In regards to your examiner article, I agree with everything you said. The problem comes that when you preach from the scriptures and attempt to equate the experiences of the Nephites to our day, church members react with quick dismissal. I believe the problem is set forth by Jacob in chapter 7:

10 And I said unto him: Believest thou the scriptures? And he said, Yea.
11 And I said unto him: Then ye do not understand them

My awakening came after I read an article called “An LDS View on War.” Suddenly it all started to become clear regarding our foreign policy and our national problems. We seek to solve all our woes by relying on our own strength. We have forgotten God and only follow Christ’s example when it suits us. If we want his strength and His protection, we need to remove ourselves from Babylon, which is where most of our members remain.

I too found Ron Paul and loved his ideas. I resolved during 2008 to never, ever, vote for parties again. I would only cast my vote for those who support the principles of the law of God.

The part about revelation notifying us of where an attack is to take place again opened my eyes a bit. The answers are all in the scriptures. We have them for a reason. Yet most members are content to let the politicians do their thing and while they watch football.

Kudos to you sir for speaking so boldly.

To this article I do make one objection. In my opinion, Harry Reid is the equivalent of a modern day pharisee. His policies in no way reflect a love for the law of God or of agency. He seeks to become a law unto himself. I don’t know his heart, but to me he is a wicked man.

But Ron Paul came along and cured me of my apathy. His writings taught me to look critically at both parties, and adopt a view on supporting what is right, rather than what is politically necessary. I now vote according to my conscience, instead of the “lesser of two evils”. Or who has the best chance to win, like its some game or contest.

Imagine If Joseph Smith at 15 did not suffer the same personal conflict when he was deciding on which Church to join based on what was right instead of what was convenient?

Good article, my only concern is that “common-sense center” and other such euphemisms are often used by those who do no want to think about things too much (not in Greg’s case I hasten to add!). Although extremes in attitude (or “emotion” as the article points out) should always be avoided, it’s a bit harder to say that a belief is extreme (I would argue that is impossible for extremism to be attached to a belief per see). Indeed, two people can hold the same belief and one be extreme about it and the other quite sensible.

“common-sense position” might be a better term. Although there seems little common sense around today…