What Brings Joy?

My Come Follow Me studies for this week took me to Helaman 1-6 in a lesson titled “The Rock of Our Redeemer.” The lesson was introduced with the following information. 

The book of Helaman records both triumphs and tragedies among the Nephites and Lamanites. It begins with “a serious difficulty among the people of the Nephites” (Helaman 1:1), and the difficulties keep coming throughout the record. Here we read about political intrigue, bands of robbers, rejection of the prophets, and pride and disbelief throughout the land. But we also find examples like Nephi and Lehi and “the more humble part of the people,” who not only survived but thrived spiritually (Helaman 3:34). How did they do it? How did they stay strong while their civilization began to decline and fall apart? The same way any of us stay strong in the “mighty storm” the devil sends to “beat upon [us]” – by building our lives “upon the rock of our Redeemer, who is Christ, the Son of God, … a foundation whereon if men build they cannot fall” (Helaman 5:12).

This scripture block teaches numerous principles, but I feel prompted to discuss a principle found in Helaman 3:24-35 “Faith in Christ fills my soul with joy.” In Helaman 3, Mormon described a time of rejoicing when the Church was so blessed that even the leaders were surprised. After reading the following verses of scripture, what do you think led to that joyful state?

24 And it came to pass that in this same year there was exceedingly great prosperity in the church, insomuch that there were thousands who did join themselves unto the church and were baptized unto repentance.

25 And so great was the prosperity of the church, and so many the blessings which were poured out upon the people, that even the high priests and the teachers were themselves astonished beyond measure.

26 And it came to pass that the work of the Lord did prosper unto the baptizing and uniting to the church of God, many souls, yea, even tens of thousands.

27 Thus we may see that the Lord is merciful unto all who will, in the sincerity of their hearts, call upon his holy name.

28 Yea, thus we see that the gate of heaven is open unto all, even to those who will believe on the name of Jesus Christ, who is the Son of God.

29 Yea, we see that whosoever will may lay hold upon the word of God, which is quick and powerful, which shall divide asunder all the cunning and the snares and the wiles of the devil, and lead the man of Christ in a strait and narrow course across that everlasting gulf of misery which is prepared to engulf the wicked –

30 And land their souls, yea, their immortal souls, at the right hand of God in the kingdom of heaven, to sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and with Jacob, and with all our holy fathers, to go no more out.

31 And in this year there was continual rejoicing in the land of Zarahemla, and in all the regions round about, even in all the land which was possessed by the Nephites.

32 And it came to pass that there was peace and exceedingly great joy in the remainder of the forty and ninth year; yea, and also there was continual peace and great joy in the fiftieth year of the reign of the judges.

I believe that one reason for the great joy was humility. The people were humble enough to recognize that their blessings were coming from God, and they were grateful for them. However, not all members of the Church continued in joy. What differences do you see between the people described in the following verses? What do you learn from their example?

33 And in the fifty and first year of the reign of the judges there was peace also, save it were the pride which began to enter into the church – not into the church of God, but into the hearts of the people who professed to belong to the church of God –

34 And they were lifted up in pride, even to the persecution of many of their brethren. Now this was a great evil, which did cause the more humble part of the people to suffer great persecutions, and to wade through much affliction.

35 Nevertheless they did fast and pray oft, and did wax stronger and stronger in their humility, and firmer and firmer in the faith of Christ, unto the filling their souls with joy and consolation, yea, even to the purifying and the sanctification of their hearts, which sanctification cometh because of their yielding their hearts unto God.

One part of the people looked at their blessings and prosperity and became prideful. In their pride, they began to persecute the people who remained humble and to afflict them. However, the people, who stayed humble, fasted, prayed, and grew in faith in Jesus Christ, continued to feel joy and comfort as their hearts were purified and sanctified. They yielded their hearts to Christ, and He purified them and sanctified them. The above scriptures show a phenomenon known by some as the “pride cycle.”

One Come Follow Me podcast discussed the pride cycle and gave me greater insights into something that I have studied for many years. The basic pride cycle is terrestrial in nature. It consists of Prosperity/Righteousness, which leads to the sin of Pride, which leads to greater Sin, which leads to Destruction, which leads to Sorrow, which leads to Humility, which leads to Repentance, which leads to Blessings, which leads back to Prosperity/Righteousness.

However, the podcaster divided the basic pride cycle to give greater understanding. Part of the terrestrial pride cycle is the telestial pride circle: Pride leads to Sin, which leads to Destruction, which leads to Sorrow – which leads to greater Pride in the situation. People in the telestial pride cycle harden their hearts so much that they do not become humble enough to repent and turn to God.

The celestial part of the terrestrial pride circle goes a different way. The people who are Prosperous/Righteous stay Humble and Repentant, which brings greater Blessings and more Prosperity/Righteousness. This type of person rejects Pride with its following problems and goes right to Humility. They recognize that all people are children of God, and we all have a responsibility to help each other.

The people going through the terrestrial pride cycle feel joy part of the time and sorrow part of the time. The people going through the telestial pride cycle feel sorrow all the time, while people going through the celestial cycle feel joy all the time. Whether people feel joy or sorrow depends on the choices they make and the actions they take.

A picture of a pride cycle can be seen at this site. 

 

 

 

Why Is Temple Service Important?

 Families are stronger when they start with a covenant made with God, and strong families strengthen communities, states, and nations. Being a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I am partial to marriages that begin in a holy temple. Marriages are stronger when both members of the couple continue to attend the temple as often as possible and preferably together.

It is important that I admit that not all marriages that start with a church or temple wedding succeed. However, a greater percentage of them do, and they are more likely to stay strong when both members of the couple attend the temple frequently.

I would like to share my own temple experiences. My husband and I were married in the Salt Lake Temple, and I returned as frequently as possible – not as often as I should have but maybe monthly. We moved to Alaska where there was no temple for the next twenty-six years. Therefore, my trips to the temple coincided with trips to other states – Hawaii and Utah.

When I made my annual trip to Utah, I allocated at least one entire day to attending the temple. I would go early in the morning and do as many sessions as possible before returning to my parents’ home for dinner. I felt a great need to “soak up the temple experience” because I knew that I could not return until the next trip.

During those twenty-six years, I had a wise bishop who counseled the members of the ward (congregation) to maintain a current temple recommend. He said that holding a current temple recommend would increase our opportunities to attend the temple. Therefore, I began to keep my temple recommend current, and I learned that my bishop was incredibly wise with his counsel.

In January 1999, the new Anchorage Alaska Temple was dedicated and opened for temple service. For the past twenty-five years, I have completed weekly temple service as frequently as possible.

Attendance at this temple has not been as easy as at other temples. First, it is necessary to make appointments to attend and only one appointment can be made per type of session (initiatory, endowment, or sealing). Now that a new temple is being built to replace the current temple, I make my next appointment soon after completing my weekly temple session. Making appointments early is necessary because participants in each session are limited due to parking restrictions. (The new temple is being constructed near the current temple and restricts the available parking spaces.)

In addition to the need to be organized and to plan early, the number of sessions is restricted to only two or three sessions per day for four days per week. Despite the challenges involved in attending the temple, I attend as frequently as possible because I need the experience.

I strongly advocate for temple attendance because I know that temple service makes us better disciples of Christ. Temple service strengthens marriages, and strong marriages lead to stronger families, communities, states, and nations.

Why Should Lawmakers Legislate Against Critical Race Theory?

After the killing of George Floyd in the summer of 2020, riots raged in numerous cities and gripped the attention of the nation. According to an article published at The Daily Signal by Jonathan Butcher and GianCarlo Canaparo, critical race theory also gripped the nation. “According to Google Trends, the search term peaked in June 2021, then interest tapered off going into 2022.” However, “the radical philosophy has not disappeared from public life.” 

What is critical race theory? It claims that “racism is the cause of every negative event in politics, education, economics, and culture.” It teaches “ideas such as diversity, equity, and inclusion [DEI]; microaggressions; and white privilege.” These “creatures of critical race theory … trace back to the Marxist claim that the world is defined by racial power struggles.”

K-12 education remains a crucial part of the national conversation on how the theory is teaching young people to consider themselves victims instead of individuals responsible for their own choices and decisions.

For example, policymakers in California and Minnesota have made “intersectionality” – critical race theory’s idea that we are oppressed in intersecting ways, based on our race, sex, and other immutable characteristics – a central component of their states’ ethnic studies curriculum.

This is horrible! Children should be taught that choices and decisions have consequences and that they can overcome “victimhood” by making good choices. However, this teaching is strategic: “The now-deceased critical race theory scholar Derrick Bell wrote that he hoped the theory would inspire academic ‘resistance’ to America’s ideals of freedom and equality under the law, which would lead to wide-scale ‘resistance.’”

In other words, Bell was hoping that critical race theory would undermine and lead to the destruction of the Constitution of the United States. I do not believe that most Americans support such a terrible idea, particularly if they truly understand what it is and its purpose.

Not all state lawmakers are allowing this radical movement to march through their educational institutions, however. In a review of the laws adopted in 14 states since 2020, we found staunch rejection of the use of critical race theory in K-12 schools. The work is not finished, even in many of those states, however. Earlier this year, a federal judge overturned a law adopted by New Hampshire officials that was meant to prevent the theory from spreading racial discrimination in the state’s elementary and secondary schools. The judge said that key provisions in the law were not well-defined, sending lawmakers back to the drawing board.

State lawmakers should continue to pursue proposals that reject critical race theory, but they must be specific about what they are prohibiting.

State policymakers should prohibit the application of the theory in the form of compelled speech and mandatory racial affinity groups and other clear examples of racial discrimination….

Lawmakers should prohibit school officials from forcing students and teachers to defend, affirm, or profess ideas that come from critical race theory as a condition of enrollment, course completion, hiring, retention, or promotion.

State policymakers should also ban the sort of discriminatory conduct that critical race theorists deem appropriate – but that are, in fact, racist – to fulfill their discriminatory aims….

A law is on much stronger legal ground when it protects someone from being forced to say something that it is when it prohibits them from saying something. Instead of “banning” critical race theory from classrooms, state education officials should update K-12 academic standards to discuss the institution of slavery in 19^th century America, the failure of Reconstruction efforts after the Civil War, ad the Jim Crow era. At the same time, educators should explain the significance of the end of systemic racism, both legally and culturally, through federal civil rights laws.

Critical race theory’s racist ideas – DEI, intersectionality, and more – are lessons from the “school of resentment” as literary critic Harold Bloom said. Children need to be taught to aspire to something, not resent everything.

I agree with the authors that children should be taught to look for the positive things in life. When they look on the bright side of life – their cup is half full and there is a silver lining to their dark clouds – they will be happier and find more enjoyment in life. I also agree that it is essential that lawmakers in all the states reject the teaching of critical race theory in schools.

How Can Americans Create Better Education Systems?

In an article published at the Deseret News, Gitanjali Poonia discussed remarks made by Representative Burgess Owens (R-Utah). She summarized Owens as saying that meritocracy and the free market are important in creating better education systems in the United States. Owens stressed this idea while speaking to students at the University of Utah at the Hinckley Institute of Politics as part of the Sutherland Institute’s 2024 Congressional Series. He also claimed that American can gain respite from the partisan climate of today by bringing back American values. 

“Utah is very, very unique,” Owens said. The state’s young residents who serve missions for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints come back not just with knowledge of different cultures, but also an appreciation for their country, Owens said.

The Beehive State also embodies a culture of compassion and hard work, he said, noting the state’s status as one with the highest number of entrepreneurs.

His work on the House Education and Workforce Committee focuses on making sure the next generation is “capable of generating businesses here and supporting businesses here,” Owens said. “We don’t want to export our kids. We want our kids to grow and stay with us here.”

“We have the kind of educational system that allows our kids to choose and pick, whether it be higher ed, (or) a high-tech career. We have all those options here, and that choice is very important. We’re going to continue to be better at that,” Owens said. While there’s room for improvement, Utah gets a lot right and can serve as a model for the rest of the country, he added….

Regardless of whether a school is private or public, if it fails to teach children, “it needs to be out of business,” said Owens. According to him, the free market should be given a chance to weed out educational institutions that can’t teach children successfully.

Owens discussed the lack of success in U.S. schools over recent years: “one in three Black students in California’s public schools passed the standardized test for English, and only one in five achieved grade level in math” in 2017. If that was not bad enough, “Among 13 of the public high schools in Baltimore, Maryland, not one student scored a proficient score in math last year,” according to Owens. Now, students across the nation are showing learning loss in their test scores due to the COVID-19 pandemic, according to Owens.

Despite strong support for school choice among parents of color, Owens said, Democrats have time and again voted against allowing parents to pick the educational institution right for their child.

His Educational Choice for Children Act would give parents more autonomy over their children’s schooling. The bill would create scholarships for students in K-12 to pay for tutoring, special needs services, homeschooling curriculum materials, education technology, and other educational needs. Individuals and businesses would receive tax credits for contributing to the scholarships, and a school district’s funding would remain untouched.

The House Education and Workforce Committee has also proposed the Parents Bill of Rights Act, which would affirm parents’ right to know what goes on at school, whether it’s the curriculum, the school’s budget or a violent incident.

“We want to protect our children. We want to be heard as parents,” Owens said.

Owens is interested in education beyond the K-12 years and said that “parents need to consider their return on investment in four-year colleges that cost tens of thousands of dollars.” He also hit the cost of college graduation and that students should not be graduating with debt. Instead, colleges should be held accountable for offering degrees that mean nothing.

Owens discussed the College Cost Reduction Act, which he cosponsored and which would “double the maximum Pell Grant awards juniors and seniors can receive.”

According to the American Council on Education, a higher education association, it would also “prevent interest from capitalizing on student loans, simplify the student loan repayment process, and require students to only pay back what they would have owed on a 10-year standard repayment plan.” Owens said this bill would help level the playing field.

Owens discussed how the Black family unit has crumbled since he was a child and that “he worries family values are deteriorating among all young people.” He likened his early years to what is happening today, “I was so proud to be a Black American, so proud of America, and so excited about going out to prove myself, because that’s what our parents were teaching us.”

Will the Supreme Court Rule on This Second Amendment Case?

 The Supreme Court may soon have another showdown on the Second Amendment, according to Amy Swearer. “The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit upheld Maryland’s ban on so-called assault weapons earlier this month, likely setting the stage for the next major Second Amendment showdown at the Supreme Court.” 

The case, Bianchi v. Brown, features Maryland residents who challenge the constitutionality of a 2013 state law that generally prohibits them from buying or possessing any firearm deemed an “assault weapon.”

The statute defines that term to include hundreds of specific models of semiautomatic rifles, as well as any other semiautomatic rifle that either (1) has a fixed magazine capable of holding more than ten rounds, (2) has an overall length shorter than twenty-nine inches, or (3) has both a detachable magazine and at least two of the following three features: a folding stock, flash suppressor, or grenade or flare launcher.

While semiautomatic rifles aren’t outright prohibited, Maryland residents are required to buy heavily modified “featureless” versions of those guns. The plaintiffs argue that this prohibition on owning virtually all of the most popular semiautomatic rifles in the nation violates the Second Amendment.

The Supreme Court hasn’t definitively addressed the question of whether the Second Amendment protects the possession of semiautomatic rifles, but to say that its overall Second Amendment jurisprudence favors the plaintiffs’ argument is an understatement, to say the least.

First, in District of Columbia v. Heller, the Supreme Court in 2008 struck down the District of Columbia’s total ban on the possession of handguns and explained that the Second Amendment’s protections extend “prima facie to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding.”

The right is not unlimited, and the Supreme Court noted a historical tradition of “prohibiting the carrying of ‘dangerous and unusual weapons.’” It emphasized, however, that handguns are “commonly possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes,” and constitute a “class of ‘arms’ that is overwhelmingly chosen American society” for exercising their natural right of self-defense.

Most recently, in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, the Supreme Court explained that judicial analyses of Second Amendment challenges must be based on text, history, and tradition, and not on any interest-balancing tests that allow courts to determine whether the government has a sufficiently compelling reason for the regulation.

Bruen didn’t specifically delve into what types of arms are protected, but the case is nonetheless instructive about how courts must go about discerning the answer to that question: When the law regulates conduct that is protected by the plain language of the amendment, the government must demonstrate that the law is consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearms regulation.

Under the Bruen test, the government doesn’t have to show a historical doppelganger for its modern law, but at the very least, it needs to provide evidence of historical laws that were relevantly similarly both in how they burden the right to keep and bear arms, and in the reason for why the laws burden that right. Additionally, the historical tradition must be formed by more than a handful of late-in-time historical outliers.

In short, under the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence, the government would have to show some longstanding national tradition of not only banning the civilian possession of semiautomatic rifles like the AR-15, but banning them because they are a type of weapon that is so inherently dangerous and unusual that it’s not commonly possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes. It can’t do so.

Swearer continued her article by explaining the “semiautomatic rifles like the AR-15 are hardly a new invention” with the “first successful semiautomatic rifle design was produced in the 1880s.” In addition, new features – “such as pistol grips, collapsing stocks, and barrel shrouds” – that assault and non-assault rifles “have no bearing on the weapon’s lethality, functionality, or concealment.”

Leftists continue their attempts to destroy Americans’ right “to keep and bear arms.” I hope that the Supreme Court takes this case and rules once and for all.

 

 

 

Who Is Dan Bongino?

My VIP for this week is Dan Bongino, a radio talk-show host, podcaster, and former Secret Service agent. He testified before members of Congress this week and was asked for his opinion competence of the Secret Service after the assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump on July 13 in Butler, Pennsylvania.

Then-Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle was forced to resign after being questioned by Congress, and Ronald L. Rowe Jr. is now the interim director.

According to Tyler O’Neil at The Daily Signal, Rep. Eli Crane, R-Ariz., asked Bongino, “Is the Secret Service in a better spot today with Director Rowe in charge?” 

“No, it’s worse,” Bongino replied. He predicted that “something else” will happen, although he added, “I pray to my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ that I’m wrong.”

“[If] you think this is the last incident, you’re out of your mind,” he said.

The former Secret Service agent said Rowe represents more of “the same people” in charge on July 13.

“Kim Cheatle, the director, wasn’t even fired. She was allowed to resign,” Bongino noted. “She’ll go get some cushy job somewhere, and her deputy” got promoted.

Bongino said whistleblowers within the Secret Service told him that Rowe “was concerned about the tie color of the agents on the detail because it seemed to imply they supported President Trump. This is the kind of stuff the Secret Service was actually wasting their time with.”

“If you can explain it, then good luck, because that’s not the agency I worked for,” he quipped….

Bongino spoke at a forum on the July 13 assassination attempt on Trump, responding to questions from five Republican members of Congress: Andy Biggs and Eli Crane of Arizona, Matt Gaetz and Cory Mills of Florida, and Chip Roy of Texas, Erik Prince, a former Navy SEAL and founder of the private military contractor Blackwater, and Ben Shaffer, a Washington regional SWAT operator who assisted in security on July 13, also answered the lawmakers’ questions….

Gaetz asked Bongino why it seems that Trump, “one of the most threatened people on the planet earth,” deals with “limited protection.”

Bongino emphasized that Secret Service “was definitely not a political enterprise” when he worked there.

Yet he suggested that politics likely played a motive in the Secret Service decreasing Trump’s protective detail.

“I absolutely believe Donald Trump and an enhanced security posture he should have had would have made him look more presidential, would have facilitated the logistical operation of him traveling,” Bongino said. “I think they were concerned about optics and making him look like a bigshot or whatever word you want to throw out there.”

“They are making some of these decisions based purely on grade school-level politics,” he lamented.

Gaetz indicated that he did not “want to believe that” about the Secret Service or the FBI. “We want to think of them as above [political capture].”

Is Democracy in Danger and By Whom?

The topic of discussion for this Constitution Monday concerns democracy and who is trying to destroy it. Victor Davis Hanson opened his article on the topic with this: “The 2023-2024 campaign season is not just the strangest on record, it’s also arguably the most anti-democratic.” He offered the following information to support his statement. 

Ostensibly, the Democratic Party has claimed over the last decade that former President Donald Trump posed a continued and existential threat to the republic. That allegation subsequently justified a variety of anti-democratic means to neuter his first two presidential candidacies, his presidency, and now his third and final run for the White House.

A near decade ago, we witnessed the 2015-2016 Hillary Clinton/Democratic National Committee/FBI-assisted effort to plant the false accusation of Trump-Russian collusion to warp the 2016 election. That gambit centered around the fraudulent Steele dossier and nearly fatally crippled the Trump 2016 campaign. That hoax would later sidetrack 22 months of his presidency before being proven a fantasy.

On the eve of the 2020 election, the left next birthed the Russian laptop disinformation campaign. That hoax also warped a presidential debate with false charges that Hunter Biden’s own incriminating laptop was once again the work of Russians seeking to conspire with Trump.

Those unusual efforts continued during the Biden administration.

For the first time in election history, the allies of one campaign sought to persuade some 16 states to try to remove a major party’s likely nominee from their primary and general election ballots.

The plan was to smother a Trump third presidential bid in its infancy, and thus once again not allow the people to accept or reject his candidacy.

Nearly simultaneously, four federal, state, and local prosecutors filed dozens of felony charges against Trump. They all shared some strange similarities.

These indictments would likely not have been filed had Trump not run for office. Nor would any of them have proceeded had Trump not been a controversial conservative Republican seeking reelection.

Almost all the charges had not been filed against any other prior candidate, and rarely a private citizen.

Some of them could just as easily have been lodged against President Joe Biden and his son.

Some indictments and convictions may still achieve their objectives of bankrupting, jailing, or keeping Trump inert during the final weeks of the campaign….

Nonetheless, Trump had survived collusion, disinformation, de-balloting, lawfare, and a subsequent assassination attempt to surge far ahead of Biden in the June presidential polls.

As is well known and as outlined by Hanson, Biden was doing so badly in the polls that he lost the support of “Democratic donors and high-ranking politicos.” They wished to stress test Biden in an unusual presidential debate held prior to either party’s convention to nominate their candidate.

Biden’s inferior performance in the debate proved to Americans and people worldwide that Biden was unfit to run for re-election or to remain in office. He was forced to end his candidacy for a second term to remain in office for the remainder of his first term. After trying to remove Kamala Harris from the ballot to stop her from dragging Biden down, Democrats suddenly decided that she was the best politician who ever lived.

By ending Biden’s candidacy, Democrats nullified the primary votes for nearly 15 million voters. Then they coronated Harris “who had neither won a primary nor a single delegate through an election” as well as “without an open convention contest or vote.”

The same secret combinations that convinced Biden to drop out of the campaign and installed Harris are now keeping Harris in the dark. Sure, she makes speeches where she tells lots of lies without any challenges. However, she is not allowed to hold press conferences or to give live interviews, hold unscripted town halls, and be caught in any situation where she does not have a scripted speech.

So, the party that had proclaimed democracy dies in darkness now favors the shadows as the preferable means to obtain and retain power – whether by ignoring primary voters, open conventions, or transparent venues with the voters.

Add up the last decade’s purchased collusion caper, unprecedented two impeachments, orchestrated disinformation hoax, efforts to de-ballot Trump, warping of the legal system to jail him and destroy his candidacy, forced removal of an unpopular but unwilling Biden from the Democratic ticket, virtual anointing of Harris by fiat in his place, and the current collusion with a compliant media to avoid public scrutiny and cross-examination of Harris.

And the conclusion?

Have those who lectured us about democracy in danger now decided to save it by destroying it?

 

How Can Humility Affect Our Reaction to Adversity?

My Come Follow Me studies for this week took me to Alma 53-63 in a lesson titled “Preserved by His Marvelous Power.” The lesson was introduced by the following information. 

When compared with the Lamanite armies, Helaman’s “little army” (Alma 56:33) of young men shouldn’t have stood a chance. Besides being few in number, Helaman’s soldiers “were all … very young,” and “they never had fought” (Alma 56:46-47). In some ways, their situation might seem familiar to those of us who sometimes feel outnumbered and overwhelmed in our latter-day battle against Satan and the forces of evil in the world.

But the army of Helaman had some advantages over the Lamanites that had nothing to do with numbers or military skill. They chose Helaman, a prophet, to lead them (see Alma 53:19); “they had been taught by their mothers, that if they did not doubt, God would deliver them” (Alma 56:47); and they had “exceeding faith in that which they had been taught.” As a result, they were protected by “the miraculous power of God” (Alma 57:26). So when facing life’s battles, we can take courage. Helaman’s army teaches us that “there [is] a just God, and whosoever [does] not doubt, [will] be preserved by his marvelous power” (Alma 57:26).

This lesson contained a powerful story about how Helaman’s young soldiers who had great faith in God. (See Alma 53:10–22; 56:43–49, 55–56; 57:20–27; 58:39–40.) Their faith in God gave them great courage, and they fought in such a way that the Lamanites feared them. All of the young men received wounds, but none of the 2060 warriors died from their wounds. The story tells us that having faith in God helps us to overcome fear. We can learn from their story to help us to win our spiritual battles with the power of Jesus Christ.

Another powerful story told in this lesson is how followers of Jesus Christ are not easily offended. (See Alma 58:1-12, 31-37; 61.) Helaman and Pahoran had good reasons to be offended. Helaman was not receiving support for his armies, and Pahoran was falsely accused by Moroni of withholding that support. Elder David A. Bednar pointed to Pahoran as an example of meekness and taught that “the most majestic and meaningful examples of meekness are found in the life of the Savior Himself” (“Meek and Lowly of Heart,” Ensign or Liahona, May 2018, 32).

A third principle taught in this lesson is that each of us has a responsibility to lift the people around us. (See Alma 60:7-14.) Moroni wrote that God would hold Pahoran responsible if he knowingly neglected the needs of the Nephite armies. The scripture block teaches us how to be more aware of and meet the needs of other people.

The principle that I hope to emphasize is found in Alma 62:39-51 “If I am humble, life’s challenges can turn my heart to God.” Life is interesting in that two people who share identical experiences – such as soldiers in war – can come out of those experiences in diverse ways. For example, we can put a raw egg and a potato in a pot of water and boil them. The potato will get softer, while the egg becomes firmer.

After the wars were over, the prophet Helaman went back to teaching the gospel and organized the church again. For some of the people, the war had softened their hearts, while the hearts of other people were hardened. The difference comes from individual choices. If we choose to stay humble during adversities, we can keep our hearts soft and in tune with God.

 

Why Are 300,000 Migrant Children Lost?

Families, communities, states, and nations are stronger when adults seek the safety of all children. This effort includes pressuring government agencies to care properly for children who enter the United States unaccompanied by parents.

Bradley Devlin at The Daily Signal shared results from a recent report from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Inspector General says that “the Biden-Harris administration has lost track of approximately 300,000 migrant children.” 

From fiscal year 2019 through fiscal 2023, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement transferred nearly 450,000 unaccompanied children to the Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Refugee Resettlement. (Fiscal 2019 began Oct. 1, 2018, and ended Sept. 30, 2019, when Donald Trump was president; fiscal 2023 began Oct. 1, 2022, and ended Sept. 30, 2023, with Biden as president.)

While Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, remains responsible for managing the child migrants’ immigration cases through the system, the Office of Refugee Resettlement is tasked with the children’s care and custody while their cases are litigated.

“However, ICE was not able to account for the location of all UCs [unaccompanied children] who were released by HHS [Health and Human Services] and did not appear as scheduled in immigration court,” the inspector general’s report says.

In the same period of fiscal 2019 to 2023, more than 32,000 of the unaccompanied children failed to appear in court after receiving a Notice to Appear.

“ICE did not always inform HHS’ Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) when UCs failed to appear in immigration court after release from HHS’ custody,” the inspector general’s report says. “ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) officers at only one of the eight field offices we visited stated they attempted to locate the UCs.”

But those 32,000 failures to appear in court amounted to just the tip of the iceberg. The report also found that “as of May 2024, ICE had not served NTAs [Notices to Appear] on more than 291,000” unaccompanied children.

Although updated guidance attempted to manage the surge of illegal immigrants, the inspector general’s office in the Department of Homeland Security says that, despite “site visits at four ICE locations,” it “observed no change in local procedures based on the guidance.”

“At one location we visited, 34,823 (84%) of 41,638 UCs in the local area had not been served NTAs to initiate immigration proceedings,” the report adds.

Republican senators and representatives were quick to jump on the Biden-Harris administration for not protecting the unaccompanied children.

The Homeland Security Act of 2021, the report notes, defines unaccompanied children “as minors who have no lawful immigration status in the United States, have not attained 18 years of age, and have no parent or legal guardian in the country available to provide care and physical custody.”

These children are “at higher risk for trafficking, exploitation, or forced labor” because of the Biden-Harris administration’s failures in enforcing immigration law, the inspector general’s report says.

According to Devlin, the Inspector General’s report is not the only one sharing some of the same results. The New York Times published a report in February 2023 that was “based on its investigation into the lives of unaccompanied migrant children who recently came to the United States.” Devlin continued with the Times report: “Human trafficking and sexual abuse involves migrant children more often than one might think, and those cases are more extreme than the more commonplace labor exploitation that migrant children may undergo in the United States.”

From 15-year-olds packaging cereal in Grand Rapids, Michigan, to 12-year-old construction workers and roofers in Florida and Texas, to slaughterhouses in Delaware, Mississippi, and North Carolina, the Times reported, “migrant children, who have been coming into the United States without their parents in record numbers, are ending up in some of the most punishing jobs in the country.”

Some children made it as far west as Los Angeles, where they sew “Made in America” tags on T-shirts. Others go even further, across the Pacific Ocean to Hawaii, where they harvest coffee.

“This shadow workforce extends across industries in every state, flouting child labor laws that have been in place for nearly a century,” the Times reported. “Unaccompanied minors have had their legs torn off in factories and their spines shattered on construction sites, but most of these injuries go uncounted.”

The pattern of exploitation sometimes turns deadly. In Brooklyn, a 14-year-old was struck and killed by a car while delivering food on his bike. In Atlanta, a 16-year-old was crushed under a tractor while on the job. In Alabama, a 15-year-old died after tumbling off a roof.

Devlin explained that the chaos in the immigration system in America “is the result of decades of liberal border policies paired with confused, convoluted enforcement procedures. He then brought information from Andrew Arthur, a resident fellow at the Center for Immigration Studies, into the discussion. Arthur told The Daily Signal that “although children long have been smuggled into the United States, the problems in dealing with unaccompanied alien children became much more difficult after the so-called Flores Settlement in 1997.”

The agreement put narrow parameters on how the old Immigration and Naturalization Service – dissolved in 2003 as part of the launch of the Department of Homeland Security – could process migrant children. Matters got only more complicated when, during passage of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 creating DHS, Democrats demanded that the new agency send unaccompanied children directly to the HHS Office of Refuge Resettlement, Arthur said.

“Don’t ask me why they picked ORR,” Arthur said of Democratic lawmakers and the office in HHS. “I literally have no idea. They didn’t detain anybody before this point, didn’t have any experience, and they’ve never really been good at it.”

Arthur explained that the “radical changes” in the immigration system of America, but “the country didn’t begin to see major increases in unaccompanied alien children crossing the border until 2008 and the passage of the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act.” This legislation was passed by a Democrat-run Congress and signed into law by Republican President George W. Bush. Section 235 of this legislation “requires DHS to send every unaccompanied alien child that it comes in contact with to the HHS Office of Refugee Resettlement ‘within 72 hours,’ Arthur said. Arthur also explained that the legislation did “something else weird.”

It separates out UACs into two separate groups. The first, if they’re from contiguous countries, Canada and Mexico, DHS can send them back if they haven’t been trafficked and they don’t have any persecution claims. But if they’re from any other country, then those kids have to be sent to HHS, and HHS has to then place them with sponsors in the United States.

The result, he said, was a massive increase in unaccompanied children from noncontiguous countries, especially the so-called Northern Triangle countries of Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador.

Vice President Joe Biden was sent to Guatemala City in 2014 “to work with regional governments to slow the flow of migrant children to the United States.” As a result, “the number of unaccompanied children showing up on the southern border” was reduced. However, the number increased during the Trump-Pence administration in 2019.

To address this problem and to ensure that unaccompanied migrant children weren’t sent to unsafe situations, Arthur told The Daily Signal, “HHS was taking 102 days by 2020 to vet the sponsors.”

The goal, he said, was “to let parents know, look, … we’re going to really look at you. And if you’re here illegally, we may put you into proceedings if you have your kids smuggled here.”

Although the problems associated with migrant children crossing the border long predate the Biden-Harris administration, Arthur submits that they became much worse on Biden’s watch.

When Biden became president on Jan. 21, 2021, “all of those safeguards that Trump had put on the system to protect those kids were gone,” Arthur said.

The immigration system “doesn’t work at this scale,” he said. “They’ve brought so many people into the United States that the very people who say the immigration system is broken are the ones breaking the immigration system.”

The problems involving unaccompanied migrant children will not slow or stop if Kamala Harris is elected POTUS. Her policies will be the same as Biden’s but on steroids. If Americans genuinely believe in protecting these children, we must elect a POTUS who will take action to stop them from coming to the United States in such numbers and members of Congress who will put safeguards in place to protect the ones who do come. Adults must act to protect these children if we honestly believe in strengthening families, communities, states, and nations.

What Happened on DNC Day 4?

Today was the fourth and final day of the Democrat National Convention (DNC) held in Chicago, Illinois. Rob Bluey shared ten highlights from the events of the day in his article published at The Daily Signal. 

1. The Main Event: Harris’ ‘Unlikely Journey’ to Democrat Nominee

“Let’s get to business,” Harris told the crowd in an attempt to quiet the raucous applause greeting her arrival onstage at United Center about 10:35 p.m. EDT.

[After acknowledging her husband, Doug Emhoff, and thanking Joe and Jill Biden] Harris talked about the “unlikely journey” that led her to the party’s nomination, recalling stories about her parents and the lessons she learned as a child of a single mother after they split up….

Harris said her parents’ involvement in the civil rights movement inspired her to pursue a career in law. She recalled that an abusive relationship between her best friend and the friend’s stepfather convinced her to become a prosecutor.

“I believe everyone has a right to safety, dignity, and justice,” Harris said. “In our system of justice, a harm against any one of us is a harm against all of us.”

2. Harris Speaks Broadly About Policy Agenda, Skips Specifics

After sharing her personal biography, Harris pivoted to policy issues. She touted her record as California attorney general, U.S. senator, and vice president and argued that she would be a better choice than returning Trump as president….

Harris took Trump to task for his leadership style as president and his behavior in the aftermath of the disputed 2020 election, then warned about his agenda should voters elect him again [in an attempt to tie Trump to Project 2025]. …

Harris accused Trump of trying to cut Social Security and Medicare, seeking to repeal Obamacare, and wanting to eliminate the Department of Education….

Citing her own upbringing in a middle-class family, Harris made a direct appeal to this voting bloc, who could swing the election to either candidate particularly in states such as Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

Harris also devoted part of her speech to abortion, an issue where she and Democrats hold a sizable advantage over Trump and Republicans. She accused her opponent of wanting to limit access to birth control and enact a nationwide abortion ban – although Trump holds neither position….

On border security, a problem that Harris failed to fix as the White House’s “border czar,” she promised to “reform our broken immigration system” and “create an earned pathway to citizenship.” Notably, she listed both before saying she would secure the border.

Harris devoted parts of her speech to two foreign wars that began on her watch as vice president, boasting that she warned Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy about Russia’s invasion in 2022 and is working “around the clock” to bring an end to the fighting in Gaza in the Israel-Hamas war.

She surprised some by explicitly referring to Hamas, the elected government of the Gaza Strip, as a terrorist organization. The war began after Hamas terrorists went on a rampage of torture, rape, and murder Oct. 7, leaving 1,200 dead and taking 250 hostages in southern Israel.

“I will always stand up for Israel’s right to defend itself and I will always ensure Israel has the ability to defend itself,” she said. “At the same time, what has happened in Gaza over the past 10 months is devastating. So many innocent lives lost. Desperate, hungry people fleeing for safety, over and over again. The scale of suffering is heartbreaking.”

3. Leaders of Teachers Unions Rally Against Trump-Vance Ticket

Dressed in white blazers, the two teachers union leaders took the stage to warn delegates about the dangers posed by former President Donald Trump and Sen. JD Vance of Ohio, his running mate on the GOP ticket.

National Education Association President Becky Pringle and American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten made partisan appeals in keeping with their unions’ one-sided political giving to Democrats.

“Donald Trump and JD Vance are not just wrong – they’re dangerous. It’s all right there in Project 2025. They will shut down the Department of Education,” said Pringle, who leads the larger of the two teachers unions. “We are coming together to say, ‘Not on our watch.’”

Launched by The Heritage Foundation two years ago, Project 2025 grew to a coalition of 110 conservative organizations that developed a transition plan for the next presidential administration. Unlike some of the misstatements and lies about it, Project 2025 does call for the Education Department’s elimination – an idea endorsed by Trump….

4. Wisconsin Senator Misrepresents Trump’s Position on Social Security

Sen. Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis., began her remarks by talking about the two grandparents who raised her as a child. It was her attempt at appealing to senior citizens – and casting doubt on Trump’s pledges to protect Social Security.

Dating to his first presidential run in 2016, Trump repeatedly has stated his opposition to cutting Social Security benefits.

[She tried to connect Trump with cutting Social Security and Medicare and give big tax breaks to billionaires and corporations.]

There’s just one problem – that’s not exactly what Trump said. In fact, he never mentioned Social Security or Medicare by name.

In a March 11 interview on CNBC, Trump said: “There is a lot you can do in terms of entitlements, in terms of cutting and in terms of also the theft and the bad management of entitlements.”

The term entitlements may reference any number of government programs; entitlements have grown in recent years to encompass an even greater share of the federal budget.

For his part, Trump clarified his position by stating: “I will never do anything that will jeopardize or hurt Social Security or Medicare.”

5. Sharpton Targets Trump, Highlights Case of Central Park 5

Delivering a divisive speech filled with appeals to several identity groups, the Rev. Al Sharpton began his remarks by taking aim at Trump….

6. Sen. Bob Casey Complains About Cost of Diapers

… Sen. Bob Casey, D-Pa., began his remarks by complaining about inflation, specifically the cost of diapers [blaming corporations for rising prices]. …

7. Senate Hopefuls Make Their Pitch

Two members of the U.S. House of Representatives made their appeals to the party faithful for jobs in Congress’ upper chamber….

8. Warren Contrasts Harris, Trump in Appeal to Working-Class Voters

Wiping tears from her eyes amid sustained applause, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., portrayed Harris as a champion for everyday Americans in contrast to Trump….

9. Stars Come Out on Kamala’s Big Night

The (Dixie) Chicks sang an interesting acapella rendition of the national anthem, comedian D.L. Hughley cracked jokes, and actresses Kerry Washington and Eva Longoria made appearances Thursday night in what has become a star-studded event in Chicago.

In another musical moment, pop singer Pink sang her 2017 hit “What About Us” with daughter Willow Sage….

10. Democrats’ Favorite Republican: Adam Kinzinger

Former Rep. Adam Kinzinger, who represented Illinois as a Republican, got a prime speaking slot to make the case for Harris….