- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I recently read the response from the church to the recent shooting in Utah. Attached is one of them:
https://www.thechurchnews.com/leaders/2025/09/12/first-presidency-statement-condemns-violence-calls-for-peace/ Personally, I’m getting tired of the violence in this country & the response by the politicians, the leaders & our church.
My question is: what would Jesus do?
Would his response be the standard:
Quote:Our thoughts & prayers go out to the families affected by these acts of violence.
I think not.I know this is a hot topic. However, I do expect the church to take a more leadership role & come up with a better response.
This world is in need of real leadership. I was hoping that the church would have a role in finding a solution.
I haven’t seen it yet.
If this is too political or off of our mission, please feel free to delete.
I want Leaders to Lead. Not campaign or be sustained in General Conference. Leadership is hard. If they can’t lead, then do something else.
Saying the words: Our thoughts & prayers go out to the family is good.
Real leadership is better. Real leadership requires solving real problems.
Or, at least trying to solve real problems.
It certainly is a tricky subject to talk about. I don’t see much appetite to tackle the issue of gun violence in the USA. The prevailing attitude appears to be that there is some number of gun deaths that is deemed acceptable in order to retain the rights of (one interpretation of) the second amendment. My reasoning is that if we had reached a theoretical unacceptable number of gun deaths then attitudes of the majority population would begin to shift. That doesn’t appear to have happened yet. My hope is that there actually is an unacceptable number of gun deaths and that change can happen sooner rather than later. My fear is that there is no bottom, that the number of acceptable deaths is infinite.
I get why the church released a statement. Many people look to the church for hope and guidance in troubling times. Many also scrutinize the church and look for implied meaning for when the church does and when the church doesn’t issue a statement. We live in very politically charged times. That said, condemning violence and calling for peace is a no-brainer.
Nearly every time there’s gun violence in the USA the phrase you mentioned, offering thoughts and prayers, often becomes a stumbling block. Of course people want to offer their condolences . Prayer can feel like the only refuge from the fear over things that feel far beyond our control. At the same time, anyone that has grown frustrated with inaction has grown frustrated with limiting our actions to only offering thoughts and prayers. When that frustration is vocalized people offering thoughts and prayers can interpret it as an attack on their faith. We go around in circles, seldom meeting in the middle.
I will say that the first presidency’s official response does not include the phrase thoughts and prayers. Theirs is more of a call to action. Advocating gun control is probably far too political of a stance to take for the church but they do call on people to seek peace and be more kind. Their statement does more than call for people to stop bad behaviors, it calls on people to build understanding and kinder communities.
You know how when we teach about sin how we teach that thoughts lead to actions and a good way to change our actions is to start with our thoughts? I read some of that into the first presidency’s message. Things their statement mentions, violence, hate, a lack of understanding, differences, lack of compassion, lack of respect, etc. Those things are occurring before a trigger ever gets pulled. I read the first presidency statement as addressing those issues as well.
If I haven’t already gone overboard, I’ll get a little more political. We live in interesting times. We live in a society where there’s a very strong market for selling people’s fears, prejudices, and hatred back to them in the form of confirmation bias coming from a supposed authoritative voice. People are exploiting others’ deepest fears to drive profit. You see it on any side of any political aisle. What we’re consuming as a society is driving a lot of the division. If we want to be more unified we need to decrease our appetite for division.
The way I see it, there are 2 points to the equation…. A)
Potency of Violence/Capacity to Harm– Whether it’s drugs or guns or whatever, we live in a time where our objects have greater capacity/range/potency to harm us. Americans by and large have lived with these objects with greater capacity to harm and less foresight into how to use them in our current environments. Most of the time, I get the sense that other countries consider us borderline lawless because we don’t have more stringent gun laws and the enforcement varies. It feels like the narrative is that our police and military forces need guns with higher capacity to cause harm in order to protect the citizens while a segment of the citizenship feels that it is their entitled right to have guns with higher capacity “for protection” that may or may be being used or stored responsibly. It’s a thorny issue because I suspect that quite a few world citizens would like to be entitled to access of individual firearms the way that Americans do without seeing American gun statistics in their countries. 
Communal Impact– We watch a lot of anime that include a variety of different interactions of the individual in their community. One of the things that is interesting to watch is a sense of obligation to “community” that I just don’t see in American culture. Like if a high school kid misses class due to being sick, another kid is nominated/nominates themselves to stop by with the homework. The art of “getting along with each other” is something that gets brought up as a class-wide skill that is demonstrated in ways that I usually don’t see here. From an LDS perspective, I think that an individual’s perspective on guns and gun violence is just going to be one more data point about different values and politics. I tend to lean liberal and find the optimization of capacity to harm to be frightening. I have libertarian friends who are pro-gun and believe that a highly armed society of individuals with low gun statistics is possible through each individual being super responsible for their guns. I have a sister who is active in the church and recently got her concealed carry permit.
This statement came out from the first Presidency today: It was good. It’s better than nothing.
It wasn’t anything like Jesus at the temple during passover. Matt 21:12-13.
What would it take for the 1st Presidency to get angry?
Of all the terrible things happening in the world & the total lack of leadership or even the attempt to solve problems.
I’m not sure that I want the First Presidency to “get angry” here – mostly because of what it might do to their health:) Humor aside, I suspect that their perspective and what they pay attention to in General Conference topically is based on a) a more global church, and b) topics they feel qualified to speak on as ambassadors of Jesus Christ (as they understand Jesus Christ and feel they have revelation about). For the most part, they do dump some words into the situation but they are not here to be the United Nations, or facilitators between humans.
Back in day (1990s I think), the key demographic of members that threatened the organization of the church was the “feminists, gays, and scholars”. The church organization hasn’t done anything that shows their most feared list has changed appreciably. Women are disengaging from church activity – to the point where more women then men left the church in surveys. People left the church because of the 2 year POX situation. Scholars are providing information/facts about different aspects of history and policy that members are learning about and resolving trust issues about. The SEC scandal and the sexual abuse normalization stories are eroding the trust of members who see a double standard of ethics at play here where the members are being taught to hold themselves to a higher standard then the church organization wants to hold.
Angry is the wrong word. I should of said Passionate. Something with conviction.
They said:
Quote:“We urge all to reject violence and instead build understanding. Recognizing that we are all children of God, we must treat one another with more dignity, compassion and respect. As we mourn with those who have experienced loss and care for those living in fear or conflict, we call upon people everywhere to build communities of greater kindness and love.”
Quote:Build understanding
doesn’t do it for me. Solutions to an epidemic is what is needed & required. I don’t see anyone encouraging
solutions.
I will stop now.
I have gotten the sense that the upper leadership fully believes that if people are taught correctly, people will behave correctly (purify their behavior and stewardships) and those correct behaviors will solve the world’s problems. This means that a lot of social justice initiatives aren’t actually discussed but are more about the member self-improvement mini-programs. It’s the “wear your garments more so that our communities qualify for blessings” model in fancier words. I also suspect that there are a lot of church organization politics at play here. How much social justice can a church promote and still be a conservative church? How much attention does the church as an organization want to draw to itself that may draw fire in the current administration. This is the same administration that has gone after DHS, PBS, the treasury, and numerous other organizations and individuals.
Dear friends! I don’t know your political persuasions AND I love you. May you all have joy and love in your lives. I am afraid of the erosions of our national unity that I have witnessed. The “othering” of people that we disagree with has reached a fever pitch.
Perhaps 4 Non Blonds said it best when they said:
Quote:I scream from the top of my lungs “What’s going on?”
In this environment, I applaud anyone that tries to bring down the temperature.
Quote:“Love your neighbor and treat them with compassion and respect,” [Pres. Nelson] wrote. “A century of experience has taught me this with certainty: Anger never persuades, hostility never heals, and contention never leads to lasting solutions. Too much of today’s public discourse, especially online, fosters enmity instead of empathy.”
President Nelson recited his call for peacemakers — “building bridges of understanding rather than walls of prejudice” — and recalled times when he has seen bitter divisions softened when one chooses to listen with respect rather than suspicion.
“Even small acts — like reaching out across lines of faith, culture or politics — can open doors to healing,” he wrote. “There is power in affording others the human dignity that all of God’s children deserve.”
He underscored that such efforts begin at home, saying that “families — though never perfect — remain one of life’s strongest sources of stability and meaning.
Governor Cox spoke to my children’s generation. He said:
Quote:“You are inheriting a country where politics feels like rage. It feels like rage is the only option but … we can choose a different path. Your generation has an opportunity to build a culture that is very different than what we are suffering through right now.”
May there be a road! Amen and amen!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.