Capdiamont\’s Weblog


Merry Christmas Humboldters
Tuesday 25 Dec 2012, 07:49
Filed under: Eureka, Humboldt, LDS | Tags: , , ,

God bless you!

 

Comments Off


MT: Mormon Tabernacle Choir CD tops classical album chart
Wednesday 31 Dec 2008, 06:43
Filed under: LDS | Tags: ,

The “Spirit of the Season” by the Mormon Tabernacle Choir and Orcherstra at Temple Square topped Billboard magazine’s classical album chart for 2008, according to the Associated Press.

The 2008 year-end music charts were compiled by computer from Billboard’s weekly and biweekly charts from Dec. 1, 2007, through Nov. 29, 2008.

2008 Year-End Top Classical Albums:

  1. “Spirit of the Season,” Mormon Tabernacle Choir and Orchestra at Temple Square With Sissel. Mormon Tabernacle Choir.
Comments Off


Freedom of Religion, freedom of speech, separation of Church and state
Saturday 13 Dec 2008, 12:15
Filed under: LDS | Tags:

Much has been made of my Church(LDS) donating millions to support prop 8, and thus should have it’s tax exempt status revoked. There is many problems with this, besides throwing the baby out with the bath water. 1st millions were not spent in support of prop 8, by my Church, only thousands, in non-monetary type, IE travel. Millions were spent by members of my Church, after being told their donations would not be tax exempt, in support of prop 8. However the no on prop 8 received more money overall, and from out of state than the prop 8 supporters did.

The 1st amendment to the Constitution:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The problem with the argument of getting rid the tax exempt status of any church involved in support of prop 8, and I haven’t heard of anyone arguing for the getting rid of the no on 8 churches, is a) By tax code Churches are allowed to speak out on issues, not candidates, b) goes against the 1st amendment itself by prohibiting the exercise thereof by restricting the their own freedom of speech, c) people don’t understand how much these churches contribute to the communities, d) churches have a duty to speak out on these moral issues, e) people have the right to exercise their religion as they see fit, even by supporting prop 8. That is guaranteed by the freedom of religion.

For 2008, for example:

SALT LAKE CITY —26 November 2008 —The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints today released a report of its hurricane relief efforts during the 2008 hurricane season. Since late August, the Church has sent dozens of semi-truck loads of supplies to the Gulf Coast to aid those affected by Hurricane Gustav and Hurricane Ike.

Additionally, two planes carrying over 47,000 pounds of supplies flew from Salt Lake City to the Caribbean nation of Haiti in September to help the Haitians recover from the effects of Hurricane Ike.

The Carlos Flores family of the West Green Ward, Houston, Texas received two food boxes.© 2008 Intellectual Reserve, Inc. All rights reserved.

According the Church’s Welfare Services Department, through the middle of October, the equivalent of about 61 total truckloads of supplies has been donated to the hurricane relief effort.

The effort included 12,000 food boxes, which contain rice, vegetable oil, peanut butter, fruit drink mix and assorted canned goods. Each food box can feed a family of four for several days. Also included were five truckloads of water, 185,000 hygiene kits, 55,000 cleaning kits, 20,000 pounds of clothing and 1,500 tarps.

Additional assistance of food, water, generators, tools, sleeping bags, chainsaws, tarps, fir strips and other items have been given from regional LDS Church storehouses.

William Skipper coordinates emergency communications over short-wave radio.© 2008 Intellectual Reserve, Inc. All rights reserved.

Assistance also included volunteers helping with the cleanup effort. Several missionaries in the Houston area wearing yellow Helping Hands t-shirts asked a woman if they could help clean up her yard. In a very firm tone, she indicated that she wanted every leaf raked and the yard cleaned perfectly. The missionaries went out of their way to make sure that they did an extra-special job for her. After they were finished, the woman came out to pay them because she thought she had hired them. When she was told they were doing it for service, she was thrilled.

The Church humanitarian aid system is experienced and well equipped to respond to a variety of disasters, including hurricanes. For instance, the Church provided 200 semi-truck loads of aid and 42,000 man-days of labor in response to Hurricane Katrina.

Disasters, as horrible as they are, give Latter-day Saints a chance to serve. Randy Ellis, Houston cannery manager and disaster volunteer, said: “We get involved because that’s who we are. We’re trying to follow the example of the Savior. It feels good to help your neighbor. We don’t do what we do to get people into the Church. We do it just to help people.”

Houston resident Billie Childress’s gratitude is typical of the many thanks the Mormon Helping Hands volunteers have received. “They have been fantastic,” she said. “They are unbelievable. They are a blessing.”


Other article

Bishops have many resources to meet members’ needs. Temporary financial help is available through special “fast offerings.” These funds are available to the bishop; they are donated monthly by members when they skip two consecutive meals and donate the money saved plus a generous additional amount for this purpose.

Also, across the country the Church operates enterprises that provide items for “bishops’ storehouses.”

For example, at farms in Utah, volunteers this summer picked more than a million pounds of peaches that were then canned and sent to bishops’ storehouses and public agencies in several states. Food, clothing and other necessities are stored in these warehouses until bishops requisition them for people in need.

These items then become tangible symbols of the “time, effort and love generously contributed for the common good.” The Church also operates a thrift store (Deseret Industries) that collects unwanted household goods, sells them inexpensively and provides training and employment.

Two principles seem to make the LDS welfare program a success. First, nearly everyone involved donates time and talent, eliminating expensive bureaucracy. And bishops offer recipients the opportunity to work in return for assistance, helping preserve their dignity and self-respect.

South County abounds with examples of people receiving help:

- Matt Deakin of Morgan Hill’s First Ward tells of an elderly woman who lived in a mobile home that had fallen into serious disrepair. Through the course of several weeks volunteer members tore out and replaced worn carpet and damaged flooring, providing her a much better living environment.

- Bishop Carl Woodland of the Second Ward in Morgan Hill recounts the story of an octogenarian, a proud Army veteran, whose house’s roof badly needed repairing. Again, volunteers joined in to replace the roof and provide him a dry home for the winter.

In addition to helping its local members, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints also sponsors humanitarian relief and development projects that benefit the general public. Recent emergency relief assistance in times of disaster include the California wildfires and Hurricane Ike in Texas.



Prop 8 myths and misconceptions
Tuesday 2 Dec 2008, 08:48
Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: , , , ,

Where did the money come from?

Opponents of Proposition 8 have criticized the Church for donations to the “Yes on 8″ campaign. Records filed with the State of California indicate that the Church did not make any contributions with the exception of an “in kind” contribution (non monetary) for some travel expenses. All other LDS-related money was contributed by Church members individually, not by the Church.

The amounts contributed to both sides were very high. It is reasonable for critics to question why their greater contributions to defeat Proposition 8 didn’t carry the vote as they expected, but to imply that the participation of Latter-day Saint citizens—most of whom were California residents—was improper is inappropriate. Such an accusation is an exercise in empowering a straw man of their own creation.

In-State Donations Out-of-State Donations Total Donations
For Proposition 8 $25,388,955 $10,733,582 $36,122,538
Against Proposition 8 $26,464,589 $11,968,285 $38,432,873
Totals $51,853,544 $22,701,867 $74,555,411
Source: Tracking the money, Los Angeles Times

Note that out-of-state contributions to the “No” side were over $1.2 million higher than the out-of-state contributions to the “Yes” side and that out-of-state contributions to the “No” side constituted a higher percentage of the overall “No” funding than out-of-state contributions did for the “Yes” side.

There have been various estimates of monies donated to the “Yes on 8″ campaign by LDS Church members, ranging from $14 to $20 million. No firm figures are available because the State of California does not request or record the religion of donors.

Estimates of LDS-related monies also do not include donations the “No on 8″ campaign received as a result of LDS Church involvement in the campaign. For instance, Bruce Bastian, a onetime Mormon, has publicly stated that he donated $1 million to the “No on 8″ campaign in response to LDS involvement as an effort to “level the financial playing field.”

There’s a fact you don’t see, more money came from out of state for No on 8, than for yes on 8.

Link for rest

Did the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints contribute money to the “Yes on 8″ campaign?

The Church as an institution made no direct monetary contributions to the “Yes on 8″ campaign. All monetary donations came from individual Church members, who decided if and how much they would contribute.

The Church did, however, make two in-kind donations with the equivalent values of $2,078.97 (October 25, 2008) and $2,864.21 (November 1, 2008). The term “in-kind” represents donations that are made to the Church in some form other than cash (For example, the payment of tithing using stock constitutes a in-kind donation). In this case, the in-kind donations were to cover out-of-pocket expenses such as airfare and lodging that were incurred by several Church leaders who travelled to California in support of the proposition. The Church declared these donations, as required by law, and they are part of the public record.

Did the Church violate its tax-exempt status by participating in the “Yes on 8″ campaign?

From the Internal Revenue Service:

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office…Political campaign intervention includes any and all activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office.

The church did not participate in or intervene in any of the political campaigns for any of the candidates running in the 2008 election. The IRS does, however, permit a Church to take positions on issues:

Under federal tax law, section 501(c)(3) organizations may take positions on public policy issues, including issues that divide candidates in an election for public office. [2]

According to Barry Lynn, executive director of “Americans United for the Separation of Church and State” (and who, for the record, was “outraged by the Prop. 8 victory”):

“They almost certainly have not violated their tax exemption…While the tax code has a zero tolerance for endorsements of candidates, the tax code gives wide latitude for churches to engage in discussions of policy matters and moral questions, including when posed as initiatives.” [3]

Nonprofit 501c(3) organizations are prohibited from spending more than 20 percent of their budgets on political activities. “The 20 percent threshold means that the Catholic or Mormon churches, whose organizations span the globe, would have had to spend hundreds of millions of dollars—if not billions—to violate their tax-exempt status.”

Oops again, quote from someone opposed to prop 8 saying the Church didn’t violate tax rules.

Were the contributions made by Church members tax deductible?

California members who chose to donate to the Prop 8 campaign were explicitly told that their donations would not be tax deductible. None of the funds donated to the campaign are allowed as deductions.

Did the Church invest more money in Proposition 8 than in all of its combined humanitarian efforts?

The question is not relevant, since the Church as an organization did not donate any money to “Yes on 8.”

Members contribute to humanitarian efforts sponsored by the church based on their specific abilities. For example, fast offerings are donations to a fund for assisting local and other members who are financially struggling. These funds represent a generous offering of the value of 2 meals abstained from on the first Sunday of each month. The combination of personal sacrifice (fasting) and financial sacrifice make such contributions particularly meaningful for both the donor and the recipient.

The Church also manages a significant humanitarian effort known as “LDS Humanitarian Services”. This organization provides relief and assistance for disasters and other urgent humanitarian needs. The amount contributed by the Church to humanitarian causes far outweighs anything that individual members contributed toward the effort to pass Prop 8. According to a 2007 report from the Presiding Bishopric of the Church, external humanitarian efforts exceeded $1 billion in cash and material contributions from 1985 until 2007. This does not include contributions of many millions more as part of the Church Welfare program.

Other humanitarian efforts include:

* Perpetual Education Fund
* Deseret Industries
* Employment Services

Many Latter-day Saints make significant contributions to humanitarian efforts outside of LDS sponsored channels. For example, in 2007, high profile Latter-day Saints John and Karen Huntsman donated more than $672 million for charitable causes not associated with the LDS Church. Utah in general was ranked #2 of all 50 states in charitable contributions in 2007.

How does the Church reconcile its opposition to same-sex marriage when it once supported plural marriage?

The same type of question was asked when, after supporting polygamy for years, the Church ceased its practice. The Church no longer practices polygamy, and should not be confused with splinter groups who continue the practice. Prop 8 protesters, however, do like to raise the issue of polygamy, and make no distinction between the LDS Church and splinter groups.

It is important to realize that 19th century Mormons who practiced plural marriage did not seek federal recognition of their marriages. They would have been pleased to simply be left alone, instead of being subject to spy networks, home invasion by federal marshals, loss of the right to vote simply for being members of the Church even if they were not polygamists, jail time, and threats of military occupation by the Congress.

Homosexuals in California with access to domestic partnership laws have far more legal protection and benefits for their cohabitation relationships than 19th century Mormons ever had. Homosexuals who choose to simply cohabitate are likewise unmolested by the state, unlike LDS polygamists of the 19th century.

LDS opposition to the use of the term “marriage” for same-sex unions derives, however, from a belief that homosexual behavior is wrong, contrary to the commandments of God, and something which believers should not support. Homosexuals are free to make their own choices about behavior, but Church members cannot in good conscience encourage that behavior by lending their voice to efforts which socially sanction it.

MYTH: Mormons were motivated to do this merely as a vehicle to be considered more mainstream Christian

Latter-day Saints object when others attempt to classify us as non-Christian, however, this does not mean that Latter-day Saints are attempting to become “mainstream” Christians. We appreciate being invited to participate in the coalition by our Christian brothers, and did so willingly because we share many of the same family values, even if our theologies differ. Likewise, we welcomed the opportunity to cooperate with Muslims, Jews, and others who share our values and concerns for society.

MYTH: The church sent thousands of missionaries door to door in CA handing out fliers

NO missionaries were asked to participate in the distribution of flyers. Missionaries do not participate in political activities while on their mission.

MYTH: The Church sent large numbers of out-of-state people in to assist with the “Yes-on-8″ campaign

Support from the campaign was generated from within congregations in California under direction of the Protect Marriage coalition.[8] There were no “busloads” of out-of-state people brought in.



Beloved Church President, Gordon B. Hinckley, Dies at 97 today
Sunday 27 Jan 2008, 10:21
Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags:

SALT LAKE CITY 27 January 2008 President Gordon B. Hinckley, who led The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints through twelve years of global expansion, has died at the age of 97.President Hinckley was the 15th president in the 177-year history of the Church and had served as its president since 12 March 1995.The Church president died at his apartment in downtown Salt Lake City at 7:00 p.m. Sunday night from causes incident to age. Members of his family were at his bedside. A successor is not expected to be formally chosen by the Church’s Quorum of the Twelve Apostles until after President Hinckley’s funeral within the next few days.

More at the link.

Comments Off



Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 114 other followers

%d bloggers like this: