Matt (00:01.944)
Hey everybody, welcome to the Latter Day Lens. Thanks for joining us this week. It's so good to have you with us. I am your host, Matt, and always, always, my faithful companion Sean is with us today. And we are so excited to welcome Clayton to the podcast. Clayton, thanks for joining us.

Clayton Keller (00:20.091)
Thanks for having me. I'm very excited to be here. I hope people don't mistake me for a very famous Clayton Keller in Utah, the hockey star hockey player. If you guys are NHL fans, I share a name with a really good hockey player, but that is not who I am.

Matt (00:38.156)
You're more famous than him. You're better than him.

Clayton Keller (00:40.113)
Maybe someday.

Matt (00:43.692)
I spent the afternoon watching old reruns of Saturday Night Live. And in 2002, there was a sketch with Matt Damon where there was a guy whose name was Matt Damon who met Matt Damon and he was complaining that everybody doesn't know him. They just know the other Matt Damon. So anyhow, when you said that, Clayton, I was like, there's a SNL sketch about that.

shawn (00:47.95)
Hmm. Yeah.

shawn (01:02.328)
Matt, that's a fascinating story. But also, but also, Matt, when you say the words, I spent the day binge watching so many things could come out of your mouth that it was fast. I mean, it was so normal to hear old SNL sketches. Like that's normal. That's cool. Matt, give us just a quick list of other things that could have come out of your mouth when you said I today I binge watched all day. Go.

Clayton Keller (01:05.231)
Ha ha!

Matt (01:20.686)
Ha ha ha.

Clayton Keller (01:23.185)
You

Matt (01:29.27)
YouTube super well knows this like they know what I wanna watch, right? So there's a guy on YouTube that talks about how housing the housing market is collapsing across the nation. He's been doing it for two years. I always watch him for a lot. There's a guy with a spreadsheet about how the second coming is gonna be soon. I watch him all the time. There's a woman who all she does is like goes through all recipes and just cooks things like here's how you make spaghetti. And I just I can't I can't not watch that stuff.

shawn (01:39.716)
Okay.

shawn (01:44.1)
There you go.

shawn (01:50.756)
There you go. There you go. What about what about stars going supernova? What about court TV cases?

Matt (01:55.598)
Yeah. For sure. Yeah, I watched that. Yeah. somebody's gotta watch the content, Sean. If I don't consume the content, nobody will. And that's not good for the world. Do you know Peter Santanello? Yeah, that's okay. He's another YouTube guy. Again, they know me, but like he travels around the world to cities. His episodes are more than two hours long of him just driving in his car, talking to people in some city, like, hey, what's your name? What are you doing? How's life?

Clayton Keller (01:56.369)
You

shawn (02:08.63)
You know No.

Matt (02:25.195)
And he walks around cities. I just watch a man walk around cities. I spend

shawn (02:28.098)
That's cool.

Clayton Keller (02:28.186)
So how does someone get that job?

Matt (02:30.827)
He he just yeah. I think all these guys started in the pandemic when people didn't have anything else to watch. And then there's like a few of us left that still have nothing else to do but watch their content. Yeah. I think

shawn (02:31.8)
Buy a camera and just do it.

Clayton Keller (02:44.645)
You

shawn (02:47.918)
Well, p listeners, now you know that because Matt's decided to leave this podcast, you know what he's gonna be doing with his time.

Clayton Keller (02:53.348)
Hahaha

Matt (02:53.417)
I wish I could tell you that I had better things to do with my life than this podcast, but the truth is I don't. I have no plans, I have no better thing in store. I just it's just time to end. And so that's all right. All right, let's open up the mailbag. This again, sometimes listeners come after Sean, and when they do, I like to read them on the podcast. This person says, Sean's defense of breaking arbitrary rules.

shawn (03:14.804)
Yeah.

Matt (03:18.687)
Is exactly the same justification I heard all the time from young missionaries living outside the guidelines of the missionary handbook and mission rules. Pause. Sean would never do that. Just so you know, Sean would never do that on the mission. They would say, listening to rap music isn't wrong. It's just an arbitrary rule in the handbook. If it's okay to cheat on a test, which it's not, is it okay to break mission rules, Sean? They feel arbitrary.

shawn (03:42.564)
I mean, there's a difference. There's a difference. If I am eyes wide open, choosing to serve a mission, then I'm committing to follow the prophet. And the rules that I'm choosing to follow in that scenario are what we consider godlike. We consider them they're church, they're church sourced, right? So I'm gonna I'm gonna follow them because I'm trying to be faithful. Whereas

If I go to my community college and the professor clearly doesn't care, doesn't care. And it's just like, you know, I'm gonna talk for an hour. I don't know any of you. I don't care to know any of you. Here's the syllabus, here's the r here are the rules. I think it's different, right? Th there's a feeling of arbitrariness and like nonchalantness.

Matt (04:28.491)
I think as I was listening to the episode again with Sandra, because by the way, she was shouting at you, but actually, Sean, before you even said anything, she's like, he's gonna make this about. Anyhow, she predicted your response, which I was very impressed. I was like, man, I've known Sean forever, and I can't predict what he's gonna say. This is what I decided you were trying to articulate that it's not about arbitrary rules versus not arbitrary rules. It's about college is telling you.

shawn (04:34.754)
Yeah.

shawn (04:40.74)
She's smart. Yeah, she's awesome.

Clayton Keller (04:45.168)
You

Matt (04:57.143)
Colleges, a class is trying to develop some skill in you. They're trying to tell you, like, here's some knowledge you need to have. Here's some some skill you need to develop. And your point is if I can develop that skill in a different way and still reach the objectives without following the course that that professor has laid out, then that's okay for me to find my own path.

shawn (05:18.37)
I I like that. That's not exactly what was in my mind, but I think that's exactly true. So I do agree with you. So what you described is true. Yeah, especially when it comes to like public high school or public grade school. Like I I hate that the system doesn't accommodate the different types and styles of learning. That drives me absolutely crazy. It's a failed system for that reason. Like there's so many people who

They have to just like if you're good at following rules or figuring out systems, you get A's and then you get into college and you can go on up and on up. But there's so many of us who just don't learn that way. So for me to if you're right, Matt, and you tell me you're in education, is the end objective to learn something? Is that the end objective for me to accomplish? See, that's the st that's there's I got a fist. I'm I've got mad. Why is that not the objective?

Matt (05:59.736)
Sometimes, sometimes.

Clayton Keller (06:02.288)
you

Matt (06:03.629)
Like like my university has a mission statement. And then based on that mission statement, they have outcomes that they want the students to develop. And then based on those university outcomes, I develop outcomes for my class. So in each of my classes, some of what I want them to learn is the knowledge. But in some of my classes, I need them to learn how to, I don't know, be team players. Or I need to teach them how to communicate like written communication or

Maybe I need to teach them how to collaborate or I don't there's other outcomes that'll be in a class. And so I have to set up assignments in a way so that you're learning things, but you're also developing skills that the university wants you to develop.

shawn (06:43.116)
So so why is it that ninety percent of my schooling experience, upper like all levels of school, was simply listen to me talk, go do this assignment and take a test. That's it.

Matt (06:55.861)
Yeah, well, because that's probably in those classes the outcomes were probably just do you know this material? Yeah. So I don't know. I think yeah, go ahead, Clayton.

Clayton Keller (07:04.4)
If I could input. Yeah, well, I mean, there are different reasons for different rules, right? Like the rules on the mission, those are to help you become closer to the spirit so that you can hear the spirit when you need to. Rules in a classroom like Matt was talking about.

to help you learn and rules on a basketball court or on the football field are to keep things fair. And sometimes in the classroom rules are to keep things fair as well. So what may seem arbitrary is just a way to kind of even the playing field so everybody's kind of jumping off the same foot.

Matt (07:37.707)
Yeah. Okay. Well thanks to the listener for pointing out that what did they point out? I don't know. Just thanks for criticizing Sean

shawn (07:45.316)
That I I would ne I mean I mean I would always default to follow rules. Follow rules in any institution that you're choosing to be a part of. I would. But don't make it about a mor don't make it a moral wrong if Yeah, it's not it's not a sometimes it's not a moral issue. Malaman say. Malaman say.

Clayton Keller (07:47.246)
The rules are arbitrary.

Matt (08:06.261)
All right, so I tried to find a s yeah, go ahead.

Clayton Keller (08:07.234)
Now I will say, sorry, before you go on, and I should have looked this up, but I've noticed, Sean, that you say malensea malenprohibita. I wonder if you have them backwards. Because I thought, malprohibita is, something is wrong because it's been prohibited, and malensea is wrong in and of itself. Is that how you've been using them? Okay. Okay. Maybe I just am listening wrong.

shawn (08:17.9)
Do I?

shawn (08:29.08)
That's how you Yeah, that's how I've used it, yeah. Thanks for ch Yes. And

Matt (08:32.855)
Whenever somebody Whenever somebody uses Latin I stop listening altogether. So I don't I have no idea what anybody says.

shawn (08:38.724)
Yeah.

Clayton Keller (08:38.864)
Okay.

shawn (08:41.526)
All all I know is the word that says it's prohibited means it's not it's just only prohibited because we choose to make it prohibited. That's the only way I know the difference. Good correction.

Clayton Keller (08:44.952)
Yeah, okay, okay. Then I'm just listening wrong. I need to fix my ears.

Matt (08:51.659)
And then you when you say autodidact, what you're trying to say is that it's important to go to college, right? That's when

Clayton Keller (08:56.016)
These people chose to go to college to learn.

shawn (09:01.356)
That's right, that's true. There you go.

Matt (09:03.925)
All right, I tried to find a topic this week, a news story that would let us continue our discussion about federalism. Because who doesn't want to talk about federalism? Like that's the cool. So I found this, this is happening in Florida. There were other examples, but I thought this would be a good example to talk about this. So Florida passed a law that as an emergency measure to help communities recover and rebuild after severe hurricanes by preventing local governments from passing burdensome building rules or stalling repairs. But in practice,

shawn (09:09.464)
Yeah.

Matt (09:33.57)
The law bans cities and counties within 100 miles of a storm from adding any new development restrictions for a full year. Critics, environmental groups, and several local governments argue that this strips their home rule authority, leaving them unable to protect wetlands, manage rapid sprawl, or upgrade flood protections in storm-damaged neighborhoods. So we talked a little bit about making federalism more local. Is this an example that suggests that maybe

More local federalism might be inspired by God.

shawn (10:05.292)
Yes, absolutely, absolutely. Great example. Don't you think? Well, if I care so much about if my if my passion is environment, I want to protect the wetlands and that trumps things like in this case, yeah, someone who lost their their home and livelihood, then I like that I have different cities or counties that I can choose to live in and be a part of that and be engaged in my in my community, like minded people.

Matt (10:08.917)
Yeah, tell me more, Sean.

shawn (10:32.78)
Now, is that separating communities a little bit? Yes, it is. But that's the beauty of federalism. I can go where I feel I'm valued and where I I value others. Yeah, I think it's awesome.

Matt (10:38.465)
Mm-hmm.

Matt (10:44.063)
And it's inspired.

shawn (10:46.37)
The question is, is it inspired of God? You didn't ask that. Well, the scriptures yeah, yeah, yeah. The prophets say in federalism is inspired, yeah. Go ahead, Clayton.

Matt (10:48.341)
Mm-hmm. Yeah, that's the question. Okay.

Clayton Keller (10:49.476)
So I say yes. I say yes.

Clayton Keller (10:55.652)
Yeah, well, I mean, we have President Oaks who has talked about our Constitution and how it's been inspired and the way our government is set up is inspired. But I think we see it in the gospel itself. So I looked up a quick online definition of federalism, and it just says, a principle or a system of government in which several states form a unity but remain independent in internal affairs. So the church headquarters provides general guidelines for everyone to follow, the implementation

is largely left up to local leaders, such as your state president or your bishops. Even within those units, federalism is apparent and encouraged. Bishops are in charge of every auxiliary, but auxiliary presidents run things on their own as much as possible.

and are supposed to only go to the bishop when necessary. The local leaders set the objectives for everyone to achieve, but then leave the execution up to each unit or auxiliary. The auxiliaries are all different and have different needs, but are all part of the same ward or branch unit. Units are all different, but are part of the same stake or district. Stakes and districts are all different, but are all part of the same church under one united governing body.

And I actually looked into the church handbook to see what I could find. And here's what it says under the section for the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. It says, the Council of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. All members of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles are prophets, seers, and revelators. Together, they form the Council of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles.

shawn (12:07.78)
Yeah.

Clayton Keller (12:35.426)
Under the direction of the Lord and by unanimous voice, this council has authority to declare and interpret doctrine and establish policy for the church. So right there you see your judicial power to declare and interpret doctrine and then your legislative power establish policy for the church. And then a few paragraphs before that it says that this quorum acts under the direction of the first presidency to build up and regulate the church in all nations. So there's your executive power.

And so we see that Lord has used the judicial, executive, and legislative powers inside his own church. So to notice federalism within his church, think, is not surprising at all.

shawn (13:19.445)
There you go. There you go.

Matt (13:21.409)
Well, so to me the upside of federalism is this. If I don't have to worry about somebody from up above dictating policy or things in my neighborhood that don't make any sense, right? Like in the case of this, when there's a hurricane, let's say we notice that like, wow, all of the flooding came in this particular spot. When we rebuild, let's do it in a way so that all of the flooding doesn't happen like right on that spot. Right. That's

but then federalism would say the the the bad of federalism would say, I can't do that, right? Because there's a power above me that's not letting me do that, right? The the positive of federalism is that I'm allowed to do that, make my own rules. The downside is when there's a body above me that says I can't do certain things. But to me, the real downside of federalism that we have to worry about is tyranny of the majority. So if I don't fit in in my community, if I'm different from everybody else in my school.

If I'm one of these hoarders that wants to just like store a bunch of trucks and like broken down things in my yard, I have this community telling me I can't do that. And sometimes that power above my city will say, Who cares? You want to store guns or a bunker or whatever in your house? You can do that. So sometimes having that layer above that's able to tell my city no, sometimes that can be protection for me against the tyranny of the majority. So

This is what makes me nervous about having too much federalism. I like having cities not be able to do everything they want to do because I'm afraid that sometimes cities are going to do things that are really bad for people.

shawn (14:45.875)
Yeah.

Yeah.

shawn (14:52.607)
But isn't but aren't you giving so much control and power to a few? Like I don't think that's the same as I mean is that the tyranny of the no, it's the tyr tyranny of the powerful. But if you're giving so much authority to the few people to decide what everyone does and how everyone does it, then

Matt (14:57.43)
Yeah.

Matt (15:03.959)
Right.

Matt (15:11.317)
But some sometimes you need like a bigger power. So for example, like there's fights right now about the Colorado River, right? Where who gets to take which water from the Colorado River as it drains and goes down into Mexico. It's sometimes it's nice to have a power above all of those states that's like, we're in charge and you guys don't get to have a say over this. And and sometimes if you leave too many things up to the localities, the local cities, they're gonna do things that are

as a whole, bad for the state because they're just looking out for their own interest and not looking out for the interest of everybody else.

Sometimes a a a a small powerful group at the top in a centralized government can be really good and really nice.

shawn (15:53.534)
I know you like that. You do like that. I know you like centralized power. But do is your but Matt, over the years has your n kind of hesitancy to back federalism has that changed at all? Do you do you like it more than you did when we started this podcast or no?

Matt (15:57.164)
It it can be good, right? Like

Matt (16:07.935)
I believe that it's divinely inspired in the constitution because President Oak says that. But the part I hate about federalism is the tyranny of the majority. Like federalism is what allowed racism to continue in the South in the United States for so many years.

Clayton Keller (16:11.61)
Hahaha

shawn (16:24.132)
Federalism did allow that. Yeah.

Clayton Keller (16:24.302)
Yeah. So this is something that I struggled with. So for the listeners on the podcast, my background is public administration. I've worked as a city administrator and as a deputy zoning administrator as part of my career, which basically means that I've gotten really good at sending people that letter, cut your grass, clean up your yard. That's what I've done as part of my career. And I guess Matt and I would have to go the rounds to talk about.

Matt (16:25.761)
Yeah.

Clayton Keller (16:52.784)
cleaning up that old track in your yard.

That looks like a piece of junk. Because I've had to make people do that and it's not fun telling people to clean up their yard because that's their hobby, that's their passion, that's what they want to do and spend their time on. But the neighbor across the street says, hey, that place looks awful. I don't want our town to look like this. People think our town is a dump because of their yard. And it is really hard to balance those competing interests. But I guess you can say the majority of the town says, hey, we want to look nice. So let's make everybody clean up.

yards or keep their grass to eight inches short or something. So yeah, I've seen it.

Matt (17:28.705)
Yeah, but Sean says but Sean says private property rights should not be infringed. It's a divinely inspired don't mess with my property.

shawn (17:37.076)
That's the beauty of federalism. If I live in the community that has a homeowners associations everywhere and doesn't want Matt's chaotic truck hoard system, I c I I w I love the idea that I can go someplace else that is a community of truck hoarders. Right? Like, like that's the beauty of federalism.

Matt (17:55.104)
Uh-huh. Joshua Tree. I can go to Joshua Tree, California, where I think everybody hoards trucks in that city.

shawn (18:01.406)
Don't don't i w I don't know where Josh I don't know where Joshua Tree is, but you could go to where do you guys spend time? Where's Sandra from? There you go. Go to Hesperia to do it. Sorry, Sandra. Sorry.

Clayton Keller (18:01.712)
I'll tell you what to do.

Matt (18:08.417)
Hesperia.

Clayton Keller (18:11.76)
Well, I was going to say, usually you'll find more property rights out in the county. Get out of your city limits and get into the county limits and you'll find you have more leeway of what you can, it is true. You'll be able to do more stuff with your property.

Matt (18:13.825)
What were you saying, Clayton?

shawn (18:23.24)
Is that true?

That's a that's a good point. And and guess what, Matt? That is why my wife and I live in the county of San Diego, because we literally found a neighborhood that suits the things that we want. We don't want houses t packed on top of each other, on top of each other. We want a little more space. We can it's absolutely true. We choose to live under a f it it like federalism worked for us. We we we wanted to live in that s environment, so we moved to the county.

Matt (18:47.115)
Yeah.

Matt (18:50.729)
It is easier to move out of a city than it is to move out of a state. It's easier to move to a different county than it is to move to a different state, right? Because if federalism ends at the state level and my state is doing something I don't like, I have to it's very hard to find a new job in a different state, to find similar schools or whatever, right? But I can move to a different neighborhood or I can move to a different city and I can still keep my job and I don't have to uproot everything in my life. I'm still close to my family or whatever. So it is a lot easier to move.

out of an oppressive city than it is to move out of an oppressive state. Would wouldn't it have been Yeah.

shawn (19:23.89)
Mm-hmm. Yeah. But I see your point. There's conf there's the when the when conflicts of interest collide, yeah, I can see that it would be chaotic and harder when you bring it federalism down to a more localized level. Yeah, it would be super hard. I agree. But I'd rather have people fighting over those things than just passing crazy laws and regulations on other things.

Matt (19:37.527)
Mm-hmm.

Matt (19:45.356)
I'm giving points to Sean because he made fun of Hesperia on a podcast. Someday I hope to retire to Hesperia. So anything that can lower property values in Hesperia before I retire so that I can buy a cheaper home there will make me happy.

shawn (19:59.018)
Sandra, in my defense, I wasn't disparaging it. I was simply saying maybe there are a lot of people with a lot of like hoarding trucks. But but I like that. I like that.

Matt (20:08.289)
Did you know I found a home for sale in Hesperia? It had like two bedrooms in the house, and it had this like 10 car garage and it had a huge storage tank for fuel. And I was like, Wow, this would be a perfect place to live. And then someone's like, Yeah, that's where the drug dealers live because it's up on a hill. They can see the police coming. There's like two rows, one in and one out, and they've got all the fuel. Anyhow, they're like, You don't want to buy that house. That's a drug dealer's house. Like, well.

Clayton Keller (20:19.962)
You

Clayton Keller (20:37.05)
Well, I'll give my point to Matt for talking about the tyranny of the majority, because you see it from time to time. Yeah. But if I could finish, I think federalism even goes down onto the personal level between us and our relationship with God, because we as individuals are our own sovereign entities.

Matt (20:43.03)
Yes, I love it.

Clayton Keller (20:57.2)
But we come together under one unified banner as the Church of Jesus Christ without a dissent, or Disciples of Christ, or Children of God, or whatever title you want to put it. We're all under that same banner together. We all have different needs and walk different paths and lives, but we all subscribe to the laws taught by Jesus.

Matt (21:16.427)
Okay, Clayton gets my points. That was good. That was that was latter day lens. Like that was really good. So I'm sorry, Sean. I'm giving them to Clayton.

shawn (21:18.792)
Yeah.

shawn (21:25.122)
it's okay. I'll give him to Clinton too, 'cause that was good. Yes.

Matt (21:28.149)
Okay, so next up, this will be shocking to all of our listeners. Donald Trump lies a lot. people who keep track of it say that in his first term he told thirty thousand five hundred and seventy-three laws, lies. Sorry. There's an article that has six lies he told about September eleventh alone. He also lied this week about the war in Iran, saying that it would end right after the midterms. And he promised to give five thousand dollars to every American if Republicans win the midterm elections. Those are just some of his most recent lies.

shawn (21:32.158)
Yeah.

Matt (21:58.08)
I believe that Americans should respect the office of the President of the United States, but I've also learned in my personal life that it is unhealthy to give dishonest people the benefit of the to the doubt. So here's a question I have. How can we both respect the office and deal with the person in the office who seems unable to be honest?

shawn (22:18.602)
Well, there's a lot of a lot of finger pointing here, a lot of a lot of judgment here.

Matt (22:22.978)
Is th is that does that feel judgy to you? That doesn't feel like fair and balanced, like to just

shawn (22:27.88)
The qu the question the question I've also learned that it's unhealthy to give dishonest people the benefit of the doubt. That's that means you're passing judgment on people's ability or what? They're their so so for example, Matt, was George W. Bush dishonest about this is open up a what what okay, okay. Okay.

Matt (22:34.037)
No, it's true.

Matt (22:46.145)
Wait, wait, I we have to go back, Sean, to what you were saying. Like in your interpersonal relationships, like with children, with your spouse, with kids you know in high school, you had you had people in your life that lied all the time. And if you're always giving them the benefit of the doubt, that could be unhealthy, right? Okay.

shawn (22:59.57)
Okay, yes. Look hang on. Okay, pause. Pause, pause. Did you ever tell your children that Santa Claus existed and brought them presents? dang it. Clayton.

Matt (23:11.317)
I did not. I told my kids, you wanna know what I told them about Santa Claus? I said, I'll tell you part of the truth about Santa Claus. Someday, if you want, you'll know the whole truth. But the part truth about Santa Claus is I am Santa Claus. And so my kids grew up thinking that I was Santa Claus.

Clayton Keller (23:13.519)
Haha

shawn (23:16.371)
Yeah.

shawn (23:26.634)
Okay, so that I mean that tracks so perfectly for Matt Miles. But listen, I we we kind of did something similar. We didn't make it all about me like some other people did, but but we also knew I felt like dude, I know this is just a fun little game and a fun little tradition, but literally it is lying to say, there's this big dude that's gonna bring you.

Matt (23:35.639)
Ha ha ha.

Matt (23:52.823)
Yeah.

shawn (23:55.528)
So so my question is do you think that ninety percent of Americans who do that are they liars? Do you put are they dishonest people?

Matt (24:03.135)
N telling your kids what you tell Santa Claus is not a matter of honest or dishonest, right? A dishonest person is a person like Trump who lies way more frequently than they tell the truth. That when you're talking to them, you don't know is what they're saying true or false because they lie so often.

shawn (24:16.018)
Okay, so s so George W. Bush saying that there are weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. That wasn't being a dishonest person. Yeah, that's what I'm asking. And so there's there's this thirty thousand five hundred and seventy-three lies that someone wasted their life like going through a tracking this obsessed person. Like how ma how many of how many of those are

Matt (24:24.437)
He believed that to be true.

Matt (24:34.189)
Tracking.

Matt (24:38.305)
No no, this is

shawn (24:41.812)
Things that Trump are is wrong about but believes in versus things that he actually like knowingly, willingly lied about.

Matt (24:48.535)
So, this is like a conversation I have with my wife all the time about people. Cause she is what I call an accuracy advocate. She always wants to find out what's the truth of the situation. And I say to her, it's impossible. You can't know it. It's unknowable. And so you just have to go with the probability. Like whether they believe it, don't believe it, whatever, because this person lies so often, I don't care why they lie. They just have a very uncomfortable relationship with the truth. I my oldest son, I would tell him this. I was like,

shawn (24:58.228)
Good job, Sandra. I w as opposed to Matt. As opposed to Matt. Okay, good.

I love Sandra.

Matt (25:18.473)
I know that 10% of what you say is probably true, and 90% of what you say is not true. And I don't have the time to figure out what's true and what's not true. So I'll just well, he's he's since he's a more honest person now than he was at that time in his life. And so I would just say to him, There's nothing wrong with me assuming that what you're telling me is a lie, because the probability is that it's untrue. And you can like that or dislike that. You can change that if you told 90% truth with 10% lie.

shawn (25:21.848)
boy.

Don't Don't Don't reveal those things. Matt, don't

shawn (25:33.15)
Ha ha ha.

Matt (25:47.478)
I would change the way that I react to the things you say. Because I'd say, wait a minute, like with my wife, high probability everything she says is true. So I trust her and I give her the benefit of the doubt. But I can't do that with people who lie all the time. And by the way, tracking his lies, that's an academic exercise. That's something that we do. We track weird things because somebody needs to measure this stuff.

shawn (26:10.548)
Yeah.

Clayton Keller (26:10.658)
Yeah, no one's going to check how much Matt lies to his kids, but we do need to check how much Trump lies to the country. I he's the president of the United States. This is going to go in the history books for one reason or another.

Matt (26:17.197)
That's right. That's

Clayton Keller (26:26.554)
think the dangerous part about this is that he says stuff and we just say, he's joking, but he's being serious about it. And I think that's where we get into trouble. So how do we respect the office while not allowing him to hurt us as individuals or us as a nation? I think that's a legitimate question because we need to figure out how to answer that.

shawn (26:49.374)
Yeah, but but can we r I I honestly don't think we c I mean, sure, I agree with you everything you said about Donald Trump, but I I honestly have a skepticism of many of the politicians, like both sides of the aisle, s people who are I mean, this the Doctrine of Covenants even says it. If you seek for power, unfortunately, there's a tendency to be like I've got power. I can use this, I can use this for my personal selfish gain. I I it's hard for me, Matt, to trust any politician.

Matt (27:19.443)
Well, that's what well, maybe that's why this question matters more to me, because I feel like part of respecting the office is that we have trust in the president. If you think about your own personal life, the people that you don't trust, it's hard to say that you respect those people or that you honor those people. Right. Like on some level, if I'm gonna say I honor the office of president, I should give them the benefit of the doubt. And I try to do that with all the presidents and all the politicians. I really do try to give them the benefit of the doubt.

shawn (27:19.443)
It really is.

Matt (27:49.045)
I take them at their word until they prove to me that I should no longer take them at their word.

shawn (27:54.218)
I mean, obviously if they're if there are clear cut, absolute, dishonest lies, then I I agree. I I can separate the respect for the office and disrespect the person. Yeah. But where I struggle is well ha it's hard then I have to separate like every politician from their office 'cause it that's that's where it struggles for me.

Matt (28:13.825)
Yeah.

Clayton Keller (28:17.008)
Yeah, remember that the person is not synonymous with the office, though, right? I mean, in the same way that we're told, don't worship our prophets because they are the prophet, right? Like, he is a prophet. He's been called to God to do a job, but he's still a human being. So like Donald Trump is our president, but he's still a human being. And this is a major flaw that he has. So you can respect his office. Like you're saying, Sean, while distrusting him or, yeah, while not trusting him. So.

Matt (28:17.089)
Well, I don't know the answer to this, yeah.

Matt (28:22.722)
Mm-hmm.

Matt (28:31.584)
Mm-hmm.

Clayton Keller (28:46.916)
I think how do we, so then how do we let him, how do we honor his office? No, let him shake hands and kiss babies, but don't let him make decisions. And.

Matt (28:55.221)
Yeah.

Well yeah, so to some extent, I think respecting the office means demanding more of the person in the office, right? If we truly respect the office of president of the United States, that doesn't that means that when a person is abusing the office or misusing the office, that we hold them accountable for it. And that we don't just say, Well, Trump doesn't know how to tell the truth. Well, Trump's just a liar, or or they're all just liars. And then we say, You know what, you're the president of the United States. You should be held to a higher standard. And you you're not allowed to just lie to people.

But I don't know how we ha how we do that, but maybe that's what it means.

shawn (29:30.762)
Did you Matt, did you see? Did you ever watch Jon Stewart? Recently, did you see Governor Cox? Is his name Mike? What's his name? Spencer Cox. Did you see that interview? Like, what's interesting is Spencer Cox, I don't know a ton about him, but watching him there, I get the feeling that this guy can't lie. I get the feeling that this guy is a Boy Scout. This guy is just like a very focused, do what's right, tell the truth all the time. And

Matt (29:34.444)
Yeah.

Yeah, wasn't w yeah, Spencer Cox from Utah. Yeah, that was awesome.

Matt (29:52.044)
Mm-hmm.

shawn (30:00.092)
Jon Stewart like kind of kind of destroyed him a little bit. He comes off looking like a a a Boy Scout. Whereas every other politician is out there, they they're not as concerned about what is right and what is the truth. They're playing a game where they're trying to bend the truth or or or position themselves. And I don't know, I mean, is Spencer Cox gonna go down in history as a a really great politician that will last, or is he just gonna be gone?

Matt (30:05.09)
Yeah.

Matt (30:15.927)
Mm-hmm.

Matt (30:27.787)
Yeah, but well, that's what I thought was fascinating about that interview. because Spencer Cox was clearly on there because he's trying to demonstrate the importance of having honest conversations with people you disagree with. And and Jon Stewart went after him. And it's true, Spencer Cox didn't have what you would call like a really good defense of it, right? His defense was just like, I'm doing the best that I can, and these are the things I believe in, and I have some constraints that I have to deal with. Like to me, that's

shawn (30:50.494)
Yeah.

Matt (30:55.307)
What you're supposed to do in politics, right? So you don't worry about did I win the the ratings game? Did I win the the dip the likes contest on social media? You say, Did I did I stand up for myself? Did I defend the things that I believe in in an honest way? Like that's what you're supposed to do. And not worry about did you win political points? And like if I were to say, as a politician, is that a good strategy? No.

shawn (30:57.554)
Mm.

shawn (31:19.902)
Yeah.

Matt (31:20.469)
And I think that I think he acknowledged that in the interview at the very beginning. He said everything about our system incentivizes us to do something different than what we're gonna do. And then he did it. And yeah, the incentive structure was there to punish him for doing that.

shawn (31:33.93)
Well then maybe the takeaway is guys like Spencer Cox are the example of how to respect the office and the person in there and that's what we want in in leadership. That's what we want. And it's just so rare. It's so frustrating.

Matt (31:46.443)
Yeah.

Clayton Keller (31:46.572)
It is rare. considering my background, I've dealt a lot with politicians on the local level.

You'll find a lot more people like Spencer Cox at the local level. I would trust 99 % of local politicians. They're so good. They are in there for their reasons. Because they get made like, your city councilman probably gets $100 a meeting or something. They're not in it for that. But your state and federal people, it is a game to a lot of them. And I had...

shawn (32:00.947)
Yeah.

Yeah. Right.

Matt (32:14.05)
Yeah.

shawn (32:20.126)
I mean that's I mean, Clayton, we we've talked about that a lot in the past. Like, okay, then remove the financial and the power incentives. And surprisingly, the guy that argued against us mostly was Levi, who who I w right? He was like, Sean, you gotta you gotta incentivize people to talented people to get into office. I was like, What that surprised me but

Clayton Keller (32:27.993)
Yeah.

Matt (32:40.289)
Mm-hmm.

Clayton Keller (32:42.062)
Yeah, so that's probably the problem then is that you think, well, we want rational, like level-headed people in office, but then people in office get subjected to the worst scrutiny in the nation. And it's such a spotlight that a person who is sane isn't going to want that. And so it's a cash 22. How do we get sane people into office?

Matt (33:04.205)
I'll tell you, you have a theocracy. It's really a simple solution. Like I I trust that the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles are sane. It was super easy. I didn't pick them.

shawn (33:07.666)
Ha ha ha ha

Clayton Keller (33:08.378)
Ha ha!

Clayton Keller (33:15.737)
you

shawn (33:16.171)
I got a an alternative plan, Matt. You you get good, honest, good people to quit doing their passion projects like a podcast so that they can be freed up to go into public service.

Matt (33:22.519)
Ha ha ha

Matt (33:26.293)
Or watch YouTube videos, something like that. All right, here's the next topic. So about ten years ago, LDS church members looked a lot like white evangelical Christians when it came to politics. They had similarly strong affinity for the Republican Party and most conservative issues at that time. However, recent polling suggests that church members are now diverging from evangelicals in important ways. And I put a link to the the survey results. This is within the last year that these surveys were done.

shawn (33:28.089)
Matt (33:56.066)
So, for example, Latter-day Saints may be the most religiously American group in the country, but they're not the most Christian nationalist group. That means they believe America has a divine role, but they're more hesitant than evangelicals to claim that America should belong primarily to Christians. And another way, when asked about the role of the United States on a global stage, white evangelicals are nearly evenly divided about whether America should be a cooperative neighbor.

Or a mighty nation willing to use military force. But among Latter-day Saints, 64% would prefer that the United States cooperate with other nations and use military force only as a last resort, while only 35% prefer a mighty nation willing to use military force. So here's the question: Are these diverging views between Latter-day Saints and evangelicals more a matter of the difference in beliefs and values and theology?

Or is it more because of a different LDS culture or maybe a different history? Like why? Why are members of our church moving away from evangelicals politically?

shawn (35:06.97)
This is a j an example of a of Matt Miles the genius being able to ask good questions that cause good discussions.

Clayton Keller (35:15.608)
Yeah, I still don't know if I have an answer for this one yet, but I will say that I've noticed it. So I grew up, I was in fourth grade when 9-11 happened. So basically all of my working memory of the political landscape of the United States is post 9-11. Yeah, and so it was very, very Republican growing up and very right-wing. So very much like I feel like.

shawn (35:32.39)
Mm, interesting.

Clayton Keller (35:45.23)
What you read, Matt, just describes my life. It's like very Republican Party grown up. And then as I grew up and saw, you know what, maybe there are better ways to do this. I need to separate myself from the hardcore right wing and look at things from a more holistic viewpoint. So I don't have an answer for you.

shawn (36:03.55)
Yeah, like yeah, like how do you how like like this is just to me, Matt, when you when I read the question, it's it just tribalism and and the whole warning of ITES came into my mind. Right? Why would there be statistics that show that majority of evangelicals believe in one way, majority of LDS people believe in another way or whatever? it does feel like it's kind of lukewarm.

Passive decision making kind of sheep, just follow, follow, follow mentality. So I I don't know that you can say that doctrine, like you always teach, Matt, like the doctrine. If you've got a man-made, ever changing political party, you can't say that my doctrine aligns with this one or this one, because they're always going to change. So it it can't be, I don't think you can say that the reason would be that the church's beliefs and values would lean towards this way or that.

Matt (36:36.769)
Mm-hmm.

Matt (36:53.058)
Mm-hmm.

Matt (37:00.791)
Mm-hmm.

shawn (37:01.16)
I th I think it's a folly in that y you have these percentages based on tribalism, I guess. And that's a bad thing.

Matt (37:09.075)
Yeah. So I I do think it's interesting, like you're both kind of like hitting on this this kind of moment we're in where members of our church, not all of them, but members of our church are sort of saying, wait, maybe the Republican Party doesn't represent me anymore, because the things that I thought it meant to be Republican no longer represent me. But we still have a lot of members of our church that are still very, very Republican because those ideas still kind of represent them. So that's why I don't think it's about doctrine or theology, because

shawn (37:37.066)
Mm-hmm.

Matt (37:37.654)
If I take like the Arizona governor's race, right? There's a member of our church running for lieutenant governor as an independent on the Democrat ticket. And then there's a member of our church running on the Republican side. And they have very different views. This is Arizona. Yeah, the Andy Biggs is the Republican running for governor in Arizona. And then the governor right now is a Democrat. And then their lieutenant governor is a former Republican, but a member of the church who's like an independent. So I don't think it's theology.

shawn (37:49.386)
W where's this?

Matt (38:07.861)
I think that people use theology to sort of like justify their political views, but I don't think that it goes theology then political views. I think they develop political views and then justify it with theology.

shawn (38:18.45)
Yeah, that's right, Matt. You know that points to Matt. Matt points that's what people do. And that's wrong. Don't do that.

Matt (38:24.801)
But I think the reason that members of our church are starting to diverge from evangelicals on some of these issues is missionary work and the globalization of our church. Right. So, so it's very hard to be a member of the church and say God wants America to be a Christian nation that fits this like white Christian nationalism thing when the president of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles is from Germany and you have somebody from where is the

Suarez from Brazil or South America somewhere, right? And and you have Cosse from France. Like we just have a more international perspective of like of the church, right? Of like when you when you ask me, like, what does God want for the world? My answer is God wants for the world like the spreading of the gospel all over the world. And so we welcome people from all different nations and nationalities, like cultures, all that stuff all kind of fits within. And I don't think that evangelicals get that same.

Flavor. But you would know better than me, Sean. And Clayton, you would know better than me because you guys hang out with evangelicals more than I do. But I don't think they have the same kind of global perspective about life that we do in our church.

shawn (39:35.85)
Yeah, th I think that's true. I think that's true.

Clayton Keller (39:36.464)
I like that. I'll give you the points on that because you're right, we as a church understand that this is a global effort and the current Christian nationalist movement is all about like America first, America's the best and us in the church, we realize like, this is about more than just America. This is the whole world we need to help.

shawn (39:55.924)
That is fascinating because that does talk about well who does your does your theology teach you that the most valuable our thorough theology clearly teaches us that in the in the in the eyes of God, the individual soul is the most valuable thing that has ever existed, whether that soul is in India or America or wherever, right? and I don't think what I've found is that theology does not, especially like in Calvinist Protestantism, it doesn't exist.

And then I see like evangelicalism who is rallying, yeah, around a national identity. And then you got to draw a line and be like, well, evangelical Americans are the right. But I that that does definitely go against what you can read throughout all the scripture. God clearly s teaches us that the most beautiful, valued individual is that blind person laying in the mud.

Matt (40:35.265)
Mm-hmm.

shawn (40:47.9)
That is an individual son or daughter of God and that is the most valuable person. And so it doesn't matter where they live or who you are or what tribe you fall into. good. That's good, Matt.

Matt (40:57.165)
Do you think President Oak's talk on the divinely inspired constitution has something to do with it too? Like when he talks about the divinely inspired constitution, it's not American exceptionalism. It's not saying we're better than everybody else.

shawn (41:03.402)
shawn (41:08.645)
that that's what I was wondering, Matt. Why like have you ever thought why is it that other nations don't recognize I mean, that's an obvious answer, but why wouldn't other nations like model their their constitutions and their laws and rules after the Bill of Rights? Why is it so rarely done? Or is it done often?

Matt (41:26.495)
It's very often they frequently model theirs after ours. But but ours has some ours has some problems with it. Right. They don't model the three fifths clause. They don't say right. There's things they don't model. But there are things in our constitution that are frequently adopted in other constitutions.

shawn (41:28.141)
it is. Okay, all right. 'Cause you're I like what

Clayton Keller (41:47.3)
Yeah, and I would, sorry. Well, I just gonna say that I would argue that President Oaks has been kind of building up to this moment where he talks about the divine constitution. I just finished a, I guess a personal project where I was listening to all of his talks since becoming an apostle.

shawn (41:47.316)
But to to your Go ahead, Clayton. No, go ahead.

Clayton Keller (42:05.196)
And the last 10 or 15 years, he's kind of been building towards this moment and talking about how the American system is set up and saying that this is inspired and we need to protect certain aspects of it.

Matt (42:18.721)
But not to say that we're better than other countries. Yeah. Or that they're in. Right. S yeah. So I think having a church leader talk about the constitution in that way, to say we that allows us as church members to say, I believe it's a divinely inspired constitution. I believe God had a role in setting up this nation. At the same time, I don't believe that that makes us better than anybody else. I don't think you get that same thing from evangelicals.

Clayton Keller (42:21.53)
Correct. Yeah, he never says that.

shawn (42:47.036)
Matt, do we believe that the if the constitution is inspired mostly, not all of it, but mostly, do we believe that so why don't we evangelicalize it to the world? Like in other words, if you believe that the gospel of Jesus Christ is the true way of happiness, it's God's plan, you certainly believe go do missionary work, spread it to the world. So why wouldn't you believe the same for this inspired constitution?

Matt (43:11.413)
Well, I will say that the church leaders want us to. At BYU Idaho, we're developing a class that basically evangelizes the US Constitution. And BYU has a class that basically evangelizes the US Constitution. So I think there's a lot of movement among church leaders to do that kind of thing, but it's gotta be secondary to the message of the gospel, right?

shawn (43:32.754)
Right, but why as a country is it a is it a righteous or a proper role of a country to go evangelize the constitution to all to spread it throughout the world and influence other countries to adopt it? that's never happened, right? I've never seen that. I've always wondered why.

Clayton Keller (43:46.16)
Well, I feel like that's what we do all the time, isn't it? Where we go in and we say, you're not a democracy, we're gonna make you a democracy, then reinstall the leaders we want.

Matt (43:51.95)
W we wrote Afghanistan's conf constitution. Yeah, we often use money through the World Bank and other kinds of things to incentivize people to adopt a constitution very similar to our own.

Clayton Keller (44:09.712)
So Matt, I'm wondering if an answer to your question that you originally posed is, these diverging views more a matter of difference in belief and values, or is it more LDS culture and history? Is, like 100 years ago, who was that apostle? it John A. Witzow or J. Rubin Clark? He had a lot of great quotes about religion and government and how people should take care of each other. And then in the 50s to the 70s, you started seeing quotes.

that were more right-winged and then they just would come out in general conference and the brethren would talk about the evils of communism. So it was very, very much like anti-left-wing, anti-communism, like pro-right-wing, all these things. And so I feel like it maybe it pushed the church general body in America to think, we have the best government system there is and all others are junk. And now we're finding

I don't know if rebound is the right word to describe it, but it's kind of like a pullback towards the center of that the brethren aren't pushing anti this, anti that. They're just saying we need to be pro-federalism.

Matt (45:22.027)
Yeah. Yeah, I don't know the answer to that, but I think it b definitely plays a role in why different members of our church think in different ways. But I wouldn't call that theology though, or doctrine.

Okay, here's the big question. So I was reading in Alma chapter forty-three, and I came across these verses. I'll just read the second verse. It says, And he also knowing that it was only the desire of the Nephites to preserve their lands and their liberty and their church, therefore he thought it no sin that he should defend them by stratagem. Therefore, he found by his spies which course the Lamanites were to take.

And then the subsequent verses talk about like stratagem. So, like the context to me seems to suggest that a stratagem is like a military trick or a plan or a maneuver, like using spies or setting up an out an ambush designed to outsmart an enemy. So we often talk about morality in combat or military operations. And it seems to me like Moroni is saying that military strategy is immoral except in a very specific context.

Right. In this case that the context was in Sir I should have read twenty-nine. And now as Moroni knew the intention of the Lamanites, that it was their intention to destroy their brethren or to subject them and bring them into bondage that they might establish a kingdom unto themselves over all the land. That's why he says it's okay to use stratagem. So this is the question. The US spends billions of dollars every year on military stratagem to protect us against enemies that are not actively attacking us. So this is the question.

Is it immoral for the United States to engage in military stratagem outside of this very specific context that Moroni describes in those verses?

shawn (47:10.132)
Ha ha ha.

Clayton Keller (47:11.288)
Can I answer with something my mom always said growing up? She said, you better never start a fight. She said, never start a fight, but if you are in one, you better end it.

shawn (47:14.143)
Hmm. No, you have to leave you have to leave moms out of this. Wait, what did she say?

Matt (47:14.283)
Yeah, of course.

Matt (47:27.213)
So

shawn (47:29.352)
I like that.

Clayton Keller (47:29.424)
I don't know how wise that is, but I mean, it served me well. I've never been in a fight.

Matt (47:34.414)
And everybody could tell they're like, if I get in a fight with Clayton, he's gonna end it. Well, so I don't I actually don't know where I stand on this a little bit. to me, I never thought of stratagem as being wrong, because that's the world we grow up in. We grew up in this I this world that says, in a conflict, take advantage of every opportunity you have to end the conflict, right? Or we should be preparing for the conflict, right? Because who who knows who's gonna attack us and when.

shawn (47:34.762)
Ha ha ha.

Clayton Keller (47:38.542)
Haha.

Matt (48:03.435)
But maybe it is the wrong thing to do, to to use deceit and deception and spies and trickery. 'cause we're maybe we're supposed to have integrity in all things that we do. And we shouldn't say, well, this is military, so it's different.

shawn (48:19.658)
Can offer an alternate thought? Because we have to look at the context of Moroni, right? What I know about Moroni was that he is this honest, good, kind Christian who just finds himself at a time in history and in and in his place where he you just have no choice. You're just fighting and battling. You have no choice. But it goes against all of his sensibilities. So I think this these verses are teaching us a little bit more about.

Matt (48:21.485)
Yeah, of course.

shawn (48:49.278)
Moroni in his character than it is about is it wrong or right to have stratagem to defend yourself preemptively? I I think it's yeah.

Matt (48:56.695)
But but if it's telling us something about his character, that means that it's not in his character to use stratagem, that he thinks it might be a wrong thing to do.

shawn (49:03.475)
I think it I think it's more saying it's not in his character to to battle at all. I think the scriptures are kind of showing us about Moroni he it's not in his character to be a fighter. He's naturally a fighter. He's naturally a warrior. So I don't not sure it's saying this I yeah, when it says he thought it no sin that he should defend them by stratagem, I think what it really means is he thought it no sin to defend them.

Matt (49:26.919)
But he but they use the word stratagem for a reason and taught and it's almost like they're justifying all of the spying and the ambushing and all that stuff.

shawn (49:30.632)
Yeah, it's interesting thought.

No, it's it's a super interesting thought, especially so Clayton, you brought up the context of the nine eleven paradigm. Like Matt, when we were we we have the luxury of being, well, you being as old as you are, pre-9-11 paradigm. And it was fascinating to see George W. Bush shift from, yeah, let's sit back and let's see what happens in the world, to mm-mm, it's time to go actively, proactively, by stratagem, preemptively go.

Clayton Keller (49:46.96)
Haha!

shawn (50:03.348)
prevent any more nine elevens from happening, right? That's a whole different

Matt (50:08.203)
I think that our country's worse off for that.

shawn (50:09.126)
It it's proactive versus reactive.

Matt (50:12.373)
Yeah, I don't think we're supposed to be proactively preemptively stopping people from threatening us.

shawn (50:17.054)
I mean, Cold War, you could all obviously nine eleven wasn't the only thing that caused American leaders to be proactive, right? The Cold War was absolutely proactive as opposed to just reactive, wasn't it?

Matt (50:28.929)
Yeah. But but think about this, Sean. Go back to the beginning of the United States of America. Did we have a spy agency? Did we have right, we were no, we didn't have anything. We didn't even have a military, right? The whole idea with the military is like everybody's gonna be ready to go, the minute men, right? And when you're called into action, then we'll go fight. We're not training regularly. We we don't have a standing army because we feel like that's the wrong thing to do.

shawn (50:30.418)
Was it wrong that was it wrong then?

shawn (50:35.05)
Okay.

No. I don't know, did we? We didn't.

shawn (50:50.346)
Okay.

Matt (50:56.605)
If we're attacked, if our liberty is threatened, we're gonna rally together and defend ourselves. But this idea that that there is gonna be this military and we're gonna train people in stratagem and we're gonna have a spy agency and we're gonna have people hate these flock cameras, right? We're gonna have flock cameras like monitoring people all the time so that whatever happens, we know what's going on.

shawn (51:14.123)
Qu okay, question Matt. Do you have a defensive proactive stratagem when it comes to your personal life and your family when it comes to the enemy Satan?

Matt (51:28.935)
I don't have spies. I don't ambush them. I d I I guess.

shawn (51:32.092)
Well sure you do. Sure you do. You sp you you yours you yourself are a spy when it comes to right? You're looking at what your kids are doing and getting into. Of course you are. What do you you're not a spy? You were look Really? When they were in high school, you didn't monitor or try to monitor what they were doing on the internet. so you were a spy.

Matt (51:40.437)
Right.

I pay no attention to my kids.

Okay, I did then. I did then, yeah, that's true.

Clayton Keller (51:54.798)
Well, the kid knows that you're looking at it, right? It's not like you're doing it in secret. Like you're sneaking into the bedroom, getting their phone while they're asleep and looking at their web browser. Like the kid knows you're looking.

Matt (51:58.69)
Yes. Right.

shawn (52:03.582)
that happens that happens all the time. Would you judge that as unrighteous? That's stratagem. Parents do that all the

Matt (52:03.615)
No, no.

Matt (52:07.817)
Right. They agreed to it in advance, right? I'm like, I'll pay your phone bill, but you have to agree to let me monitor your activity. I don't know. Like Sean, I don't even lock my door at my house at night. There is anyone can come into my house at any time with like no resistance at all. Because I don't

shawn (52:14.707)
Stratagem.

shawn (52:26.61)
Matt, do you have do you do you what kind of subscriptions, like movie subscriptions do you plant? Do you have do you have do you have w what's it called? The one that edits all the bad stuff? Vid Angel? Do you have Vid Angel? You don't. Stratagem.

Matt (52:36.363)
Vid Angel? I do not. I get vid angel for about a month a year. I get that's not stratagem. Stratagem is deceit and ambush and trickery.

Clayton Keller (52:42.361)
You

shawn (52:46.92)
I don't why why st

Matt (52:49.121)
Well, that's just what it seems in the scriptures stratagem is.

shawn (52:52.574)
I think stratum is just a fancier word of saying strategy though. I don't think strategy always like you can have good moral strategy stratagem and immoral stratagem. So sure, maybe don't but you're saying by nature spying, a country spying, is by nature dishonest. That's what you're saying.

Matt (53:05.302)
Well I don't

Matt (53:09.545)
Is dishonest. Yes. It sends a bad message to the country. The idea

shawn (53:15.145)
Okay, so you're not the qu your question is not should we not should we or should we not have strategy to defend or preemptively defend us against enemies? You're saying should we should we is it wrong to do it dishonestly? That's what you're questioning.

Matt (53:27.883)
Yeah. Is it okay to be dishonest in warfare? Is it okay to be dishonest in international rela

shawn (53:31.306)
okay, can I ask you? Okay, so those World War Two, when they would put up those inflatable, like fake tanks and armies, or in Iraq, right? What was the Iraq strategy when Schwarzkopf went around and they put up all those fake things? Is that d that's im that's dishonest?

Matt (53:53.706)
So what I'm saying is Moroni seems to say, if somebody is attacking you and they're gonna they're threatening your liberty, okay, fine. They've attacked you. You can defend yourself by stratagem. But should you preemptively or aggressively go in and deceive and lie and whatever in another person's country so that you can defeat them militarily? No, I think he's saying that fine if you have to do it to defend yourself, but you shouldn't use it as like a

shawn (54:02.641)
okay.

shawn (54:19.571)
I see.

Matt (54:21.729)
This is what we do all the time, kind of thing.

shawn (54:23.934)
But you're reading that as if I'm defending myself, it's okay to be dishonest, because you're defining stratagem as dishonest.

Matt (54:30.135)
That's what seems to be what Morona is saying, or Alma is saying about Morona.

shawn (54:32.266)
I think you're reading the wrong I think Sandra would agree with me that you're reading the wrong the the s the word stratagem wrong. That it's that stratagem isn't in and of itself by nature dishonest immoral. Like strategy you can you can have good strategy, positive strategy.

Matt (54:50.4)
Okay.

Clayton Keller (54:50.682)
So Sean, do you think Morona was a kind of military leader that just wanted to meet out on the open field for battle versus, you know, meet someone in a valley and flank them from behind?

shawn (55:02.463)
I think he was flanking him. I think he was definitely by stratagem winning at all cost. I think he hated every minute of it. Like we know his nature. He hated it. Absolutely despised it. But of course he was gonna do it if he's gonna if I'm gonna do it, I'm gonna do it. Like let's do it right. But I think for sure he was tricky and sneaky. You don't think so?

Clayton Keller (55:25.7)
I'm sure he was. I mean, he was really, he was a brilliant military strategist. know that. Yeah. Yeah. We know he didn't want to do it.

shawn (55:37.214)
Matt, I I I would argue that it's necessary, like to preemptively like if you have knowledge Matt, if you have knowledge of a terrorist attack coming into America, but it hasn't happened yet, yeah, you have to proactively I don't know if that's proactive or reactive, but you have to go in and and do something about it, don't you think?

Matt (55:37.495)
Okay.

Clayton Keller (55:55.684)
But how preemptive are you going to be? Yeah, that's where I'm traveling.

Matt (55:59.566)
Here's here's my verse. Right. My verse is this. I don't remember where it's at. It says, renounce war, proclaim peace. That's what we're supposed to do. And I think that having stratagem spies, like the more I have a powerful military, if I just put myself in Donald Trump's position, you're the one that gave me all of these Heimar missiles. You gave me the most powerful military in the world. You give me all of this power, and then say, but don't use it, except for inappropriate ways. Like

Only use it the way we tell you to use it. That's too much power, too much temptation to give somebody. It's better to say, we're gonna renounce war, proclaim peace, and then if necessary, not I heard they might have nuclear weapons. I heard they might have weapons of mass destruction. When they use them against us, then we can defend ourselves. We don't have to like base like all that spy stuff creates situations in which you

shawn (56:47.57)
shawn (56:53.556)
That was a

Matt (56:57.527)
Feel like you're being threatened when you're not really being threatened. Wait until there's a real threat.

shawn (57:00.426)
That was a subtle that was a subtle jab at one of your favorite presidents.

Matt (57:05.131)
Well, are you talking about Trump when he's talking about Iran was gonna g use their nuclear weapons against us?

Clayton Keller (57:05.55)
You

shawn (57:10.94)
No, I'm talking about your subtle jab at one of your favorite presidents. Yeah. Yeah. Like pretend like you didn't know.

Matt (57:14.554)
Bush with weapons of mass destruction? Yeah. I like all of the I like every president except for Trump. wait. Hey everybody. Thanks for joining us. We'll talk to you again next week.

Clayton Keller (57:16.868)
No, you like Bush Senior, right? Don't you like Bush Senior more than Bush Junior?

shawn (57:22.654)
Ha ha ha.

Clayton Keller (57:24.26)
Disclaimer.

shawn (57:26.442)
Okay, let's end on that. That's perfect.