Paragraph 9
Family Advocacy in Communities and GovernmentsA CLOSER LOOK
Phrase A
“Internationally, people with more education are also consistently more likely to be motivated by certain issues. This is especially true regarding free speech: In 11 countries, people with higher levels of education are more likely to say they could be motivated to take political action on free speech issues. Poverty is the one issue where there are relatively few differences between those who have more education and those with less education.”
Wike, R., & Castillo, A. (2017, October 17). Political Engagement Around the World.
On the individual level, extra-parliamentary activism could come in the form of signing or collecting petitions, handing out political leaflets, or boycotting. Certain brands and products are bought—or refuted—for ideological, ethical or environmental reasons. This is also a way for ordinary citizens to directly influence the people in power (not necessarily politicians), and thus a rational form of manifest political action.
Ekman, Joakim & Amnå, Erik. (2009). Political participation and civic engagement: Towards a new typology. Human Affairs. 22. 10.2478/s13374-012-0024-1.
“In addition to participating directly in civic groups or activities, 49% of Americans have spoken out about an issue that is important to them in the past year by contacting a government agency or official, signing a petition, writing a letter to the editor or calling into a radio or television show. Among those who contacted a government official in person, by phone or by letter, 67% received a response to their query. This is little different from the 64% of those who received a response after sending a government official an email. Similarly, 66% of individuals who contacted a government official by phone, letter or in person were satisfied with the response they received.”
Smith, A., Schlozman, K., Verba, S., & Brady, H. (2009, September 1). The Internet and Civic Engagement.
The passive form of non-engagement would be found among citizens who perceive politics as not interesting. Citizens with this orientation do not feel any particular need to make their voices heard, and politics is simply left to others. They do not follow political and civic affairs, and typically hold no strong opinions about politics. It could mean though that increasing number of citizens turn away from the political sphere, into the private sphere. Here, a reservoir of participation could emerge. Citizens are still very much interested in politics, informed, skilled, and have political efficacy beliefs. But, for the time being, many of them chose not to take part in politics in a conventional sense. However, they are on “stand-by”; and if something would trigger them, they certainly would not have any problems getting their voices heard.
Ekman, Joakim & Amnå, Erik. (2009). Political participation and civic engagement: Towards a new typology. Human Affairs. 22. 10.2478/s13374-012-0024-1.
Elder Neil L. Anderson’s story from General Conference:
Recently, I spoke with a Laurel from the United States. I quote from her email:
—“This past year some of my friends on Facebook began posting their position on marriage. Many favored same-sex marriage, and several LDS youth indicated they ‘liked’ the postings. I made no comment.
—-
“I decided to declare my belief in traditional marriage in a thoughtful way.—-
“With my profile picture, I added the caption ‘I believe in marriage between a man and a woman.’ Almost instantly I started receiving messages. ‘You are selfish.’ ‘You are judgmental.’ One compared me to a slave owner. And I received this post from a great friend who is a strong member of the Church: ‘You need to catch up with the times. Things are changing and so should you.’
—“I did not fight back,” she said, “but I did not take my statement down.”
—-
She concludes: “Sometimes, as President Monson said, ‘You have to stand alone.’ Hopefully as youth, we will stand together in being true to God and to the teachings of His living prophets.”Elder Neil L. Anderson, “Spiritual Whirlwinds,” General Conference, April 2014.
In the spring of 1996, a BYU law professor named Richard Wilkins boarded a plane to the bustling and exotic city of Istanbul, Turkey. He was asked to attend a large United Nations conference by some members of the Church who were involved with family policy on an international level. As he was packing, his wife suggested he take a copy of the newly issued The Family: A Proclamation to the World with him.
The 1996 conference in Istanbul was bringing in over 25,000 ambassadors, diplomats, and delegations from around the world. Here they would vote on a dramatic plan that would be the blueprint for family policy for the next 20 years, but unfortunately many proposals were heavily focused on things that would be harmful to the families of the world. The stakes were high and the tensions were mounting. See the full article here.
BYU Law Professor Richard G. Wilkins:
We have been given a charge to stand up to a fire now burning (virtually out of control) throughout the world. This fire is being used to forge norms and laws that can undermine the meaning, value, and importance of the family and family life. We may not like the heat emanating from this fire. We may be afraid of the sparks—and wisely so. … Nevertheless, standing up to this fire is our charge, as surely as crossing the plains was the charge given to an earlier generation.
—If we learn to stand up to this fire, and to do so with patience, humility, love, and forgiveness … with the generous assistance of our Father in Heaven, given by and through our obedience to
His Son, Jesus Christ, we can forge results stronger than iron: generations of mothers and fathers, sons and daughters, grandparents and grandchildren, who will reap the blessings of the simple things of life—marriage, motherhood, fatherhood, childhood, and faith—the simple things that make ordinary life pleasant and possible.
—–
No task in this increasingly complex world is more important.
Wilkins, Richard G. (2005) “The Principles of the Proclamation: Ten Years of Help,” BYU Studies Quarterly: Vol. 44 : Iss. 3 , Article 3. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/byusq/vol44/iss3/3
“The Proclamation ends with a warning and a call for action. The warning is disquieting. Failure to reverse current trends “will bring upon individuals, communities, and nations the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets.” But a way out is marked as well: citizens and government leaders are called upon to take action “to strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society.”
“[Y]ears after the Proclamation was first read to members of the Relief Society from the pulpit of the Salt Lake Tabernacle, it has been framed, hung on the wall, even memorized. These laudable actions, however, are not enough. Despite the constant request of President Hinckley to stand for something, many members of the Church are fearful to stand up for marriage, life, and the family. A decade after the Proclamation was first issued, we must overcome our fear.
“The defense of the family must be grounded in reason. We must use carefully chosen words and act pursuant to well-thought-out plans motivated by love and compassion. We must not be angry, dogmatic, or insensitive to the deeply felt concerns of those with opposing views. Without compromising principle, we should seek common ground. As President Hinckley has counseled, we must avoid contention and dispute whenever possible.
“But, however reasoned, careful, compassionate, planned, and moderate our efforts, we must be prepared for the sparks that will surely fly. We must never create needless controversy for ourselves, our families, our nation, or the Church. But we must also not retreat from the defense of truth. Let us not withdraw, but stand up to the fire of our times.”
Wilkins, Richard G. (2005) “The Principles of the Proclamation: Ten Years of Help,” BYU Studies Quarterly: Vol. 44 : Iss. 3 , Article 3. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/byusq/vol44/iss3/3
Lifting Where We Stand
Throughout the greater part of human history, much of mankind has sought to understand and abide by eternal truths surrounding human nature that serve foundational to the betterment of human society.
One of such eternal truths is that a healthy and stable family is the foundational building block of society, the most sacred and most beneficial of all relationships. In fact, the family is so important it has been said that “nothing in the world could make human life happier than to greatly increase the number of strong families.”
Thus, it is of great concern that the state of family stability in the world is deteriorating with fewer persons getting and staying married, more individuals engaging in extramarital sex, and more children being born without a father in the home. This breakdown harms society, making communities weaker and individuals more susceptible to poverty, criminal activity, and abuse of harmful substances.
It should therefore be the mission of all “responsible citizens and officers of government everywhere to promote those measures designed to maintain and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society.”
So, the question is how?
While there is no one answer to this question, I believe a piece of the puzzle is found in a story that was shared with me as a young man.
Many years ago, in a meetinghouse in Darmstadt, Germany, a group of men were asked to move a grand piano from a chapel to an adjoining cultural hall, where it was needed for a musical event. The task was daunting, requiring not only physical strength but also careful coordination. The men exchanged plenty of ideas, the men repositioned themselves by strength, height, and even age. But with no avail could the grand piano be balanced in a manner that allowed it to be moved. As they stood around the piano, facing uncertainty, one of the men spoke up saying “Brethren, stand close together and lift where you stand.” While it seemed too simple, it proved to be the answer. Standing close together and lifting where they stood, the grand piano was moved.
In our own lives we can lift where stand by focusing more intently on the needs of our own families, choosing to abstain from immoral actions, and actively seeking to improve the relationships we are in.
In doing so, we can overcome the daunting task of strengthening the family just as the men were able to move the piano. We will mend broken hearts, heal fractured relationships, and increase familial stability by standing close together and lifting where we stand.
In a world that portrays sexual immorality, profanity, and degeneracy as acceptable it will take individuals and communities to protect and promote the family with boldness, empathy, and charity; not brashness, indifference, and antipathy. People crave, and need, individuals to look up to and we must actively embrace the challenge of being examples of what society needs at this time.
As we lift where we stand, we must remember that the traditional boundaries which shape the formation of the family are not discriminatory. It is never discriminatory to recognize and uphold the unique and important roles that mothers and fathers play in the lives of children and society at-large. Moreover, it is kind and compassionate as the promotion of the family recognizes that the flourishment of society depends upon the existence of the family.
Not everyone agrees with these beliefs, and that’s OK, so long as we all remain free to speak and act in accordance with our different beliefs. If we are all to remain free, we must recognize that the traditional view of marriage and sexuality is a legitimate point of view to hold.
True tolerance is not a one-sided affair. It is a healthy understanding of human dignity that leads us all to treat others with respect and compassion, even when our beliefs conflict. One can hold to principled, traditional views on these matters while approaching different lifestyles with great compassion.
So, remember, as you lift where you stand seek to understand the beliefs of all parties involved, but speak with boldness in defense of what will bring forward the most happiness for God’s children.
Phrase B
“In many countries, family rhetoric is abundant, but the issue is how this rhetoric plays out in policy decisions. … Family policy professionals … must assume responsibility for communicating with decisionmakers to help them see families, not as the private problems of a particular family, but as public priorities for policy and program decisions. …
The companion implicit term, the family impact lens in policymaking, acknowledges the critical role family considerations play in a broad range of policies by analyzing (a) what the consequences are of any policy or program on family well-being and (b) when families are used as a means to accomplish other policy ends. Many policy issues are not considered family policies per se because they affect individuals as well as families, yet they still would benefit from the family impact lens. …
Rather than concentrating on overly specific problems or solutions, a family-centered view enlarges our organizing frame by moving toward a more holistic, multidimensional way of thinking about policy challenges. A family impact lens promotes a longitudinal lifespan perspective that considers families from the cradle to the grave … In longitudinal studies, a focus on families and the policies that support them may help a society develop a caring, committed citizenry.”
Four ways that professionals can help family policy achieve serious standing in countries around the world are detailed below:
1. Professionals could encourage decisionmakers to focus on the whole family rather
than a single family member (e.g., only the mother or the father or one child) or a
specific dad (e.g., only the couple, mother-child, or father-child relationship).
2. Professionals can communicate with policymakers about the value of investing in
family policies by focusing on the contributions families make to society. Focusing
on families is an effective and efficient means of generating productive workers and
raising caring, committed citizens.
3. Professionals can encourage countries to establish a locus for family
policymaking—a specific agency, organization, or governmental body—that is
designated with official responsibility for (a) promoting families as a priority for
study, investment, partnership, and political action; (b) analyzing how families
affect and are affected by policy; and (c) designing, implementing, and evaluating
family policies.
4. To encourage international exchange of ideas, professionals could write in books,
journals, and reports about their experiences with family policy in their own
country—what family policies have been put in place and what contributions they
have made to families and society.
Bogenschneider, K. (2011). “Family Policy: Why we need it and how to communicate its value.” Assessing Family Policies: Confronting Family Poverty and Social Exclusion &
Ensuring Work Family Balance, The United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA), Division for Social Policy and Development (DSPD), New York. 1-3 June, 2011.
The Boyer’s Story
They didn’t want us anywhere near their municipality.
With a population of well over 100,000, they still viewed us as a threat. They had heard we were coming, so the municipal council of George, Zambia quickly denied our requests for a place to meet and live. They knew nothing about us, but they were quite sure the “Mormons” were up to no good. They blocked our efforts before we began. It was so frustrating. We decided our best action was to attend a Municipal Council meeting to observe and learn more about our new community. Having had experience as diplomats, we went dressed as professional diplomats. We made no comments or demands, just attended and observed. Near the close of the meeting the Commissioner in charge declared he’d been watching us and asked if we were part of the diplomatic school. We answered no, but we’d appreciate a chance to speak to the council. He said it was obvious we were important, so he gave us the floor. We’d been praying for this moment. But the words we were inspired to say were not directly about the Church of Jesus Christ or our mission, they were about families. When we stood to speak, we found ourselves sharing our love of family and the vital importance strong families have in our communities and cities. We testified that defending the family was the most important role these council members could play in their city. Then we told them we’d be happy to visit with each of them in their homes to share with their families the qualities that make up a strong family as taught by Jesus Christ. That was it. We thanked them for their time and suddenly they were all clamoring to make appointments with us. By the end of the next week we had been warmly welcomed into each of their homes. We’d built friendships and shared the foundational principles of families with each of them. Each family hung on our every word. Each family requested and received suggestions for strengthening their relationships as a family and with God. Each of them invited us back any time. The next week we were stopped on the street by the lead Commissioner. He said, “I want you to know something. I voted adamantly against you having access to our city. But your respect and your focus on strong family values has changed my mind completely. I wish I had never voted the way I had. I’m glad you came anyway.”
Tad Callister’s Speech to the Mayflower Society
For members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the family is central to our faith. In fact, we have a theology of the family. Faith and family are deeply embedded into everything we do, from temples to genealogy and missionary work. It’s what we’re all about.
The family proclamation teaches us that “the family is central to the Creator’s plan for the eternal destiny of His children.” It concludes with uses strong, declarative words such as “we warn” and “we call upon”, which give us an idea of just how serious we should be taking this document. We know that this is one of the most significant doctrinal statements of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. But why exactly is the family and religion so critical to the well-being of our society? To the world? Do these religious principles hold water outside of our church? Do they hold water from a secular standpoint?
Tad Callister’s recent address to the Mayflower Society titled “America’s Choice: A Nation Under God or Without God” (link) may help answer these questions. He makes the following points:
1. “There is a necessity of a moral people. Without moral guidelines from God, there are no fixed boundaries to address the burning social issues of our day. … a nation of moral relativism, built upon a foundation of sand that would shift or collapse with the constantly changing tides of public opinion.”
—–2. “Goodness comes from learning the will of God and doing it. That is one reason why religion is so critical to the welfare of [the world], because it defines and reinforces the moral principles by which we should live. It is our [world’s] best catalyst for goodness. It is a counterbalance to man’s natural and selfish interest and desires for power.”
This may sound sensible to members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. After all, we believe that these principles are encompassed in plan of salvation. But what about in the secular world? Callister answers this by quoting from prominent professor and writer, Arthur Brooks, who wrote a book titled “Who Really Cares?” This book is a frank and honest discussion of an avalanche of research about who really gives money or time for charity and community service and who does not. Brooks shares these conclusions:
Religious people are far more charitable with their time and money than secularists. Religious people are more generous in informal ways as well, such as giving blood, giving money to family members, and behaving honestly.
Brooks then makes a candid admission, adding significant weight to his positive assessment of religion:
I confess the prejudices of my past here to emphasize that the findings in this book—many of which appear conservative and support a religious, hardworking, family-oriented lifestyle—are faithful to the best available evidence, and contrary to my political and cultural roots. Indeed, the irresistible pull of empirical evidence … is what changed the way I see the world.
What a fascinating conclusion from such a prominent individual! By his own admission, he didn’t pay much heed to the faith and family-oriented lifestyle, yet he was compelled to change his worldview once he saw the avalanche of empirical evidence. Timothy P. Carney, author and commentary editor of the Washington examiner backs up what Brooks found:
From time to time, the media will trumpet some study finding some malady among the religious—they’re angrier, or stupider, or greedier. But ask almost any social scientist, Left or Right, religious or secular, and he or she will tell you with high confidence that religious people are better off socially and economically and fall into fewer negative behaviors (crime, teenage pregnancy, drug abuse, suicide) than nonreligious people. Popular culture likes to paint the dark picture of religion in America, but the actual data point the other way.
This is why faith and family are so critical to the well-being of our society. When mountains of data support the repeated teachings of prophets and apostles, the bridge between faith and reason crystallizes. It’s one of the (many) reasons for this website. The use of ancient and modern scripture, scholarship and storytelling are a compelling combination for making the case for strong marriages and families = strong societies and happier people. We hope you’ll be able to use some of the data points on this site to help you in your everyday conversations with friends and family—perhaps even this week.
For a deeper look at why research is so important to this site, please visit our Research page.
Phrase C
“The family is the nucleus of civilization and the basic social unit of society. Aristotle wrote that the family is nature’s established association for the supply of mankind’s everyday wants. Research clearly shows that the institution of the family is the first form of community and government and, as Michael Novak said, the first, best and original Department of Health, Education and Welfare. For a civilization to succeed, the family must succeed. …
—–If we have stronger families we will have stronger schools, stronger churches, and stronger communities with less poverty and less crime. The family is the linchpin of society, both economically and socially. …
—–
Charles Murray teaches us in his book, “Coming Apart,” that one of the great secrets of the successful upper class is its dedicated practice of traditional family values. Men and women who get married, stay married and have children within marriage are more likely to be in, and to stay in, the middle or upper class. There are exceptions: there are some great and successful single parents and some awful two parent families, but most of the time it works best with, yes, a mother, a father and children. The upper classes — liberal and conservative, Democrat and Republican alike — believe this and practice it. Sadly, they do not often preach what they practice.
Bennett, W. “Stronger Families, Stronger Societies,” The New York Times, 24 April 2012. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/04/24/are-family-values-outdated/stronger-families-stronger-societies
“The Seminar on Family and Welfare (1986), composed of a bipartisan group of scholars with eminence in their fields, reached three powerful conclusions, and made almost 60 practical recommendations designed to alter costly trend lines. The three most significant conclusions, powerfully supported by the statistical data, were expressed in this form: A couple has a 93 percent chance of escaping from poverty if it does these three things: (1) gets married and – even if not on the first try – stays married; (2) completes high school; and (3) maintains at least one partner working full time for at least 50 weeks a year, even at minimum wage.”
Novak, M. “Crumbling Foundations – Why the Family is Crucial to Civilization,” The New York Times, 1 December, 2006.
It is well-known in empirical literature that being married and having a family ordinarily makes a man a better and more productive economic agent than when he was single. In the so-called monogamous bourgeois family structure, family ties become a powerful social motivator – ties not just of duty, but also of love and dreams about the future. Whatever may be true for other states and forms of life, it is not true for the married monogamous family with children that “in the long run, we are all dead.” To the contrary, such families live for the long run, plan for it, work toward it. The family is a very powerful engine of economic development. …
—
Whereas the 20th century pivoted on the dream of redistributing income through the agency of the state – a project which in the end failed – the 21st century ought to turn in a new direction. It ought to aim at shaping a regime of universal family capital. …
—-
The role of a strong, wise, and inventive government is a very important one. Nevertheless, a still more central and dynamic role in the free society – both in its economy and in its politics of self-government – is played by the family. If the family unit is allowed to fade into eclipse, it may well prove fatal to our civilization.
Novak, M. “Crumbling Foundations – Why the Family is Crucial to Civilization,” The New York Times, 1 December, 2006.
“We have abandoned our children. Between a soaring divorce rate and an equally soaring rate of children born to unwed mothers, it is now the case that the majority of our children will spend at least a portion of their childhoods in single parent homes—in effect being raised without fathers. A large minority will spend their entire childhoods essentially without fathers, and a considerable number will not even know who their fathers are.
This is an extremely unusual circumstance—perhaps unique in human experience. In no known human society, past or present, have children generally been raised outside of an intact nuclear family. The nuclear family is one of the most basic of all human institutions, a system of doing things so fundamental that until this century it occurred to very few people that life could exist without it.”
James Lincoln Collier, “The Rise of Selfishness in America,” (1990), 246.
We are seeing the forgoing of marriage altogether for a growing segment of society rather than just a delay of it. That’s a dramatic social change with implications not only for one’s personal spiritual progress but also for society and the economy. … As the Lord’s pattern for the family is altered and marriage is redefined or abandoned altogether in many countries, we’re starting to see patterns of family instability and decreased child well-being. As the wisdom of the world calls “evil good, and good evil,” we would do well to look to the Lord’s pattern for preparing for a righteous marriage and strengthening the family as the fundamental unit of society.
Dr. Jason Carroll, “Delaying Marriage: The Trends and the Consequences,” Ensign March 2017.
See also paragraph 1, phrase C [Family central to God’s plan]; and paragraph 7, sentence A [Family ordained of God].
The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.
United Nations, “Universal Declaration of Human Rights,” Article 16(3)
The family, a universal community based on the marital union of a man and a woman, is the bedrock of society, the strength of our nations, and the hope of humanity. As the ultimate foundation of every civilization known to history, the family is the proven bulwark of liberty and the key to development, prosperity, and peace. The family is also the fountain and cradle of new life, the natural refuge for children, and the first and foremost school to teach the values necessary for the well-being of children and society. The family truly is our link to the past and bridge to the future.
“The World Family Declaration,” Retrieved from http://www.worldfamilydeclaration.org/WFD
International treaty provisions echoing Article 16(3) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:
- INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS: “The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.” Article 23(1).
- INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND CULTURAL RIGHTS: “The widest possible protection and assistance should be accorded to the family, which is the natural and fundamental group unit of society, particularly for its establishment and while it is responsible for the care and education of dependent children.” Article 10(1).
Marriage is the fundamental building block of all human civilization. The government does not create marriage. Marriage is a natural institution that predates government. Society as a whole, not merely any given set of spouses, benefits from marriage. … This understanding of marriage as the union of man and woman is shared by the Jewish, Christian, and Muslim traditions; by ancient Greek and Roman thinkers untouched by these religions; and by various Enlightenment philosophers. … Marriage as the union of husband and wife arose in many places, over several centuries, in which same-sex marriage was nowhere on the radar. Indeed, it arose in cultures that had no concept of sexual orientation and in some that fully accepted homoeroticism and even took it for granted. … One need not appeal to distinctively religious arguments to understand why marriage—as a natural institution—is the union of man and woman.
Ryan Anderson, “Marriage: What It Is, Why It Matters, and the Consequences of Redefining It,” Heritage Foundation, 11 Mar 2013. Retrieved from https://www.heritage.org/marriage-and-family/report/marriage-what-it-why-it-matters-and-the-consequences-redefining-it.
The family is not only the fundamental group unit of society, but is also the fundamental agent for sustainable social, economic and cultural development. … Strengthening the family presents a unique opportunity to address societal problems in a holistic manner. … Reiterating that strong, stable families contribute to the maintenance of a culture of peace and promote dialogue among civilizations and diverse ethnic groups, … we reaffirm international commitments to the family and call upon all Governments, international organizations and members of civil society at all levels to take action to protect the family.
United Nations General Assembly, Social development, including questions relating to the world social situation and to youth, ageing, disabled persons and the family, A/59/592 (3 December 2004).
