|
 The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints recently announced that a new function of the church will be added to the existing three-fold mission. That mission currently is redeeming the dead, perfecting the saints, and proclaiming the Gospel. The new fourth function is care for the poor and needy.
Caring for the most vulnerable in society is something the Church has always been concerned about. But placing that task in this overall mission statement of the church gives that responsibility added emphasis. LDS members will become more aware of the need for caring the poor and needy in society. This is particularly timely at the Christmas season.
The Utah County Democratic Party shares that emphasis. The second paragraph of our platform states that Utah County Democrats "stand for policies and programs that benefit all Utahns. We believe a community is no stronger than its weakest members." Interestingly, the Utah County Republican Party's platform makes no such statement.
The vast majority of the acts of care performed in a society are now, and will continue to be, private acts undertaken by various charitable institutions and, even more importantly, individuals. That includes performing small acts of kindness for those who face difficult circumstances - a new baby in the home, serious illness, unemployment, a death in the family, etc.
But we also believe there are comprehensive needs that transcend individuals and even charitable institutions' abilities. In our society today, the problems of health care, old age assistance, unemployment, and poverty are not just solvable by individual efforts. They require a more universal approach that protects both the recipient and even the giver.
Recently, a student in one of my classes dismissed the idea of government playing a role in caring for the elderly, the unemployed, or the sick. He said families should take their relatives into their homes and care for them. Although an option for some people, that expectation would be impossible for most families.
And our society has been there before. Prior to Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, unemployment compensation, etc., people did just what that student suggested. The consequences were potentially disastrous. One family could have some misfortune that led to a catastrophic illness or long-term unemployment. That family often suffered the loss of their savings and even their home. A neighbor or an extended family member might not have that misfortune and they were okay. However, that would not mean the neighbor, or even an extended family member, would have the ability to support both families, even for a short period of time. They, too, would go bankrupt.
It would be impossible today for the vast majority of individual families to be able to meet the health care, income, and employment needs of other family members or their neighbors when they have serious needs. That is where these programs help families deal with those needs. The operative word is "help." These programs do not substitute for individual acts of charity. Rather, they supplement them in a way that doesn't overwhelm the giver.
It is vital to remember that even with the introduction of these programs, government does not end up supporting people in some extravagant lifestyle. In fact, in many ways, these programs cover the bare minimum, particularly in a severe recession. Today, unemployment benefits are running out for millions of families. Health care costs loom as employers drop coverage or families lose their jobs and forego health care insurance and access to health care.
Nevertheless, these programs, to a limited extent, provide some assistance for people in difficult times. Many elderly people live off of their Social Security checks. For many who are poor, Medicaid is their health care plan. Millions of families right now are dependent on their unemployment compensation.
By taking a relatively small amount from all, our society is providing help for the most vulnerable in society without bankrupting others. As a result, our society can provide for the poor and needy without creating additional poor and needy people. Due to the existence of these programs, there are fewer homeless families, fewer elderly people who suffer or die without adequate health care, and fewer families who don't have enough for their children to eat than there would be otherwise. And since we never know when we might be among those unlikely few, all of us benefit from the existence of these programs.
Is it coercion to take funds for these programs in the form of taxes? Yes, it is. But government coerces us to do alot of things in society, including things that may be inconvenient or undesirable to us. For example, government coerces me to pay taxes for wars, whether or not I agree with them. Government coerces me to pay for roads and bridges I will never use.
Government coerces me in other ways. It coerces me to stop at red lights and stop signs, even when I'm in a hurry to get somewhere. It requires me to have car insurance when I buy a car and to hold a drivers license. It requires me to abide by local ordinances on fire use, home additions, snow removal, etc.
Coercing me to give to others does not diminish my gift. Providing for those who are most vulnerable ennobles all of us because we live in a society that is willing to sacrifice some in order to provide for those who are in need.
When we join society, we give up certain liberties in order to join with others in pursuing the common good. Caring for the poor and needy, both through private and public means, is another element of pursuing the common good.
The LDS Church's new function sends a message to all of us that there are poor and needy in society who need our care. It is important for us to make that task a priority, in our roles as individuals, church members, and as citizens.
|
