foundation or code for legitimacy other than the majority's consensus.<br /> <br />When applied to society, Democracy is synonymous with Socialism. When the workers of a corporation (majority) rise up against the owners of the corporation (minority) to take control of the corporation in the "name of the people" -- do we not call this Socialism? When there is no other claim for legitimacy of government other than there mere majority's consent, this is Socialism. In order to clarify such a distinction, we call this Social-Democracy (Socialist-Democracy).<br /> <br />Within this paradigm, everything you've addressed in your email is absolutely correct: Rights are merely a fabrication, and really only exist in the abstract consciousness of the people. Law is not a constant of nature, but is continuously changed according to social-norms. Law is nothing other than the imposed rules of the majority wherein they decide how best to control, manipulate, and coerce the rest of the people. All "rights" are therefore considered alienable/alterable and we end up with an influx of confusion and political turmoil.<br /> <br /><u>Inalienable and Alienable? How Was the Transition Made?</u><br /><br />The crux of this problem lies merely at the door of <i>perception </i>and <i>semantics. </i>After all, perception is the determining factor of law, right? Law is that which defines how things <i>are</i>, and our differing perceptions will vary what <i>laws</i> we adhere to and accept. This is tricky, because people -- at times -- will become so fixated on a particular issue that they will basically deny the existence of gravity to make sure their theory of the world is correct. They deny the obvious existence of natural law (natural consequence) to force their own perceived reality (forced outcome).<br /> <br />The same event can be seen in two different perceptions. When I see a man incarcerated for violent misconduct, I do not see a man who has <i>lost</i> any freedom or liberty. I see a man who stepped outside his natural law rights to violate the natural law rights of another; as such, this man, by the definition of natural law, is no longer capable of self-conduct and government and must be placed in a location of like-acting individuals (jail) until he may regain self-government. This same event, however, can be seen in different eyes. When rights are alienable, the masses take control over the individual (as a God-type figure), and punish him for breaking their social norm (whatever that may be). This man's "rights" are then taken away (by virtue of the masses that <i>allowed</i> him to even have any rights to begin with), and he remains without any rights until the masses decide that he may have them again (if any at all).<br /> <br />While the same consequence/outcome has been achieved, the perception of what has happened is completely different. Is this perception and difference important? Indeed it is! This is the very point wherein the transition from a Constitutional Republic to a Socialist-Democracy has been made! This is a subtle difference, and for one making the mental transition from a Democratic mindset to that of a Republic mindset there is often a lot of fear. Fear -- and the forced sense of security that immediately follows fear -- is the antithesis of freedom; in fear, the masses reject natural law for physical control. It appears that people find more perceived safety when they can control their neighbor than in allowing freedom to exist.<br /> <br /><u>Conclusion</u><br /><br />Law, within the parameters of nature, only define natural and inalienable rights -- they do not compete with them. When laws appear to compete with natural and inalienable rights, you know the transition is being made from freedom to coercion -- from our Constitutional Republic to a forced Socialist-Democracy.<br /> <br />We do not have the <i>right</i> to violate another sovereign individual's life, liberty, or property; however, when we do and step outside the limits of natural law to infringe upon our neighbor, then the natural law defines that such a person be dealt with in order to not do such a thing again.<br /> <br />It is important to <i>always</i> maintain the thought of inalienable liberty, freedom, and property. Why? Because it will always allow for freedom. Historically, Republics have lasted between 500 - 800 years, whereas Democracies have never stood longer than 200. The Founders hated Democracy with a divine passion that does not exist in our body politic today. George Washington, the man who would not be king, was noted to have wanted to be subject to a tyrannical monarch than to a Democracy. We were given a Republic (the only <i>guarantee </i>in the entire U.S. Constitution -- Article IV Section 4), and we must fight to make it so. The only guarantee of being safe in our inalienable liberty is within the protection of a Republic.<br /> <br />Hopefully this helped clarify a few issues. Please let me know if this helped.<br /><br />Sincerely,<br /><br /><span style="color:#888888;">--<br />Shiloh Logan</span>Shiloh Loganhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01232352679206328450noreply@blogger.com0