The Proper Role of Government

Yesterday we had our first meeting as a new Colloquium group at the home of Darren and Terry Pitchers. It was an excellent evening. The topic discussed was based on Ezra Taft Benson's

"The Proper Role of Government".

Written in 1968 it is still a timely message. Discussion varied from debates as to what extent we do or don't have liberties here in Canada and what those are to whether or not it should be illegal to smoke when pregnant!

I'd like to lay out some of my thoughts as I went through and studied this article a few times.

• The first paragraph lays out President Benson's view of the rarity of which we see men in the public spotlight choosing to act on solid eternal principles of government. It is not easy and not common for someone to choose an unpopular view even when it is the right thing to do. As I read it I wondered to myself how often these men and women are just doing the best they know how and don't know any other way.
• Although the article focuses mainly on governments of countries, I found in the principles presented much to ponder with regards to the governing of my family. How often do I violate the principles of good government in my own home? How can I raise up a voice for better government until I am willing to implement the same in my own home?
• It is important to note that President Benson does not advocate NO government, he even goes so far as to maintain that governments were instituted of God for the benefit of man (quoting scripture in D&C 134)
• When talking of inalienable rights, President Benson outlines that we must accept that certain rights are God Given and not Government given. As soon as we submit that rights are given by the good will of the government we accept that they can take them away. These rights are principly life, liberty and property.
• I was struck by the quote from Albert E. Bowen in the article stating "There is always a right and wrong to every question which requires our solution." Is he serious? ALWAYS a right and wrong? Is there not any gray areas or even two right answers to the same question... I wonder.
• I was very interested in his paragraph about the seperation of Church and State. I did some further reading and found this quote by Gordon B. Hinkley:

"I have time to discuss one other question: “Why does the Church become involved in issues that come before the legislature and the electorate?”
I hasten to add that we deal only with those legislative matters which are of a strictly moral nature or which directly affect the welfare of the Church. We have opposed gambling and liquor and will continue to do so. We regard it as not only our right but our duty to oppose those forces which we feel undermine the moral fiber of society. Much of our effort, a very great deal of it, is in association with others whose interests are similar. We have worked with Jewish groups, Catholics, Muslims, Protestants, and those of no particular religious affiliation, in coalitions formed to advocate positions on vital moral issues. Such is currently the case in California, where Latter-day Saints are working as part of a coalition to safeguard traditional marriage from forces in our society which are attempting to redefine that sacred institution. God-sanctioned marriage between a man and a woman has been the basis of civilization for thousands of years. There is no justification to redefine what marriage is. Such is not our right, and those who try will find themselves answerable to God.
Some portray legalization of so-called same-sex marriage as a civil right. This is not a matter of civil rights; it is a matter of morality. Others question our constitutional right as a church to raise our voice on an issue that is of critical importance to the future of the family. We believe that defending this sacred institution by working to preserve traditional marriage lies clearly within our religious and constitutional prerogatives. Indeed, we are compelled by our doctrine to speak out.
Nevertheless, and I emphasize this, I wish to say that our opposition to attempts to legalize same-sex marriage should never be interpreted as justification for hatred, intolerance, or abuse of those who profess homosexual tendencies, either individually or as a group. As I said from this pulpit one year ago, our hearts reach out to those who refer to themselves as gays and lesbians. We love and honor them as sons and daughters of God. They are welcome in the Church. It is expected, however, that they follow the same God-given rules of conduct that apply to everyone else, whether single or married."
- Gordon B. Hinckley, “Reverence and Morality,” Ensign, May 1987, 45 -

• Talking of the proper role of government he states "... the proper function of government is limited only to those spheres of activity within which the individual citizen has the right to act. By deriving its just powers from the governed, government becomes primarily a mechanism fo defense against bodily harm, theft and involuntary servitude." How often do governments go beyond these bounds?
• We had a good discussion about redistribution of wealth and how by taking money from the government makes us beholden to them. It was discussed that this was often hard. Sometimes we feel we need that assistance eg Starving students wanting to get an education are offered a government grant. Sometimes we feel entitled to a tax kickback - Hey, I pay lots of taxes, I'm gonna take what I can get, right? Sometimes we get the money from the government whether we want it or not! Sometimes we can't refuse it even if we don't want it other than choosing to not cash the checks that drop in our mailboxes. The most interesting part of this discussion came when Sister Stone who dropped in for a bit related her experience when she worked at BYU many years ago and the University was debating whether to accept governmental research monies for assistance. The board of directors (the 12 apostles of the LDS church) said no. Many faculty were aghast and couldn't understand why not. How would BYU become a respected research institution without the help! Then she related how through this inspired decision, the University was able to say from a moral high ground that it would not accept government mandates concerning the institution the most prominent example being the request for co-ed habitation on campuses. Intersting...
• The final cry of the article is for all right thinking people to come together in standing for and promoting these principles. He outlines that by 1. Not implementing any new welfare state programs 2. Let present programs run to their term with no renewal and 3. phase out indefinate programs. These programs are referring to what Bastiat referred to as the "legalized plunder" programs of the government taking as their right to do something that would be deemed and punished as criminal if done by the individual.
• We ended the evening talking of ways we can further the cause of liberty, with a lot of discussion about promoting and getting behind an effort to bring a college campus of George Wythe College to Alberta. Work has been done in this direction and more work needs to be done. Thomas Paine said "What we obtain too cheap, we esteem to lightly, 'tis dearness only that gives everything its value. 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."