I have pondered the loud, incessant, sometimes mindless claims of individuals who see virtually everything as being a ‘right’ that they entitled to. Not to stir up controversy but to cause some serious reflection on the part of your readers, I have chosen to take a very narrow view of “rights.” I will let others argue the political definitions and ramifications. I believe that a “right” is something that is granted mortals by God. Although men and governments often proscribe the God-given rights of others, those rights are part of our mortal existence.
There is a statement made by President Joseph F. Smith that may cause some to swallow twice until they understand what he is saying: “Men and women ought not to be willing to receive charity unless they are compelled to do so to keep from suffering ... It is a bad thing for men to think the world owes them a living, and all they have to do is to beg or steal to get it. When it comes to this class of people I am very much of the mind expressed once by Dr. Johnson, when a beggar came to him and asked alms and insisted that the doctor should be generous in helping him, “for,” said he, “doctor, you know that I must live.” But the doctor said, “I don’t see the least necessity for it.” When a man becomes a parasite, living upon the charity of his friends, I confess it is hard to see the necessity for him to live. He is no good to anyone. I speak this way only of such as are able-bodied, such as have their faculties and can devote these to some industry, to some useful labor. I don’t refer to the cripple, to those who are enfeebled by age, because I look at them in an entirely different light; there is a necessity for them to live, and there is a necessity for us to assist such, but there is no great need in this world for men and women who are able to work and will not work” (Conference Report April 1898, pp 48-49).
Yes, we are afforded the privilege, the opportunity, the agency to make of ourselves what we will, but to mistakenly believe that the world owes us a living, is contrary to what the Lord has revealed. In Doctrine and Covenants 42:42 the Lord revealed: “Thou shalt not be idle; for he that is idle shall not eat the bread nor wear the garments of the laborer.” A thousand times over I would rather see us provide opportunities to the disadvantaged to work and earn their own way than to give them something that contributes to their helplessness. There is pride in accomplishment. The entire welfare system of the Church was established under the prophetic leadership of President Heber J. Grant who said: “Our primary purpose was to set up, in so far as it might be possible, a system under which the curse of idleness would be done away with, the evils of a dole abolished, and independence, industry, thrift, and self-respect be once more established amongst our people. The aim of the Church is to help the people to help themselves. Work is to be re-enthroned as the ruling principle of the lives of our Church membership” (Conference Report, October, 1936:3).
When one comes to think that he or she is entitled to certain privileges designed by God to be earned “by the sweat of thy face” (see Moses 4:25), then one actually loses freedoms, and to the degree that we adopt that attitude we retard our progress towards fulfilling the purpose of mortality—which is to qualify to return to the presence of God and gain our eventual exaltation. Whenever we expect someone to do something for us, we set ourselves up for disappointment and frustration. If those so expected fail to come through on our expectations, we somehow feel wronged or violated. When we expect nothing and someone (anyone) does something for us, we rightly should be filled with gratitude. By expecting little or nothing we put ourselves in a position where we can rightly adopt the adage: “If it is to be it is up to me.”
How extremely empowering is the feeling or attitude that with the help of God you can accomplish whatever you put your mind to. How restricting and debilitating the belief that you are a helpless puppet being yanked around by some evil puppeteer and strictly at the mercy of a cruel, uncaring world. I glory in the “rights” that God has granted to all of us. I marvel that so many who fought so valiantly in the war in the pre-earth life for the privilege of “work[ing] out your own salvation with fear and trembling” (see Philippians 2:12) seem so willing to turn over to the government or anyone else the growth that come from fulfilling God’s program of growth toward exaltation through work.
Randy Bott is an associate professor of church history at BYU.





Feeds   
Born on second base and constantly congratulating himself for hitting a double.
Brother Bott,
Please read up on Natural rights (inherent rights given to every person on this earth, or as some say, granted from God) vs. legal rights.
both are still "rights."
If you have a "right" to charity, health care, marriage, etc. as the law would have it out to be, tell me, whose RESPONSIBILITY is it to ensure those rights? Don't I have a right to keep the money I earn? How is it okay to "guarantee" someone's legal right to, say, health care by taking away another person's inherent right to property?
amen brother
My response to Professor Bott is too long to post here, so I've posted it at my blog: http://dissentinginpart.blogspot.com/2009/11/open-response-to-randy-bott...
I agree with Brian -- I didn't think of health care at all when I read Brother Bott's letter.
Your response was thorough, however I believe it fell a little flat since you wrote the whole thing based on your interpretation.
You know what assuming does.
Huh, when I read Professor Bott's letter, I didn't think of health care at all. All I thought of was the general sense of entitlement growing in the world today. There are so many people on welfare and WIC that probably don't need to be (I'm sure there are plenty that do need it--I can't make a blanket statement for everyone, of course).
From the President Joseph F. Smith quote: “Men and women ought not to be willing to receive charity unless they are compelled to do so to keep from suffering." I just wonder if people using these charities (many students at BYU) would plan a bit better, could they avoid using them? Just because the government will give you money, doesn't mean you are entitled to it and need it.
So you can point fingers angrily if you want, but I think this article has more general applicability than just health care. Just my two cents.
Just a little addition to your comment--let's not forget by overuse of the word "government" that WE are actually the one's paying. Government doesn't "earn" any money. They get it from the people. Those using charity when it is not needed are taking it from citizens (who are held up by the point of a gun shaped like iron bars and orange jumpsuits)who actually are working.