The Latter Day Lens

Send us Fan Mail

What if the Constitution guaranteed every American the right to healthcare?
In the second-to-last episode of the original Latter Day Lens, Matt, Shawn, and returning guest Marc tackle healthcare costs, political change, and the personal sacrifices involved in standing up for your beliefs.
Matt introduces a proposed constitutional amendment modeled on the Second and Fourteenth Amendments. But there's a twist: rather than requiring government-funded healthcare, he argues that his amendment would protect individual access to medical services by limiting government regulation.
Shawn questions whether courts would interpret the amendment that way. Marc unexpectedly argues that a national health service may be the more practical solution.
The conversation also explores two other questions:
Are young Americans changing the political landscape? The hosts discuss political realignment, dealignment, and whether generational changes can produce lasting political shifts.
What can we learn from Dolores Huerta? Her work organizing farmworkers raises difficult questions about moral courage, activism, personal sacrifice, and the risks of speaking out against powerful people.
Plus, the hosts debate political favoritism, immigration, and presidential pardons.
And Matt announces that the next episode will be the final episode of the original Latter Day Lens, with news about what comes next.
Question for listeners: What should a constitutional right to healthcare actually guarantee?

Chapter Markers
00:00 — Welcome Back, Marc
00:53 — Our Second-to-Last Episode
01:15 — Listener Mail: Faith, Money & Priestcraft
02:49 — What's Coming Next?
03:00 — Are Young Voters Changing American Politics?
03:47 — Political Realignment vs. Dealignment
07:02 — Marc Challenges Matt
08:18 — Young Voters and Political Geography
09:31 — Does Realignment Have a Latter-day Lens?
11:19 — Immigration, Political Favoritism & Brazil
14:53 — Presidential Pardons and Political Motives
18:45 — Remembering Dolores Huerta
19:54 — Being Anxiously Engaged in a Good Cause
21:11 — The Personal Costs of Activism
24:32 — Public Leadership and Personal Sacrifice
25:24 — Should Victims Speak Out?
28:24 — Can We Fix Healthcare With One Amendment?
29:00 — Matt's Proposed Healthcare Amendment
30:12 — Shawn Challenges the Proposal
31:36 — Is Healthcare Like the Right to Bear Arms?
34:10 — Marc's Unexpected Healthcare Position
34:39 — Should Government Get Out of Medicine?
36:21 — A Free-Market Right to Healthcare
37:06 — Shawn Calls It a Trojan Horse
38:18 — Can AI Replace Some Medical Services?
39:00 — The Cost of American Health Insurance
40:46 — The Abortion-Law Surprise
41:13 — Why Constitutional Amendments Are Complicated
41:40 — Next Week Is Our Final Episode

Visit our website to join the conversation: Latter-day Lens

Send us Fan Mail

What will the 2026 midterm elections actually change—and what does the Book of Mormon teach about political corruption?

Matt and Shawn welcome Levi back for a special midterm election edition of The Latter Day Lens.

The hosts begin by examining candidates from both major parties and asking what qualities they value in elected representatives. The discussion explores political independence, bipartisan cooperation, religious convictions, rural representation, housing policy, and the tension between personal principles and party loyalty.

Then they revisit their predictions from the 2024 presidential election.

What did they expect from the Trump administration on Ukraine, the Middle East, tariffs, and domestic policy? Which predictions held up, and where did they misjudge what would happen?

Next comes the central midterm question: How might Congress change if Democrats gain control of one or both chambers—or if Republicans retain control?

Matt, Shawn, and Levi explore possible legislative gridlock, congressional investigations, impeachment, immigration policy, and the limits of congressional power when the president and Congress disagree.

Finally, the episode turns to Ether 8 and the Book of Mormon's warning about secret combinations.

What qualifies as a secret combination? How is it different from ordinary political corruption? And what responsibilities do citizens have when they believe powerful people are protecting one another from accountability?

The conversation ends with an unexpected historical example from Liberia and a discussion of how ordinary people can organize to challenge entrenched power.

Question for listeners: How should people respond when loyalty to a political party conflicts with their personal principles?

Join the conversation at LatterDayLens.com.

00:00 — Midterm Election Special
01:01 — Finding Candidates Across Party Lines
01:41 — Levi's Republican Selections
06:09 — Shawn's Test for Independent Politicians
07:55 — Susan Collins and Bipartisanship
09:45 — Thomas Massie and Party Loyalty
11:47 — Democratic Candidates Worth Discussing
13:16 — Religious Values and Political Priorities
16:24 — Housing, Rural Communities, and Representation
18:33 — Revisiting Our 2024 Election Predictions
19:30 — Ukraine, Russia, and the Middle East
24:02 — Tariffs and Domestic Policy Predictions
25:06 — Matt Admits He Was Wrong
27:31 — What if Democrats Control Congress?
29:43 — Impeachment and Congressional Oversight
31:29 — What Could Congress Actually Accomplish?
33:23 — Ukraine and U.S. Foreign Policy
35:35 — Immigration, Asylum, and ICE
38:16 — Is Political Gridlock a Good Thing?
39:09 — What if Republicans Retain Congress?
41:37 — Ether 8 and Secret Combinations
43:22 — Can the Constitution Stop Corruption?
45:03 — January 6 and Constitutional Safeguards
49:41 — What Defines a Secret Combination?
51:45 — Is Corruption the Same as Conspiracy?
54:02 — How Do We Stop Secret Combinations?
55:07 — The Women Who Helped End Liberia's Civil War
57:25 — Collective Action and the 4B Movement
58:02 — The Book of Mormon's Warning for Today
59:10 — Final Thoughts

Visit our website to join the conversation: Latter-day Lens

Send us Fan Mail

Is it wrong to make money preaching the gospel? And when does religious content become priestcraft?

Matt and Shawn welcome Melanie back to The Latter Day Lens for a surprisingly personal debate about faith, money, Christian influencers, and the growing business of religious self-help.

A report about Life Surge, a company that attracts Christians to inspirational events and sells expensive coaching programs, raises a difficult question: Can someone sincerely promote faith while also trying to make a profit?

Melanie argues that mixing religious teaching with personal enrichment creates serious spiritual risks. Shawn asks whether charging for faith-promoting content might actually allow creators to reach more people. Matt shares his own experience selling business coaching and explains why the work eventually made him uncomfortable.

Then the conversation turns to two other big questions:

Can sports bring Americans together? New research suggests that shared team loyalties can reduce political hostility. But Matt wonders whether sports fandom is actually one of Satan's counterfeits of meaningful human identity. Melanie pushes back.

Is improving public education a religious responsibility? Matt, Shawn, and Melanie debate tutoring, teacher salaries, early childhood education, government spending, and whether society is investing enough in helping children learn.

Plus, Matt and Shawn discuss the approaching end of The Latter Day Lens—and hint that something different may come next.

In This Episode

• Melanie returns to The Latter Day Lens
• What comes after Matt leaves the podcast?
• Sports fandom and political polarization
• BYU–Utah football rivalries
• Is sports fandom one of Satan's counterfeits?
• Moses 1 and our identity as children of God
• Can shared interests help us love our neighbors?
• Education as a religious responsibility
• Small-group tutoring and the science of reading
• Universal pre-K and teacher compensation
• Why talented students may avoid teaching careers
• Government spending and educational priorities
• School accountability and academic standards
• Life Surge and Christian financial coaching
• Religious entrepreneurship and priestcraft
• Can Christian influencers make money ethically?
• Matt's experience selling business coaching
• Shawn's Mission Stories podcast
• The spiritual risks of wealth and popularity
• How personal revelation informs financial decisions

The Question We Want You to Answer

When does making money from religion become priestcraft?

Should religious educators, authors, podcasters, and other creators earn money from their work?

Is the important distinction how much money they earn, how they earn it, or what they intend to accomplish with it?

We'd love to hear your thoughts.

Chapter Markers

00:00 — Welcome Back, Melanie
00:23 — Is The Latter Day Lens Ending?
02:25 — Can Sports Heal Political Divisions?
03:49 — The Problem With Sports Rivalries
04:48 — Is Sports Fandom a Counterfeit of Satan?
06:16 — Moses 1 and Our True Identity
07:26 — Melanie Defends Sports Fandom
10:58 — Would the World Be Better Without Superpowers?
13:59 — Power, Dependence, and International Relations
17:03 — What Is Righteous Dominion?
18:18 — Canada and the Power of Cooperation
20:55 — Why Younger Americans View Foreign Affairs Differently
23:16 — Is Education a Religious Responsibility?
25:46 — Intelligence and Eternal Progression
27:46 — Why Talented People Avoid Teaching
29:16 — Are We Spending Enough on Education?
32:06 — Education, Medicare, and the Military
34:41 — Which Education Reforms Actually Work?
36:14 — Matt's Plan to Fix Public Education
37:41 — The National Debt and Future Generations
40:00 — When Faith Becomes a Business
41:57 — Is Making Money From Religion Wrong?
43:16 — Should Christian Influencers Get Paid?
45:18 — When Does Money Corrupt Good Intentions?
47:37 — Can Profit Help Spread the Gospel?
49:13 — How Much Money Is Too Much?
50:44 — Shawn's Mission Stories Dilemma
51:39 — Final Thoughts

Visit our website to join the conversation: Latter-day Lens

Send us Fan Mail

Why do intelligent, educated people sometimes believe things that aren't supported by evidence? And is believing a conspiracy theory necessarily a bad thing?

Matt and Shawn welcome David back to The Latter Day Lens for a conversation about political identity, election predictions, conspiracy theories, religious faith, and the rights of Americans living in U.S. territories.

The conversation begins with a thought-provoking listener observation: War might actually be worse than hell.

The listener reasons that people suffering in hell are understood to be accountable for their actions, while war inflicts terrible suffering on innocent people. Matt, Shawn, and David consider the implications before Matt takes the discussion in an unexpected direction: Would watching people suffer in hell be an appropriate form of entertainment?

From there, the conversation turns to politics.

What Do Left and Right Actually Mean?

Across the world, political movements are commonly described as left-wing or right-wing. But those labels don't necessarily mean the same thing everywhere.

Matt explains how political scientists use surveys to measure ideological self-placement and how voters relate their political identities to political parties.

Shawn traces the familiar left-right terminology to the French Revolution, while David raises a fascinating historical question: Was Abraham Lincoln a radical or a conservative?

Lincoln's opposition to slavery and defense of the Union illustrate how political labels depend on historical circumstances.

The conversation then becomes theological. Should Latter-day Saints align themselves with worldwide movements of the political left or right? Or is the gospel compatible with people who hold a wide variety of political beliefs?

Matt argues that political commitments and religious commitments will inevitably come into tension at times, regardless of ideology.

The discussion explores what happens when political convictions conflict with religious teachings—and how believers can navigate those disagreements.

Are Election Predictions Harmful?

Political polls, forecasting models, and prediction markets increasingly shape public expectations about elections.

But what happens when a forecast assigns a candidate a high probability of victory and the candidate loses?

Matt questions whether election predictions can create an exaggerated sense of certainty about outcomes that are inherently uncertain.

Shawn and David challenge the argument, asking whether forecasts are genuinely harmful and whether restricting their publication would create greater problems for freedom of expression.

The conversation considers voter turnout, public confidence, social pressure, and the difference between a forecast and an actual election result.

Why Do We Believe Conspiracy Theories?

This is where the conversation takes its most personal turn.

The anniversary of the October 7, 2023, Hamas attacks leads Matt to introduce claims about what Israeli officials may have known before the attacks. He also mentions longstanding conspiracy theories surrounding Pearl Harbor and September 11.

The hosts do not establish those claims as facts. Instead, they use them to explore a psychological question:

Why are conspiracy theories so appealing?

David discusses research suggesting that conspiracy beliefs can provide explanations for disturbing events, particularly when people feel powerless or unable to influence what happens around them.

Shawn connects the discussion to epistemology: the study of knowledge and how we determine what is true.

He argues that people need reliable methods for evaluating evidence rather than simply accepting explanations that feel convincing.

Matt takes a different position. He wonders whether believing an unproven theory is necessarily harmful, especially when the belief doesn't seem to affect anyone else's life.

Then he offers a particularly memorable example.

Matt explains that he has long believed silk boxers can cause infertility—largely because Kramer said something about it on Seinfeld.

David challenges whether Matt truly believes this or simply enjoys entertaining an unusual explanation.

The conversation moves from there to a much more serious issue: What happens when people continue believing something even after encountering substantial evidence against it?

Matt discusses how people defend deeply held beliefs, while Shawn emphasizes the importance of faith, evidence, and the spiritual process of seeking truth.

The hosts also consider how religious belief differs from conspiracy thinking, and whether an explanation can feel meaningful without being supported by reliable evidence.

Should Puerto Rico Become a State?

The final discussion begins with an unexpected observation from General Conference.

President Henry B. Eyring welcomed choir members from numerous countries, including Puerto Rico.

Matt points out that Puerto Rico is not an independent country. It is a U.S. territory, and people born there are generally U.S. citizens.

Yet residents of Puerto Rico do not have the same federal voting representation as residents of the 50 states.

That raises a question about equality, citizenship, representation, and self-determination.

Should residents of U.S. territories be offered a binding choice between statehood and independence?

Or should the current territorial arrangements remain available when residents have different preferences about their political future?

David discusses the historical transitions of Alaska and Hawaii from territories to states, while Shawn raises questions about whether the people of Puerto Rico have sufficiently expressed a preference for changing their status.

Matt argues that the central issue is not which status Puerto Rico should choose, but whether territorial residents have meaningful control over the decision.

The conversation ends with a familiar Latter Day Lens disagreement: What does it really mean for a people to govern themselves?

In This Episode

• Is war worse than hell?
• What left-wing and right-wing mean around the world
• Abraham Lincoln and changing political identities
• Political ideology and Latter-day Saint discipleship
• Election polls, prediction markets, and voter expectations
• The psychology of conspiracy theories
• Pearl Harbor, September 11, and October 7 conspiracy claims
• Epistemology and the search for truth
• Faith, evidence, and personal revelation
• Matt's Seinfeld-inspired infertility theory
• Why people resist changing their beliefs
• Puerto Rican citizenship and representation
• Statehood, independence, and territorial status
• Alaska, Hawaii, and the history of statehood
• The Declaration of Independence and self-government

The Question We Want You to Answer

How do you distinguish healthy skepticism from conspiracy thinking?

Is it enough to believe something because it feels right or provides a convincing explanation? What responsibility do we have to reconsider our beliefs when we encounter contradictory evidence?

Send us your thoughts at LatterDayLens.com. We may discuss your responses on a future episode.

The Latter Day Lens explores politics, religion, culture, and current events through a Latter-day Saint lens. Matt and Shawn don't always agree—and that's the point. Our goal isn't to tell you what to think. It's to ask better questions.

Chapters

00:00 — Welcome Back, David
00:36 — Is War Worse Than Hell?
02:55 — What Do Left and Right Mean?
05:11 — The French Revolution and Political Labels
09:23 — Was Abraham Lincoln a Radical?
10:55 — Does the Gospel Favor a Political Ideology?
13:23 — When Politics Conflicts With Faith
15:35 — Are Election Predictions Harmful?
17:58 — Forecasts and Election Legitimacy
19:34 — Should Election Polling Be Restricted?
21:25 — Do Predictions Discourage Voting?
24:05 — Why Do People Believe Conspiracy Theories?
26:02 — The Psychology of Conspiracy Beliefs
27:08 — Faith, Epistemology, and Truth
29:26 — Can Conspiracy Thinking Be Harmful?
31:26 — Matt's Seinfeld Conspiracy Theory
33:13 — Why Evidence Doesn't Always Change Minds
35:57 — Is Puerto Rico Being Treated Unequally?
39:36 — Statehood, Independence, or Status Quo?
41:10 — What Did Puerto Rico Vote For?
43:09 — What Does Self-Determination Mean?
47:03 — The Economic Consequences of Statehood
49:25 — Do Nonbinding Votes Really Matter?
50:10 — Final Thoughts

Visit our website to join the conversation: Latter-day Lens

Send us Fan Mail

What happens when conservative principles collide with government power?

This week on The Latter Day Lens, Matt and Shawn are joined by Porter for a wide-ranging conversation about gambling, government regulation, college athletes, modesty, war, presidential power, Christmas music, and what it means to live your faith in the real world.

Should the Government Regulate College Sports?

The U.S. Senate has just passed the bipartisan Protect College Sports Act, 77–22. The legislation would establish federal rules governing name, image, and likeness compensation, transfers, revenue sharing, athlete protections, and other aspects of college athletics. It now heads to the House.

Supporters argue that Congress needs to bring stability to a chaotic college-sports environment and protect athletes and less-profitable Olympic sports. Critics—including the NAACP—argue that the legislation gives too much power to universities and athletic conferences while restricting athletes' ability to bargain collectively.

So here's the question:

Should the federal government regulate college sports at all?

And more broadly, should a supposedly conservative Republican Congress be telling young adults how much money they can earn, where they can transfer, and how they can use their name and image?

Is Gambling Morally Wrong—and Should Government Ban It?

President D. Todd Christofferson recently spoke directly about the explosion of gambling, calling gambling morally wrong and warning that it can become consuming and crowd out productive activities. He emphasized the difference between contributing value through work and gaining at another person's expense. Read the Church's General Conference coverage of his remarks.

That raises a fascinating political question:

When the Church teaches that something is morally wrong, should Latter-day Saints try to make it illegal?

Matt thinks government sometimes has a legitimate role in restricting harmful behavior. Shawn is much more skeptical of using the government to enforce morality.

The conversation gets even more complicated when they discuss prediction markets such as Kalshi and Polymarket, which have increasingly blurred the line between gambling and financial markets.

And then the question gets very uncomfortable:

If gambling should be illegal because it harms society, what else should be illegal?

Does the Church Have a Modesty Standard for Athletic Clothing?

A controversy involving BYU cross-country runners raises another familiar question: Does Church modesty guidance apply to athletic clothing?

The conversation takes an unexpected turn as Porter digs into decades of Church teaching about modesty and discovers a significant shift from very specific standards toward a more principle-based approach.

The Church's current teaching emphasizes honoring the body as a sacred gift and allowing the Spirit to guide decisions about clothing and appearance. A 2017 Church publication also explicitly taught children to be kind rather than judge others for how they dress. Read "Modesty Means..." from The Friend.

So what changed?

And perhaps more importantly:

Is it our job to decide whether someone else is sufficiently modest?

Is American Military Power Being Used for Profit?

The conversation then takes a dramatic turn toward Venezuela.

Matt, Shawn, and Porter debate the morality of American military intervention and the expanding role of U.S. economic interests in Venezuela's oil industry.

The U.S. government has secured rights to a 35% interest in North American Blue Energy Partners, a company planning a massive expansion of Venezuelan oil production. S&P Global explains the agreement and its proposed investment.

The arrangement has already drawn questions about the relationship between military power, economic interests, and Venezuela's political future.

Is the use of American military force morally justified if it protects American interests?

What about regime change?

And what happens when the military becomes a tool for economic policy?

Porter takes a particularly strong position: military force should be used only when it is necessary to prevent an immediate loss of human life—and even then, military action may not be the best tool.

How Much War Is Too Much?

The Venezuela discussion becomes a broader conversation about Iraq, Iran, Ukraine, September 11, and the moral limits of military intervention.

What does it mean to "renounce war and proclaim peace" while still believing that nations have a right to defend themselves?

Does Captain Moroni's example justify preparing for war?

Can a nation morally use violence to prevent a future threat?

And is there a point where defending freedom actually destroys the very freedoms you're trying to protect?

When Is It Okay to Start Playing Christmas Music?

Finally, the most important question of the episode.

A Utah radio station began playing Christmas music on September 28—barely a week after the beginning of fall. The Salt Lake Tribune covered KLO's unusually early Christmas launch.

Matt has a problem with this.

He argues that starting Christmas music too early turns Christmas into a commercial holiday centered on shopping, nostalgia, Santa, and Mariah Carey rather than Jesus Christ.

Shawn isn't buying it.

Maybe even cheesy Christmas music helps create a culture of joy, nostalgia, generosity, and—eventually—thoughts about Jesus.

So we settle the question once and for all:

When is it morally acceptable to start playing Christmas music?

And yes, Matt really does become Charlie Brown.

Chapters

00:00 — Welcome Back, Porter
00:46 — Should Gambling Be Illegal?
02:30 — Victor Wembanyama Takes a Stand on Gambling
03:40 — What Should Government Make Illegal?
06:00 — Can Government Regulate Morality?
09:35 — Should the Federal Government Regulate College Sports?
10:23 — How Much Should College Athletes Be Allowed to Earn?
11:36 — Are Universities Becoming For-Profit Institutions?
12:39 — Why Is Congress Doing This Right Now?
14:39 — Does the Church Have a Modesty Standard?
16:20 — Is Judging Someone's Clothing Pharisaical?
17:04 — What the Church Used to Teach About Modesty
20:48 — Why Did Modesty Standards Change?
22:59 — Does Clothing Reveal Your Character?
25:24 — Where Should We Draw the Line?
26:45 — Should You Question the Handbook?
30:15 — Can You Judge Someone's Intentions?
31:58 — Is American Power Being Used for Profit in Venezuela?
33:54 — Is Military Force Ever Morally Justified?
36:05 — Can You Prevent a Future War by Starting One?
38:21 — What Has American Intervention Cost?
40:00 — When Is War Actually Justified?
41:44 — Has the Republican Party Lost Its Way?
43:09 — How Early Is Too Early for Christmas Music?
45:05 — Is Early Christmas Music Ruining Christmas?
46:39 — Matt Becomes Charlie Brown
47:04 — Is Christmas Music Good Even When It's Commercialized?
49:11 — Can Christmas Music Point People Toward Christ?

Visit our website to join the conversation: Latter-day Lens

Send us Fan Mail

What should a faithful Latter-day Saint do when Church leaders take a political position—and you aren't sure you agree?

That question drives one of our most candid conversations yet.

The United Nations, Ezra Taft Benson, and Prophetic Counsel

We begin with the United Nations. New Gallup polling across 137 countries finds that 50% of adults worldwide approve of the UN's performance, compared with 26% who disapprove.

But Latter-day Saints have an interesting history with the organization. During the 1960s, Ezra Taft Benson was a fierce critic of the United Nations, warning about communism, threats to national sovereignty, and what he saw as parallels with the Book of Mormon's warnings about secret combinations.

Today, the Church works with and supports UN organizations.

So what changed? And how should Latter-day Saints understand political counsel from Church leaders decades later? Are some prophetic teachings intended for a particular time and circumstance?

When Church Leaders Tell You How to Vote

Then the question gets much more personal.

Idaho's Proposition 1 would overturn the state's strict abortion ban. Supporters are making an unusual argument: Idaho's abortion law has contributed to an exodus of obstetricians and reduced access to healthcare for women. Opponents dispute that interpretation and argue that the state's abortion restrictions protect unborn life.

Then Church leaders entered the debate.

In a letter sent to Idaho congregations, the Area Presidency announced the Church's opposition to the initiative and urged members to vote against it.

Does an Area Presidency speak for the Church?

And what should a faithful Latter-day Saint do if personal study, prayer, and conscience seem to point in another direction?

Matt and Shawn revisit the experiences of Latter-day Saints during California's Proposition 8 campaign and discuss Harry Reid's disagreement with then-Apostle Russell M. Nelson over a proposed constitutional amendment defining marriage.

What does it actually mean to sustain Church leaders? Is obedience always the same thing as agreement? Where does personal revelation fit? And is there a faithful way to disagree?

Should We Put Weapons in Space?

Then the conversation moves from the ballot box to outer space.

The U.S. military has acknowledged possessing operational weapons in orbit, raising new questions about an arms race beyond Earth's atmosphere.

The potential consequences go far beyond military competition. Destroying satellites can create fast-moving orbital debris, potentially producing cascading collisions—the dreaded "Kessler Effect"—that could threaten the satellites modern life increasingly depends upon.

Matt argues that the scriptural command to "renounce war and proclaim peace" should make Latter-day Saints deeply skeptical of expanding warfare into another arena.

Shawn isn't convinced.

If potential adversaries develop these capabilities, does a nation have a moral obligation to prepare to defend itself? Does Captain Moroni provide a model for military preparedness—or is there a point at which preparing for war actually makes war more likely?

The Big Question: Is Language Divine?

Finally, things get unexpectedly philosophical.

A study involving 228 languages found little evidence that some languages are inherently more beautiful than others. Listeners' preferences appeared to be influenced much more by things like the speaker's voice and familiarity with a language.

That raises a very Latter-day Lens question.

President Dieter F. Uchtdorf has jokingly praised German as a heavenly language, and most of us probably have languages we find particularly beautiful.

But is there actually something divine about language?

If we could hear Adam and Eve speaking the pure Adamic language, would something about it sound familiar—or even beautiful—to everyone? Or would we still prefer the languages we already know?

The discussion eventually expands into music, art, the golden ratio, resurrection, and an even bigger question: Are beauty, language, and music merely human creations, or are they expressions of eternal principles?

Chapters

00:00 — Mailbag, Key & Peele, and Political Outrage
05:10 — Do We Need Political Enemies?
08:28 — Ezra Taft Benson vs. the United Nations
10:55 — Can Prophetic Political Counsel Expire?
13:23 — When Church Leaders Misunderstand an Issue
15:20 — Study It Out, Decide, and Pray
17:40 — When Church Leaders Tell You How to Vote
19:28 — Does an Area Presidency Speak for the Church?
21:41 — Prop 8, Steve Young & Political Disagreement
22:49 — Harry Reid vs. Russell M. Nelson
23:33 — Does Sustaining Mean Obeying?
26:33 — Personal Revelation vs. Church Counsel
29:57 — Can You Criticize a Church Political Position?
31:16 — Do Church Leaders Learn Too?
33:56 — Should America Put Weapons in Space?
37:09 — "Renounce War" vs. National Defense
41:15 — What Would Captain Moroni Do?
44:06 — Are Some Languages More Beautiful?
46:10 — Is Beauty Objective?
48:57 — Was the Adamic Language Divine?
51:29 — Is Music Eternal?
53:09 — Shawn's Case for Eternal Beauty
55:21 — Final Thoughts

Join the Conversation

Here's the question we especially want to hear your answer to:

If Church leaders publicly ask members to support or oppose a political measure, what does sustaining those leaders require?

Does it mean voting as requested? Does it mean taking their counsel seriously while still seeking your own answer through study and prayer? And what should a faithful Latter-day Saint do if those two things appear to lead in different directions?

Send us your thoughts at LatterDayLens.com. We may discuss your response on a future episode.

The Latter Day Lens explores the questions Latter-day Saints argue about privately—but rarely discuss publicly. Faithful, intellectually honest, and no requirement that Matt and Shawn agree.

Visit our website to join the conversation: Latter-day Lens

Send us Fan Mail

Is the Book of Mormon socialist?

That question launches Matt, Shawn, and Levi into a much bigger debate about capitalism, democratic socialism, wealth inequality, agency, public education, corruption, and how far government should go in encouraging people to make good choices.

But first: Is America's government becoming too corrupt?

A new Gallup survey finds that 89% of U.S. adults believe government corruption is widespread—the highest level Gallup has recorded in two decades.

Matt turns to King Mosiah.

Mosiah argued that government should operate according to the “voice of the people” and established a system of judges rather than continuing Nephite monarchy. Would greater direct accountability to voters reduce corruption today?

Should Americans directly elect more officials—including judges and presidents—or is one of the strengths of the Constitution precisely that different institutions respond to voters at different speeds?

Levi argues for what he calls a heterogeneous government: a House of Representatives that responds relatively quickly to changes in public opinion, a Senate designed to move more slowly, and courts insulated from immediate political pressure.

Matt sees a downside: the farther an official gets from direct voter accountability, the easier corruption may become.

That leaves an uncomfortable question: How much democracy is too much democracy?

Then the conversation turns to economics.

Matt begins with the recent experiences of the United States and Argentina and asks whether contemporary conservative economic policies have actually improved everyday life for ordinary people.

But the conversation quickly becomes theological.

Matt compares elements of the Democratic Socialists of America platform with teachings in the Book of Mormon and argues that scriptural teachings about poverty, inequality, work, and care for the poor can sound surprisingly compatible with some policies associated with the economic left.

Shawn strongly disagrees with equating those teachings with socialism.

The Book of Mormon certainly condemns pride, exploitation, neglect of the poor, and excessive attachment to wealth. But does that tell us anything about what government should do?

Then Matt brings up Fourth Nephi.

After Christ's ministry among the Nephites, the people had “all things common among them,” and the society was characterized by extraordinary unity.

Is that evidence for a more egalitarian economic system?

Shawn identifies what may be the crucial distinction: they chose it.

Can government create a Christlike society by compelling people to share? Or does using coercion to produce an outwardly righteous result undermine the agency that makes the action righteous in the first place?

Levi reframes the economic question another way. If two different sets of economic policies produce roughly similar levels of economic growth, but one provides more healthcare, education, environmental protection, or assistance to the poor, why wouldn't society choose those additional benefits?

That leads Matt to the economic outcome he would most like to recover: a society where a household can realistically choose to live on one income, allowing either parent to remain home if the family wants that arrangement.

And that leads directly to education.

International educational performance has continued to decline. OECD's new PISA 2025 results report historically low average mathematics and reading performance across OECD countries, with reading down 28 points since 2015 and mathematics down 22. The OECD also warns that excessive or poorly guided use of digital devices and AI can undermine learning.

Meanwhile, only 32% of Americans say they are satisfied with the quality of K-12 education in the United States, the lowest result in Gallup's 27-year trend.

Matt sees a connection to the previous episode's discussion of federalism.

Are American schools too locally controlled?

If individual communities determine educational priorities, a dominant local faction can place enormous pressure on schools. One community may emphasize academics. Another may care more about athletics, extracurricular activities, religion, ideology, or simply keeping parents happy.

Would national standards force competing factions to compromise until only the things Americans broadly agree children should learn survive?

Shawn sees the opposite danger. Centralization means that when government makes a bad decision, everyone is stuck with it. Local control gives families at least some opportunity to choose communities that better reflect their priorities.

Then comes the episode's biggest question:

Should government ever try to make us better people?

Prohibition becomes the case study.

Alcohol produces genuine external harms. But the Constitution of the Church's political theology, particularly Doctrine and Covenants 134, also emphasizes freedom of conscience and warns government against suppressing the freedom of the soul.

So where is the line?

Matt introduces the idea of a government nudge.

Rather than simply banning something, government can make desirable behavior easier and undesirable behavior harder.

Levi takes the idea further: What if buying alcohol required a license? Someone convicted of drunk driving or alcohol-related domestic abuse might temporarily lose the ability to legally purchase it.

Shawn sees the danger immediately.

A “nudge” seems attractive when government is nudging people toward your values.

What happens when the political majority changes?

The conversation turns to government incentives surrounding marriage and same-sex relationships as an example of how policies designed to encourage behavior one majority regards as desirable can burden people who do not share the majority's values.

That produces the central tension of the episode:

Government inevitably influences behavior. But when does influence become coercion?

Can government discourage harmful choices while still respecting agency?

Or should government remain neutral and leave persuasion about morality to families, churches, communities, and individuals?

And, naturally, the conversation ends with the policy question America has somehow failed to confront:

Should Broncos fans have to pay an extra tax?

In this episode:

• Why 89% of Americans perceive widespread government corruption
• King Mosiah and the “voice of the people”
• Direct democracy vs. representative institutions
• Why different branches of government move at different speeds
• Accountability and political corruption
• Capitalism, socialism, and the Book of Mormon
• The Democratic Socialists of America platform
• Poverty and wealth inequality in scripture
• Fourth Nephi and “all things common”
• Can government force righteousness?
• Property rights and agency
• The one-income family
• Why educational performance is declining internationally
• AI and digital distraction in schools
• Local control of American education
• Federalism and national education standards
• Prohibition
• Alcohol, agency, and public harm
• Government “nudges”
• When incentives become coercion
• Doctrine and Covenants 134
• And an entirely reasonable tax on Broncos fans

00:00 — Welcome Back, Levi
05:28 — Is American Government Too Corrupt?
07:17 — Would King Mosiah Elect Everyone?
11:59 — Majority Rule vs. Minority Rule
13:02 — Why Government Should Move at Different Speeds
15:03 — Does Accountability Reduce Corruption?
19:33 — Has Conservative Economics Failed?
25:37 — Is the Book of Mormon Socialist?
29:07 — Fourth Nephi: “All Things Common”
30:24 — Can Government Force Righteousness?
33:02 — Why Not Provide More If We Can?
35:27 — Can One Income Support a Family?
36:59 — Are American Schools Failing?
40:51 — Is Local Control Hurting Education?
43:50 — Would National Standards Work Better?
48:19 — Prohibition, Alcohol & Agency
51:34 — Does Agency Include Bad Choices?
52:03 — Can Government Nudge Us Toward Good?
53:05 — Should You Need a License to Buy Alcohol?
54:16 — Can Government Make People Righteous?
57:55 — When Does a Nudge Become Coercion?
1:02:13 — Tax the Broncos Fans?

Visit our website to join the conversation: Latter-day Lens

Send us Fan Mail

Why are Latter-day Saints and white evangelical Christians beginning to look different politically?

Matt, Shawn, and guest Clayton examine new polling on Mormon politics, Christian nationalism, American power, and whether the increasingly global nature of the Church is changing the way Latter-day Saints see America and the world.

They also ask whether modern politics punishes honest politicians, how to respect a political office when you distrust the person occupying it, whether federalism is actually a gospel principle, and what Captain Moroni's use of spies, ambushes, and “stratagem” might teach us about preemptive war.

The Question We Want You to Answer

Alma 43 says Captain Moroni “thought it no sin” to defend the Nephites by stratagem.

Why does Mormon tell us that?

Was Moroni's use of deception justified specifically because the Nephites were defending themselves? Can nations today morally use similar tactics to prevent an attack before it occurs? Or does Christian discipleship demand a much stronger presumption against preemptive force?

Send us your thoughts at LatterDayLens.com. We may discuss your response on a future episode.

In this episode:

• Spencer Cox, Jon Stewart, and political honesty
• Whether modern politics punishes honest politicians
• Respecting an office while distrusting its occupant
• Why local politicians may face different incentives
• Florida, hurricanes, zoning, and local control
• Federalism and the tyranny of the majority
• Property rights vs. community standards
• Clayton's experience in local government
• Is the LDS Church organized according to federalist principles?
• Why Latter-day Saints and evangelicals may be diverging politically
• Christian nationalism and LDS political culture
• Missionary work and the globalization of the Church
• The Constitution and American exceptionalism
• Captain Moroni and military “stratagem”
• Spies, ambushes, and military deception
• Preemptive war and September 11
• “Renounce war, proclaim peace”

Chapter Markers

00:00 — Can an Honest Politician Survive?
00:50 — Welcome & Meet Clayton Keller
03:18 — Are Arbitrary Rules Meant to Be Broken?
09:03 — Should Cities Have More Power?
13:21 — The Dark Side of Local Control
16:24 — Property Rights vs. Your Neighbors
20:37 — Is Federalism a Gospel Principle?
21:28 — Can We Trust a Dishonest Politician?
28:17 — Respect the Office, Distrust the Person?
29:30 — Spencer Cox and Honest Politics
31:46 — Why Local Politicians Are Different
33:26 — Latter-day Saints vs. Evangelicals
38:24 — Does a Global Church Change Politics?
40:57 — The Constitution Without Nationalism
44:09 — Has LDS Political Culture Changed?
45:37 — Captain Moroni and Military Deception
49:30 — 9/11 and Preemptive War
53:27 — Is Dishonesty Ever Moral in War?
55:59 — Renounce War, Proclaim Peace
57:14 — Final Thoughts

The Question We Want You to Answer

Alma 43 says Captain Moroni “thought it no sin” to defend the Nephites by stratagem.

Why does Mormon tell us that?

Was Moroni's use of deception justified specifically because the Nephites were defending themselves? Can nations today morally use similar tactics to prevent an attack before it occurs? Or does Christian discipleship demand a much stronger presumption against preemptive force?

Send us your thoughts at LatterDayLens.com. We may discuss your response on a future episode.

Visit our website to join the conversation: Latter-day Lens

Send us Fan Mail

Is cheating actually a sin—or are some rules just arbitrary?

Matt says that even after explicitly telling his BYU–Idaho students how they may and may not use ChatGPT, about 20% still cross the line. Shawn asks a more uncomfortable question: If a professor makes an arbitrary rule, is breaking it actually immoral?

That launches a debate about AI, plagiarism, the Honor Code, obedience, honesty, and what actually makes cheating wrong. Matt also confesses that he cheated in high school—and tells the story of the BYU professor who completely changed how he thought about integrity.

Then Matt and Shawn turn the Latter Day Lens toward three more questions:

Should Christians use Jesus to justify healthcare policy? James Talarico does. Matt likes Talarico but argues that using Jesus to validate our political positions may actually cheapen Christianity.

Should Latter-day Saints abandon political parties? Charles Barkley says Americans are being manipulated into fighting one another. Matt and Shawn agree with his diagnosis—but not necessarily his solution.

Can government actually give us liberty? Drawing on Viktor Frankl, scripture, and the American founding, Matt and Shawn distinguish freedom from liberty and ask whether even an oppressive government can take true liberty away.

And somehow Naked and Afraid becomes an argument about federalism.

Chapters

00:00 Welcome to The Latter Day Lens
03:46 Women and Church Culture
06:51 Is Cheating a Sin?
12:42 When Rules Become Dishonesty
18:57 Students Cheating With AI
21:17 Matt Cheated in High School
24:51 Jesus and Healthcare
33:15 Jesus in Politics
35:40 Charles Barkley on Politics
39:26 Latter-day Saints and Parties
46:12 Freedom vs. Liberty
47:50 Viktor Frankl's Last Freedom
52:21 Government and Morality
54:15 Naked and Afraid Government
58:56 More Federalism?
1:00:20 Final Thoughts

Question for you: Where do you draw the line between breaking a rule and being dishonest? Is using AI on an assignment cheating if the student actually learns the material?

Send us your thoughts at LatterDayLens.com. We may share your response on a future episode.

The Latter Day Lens explores the questions Latter-day Saints argue about privately—but rarely discuss publicly. Faithful, intellectually honest, and no requirement that Matt and Shawn agree.

Visit our website to join the conversation: Latter-day Lens

Send us Fan Mail

In this episode of The Latter-day Lens, Matt, Shawn, and guest co-host Levi open with a personal announcement regarding the future of the show and Matt's timeline for stepping away.

From there, the panel dives into four distinct issues spanning governance, ethics, academia, and church trends:

• Federal Data and Public Good: Following meteorologist John Morales's warning about NOAA budget cuts and lost weather balloon data, the team debates whether the federal government has a moral duty to fund public data collection or if private industry could handle it better.
• Civilian Casualties and the Ethics of War: After reports on rollbacks to the Pentagon's Civilian Harm Mitigation and Response Framework, the hosts debate the moral obligations of nations during military conflict.
• DEI, Academic Scrutiny, and Institutional Standards: Exploring the tragic story of Cambridge sociologist Jason Arday alongside broader critiques from Roland Fryer, the panel examines the nuances of DEI policies, double standards, and how merit and background are evaluated.
• LDS Church Growth Over the Last 25 Years: Examining recent state-by-state growth data across the United States, the group discusses shifting demographics, migration patterns, and the powerful impact of sister missionaries across global congregations.

Chapter Markers

00:00 - Episode Intro

00:35 - Welcome & BYU-Idaho Break Banter

01:22 - Listener Mailbag & Matt's Personal Announcement

03:08 - Shawn's AI Matt & Guest Host Openings

04:28 - Future Callings, Public Scrutiny, and Stepping Down

07:35 - Topic 1: NOAA Budget Cuts & Hurricane Forecast Reliability

09:12 - Levi on Private Sector Solutions vs. Market Redundancy

10:59 - NASA, SpaceX, and Government Efficiency in Basic Science

13:00 - D&C 134:1 & The Government's Moral Obligation to Public Good

15:06 - Toll Lanes, USPS Infrastructure, and Market Dependencies

20:39 - Social Democracy vs. Teddy Roosevelt Republicanism

23:11 - Downstream Costs of Cutting Science Agencies & DOGE Discussion

25:53 - Topic 2: Dismantling the Civilian Harm Mitigation Framework

27:06 - Correlation vs. Causation in Military Strikes

29:56 - Matt's Argument: Shortening Wars vs. Categorizing Casualties

32:21 - Levi's Counter: Conscription, Infrastructure, and Inherent Value of Civilians

36:03 - Deuteronomy 20:19, Alma 14, and Scriptural Contexts of Conflict

38:12 - Undeclared Wars and Constitutional Authority

39:53 - Topic 3: The Tragic Story of Cambridge Professor Jason Arday

42:16 - Dissertation Scrutiny, Claudine Gay, and Academic Witch Hunts

49:05 - The Psychological Toll and Double Standards of DEI Appointments

51:07 - Shawn on Overcoming Adversity vs. Institutional Programs

53:10 - Defining DEI: Accounting for Hurdles vs. Lowering Standards

55:28 - The Track Coach Analogy & Recruitment Pipelines

58:51 - Topic 4: 25 Years of LDS Church Growth Statistics

1:01:02 - Tolstoy Rumors & Why California Church Population Shrunk

1:02:39 - Should Members Move Away From Utah, Idaho, and Arizona?

1:03:37 - The Role and Impact of Sister Missionaries in Recent Growth

1:07:15 - Demographic Trends: Young Women Leaving & Mission Marriages

1:09:50 - Shawn's Parable Mix-Up: Wheat and Tares vs. Wheat and Chaff

1:11:08 - Wrap-Up and Sign-Off

Visit our website to join the conversation: Latter-day Lens