Legal v. Societal effects on behaviour

Dyany · Senior Member

Legal v. Societal effects on behaviour

arbilad · Head Chef

Dyany, I think you've hit the heart of the matter - no set of laws is sufficient if the people are immoral. While I love many things about Europe (have you ever had chocolate nougat from Switzerland? It's chocolate lover's heaven), the fact is that they have become very secular. Besides the restrictive gun laws, I think that's one reason for the astronomic rise in violent crime in England.

Cocobeem · Keeper of the Holy Grail

So what can we do to make a bigger difference in "setting the mores and tabus of our society"?

And Swiss chocolate, yessssss. And I'll add-- Italy. Ice Cream.

Roper · Senior Bucketkeeper

Dyany, good analysis!

I would add that our government should only regulate behavior to the extent necessary to protect the consititutional rights of citizens.

Countries that try to implement our system of government usually get close to the structural aspect, but then they establish laws to regulate behavior based on an elitist social agenda, etc. In so doing, they destroy the purpose for the structure.

And, as I have stated elsewhere, I believe our Constitution is intended to be the foundational political document of the Lord's kingdom. If a society doesn't believe in Jesus Christ, they likely won't value a form of government that lays the foundation for His kingdom.

I think it all comes back to your concluding point, Dyany, about the teaching of the Word. And I think that's the answer to Coco's question as well.

-- Edited by Roper at 22:20, 2007-03-23

fear of shiz · Profuse Pontificator

Culture is important. The only stable, free governments that have lasted are in the US, Great Britain, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. Hmmm....what do all these nations have in common....Anglo/Protestant Heritage, maybe???? And what are the basic elements of that heritage? Churchill defined it as "common conceptions of what is right and decent, a marked regard for fair play, especially to the weak and poor, a stern sentiment of impartial justice, and above all a love of personal freedom ... these are the common conceptions on both sides of the ocean among the English-speaking peoples."

Cocobeem · Keeper of the Holy Grail

shiz- Where is that Churchill quote found, if you wouldn't mind?

fear of shiz · Profuse Pontificator

Here was the first thing I found when I googled it:

http://www.winstonchurchill.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageID=2

Apparently it was from a speech he gave at Harvard in 1943. I have come across it many times in my readings.

Dyany · Senior Member

Ironically, I think that one of the ways that we can influence the mores and tabus of society is by staying politically active -- yes, it's good to do that for its own sake, but mostly to remind and influence others that YES these are our rules and NO we will no tolerate their abuse. The 'silent majority' thing is, to me, an example of 'good men doing nothing.' Otherwise, I think the very best thing we can do is raise righteous families. It's where we have the most stewardship and direct influence. THEN, we do what we can in our communities to strengthen the resolve and influence of righteous people to be righteous.

I think that that Winston Churchill quote is great, but we can't let ourselves become complacent. Look at most of Europe -- they had Luther and other great Reformationists, but it didn't take long to put those values aside and slip into degradation. We're only a generation or two behind.

fear of shiz · Profuse Pontificator

I am not arguing that we should be complacent, or that the success of the Anglosphere has been a given. I am actually, more or less, on the same side as you. The culture of the people is key. I was just providing a broader perspective. All those elements that Churchill mentioned--care for the poor, fair play, personal freedom, etc.--those mores of society are similar to and complimentary to the Gospel.

And I was trying to point out that the US is not entirely unique. Our Anglo cousins have done well. Though some of them, in Canada and UK especially, are losing sight of their heritage.

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

but someone posted on my blog that we needed more girly stuff in Bountiful, so here I am.
Okay, who's the wise guy?

I don't know if there is a simple answer to the question Dyany brings up. We do know that the US was set up in order for the Gospel to have a place where it could be restored with out the problems it would have faced in other parts of the world. And, the Restoration was literally a work that started taking place centuries before Joseph Smith was even born.

I would guess that it goes back at least as far as the downfall of the Western Roman Empire. Everything kind of builds on what came before, both good and bad, throughout the centuries, to the point that there was a place on the earth free from direct oppression by dictators and kings with a people that for the most part lived in harmony with the gospel of their own choice.

The fact that English / British society essentially was the vanguard of developing that would also explain why much of the nations that were settled and established by them (U.S., U.K., Australia, Canada, and New Zealand) are (or were) all so similar in the basic religious value systems.

Elder Packer has said True doctrine, understood, changes attitudes and behavior.

The study of the doctrines of the gospel will improve behavior quicker than a study of behavior will improve behavior. (November 1986 Ensign, "Little Children"

So, my vote is that the larger part of a person's behavior is encouraged by societal factors. Laws will only work where people feel responsibility for upholding the law of society. If behavior is going down the tube to reflect where society is going, then more laws are not necessarily going to reign folks in. It is the living of and spreading of the gospel truths that will... at least until such time as the majority of the people become too hardened to repent or their pride and wickedness.