Melanie (00:00.426)
Sorry.

Matt (00:00.952)
Hello, hello everybody and welcome to the latter day lens. It is so good to have you with us this week. I'm your host Matt with me as always is Sean and now newlywed Melanie. What's your last name Melanie? What do you go by just Melanie? Melanie Huffle. Melanie for now is with us. We're so glad you joined us Melanie. Sean calls you Melanie Hufflepuff just to like poke at you, but I like.

Shawn (00:15.738)
Hufflepuff, Hufflepuff.

Melanie (00:17.096)
Just call me Melanie for now.

Hehehehe

Melanie (00:26.72)
It's a good name. Good name. Essentially.

Shawn (00:26.8)
I'm not poking, that's your new name. That's your new name.

Matt (00:31.16)
Did you know when Melanie was younger, she would take those BuzzFeed quizzes, which Harry Potter house are you? And if it said Hufflepuff, she would try again so she could be Gryffindor Melanie?

Melanie (00:44.378)
You know, if you don't remember, you don't get to know.

Shawn (00:47.462)
Matt, Matt, there's not even a question of debate. Like Melanie is definitely a Gryffindor. Like there's no question.

Matt (00:47.554)
Slytherin Slytherin she'd want to be Slytherin

Matt (00:55.502)
Is that right Melanie?

Melanie (00:57.376)
I always thought I was a Slytherin or maybe a Ravenclaw, but like it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter.

Matt (01:02.008)
Yeah. Yeah.

Shawn (01:05.861)
It matters.

Matt (01:07.499)
You can hear how she's still trying to convince herself of that. She's still working on it. Hey, by the way...

Melanie (01:10.528)
It takes a long time to relearn old habits or unlearn.

Shawn (01:11.654)
Ha ha ha ha ha.

Matt (01:17.112)
By the way, Melanie, we were having a debate about the name Edward because you said it was so closely tied to Twilight and I insisted that it wasn't. But guess what? I talked to a lot of people at BYU Idaho and you're right. People hear the name Edward, they think of Twilight.

Melanie (01:32.532)
Thank you. I just need you to convince Luke now because he still doesn't believe me.

Matt (01:35.299)
haha

Matt (01:40.482)
Well, tell Luke to listen to the podcast. can listen and like, and he'll know everything we say on the podcast is true. We never lie. Right, Sean?

Shawn (01:47.974)
I also like Melanie how really the only debates Matt's willing to like submit and admit that he's wrong and just once it don't matter.

Melanie (01:56.481)
You're telling me like the efficacy of the name Edward doesn't matter in the long run? I feel like that's a critical topic in today's world.

Matt (01:57.422)
Do I get the points on that?

It matters.

Shawn (02:03.782)
hahahahah

Ha ha ha ha!

Matt (02:09.774)
Here's another test. I say the first name George, what do you think is the natural last name? Like, who do you think of? George? Who?

Shawn (02:18.086)
to Kai.

Matt (02:19.374)
That's such a good one. He's from Star Trek, Melanie. He's all over social media. He was in the OG Star Trek.

Shawn (02:20.656)
Ha ha ha ha.

Melanie (02:21.608)
I don't even know who that is.

Melanie (02:29.317)
okay.

Matt (02:30.516)
Melanie, who do you think of when you hear the name George?

Melanie (02:33.028)
George Stephanopoulos, of course.

Shawn (02:35.002)
What? What? You sh-

Matt (02:35.094)
naturally naturally and you know Sean you could ask you could ask any of my children and they would say the same thing to you, Stephanopoulos

Shawn (02:43.622)
But that's just colloquial to the Miles household. For sure.

Matt (02:48.014)
Hey, by the way, this reminds me, my wife and I went out to see the movies last night. I put on my Michael Jackson t-shirt. I was so excited to go see the Michael Jackson biopic, but she persuaded me to see this other movie instead called Sheep Detectives. my goodness. Best movie.

Melanie (02:48.522)
Probably. I don't think anyone else calls him Georgie Porgie.

Shawn (02:53.83)
What the heck?

Shawn (03:03.878)
Go.

Shawn (03:12.623)
You

Matt (03:14.548)
Easily best movie of the year. I hope it wins best picture. It definitely should such a good movie There are scenes in that that are so funny I've never ever seen anything quite so clever or humorous ever in my life as sheep detectives So good

Shawn (03:28.294)
I don't know that I... Yeah, I don't know that I... And I don't know that I trust Matt's film critic.

Melanie (03:29.918)
I think he's going senile.

Matt (03:32.279)
You

Go. You guys can look it up on. You can look it up on letterbox when I read my the mail bag, but I'm just telling you listeners you heard it here first. Sheep detectives. It will make your day. It is such a good show.

Melanie (03:46.026)
Dad, are you just secretly in love with Hugh Jackman?

Shawn (03:49.056)
Ahahahahah

Matt (03:49.326)
We're halfway through the movie and Sanders like, is he Wolverine? Yeah, yeah, he's Wolverine. Is he also maybe Iron Man? No, he's not Iron Man. Such a good show. Hey, well, in the mail bag, a listener wrote in, I almost didn't read any listener comments because I wasn't thrilled with any of them, but this one, why not?

Melanie (03:56.577)
you

They do look the same though. They do look the same.

Matt (04:18.606)
This person said, we were talking about the $25 billion that has been spent on the Iran bombing so far. They said, wow, how about the $35 trillion in fraud committed by the Democrats? That's enough to fund the entire nation 35 years with no income tax. 45 years with no income tax. Okay, number one, do you know what the budget is this year for the federal government? Just this year, $9 trillion. So again, that's not 45 years, right?

Even if it was 35 trillion in fraud, that's only four years of funding the federal government. But second of all, 35 trillion in fraud, by the way, by the Democrats. Oh, okay. Like the party somehow was like stealing all of this money. Anyhow, I don't know what to do with some listeners, Sean. It's just like, come on. That's just ridiculous.

Shawn (05:04.806)
But do a very quick like Google search and what you have is certain media outlets basically pushing propaganda like that. And so if you're going to be willing to just believe what's online, then you're going to believe certain things, right?

Matt (05:14.99)
Matt (05:25.134)
Yeah, well, thankfully, most of our listeners aren't that way. Listener who wrote this, I don't mean to be rude to you, but seriously, like, just ask like, somebody who's not in your like, really tight, close circle of social media friends or something just like, ask a school teacher, I don't know, ask like a bus driver, ask it ask, say that to them and see how they how they respond to that. Hey, do think it's true the Democrats stole $35 trillion in fraud? Like

Shawn (05:45.168)
That's your advice?

Matt (05:54.286)
That doesn't even make any sense.

Shawn (05:55.942)
Maybe your advice was not quite spot on. Don't ask, I mean, sure, ask anyone, I guess, a bus driver included, but just go online and do a little research and you'll find that it's just a propaganda talking point. Just be non-biased and do a little research and you'll find that there's no way to even verify that.

Matt (06:04.811)
that's a better way.

Matt (06:13.452)
Yeah, okay. I like that better. Okay.

Shawn (06:15.895)
or ask your bus driver.

Matt (06:17.71)
Yeah, which in Rexburg, we don't even have a bus. So, all right. First up this week on the Thought Provoker. At a town hall in Marblehead, Massachusetts, David Modica became famous online after he honestly questioned why the town was trying to avoid building new housing. Marblehead has to follow a state law that asks towns near public transit to allow more homes. But the town chose a plan.

that would put most new housing on a golf course where it probably will not be built. Housing prices in the United States are too high, but cities do not want to high density housing. So here's the question, is that morally wrong? Do cities have a moral obligation to develop affordable housing options? Please say yes. Please say yes. Please say yes. Melanie, you go first.

Shawn (07:05.957)
I mean, know what both of your answers are gonna be, so let's hear your answer. Yeah, I know what your answers are gonna be. Go ahead.

Melanie (07:12.83)
I think that it depends on the population demographic of the city. See, Luke and I were driving today from Pleasant Grove, Utah to the Linden, Utah temple. And in so doing, we drove through a little patch of Linden, Utah. And the whole time I was like, this is the most insanely manicured Main Street I have ever been on. Like we weren't even on Main Street. There was just a side street with like...

Shawn (07:17.189)
nice.

Matt (07:18.243)
come on.

Melanie (07:39.925)
lamp posts with potted plants hanging from them. I was like, what kind of affluent does this town have to be to have this sort of decor on the road? I don't know a ton about London, Utah's makeup, but I think it's true that there are some towns that are populated almost entirely by people who are pretty financially well off. If those towns are like, okay, everyone here is financially well off and we don't need high density housing, I think that's like

Matt (07:49.133)
Mm-hmm.

Melanie (08:09.81)
I can see where they're coming from. But I think that towns like Provo, Utah, that have demographics that are significantly more diverse, have an obligation to make sure that there's housing that the citizens of that town can afford. And I think they're neglecting it.

Shawn (08:26.021)
Melanie, it'll probably make you change your mind, but I applaud you for your answer. It'll probably make you now wanna change your opinion.

Matt (08:26.222)
That's close to you, Sean.

Melanie (08:33.248)
Yeah, I'm scared. I'm very scared, but it's where I stand right now. I think the government is obligated to fulfill the well-being of its citizens. And if you have a town where none of the citizens need high density housing, then like, whatever, okay, make things pretty.

Matt (08:37.633)
No, no.

Shawn (08:50.725)
Pretty logical, Matt. Matt, pretty logical.

Matt (08:50.914)
Well, you'll never know because they can't they can't afford to move there. They do it on purpose to make sure that they don't have any poor people in their city. Go ahead, Sean. Well, I look up some scriptures because Melanie's anecdote was painful to me. I'm to look up Doctrine and Covenants, Section 104. And you tell me, Sean, you tell me why you think Melanie's right about that, because you're both wrong.

Melanie (09:02.272)
You

Shawn (09:15.331)
The, mean, no, they definitely shouldn't meddle because Matt, government meddling in the cost of homes is what causes the home affordable crisis anyway. Like if you look at, no, it's true. If you look at, okay, you look at why did the Federal Reserve take control of interest rates? Well, it's because there were natural consequences in the marketplace. There were crashes and that was scary. And so they start to take over.

Melanie (09:29.952)
Shawn (09:44.549)
Just look at 2000, the year 2002 today. Look at interest rates and look at the price of homes generally. Price of homes are like four times what they were 26 years ago. And in that same time period, starting with the financial crisis caused by government, as well as the COVID years, artificially low interest rates.

Matt (09:58.23)
Yeah. Yeah.

Shawn (10:12.402)
made it absolutely easy for corporations to come and buy in, people to buy. Like it caused such huge housing inflation. Government came in and meddled. And so Matt, the solution isn't, yeah, we need government to meddle even more. Like let's have government come in and regulate even more to put quotas for who should live and how much it should be. Government meddling like that just keeps screwing things up. It's always going to.

Matt (10:38.668)
You always tell me Sean that in California there's not enough housing. You regularly tell me that. Yeah, well and cities create zoning laws and in those zoning laws they decide what kinds of houses you can build, how much space you have to have, all of that sort of stuff. Yeah, so I'll read from the script. This is Doctrine and Covenants 104 verse 17. For the earth is full and there is enough and to spare.

Shawn (10:43.076)
Well, it's true. Yeah, of course.

Shawn (10:54.788)
That's right.

Matt (11:04.096)
Yea, I prepared all things and have given unto the children of men to be agents unto themselves. Therefore, if any man shall take of the abundance which I have made, and impart not his portion according to the law of my gospel unto the poor and the needy, he shall with the wicked lift up his eyes in hell, being in torment."

Shawn (11:23.024)
But Matt, that makes my point for me. Your zoning laws in California are the reason there's no affordable housing.

Matt (11:29.038)
They're being immoral. That's what I'm saying. They're being immoral. So when I first moved to Lawrence, Kansas, I would go into these nice neighborhoods and what you would have is you would have a street of like big huge houses. Then the next block would be like twin homes, double homes, stuff like that. And then you'd have apartment complex apartment complexes. And they called this mixed use housing.

And of course the rich people always want to create zoning laws that make it so that in your neighborhood, you have to have a certain kind of house, so much land, so much space, probably have to be in their HOA. And what that does is that creates disparities in the community. And it also creates social distance between the rich people and the poor people. But in communities like Lawrence, Kansas, where you have some big houses, some twin homes, some apartment complexes, some duplexes all together in the same neighborhood.

It helps reduce the disparities between rich and poor in those communities and helps people get to know people that aren't necessarily rich all the time. And the rich have no place where they can run and hide. Like seriously, in Lawrence, Kansas, there was, there were former NBA players, right? Because university of Kansas has a good basketball program. So in my ward, there was a former NBA player. There was a former Superbowl head football coach. And then there were like people that were dirt poor, like we were living in government housing.

all in the same community because that's the way that they set things up. And so I think that it's morally wrong for cities and towns to say, we're not going to diversify the kinds of homes that are in our communities.

Shawn (13:04.486)
But you want government to force the diversity as opposed to letting the market allow diversity.

Matt (13:09.026)
The market, the government already does it with zoning, right? Somebody, this happened in my neighborhood not very long ago. Somebody bought this land and they wanted to put apartment complexes and townhomes in there. And all of the neighbors rose up and said, no, you're not gonna change the zoning. You can only build million dollar homes in this neighborhood. And so the developer's like, fine, I guess we'll only build million dollar homes. Even though the demand would have been for other kinds of housing, people use those zoning laws.

Shawn (13:15.002)
Yeah. Yeah.

Matt (13:37.55)
to restrict who gets to build homes where. Yes.

Shawn (13:37.69)
Okay, you're saying it's immoral. You're agreeing with me that government needs to deregulate so that there's freedom and the marketplace will allow for a more diverse community.

Matt (13:48.142)
What is there no need to do?

Melanie (13:48.553)
I feel like the question is what we're deregulating though. Because it's like, is the question zoning laws or is the question like forcing more building of affordable housing?

Shawn (13:52.388)
zoning laws?

Matt (13:59.372)
I'm not gonna deregulate zoning laws. I'm gonna say cities need to stop using zoning laws to keep poor people out of their cities. That's what I would say.

Shawn (14:06.137)
Yeah, you're the yet there's there's no way Matt that's ever going to happen. Government is going to give in to the powers that be in the community, which are the rich people. They're always going to zone the way the rich people want to zone. They are the government are the rich people in many cases. So they are going to zone it the way that they're. Yeah, Matt, it's the regulation that's causing the problem.

Matt (14:27.734)
I feel Sean like you're saying that I'm right, but just for a different reason. But I'm right. You agree with me that it's immoral for cities to stop to not hold on for cities to, yeah. They do they have a moral obligation to develop affordable housing options.

Shawn (14:32.631)
Yeah, I do.

Shawn (14:45.625)
No, the cities don't have the obligation to develop it. The free market does. I think it's moral for the free market to allow for it. Yeah, the city, no, the government's. Does the government have a morality?

Melanie (14:52.618)
Does the free market have a morality?

Matt (14:57.688)
Yes, Sean, we are the government. It's the government of the people, by the people, for the people. We're the people. We're the government.

Shawn (14:59.598)
Why?

Then there's your answer. The free market is the same thing. It is we the people. It is.

Melanie (15:06.561)
No, the government is like an institution established to protect the people. The free market is just this thing that happens as a result of people's actions.

Shawn (15:16.174)
I would suggest that the free market is simply two individuals in a free exchange unencumbered by governments ineffective or unwilling.

Matt (15:24.248)
will to be moral.

Melanie (15:26.076)
So maybe when you say the free market has an obligation, you're saying, we have an obligation.

Shawn (15:30.521)
That's exactly what I mean by free market, right? Melanie, you own that plot of land over there. I own this plot of land right here, right next to each other. We can engage with each other to do the right thing and to provide housing for you and for me. And yeah, that's right. We're the market.

Melanie (15:32.968)
Okay.

Matt (15:46.712)
But increasingly, it's the government that owns property and they're deciding who to sell it to in a public exchange, right? Where there's like all this government land and the government says we need to sell this land to increase housing options and things like that. And then they sell it to a billionaire who puts a home on a like a hundred acre ranch that nobody else gets to go to because they spent all that money for the land. Whereas the government could say, we're gonna sell this to the highest bidder who agrees to build these kinds of homes here.

they could do that. And that would be maybe a more moral thing to do than allowing the

Melanie (16:19.316)
Maybe we should just change zoning laws so that you can't build a house that's on more than two acres within 30 minutes of a Walmart.

Shawn (16:27.845)
Whoa!

Matt (16:28.206)
Within 30 minutes of a Walmart. And why is Walmart the choice, Melanie?

Shawn (16:33.061)
Hahaha!

Melanie (16:37.344)
You know, I was just making a proposal and I feel like Walmarts are at the epicenter of all things important.

Matt (16:40.203)
I see.

Shawn (16:43.449)
hahahaha

Matt (16:43.636)
Okay, I'll give Melanie the points for that. That was like a really powerful point.

Melanie (16:48.128)
you

Matt (16:51.65)
All right, the next topic. So there's this journal, it's an online journal I read, it's called Square Two. they have, somebody wrote an anonymous essay. And so at the start, I wanna say this. I am not a fan of people creating anonymous content. If you think something, if you believe something, put your name to it, put it out there. People will evaluate both the content and you by the things that you write. But if you're saying, well, I'm afraid of this or this or this, so I'm not gonna be public about it, already I'm suspicious, so.

Shawn (17:20.301)
Why are you supportive of it then? You're about to read an anonymous essay.

Matt (17:24.13)
Well, because I think that they raise an interesting point, but I'm not 100 % sure that the person who wrote this is actually a gay man, even though they say that they are. okay, so Pride Month is coming up. By the time this episode drops, Pride Month will be at our doorsteps. So that's why I wanted to talk about this. Okay, so in this essay, a gay man from, argues that people should not celebrate gay pride and that marriage should be between a man and a woman.

The anonymous author says homosexual behavior goes against church teachings and believes society should give special support to heterosexual marriage because it can create and raise children with both biological parents. The author also criticizes modern ideas about sexual freedom, same-sex marriage and surrogacy. Like literally out of nowhere, this person just really attacks people having surrogate children, but anyhow.

Overall, the essay urges gay members of the church to follow commandments instead of building their identity around pride. So this is a question I want to ask, regardless of the essay. Is it morally wrong for people to build their identity around pride and should we avoid pride events?

Shawn (18:38.029)
Melanie, do you want to take this first or do you want me to?

Matt (18:40.27)
I'll go first if you guys want me to. don't Okay, because I wrote the question and I thought I've probably thought a lot more about it than you guys have. Okay, so this is what I've concluded. So Steve Young, the football player is left handed and he has talked many times in his life about how society discriminates against left handed people, which I've never been left handed, but I'm just gonna agree with Steve Young on that, right? Maybe society discriminates against left handed people, but

Melanie (18:42.76)
You should go first.

Shawn (18:42.969)
Yeah.

Matt (19:10.388)
Left-handed people are not put into a lower status position in society by the fact that they're left-handed. so pride events for gay people and for transgender people and for racial minorities, they are about helping people find community with other people who share their identities that might be low status. And so when people say pride events are bad because you're just celebrating sin, they're not celebrating sin.

They're celebrating the fact that they're different and the most people in their community look down on them and they want to find support and community with people who will not look down on them. And so I support pride events and I think as members of the church, we should support pride events because we should send them the message as church. We don't look down on you as members of the church. We don't look down on you. We love you as much as we love left handed people and straight people and all people. And so

If the purpose of the event is to say, help me feel like I am of worth and I belong, then we should support that.

Shawn (20:09.797)
Okay.

Shawn (20:16.869)
Okay. Why can't you apply the same logic to a Nazi event?

Matt (20:22.51)
because Nazis are celebrating hatred towards others generally, right? Also, Naziism is more of a choice. I know that there's some biological heritability things towards those specific ideologies, but one in theory could change their Naziism if they wanted to.

Shawn (20:29.719)
Okay, how about a

Shawn (20:42.679)
Okay. So you're, you're now, I think the basis of your comment isn't necessarily just in, we should support anyone. Even if they don't abide or agree with our morals, we should support their, you're transitioning from that to kind of revealing a little bit of your ideology. Maybe no.

Matt (21:00.12)
Well, no, like, so for example, if I go to Mormon pride events, we don't call them pride events, right? But I go to those because I'm supportive of our Mormon community when we have like the Days of 47 parade, or we have a ward activity, or we have a stake activity. Those are basically Mormon pride events. We just don't call them that. And I go to those because I'm supportive of that community. I want to support that community. Nazism is not a community I want to support. So I don't think we need to support every community.

Shawn (21:24.261)
Okay, so can you apply the, that's fine. That's what I'm saying. So why are you picking and choosing which ones? For example, an abortion event, a pro-abortion event.

Matt (21:34.798)
I'm 100 % gonna. So again, people don't usually carry abortion as an identity, right? They don't say I had an abortion and that's who I am. No, they just, that's like something they did. It's not who they are. Yeah. So pride events are about like who we are, right? I feel like I'm a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and that's an identity I want to celebrate. People who are gay feel like they're gay and that's an identity they want to embrace.

Shawn (21:41.273)
Sure they do.

Shawn (21:46.711)
I see.

Melanie (21:57.386)
So.

Melanie (22:01.908)
I want to pose a question, not because I disagree with you, Dad, because I think, like, I do agree with you, but I want to make sure we're giving every side, like, a voice here. And so I feel like if the hypothetical author of this essay were here with us, the point he would be raising is, should being a member of the LGBTQ plus community be a part of your identity if you're a member of the church?

Because I feel like what he's arguing is like the teachings of the gospel of Jesus Christ are that behaving in that way is a sin. And so we shouldn't be embracing it or making it an identity that we need to like connect with other people who are like us that way, you know?

Matt (22:47.938)
Yeah, well, so I think that I think that's a valid point. And I think a lot of people make that point. I think that what I would say to that is when a person becomes a member of our church, there are a lot of identities that they have, some of which are supportive of the church and some of which maybe are like contrary to the church. But it's not up to me to decide which identities someone should or shouldn't embrace.

and it's not up for me to decide whether or not I'm going to accept them based on those, that's between the person and the Holy Ghost. And so like the example I would use is when we were in Kansas, I had a friend get baptized and he was a diehard Chiefs fan. And at this time, the Chiefs had been bad at football for like 10 years, but he was a season ticket holder. He would go every Sunday and Chiefs is part of his identity. Like this identity as a Chiefs fan was a huge part of who he was.

Shawn (23:15.534)
you

Matt (23:40.77)
But after about like two or three years of being in the church, he was like, you know what? Sunday is a holy day. It's the Sabbath day. I probably shouldn't spend my Sundays at Chiefs football games. And he sold his Chiefs football tickets to better keep the commandments as he saw fit. And I think that if it had been something where he was like, I'm a Chiefs fan, I love it. And I was like, but you're breaking the Sabbath day and that's a sin and you shouldn't do that. That doesn't allow him the space to grow in the

in his relationship with the Savior to decide for himself which identities to embrace and which ones not to embrace in his life. There are openly gay members of our church. There are openly transgender members of our church. We should do everything we can to make them feel accepted and loved.

Shawn (24:23.289)
But do you?

Do you also say, support my friend? No, if you're gonna go to football games on Sunday, I support that, that's your identity. And I don't wanna judge you. You wouldn't say that, would you?

Matt (24:36.654)
Of course I wouldn't say I'm going to judge you for being a chiefs fan.

Shawn (24:38.807)
No, no, no. But do you support the same way that you choose to support pride events and pride celebration? Do you support Chiefs Sunday Pride celebrations and events for your buddy?

Matt (24:52.704)
If they invited me to go to a Chiefs football game on a Saturday or on a Monday night, of course I would go with him to that, right? Because I would think of it as breaking the Sabbath day.

Shawn (24:58.68)
Why not on a Sunday?

Shawn (25:02.829)
Right, it crosses a moral line, which is the same reason that this man is giving in this essay. It crosses a moral line.

Matt (25:07.968)
Okay, there's nothing wrong with being gay. That's not a sin, right? And when I go to a pride event, they're not inviting me to participate in gay activities. They're not inviting me to participate in immoral things. They're just saying, come and celebrate with me, with my people, with people I feel like accept me for who I am. Come and be a part of this. And there's no sin in that. It's just like, yeah, of course I would do that with you.

Shawn (25:27.717)
Yeah. Yeah. I'm not disagreeing with you either, but I'm going to take the easy, the safe route away from this. Cause your question is, is it moral to build our identity in pride? Should we around pride? And the scriptures are really clear on this. just go to Moses one, right? God and Moses are talking face to face. This is a really like fundamental piece in the history of man with God relating to his prophets.

Matt (25:34.605)
Yeah.

Matt (25:42.272)
Around pride. Yeah.

Shawn (25:55.672)
And he literally starts and says, Moses, you're my son. I'm going to establish the one primary identity that is most important to all. And then he goes through and repeats it three times. Moses, you're my son. And they have this amazing conversation and the Lord is teaching Moses these things, but the main thing he's teaching was you're my son. Then God goes away and his glory leaves him and Moses falls to the earth. And when he comes to, the glory's gone and Satan comes and tempts him. And what's the first thing that Satan does? He says,

Matt (26:25.08)
says.

Melanie (26:26.154)
Son of man.

Shawn (26:27.321)
He calls him son of man. says, Moses, identity is, I'm going to help you understand what, what I want your identity to be. So Matt, I think any identity that isn't tied to our father in heaven, being a son or daughter of father in heaven and being in the covenant relationship with Jesus Christ. Yeah. It's a dangerous thing to build your identity around it. It's a son of man type of identity to go and, and represent yourself as that identity. So yeah, it is immoral. It is immoral.

Matt (26:46.947)
Yeah.

Matt (26:53.792)
I I agree with you, but I will say the same is true of party identification. Party identification becomes an identity that does the same kinds of things for people.

Shawn (26:59.927)
Amen. Absolutely.

Okay, now I want our friends to listen, those of us who engage. Like I have this question for my friend Levi Barnes. I would love your opinion on what we're talking about because I do feel like sometimes people do put just as much identity into party affiliation, for example. Yeah.

Matt (27:21.486)
For sure. That's well documented. Yeah, there are a lot of identities people adopt. And by the way, sports fans is an identity. Like the story I tell people, I'm a Miami Dolphins fan. It's a long and arduous life that I live. But when Tom Brady was accused of cheating, whenever whatever that was with Deflategate, I don't need to know any of the facts of the case. I don't need to know anything. I know that he's a Patriots football player. They're in our division. They're our rivals.

Melanie (27:33.94)
Yeah.

Shawn (27:37.253)
Pfft.

Matt (27:50.85)
And I believe every bad thing about Tom Brady that anyone ever says because I have this identity as a Dolphins fan. And so yeah, any identity we choose to adopt brings along with it temptations to not really think about things, to say hurtful things, do, we'll just say worldly things. And so yeah, we should, like Sean said, we should embrace our identity as children of God first, but that's a hard thing to do.

Shawn (28:16.321)
Matt. yeah.

Melanie (28:16.328)
Yeah, I want to chime in. As a young adult, I hear this quoted at me quite often, but a few years back, President Nelson gave a devotional called Choices for Eternity addressed at the young adults of the church where he emphasized the idea that the three most important identities we should all be embracing are the identities child of God, child of the covenant and disciple of Christ. And after he introduced those three identities, he made it very clear that any identity

that draws us away from or takes priority over one of those identities is something that we should be working to forsake and leave behind. And I think that that's a teaching that possibly hasn't resonated with all of us in quite the way that it should have.

Shawn (29:01.315)
Mmm, nice.

Matt (29:01.678)
Well, and I think that it's easy for us to say, look, pride is one of those evil identities. And I think what I'm trying to say is we have other social identities that we embrace that also lead to similar kinds of temptation that lead us away from Christ, but it's more subtle. And so we don't notice it because I see, go ahead.

Melanie (29:18.239)
Yeah.

Shawn (29:21.071)
But don't you think it is, it is, I can be supportive of my relatives and my friends who are gay in the church and outside of the church. I can love them and I do, and I support them without, without, I guess celebrating pride month or like, this is an arbitrary club. The route, Matt, the rules are defined not by God and not by

Matt (29:43.022)
I don't know, Sean.

Shawn (29:48.014)
you know, some social contract, they're just defined by the organization that's driving that agenda. It is okay, Matt, I'm not homophobic and I'm not a hater and I'm not judgmental if I don't support that movement, but I do support and love my brothers and sisters who I have no judgment for when it comes to that.

Matt (30:08.28)
But what I want to say, Sean is last summer I went to the pride event in Rexburg and what I saw at the pride event was mostly my students in my classes and the way that their faces lit up and the happiness that was on their face just by seeing me at the pride event. Then I said, there's some, there's a message that we send to people, whether we go to the events or choose not to attend the events, it sends them a very important message. So even if

which by the way, I think that you and Melanie are both right about identities. These other identities are still real and we need to love and support people who have those identities as primary identities. And it just means a lot to them when they see that you're at a pride event. don't, look, I can't possibly understand what happens at a pride event or why they choose to do what they choose to do. I also don't understand Renaissance festivals that people go to and I don't understand a great variety of things that people do. I just know that when I go there, it makes my students really, really happy to see me there.

Melanie (30:59.104)
Okay.

Matt (31:07.842)
and they feel support from me in ways that I can't communicate otherwise.

Shawn (31:12.601)
Yeah, but you, but I don't, I don't know, Matt, that doesn't, the same would be said for going to a KKK rally. The people would be thrilled. They would be so happy to see you at that KKK rally. So I don't think.

Matt (31:23.542)
Yeah, but the two events aren't the same.

Melanie (31:24.088)
Sean, can I, yeah, can I posit my one point of contradiction there? Like, KKK rallies, Nazi organizations are all built on the idea of tearing down another demographic. And Pride events are just saying, we have been torn down for a long time, and we want a place where we can be ourselves and we can feel loved.

Shawn (31:28.366)
Of course.

Matt (31:47.426)
Yeah, I'll give Sean the points on this. I'll give Melanie the points too. No, I'm serious. Okay, fine. Melanie gets all the points because Sean doesn't want them.

Shawn (31:47.983)
Okay. Yes. Shut up. Shut up.

Hey! No, I...

Melanie (31:58.003)
Yay!

Matt (32:02.006)
All right, we haven't talked about Russia and Ukraine for a long time. And some people might wonder, is there still stuff happening in Ukraine? The answer is yes. And every week I think about bringing it up and I choose not to, but I just couldn't do it anymore. So here we go. Some sanctioned Russian lawmakers visited Washington DC recently and toured the US Capitol during a trip connected to possible peace talks about the war in Ukraine. Critics said the visit would weaken US sanctions and make Russian officials seem more accepted.

Meanwhile, the United States also temporarily eased sanctions on Russian oil because the war with Iran caused oil prices to rise sharply. The goal was to help stabilize energy markets and keep gas prices lower. Russia welcomed the decision and asked for more restrictions to be removed. However, many European and Ukrainian leaders were upset because they said the move would give Russia more money to continue its war in Ukraine. So given all of these things that have happened since Trump became president in 2025.

This is the question. Has Trump effectively broken the promise we made to Ukraine in 1991 that we would protect them if they destroyed their nuclear arsenal?

Shawn (33:10.021)
Yeah, here's the problem, Matt. You're in La La Land. Like you're, you're just drinking the Kool-Aid of the internet and you're going to your bias. Remember Trump campaigned and said 10 days, I will end the Ukraine international war. It's been over for like two years, dude. What are you, come on, pay attention. They did. Cause he's remember he promised that he would cause.

Matt (33:21.134)
The end of the war on peaceful terms.

Melanie (33:32.082)
It's like how there's a ceasefire in Gaza right now.

Matt (33:35.018)
and Iran and Lebanon. So Sean, sounded sarcastic to me. I don't think you really believe that.

Shawn (33:36.217)
Mmm.

Shawn (33:42.245)
that the war's over because Trump is the man? Yeah. No, I don't.

Matt (33:44.438)
Yeah. Want me to tell you, want me to tell you why I think it matters? I've been, I've been looking at public opinion surveys. I did a deep dive yesterday looking at stuff and this is what I found. The Republicans who still support Trump's position in Iran. Cause there's some out there. The only people that are left that think that Trump is doing a good thing in Iran are some Republicans. And those Republicans, when you talk to them,

then you say, okay, why is it good what we're doing there still? Their answer is Trump's gonna make sure that Iran never gets a nuclear weapon. Okay, so it matters the way that you handle international agreements, right? There's nothing we can actually do as a country to make sure Iran never gets a nuclear weapon. All you can do is you can create a treaty, you can create an agreement, and you can hope that their side is gonna stick to their end of the agreement and our side is gonna stick to our end of the agreement.

And so if you, as president of the United States, ignore agreements we've made in the past about people giving up nuclear weapons, then that creates a situation in which nobody will ever negotiate with you on good terms. Iran will never say, yeah, let's agree to like giving up this pursuit of nuclear weapons because you're offering us so much and we believe you when you say you're gonna give us all of these things that we want.

Shawn (35:07.855)
She's mad. don't know. I think I of course agree with you, but I think you're you're we're talking about this in vain. Like we've already abandoned that agreement so many times that I think we're past it. Like, like you're not going to have anyone coming in and saying, no, no, no, no, we need to go back and study that agreement and make sure we're true to it. I think what we have to do is recognize that the fact that Europe has started to support Ukraine a lot more that Ukraine.

Have you seen these reports on how successful Ukraine is becoming with their incredibly innovative tactics? They're drones, it's incredible. And to me, we need to celebrate that and embolden them. I don't know, is it worth talking about the fact that we haven't?

Matt (35:47.854)
their drones. Yeah, yeah, Ukraine's doing great.

Matt (36:01.87)
Sean, there are Republicans in Congress, there are Democrats in Congress who are still interested in us keeping our end of that agreement in 1991. Of course, Lindsey Graham talks about it. Marco Rubio talks about it. Not when Trump's around, obviously, but behind closed doors. Plenty of Republicans are in favor of us keeping our end of that bargain. even now, right, even if Trump now were to say, you know what, Ukraine, looks like they're actually going to win this thing and we're going to go in and help them win.

Shawn (36:10.817)
Are there are there

Hmm.

Shawn (36:22.434)
Okay, all right. I could be wrong.

Matt (36:31.96)
then I still think it's not too late. I still think that Ukraine would remember the US came through in the end to help us out.

Shawn (36:34.264)
Okay.

Shawn (36:38.083)
Okay, I'll go with that. I'll submit to that.

Matt (36:40.726)
Like in the Revolutionary War, we were losing to England and we were trying to get France to help us. And by the time France jumped into the war, the tides had turned and we were about, we could have maybe won it without France's help. But forevermore, as a nation, we remember France being there for us at that time of need and helping us to end the Revolutionary War. We couldn't have won it without them, we say. And so even if that's all that happened is that in the very end, we come in and save Ukraine. They'll still remember that and thank us for that.

Shawn (37:00.719)
Do you?

Shawn (37:11.193)
Yeah, of course I agree with you, man. I'm just playing devil's advocate. But do you feel like this approach of talking to you to Russia at this point is a bad one? Like

Melanie (37:22.162)
Yes.

Matt (37:23.726)
Tell us more, Melanie.

Shawn (37:23.781)
Yeah.

Melanie (37:25.696)
I don't know, I'm not an international diplomat or whatever, but I think it's a very

Matt (37:32.226)
yet.

Melanie (37:35.995)
I don't like the idea of the US always being on good terms with the aggressors. And I also don't like the idea that we started a war in Iran, relatively unprovoked. And then we're using the fact that we started a war in Iran and we're looking at the consequences of that and saying, to mitigate these consequences of a conflict we started, we're going to lessen sanctions on an aggressor somewhere else in the globe.

Shawn (37:41.157)
Melanie (38:06.024)
I think like, I'm sure it has economic repercussions that I don't understand, but it feels immoral, duplicitous, and like a coward's way out of dealing with the consequences of your actions.

Matt (38:19.736)
I'll tell you this because there are a lot of US lawmakers that have been indicted on crimes in Russia. I can tell you this, if they were to show up in Russia and start touring the Kremlin, they would get thrown into prison and they wouldn't get released. And we should have done the exact same thing to those Russian lawmakers. Welcome to the United States. You're going to Alcatraz. And when Russia decides to, we should have used them as like bargaining chips with Ukraine. Like that's how you, if you want Putin to respect you, use his tactics against him.

Shawn (38:38.713)
Ha ha ha ha!

Shawn (38:48.517)
Here's the thing though, Matt and Melanie, we all have very close ties to Ukraine. And so we have some bias and I agree with everything you're saying. I agree. And it is the right thing to do. But from the perspective of the rest of Americans, many of them don't have the ties that we do. They just see this as another weird country that has self-interest and they can't find our own self-interest in it. So to me, the stance that you're taking, though it is the right stance, I think you have to, don't we have to soften our message a little bit and be a little more strategic in our message?

Melanie (39:16.83)
Does it feel better if I also say I'm uncomfortable every time I see Trump talking to Kim Jong-un?

Matt (39:16.916)
self-interest.

Matt (39:22.03)
Right. Her presidency. The self-interest Sean is simple. If you want to have credibility when asking countries to give up their nuclear weapons, you have to honor the agreements you made 30 years ago. That's the self-interest.

Shawn (39:22.7)
Hahaha

Melanie (39:25.511)
Yeah.

Shawn (39:36.129)
Agree. Of course.

Melanie (39:37.567)
And I think my self-interest is far simpler. As citizens of the United States, we like to claim that we are members of a moral free nation. Right? So much of our patriotism is wrapped up in this sense of us being moral and good and the flagship for all that is right in the world. And I think like, if that, we want that to be our identity. If we want that to be what we claim we are as a country, then our leaders need to be exhibiting those characteristics. And I don't think we are.

Matt (40:06.286)
Okay, Melanie gets the point. Why do I keep giving Melanie the points? Sean, you haven't given me points in so long and I know she's doing good. Okay, well, there's no points on the big question, but this is something when I was teaching my intro to American Government class, I came across these data and I was like, we're gonna talk about this on the podcast because my students...

Shawn (40:07.727)
Hard to argue guys. Yeah, you get the points. She's killing it. She's killing it.

Shawn (40:26.477)
I'm going to earn your points. I'm going to earn your points on this one,

Melanie (40:29.216)
Yes.

Matt (40:29.294)
Okay good. My students were shocked by this information. Okay. As the United States gets close to its 250th birthday, many Americans are unhappy with how democracy is working. A Pew Research Center poll found that 62 % of Americans are dissatisfied with U.S. democracy. Many people think that elected officials do not care about them. They think the political system needs major changes and that the country is very divided by political party, race,

and social and economic issues. Yet, if you look at the results of the 2024 election, 95 % of the incumbents nationwide were re-elected. In 2022, 94 % were re-elected, and in 2020, 93 % of incumbents were successful. So on May 31st, most of the wards in the United States are gonna have a fifth Sunday lesson about celebrating our nation's founding. And so this is a question I have.

What should we make of this disparity? Do we need to make changes to the system to force elected officials to be more accountable to those they represent? Or do we need to do a better job of teaching people how they can make a difference?

Melanie (41:43.86)
Both!

Matt (41:43.926)
Because

Shawn (41:45.413)
Both, go on Melanie, go ahead. Preach it.

Matt (41:47.374)
Tell us more, Melanie.

Melanie (41:48.81)
Well, you were gonna say something, Dad, you should say it first.

Matt (41:51.63)
I was just gonna say, so if it's true that the elected officials are supposed to represent the people, but the majority of the people feel like everything's broken, but they're all getting re-elected anyways, it feels like there's this disconnect there.

Melanie (42:06.086)
I have recently acquired a degree of personal closeness with someone who's completely given up on politics.

Matt (42:13.358)
Is it your husband?

Melanie (42:17.6)
Perhaps. And I think it's not something I perfectly understand yet, why he approaches things the way that he does. But I think there's a very prevailing attitude among people that politics doesn't do anything, you know? There are a lot of complicated issues that are presented to the general public and everyone's like, I don't know. Like I regularly am like, I don't know how the economy works.

If I have a politician talking to me about economic issues, my eyes glaze over and I totally check out. And I think for a lot of American citizens, everything political is that way. And so they say, we don't see anything changing. We see a lot of people doing things that we feel like are wrong. And so why should we even try?

Matt (43:10.734)
But Melanie, that system of government, President Alan H. Oaks said is divinely inspired. Separation of powers, federalism, the US Constitution structure. The things that make it so hard to get things done politically, President Oaks said are divinely inspired principles.

Shawn (43:20.037)
Thanks.

Melanie (43:32.744)
It's easier to say God inspired it and I'm not going to touch it.

Matt (43:36.676)
I see.

Shawn (43:37.039)
There you go Melanie.

Melanie (43:39.742)
I think, I don't know.

Matt (43:42.154)
Yeah, well, I'll say go ahead, Sean.

Shawn (43:42.884)
Matt, I have to understand a little bit more because you being the political scientist sometimes for knuckleheads like me, you need to give a little more detail. Why are you suggesting this disparate, like assuming, cause I don't, but assuming that this poll is correct, these polls, assuming it's correct or accurate, what is the reason for the disparity? I think you're just assuming that the rest of us know your-

Melanie (44:00.705)
you

Matt (44:01.654)
Yeah, it's correct.

Shawn (44:12.047)
thoughts on what the reason for the disparity is. The disparity meaning that 62 % of Americans are dissatisfied, yet 95 % of the politicians keep getting put back in office. Why? What's the reason?

Matt (44:21.966)
And why do they keep getting reelected even though Americans are unhappy with them?

Shawn (44:27.555)
Yes, that's what my big question is.

Matt (44:29.42)
because they make the election laws. And so if you're the person that decides when the elections happen, who gets to vote, when they get to vote, what they get to vote on, you can manipulate the outcome like all of political science.

Shawn (44:31.619)
No!

Shawn (44:41.925)
So it's DNC 121.39. We have learned by sad experience that is the nature and disposition of all men as soon as they get a little authority as they suppose, they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion. They are protecting their power, correct? Okay, okay, so that's the reason. Thank you for stating that. So you're suggesting that modifications need to be made like term limits or like age limits?

Matt (44:52.172)
Yeah. Yes, always.

Matt (45:05.367)
So people always go to these solutions that don't actually fix things, right? Term limits doesn't fix this problem, right? Because it's not just the elected officials that cause problems, it's the unelected officials. And so when you put term limits on elected officials, there is a revolving door where they go from their elected office to appointed office, and they exercise the same power.

Shawn (45:12.196)
Why?

Shawn (45:26.447)
So what do you, so teach us, your question was do we need to make changes to the system to force elected officials to be more accountable to those they represent, how?

Matt (45:34.638)
Yes. You just need to change election laws. That's all you have to do. Well, there's a number of ways you can change the election laws, but people get bored when they're thinking about it. But I will just say this when president Oaks says that when, yeah, people don't want to know these technical details. I'll say this in Idaho last election, 2024, there was a measure on the ballot that if it had passed and the legislature had actually kept with it,

Shawn (45:37.305)
How though? Like, what do you mean, how?

Melanie (45:44.948)
Yeah.

Shawn (45:47.705)
That's Melanie's point, right?

Melanie (45:49.792)
You

Matt (46:01.964)
It would have fundamentally changed elections in Idaho and then people would have actually had a voice in things in Idaho. But the Republican party spent millions of dollars on ads to make sure that that proposition failed. Like I don't really get into politics issues that often, but I had three signs in my yard for this proposition. Cause I'm like, here's actually something where people could actually make rules changes that would give them more power. And all they did is listen to Republican party talking points. And by the way, the Democrats agreed to Democratic party talking points.

And away it went, they voted it down.

Shawn (46:32.421)
Okay, okay, okay. So you've already bored, we're all bored based on what you're talking about. So let me go to a different, I guess, sermon that you often preach, which is citizens get involved because don't you agree, that cult of personality is more effective than voting changes or voting law changes? So that's what saying. So you've got signs in your yard for no reason, but.

Matt (46:36.032)
Yeah, right.

Matt (46:51.744)
Yes, voting doesn't do anything.

Shawn (46:58.251)
You always preach, I mean, do you agree? Cult of personality becomes like I'm watching right now, know, no one else is the mayoral race in Los Angeles.

Matt (47:06.128)
I know. saw that on, by the way, it was on Inside Edition. The guy's living in a trailer, right? Is it running for mayor of LA?

Shawn (47:13.477)
The story that that guy is putting out there is just catching on fire. The whole story is, okay, he's like bipartisan, but he's going, look, all of these candidates have been in power and for example, caused or didn't prevent or didn't do anything. They've failed completely in so many areas, including this big city in LA burning down. He says, well, I lived in that city. My parents lived in that city. Our homes are gone. We live in trailers. And here's what we will do to make sure this never happens again. And the story is catching on fire.

And this guy's really charismatic. So isn't your, like I often will preach Revelation 3.15 that says, you know, I the Lord know thy works that they are neither hot nor cold, but lukewarm, if they're lukewarm I'll spit thee out of my mouth. I want you to be passionately engaged and be, and so you preach that all the time. Good people, if they would just get more involved, then we'll have better people to choose from to represent us. Is that not the answer as opposed to the other?

Matt (48:08.248)
That's what President Oaks says, right? President Oaks says that we should, he does say vote, so I'm not gonna say don't vote. He says, run for office. He says, reach out to elected officials. And he says, contribute to campaigns and help on campaigns of people you like. Like those are the things you do. So people hate the word lobbying. Lobbying is very, very powerful and makes a huge difference. Writing to your member of Congress, I know it sounds weird and antiquated.

Melanie (48:15.317)
Hehe.

Matt (48:35.042)
participating in protest movements, participating in rallies, signing petitions, all of those things matter, but people don't do any of those things. So I just think it's like, okay, we could talk about changing election laws, we could talk about institutional changes that could happen, but I just think we actually need to teach people how to make a difference. So Melanie's husband, Luke, who's given up on politics, he's only given up because he doesn't know how to make a difference.

Like my brother, he's been married now, I think around 10 or 15 years. I can't remember how long. I remember when I very first met his wife, she hated politics. She thought it was the most boring thing on earth. Now she is so involved in politics. She gets angry at my brother because of his apathy. She just finished serving as PTO president in her local school and raised a whole bunch of money to build a playground. Like she has learned.

Melanie (49:15.636)
Hahahaha

Melanie (49:23.908)
Hehehe

Matt (49:32.386)
how to make a difference through the political system and it's contagious. And now she really wants to get involved and active and make a difference in her community. And I think that that's probably our biggest problem is we don't teach people how to make a difference because if you ever take the time to go make a difference, it's contagious and you say, I can fix all of the problems. And then you go about trying to solve the problems and we just need more people like that. That's what I argue for in the big question.

Shawn (50:00.87)
Mmm.

Matt (50:00.898)
We should tell people how to make a difference. It's not in a social media post. It's not in writing a really clever thing or making a video or liking a video. It's in doing the things that actually make a difference.

Shawn (50:06.917)
G.

Shawn (50:13.871)
So Matt, do you think Revelation 3.15 applies? I mean, what else is the Lord teaching us in multiple spots in scripture, including very explicitly in Revelation 3.15? I would that your works were hot or cold and not lukewarm.

Matt (50:27.384)
But I think that there are plenty of people that are hot about politics but don't do anything. So it's, right? It's like...

Shawn (50:33.445)
But that's what the meaning of the scripture is. He's not saying have strong opinions and not look for opinions. He is talking about our actions.

Matt (50:40.654)
He's saying go do something about it.

Shawn (50:42.295)
Yes, he's saying live your life hot or cold, not lukewarm.

Matt (50:46.51)
But Melanie's husband doesn't know what to do.

Melanie (50:51.678)
And I think my only point of worry with that verse is like, yes, I think we should be passionate and engaged and hot or cold, but I think we need to be careful what it is that's making us passionate and engaged because so much in politics, if you're involved and passionate about it, it's anger. And I think anger should not be the motivation in our political activity.

Shawn (51:15.909)
Yeah, absolutely. Absolutely.

Matt (51:17.282)
I know listeners might not love this, but I think that it was not an accident that God called a prophet on the earth with a medical background to help guide the church through the COVID-19 pandemic. And I think it's not an accident that he's called a prophet of God to lead the church in a time where democracy in the United States is in crisis. And I really do think that if we listen to President Oaks and what he's trying to teach us to do, he really is trying to teach people how to solve

problems using political solutions and trying to get people to stop just standing on the sidelines shouting about things.

Shawn (51:53.603)
Well done, Matt. That was beautiful.

Melanie (51:56.914)
I might have to give him my points. But Sean, can I split points because I like your verse too?

Shawn (51:58.937)
Yeah, all of them.

Matt (52:02.956)
Yeah, Sean's verse is good.

Shawn (52:03.167)
Yeah. Thank you. Begrudgingly bad game. Yeah, I guess it was good too.

Melanie (52:05.504)
You

Matt (52:09.294)
There's no points on the big question. No one's supposed to get points on that. We're just supposed to like think big thoughts for their own intrinsic worth. Hey you guys, thanks so much for joining me. Listeners, thanks for joining us this week. It was good to have you with us. Right into the mail bag, something a little more interesting that doesn't make me so angry and I'll read it on the air. We'll talk to you guys again next week.

Melanie (52:14.144)
Puff.

Shawn (52:15.875)
Yeah, too bad.

Melanie (52:31.336)
You