The Instigator
gogott
Pro (for)
Losing
25 Points
The Contender
left_wing_mormon
Con (against)
Winning
33 Points

True liberalism is not compatible with Mormonism

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/21/2008 Category: Religion
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,117 times Debate No: 4465
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (17)
Votes (14)

 

gogott

Pro

My argument here is that members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints who embrace far left views must abandon principles or at least be out of harmony with many of their principles in the Church. Obviously, the idea that it is a good thing when a woman can choose to have an abortion is one clear example. But there are many others which I will give examples for in the rounds to follow.
I am not challenging your faith in the Lord, just thought this would be an interesting debate.
left_wing_mormon

Con

I'm assuming my opponent is a Mormon. Thank you for starting this debate.

You mention Abortion specifically. By me being being Pro-Choice I would like to say I would never support abortion for birth control reasons. As prophet Gordon B. Hinkley said "Abortion is an ugly thing, a debasing thing, a thing which inevitably brings remorse and sorrow and regret."1

That being said, the official church website has a statement from the first presidency on the topic of Abortion. Before I touch on that I would like to post the official church statement on abortion from 1973 from Harold B. Lee and te first presidency:

"The Church opposes abortion and counsels its members not to submit to or perform an abortion except in the rare cases where, in the opinion of competent medical counsel, the life or good health of the mother is seriously endangered or where the pregnancy was caused by rape and produces serious emotional trauma in the mother. Even then it should be done only after counseling with the local presiding priesthood authority and after receiving divine confirmation through prayer."2

We jump to present day, and we look at the LDS churchs official website and we see that the 1973 stance stands today as truth. I quote from the website:
The Church allows for possible exceptions for its members when:

• Pregnancy results from rape or incest, or

• A competent physician determines that the life or health of the mother is in serious jeopardy, or

• A competent physician determines that the fetus has severe defects that will not allow the baby to survive beyond birth.3

**********************************************

I would like to say that many very faithful members of the Church are also very high ranking political figures in our government. Harry Reid is a liberal democrat from Nevada and he is Senate Majority leader. Look at today's first presidency of the Church, President Henry B. Eyring is a democrat.

Thank you for starting a debate like this. I feel that my political and social views fit very well with my religious morals. But we need to keep in mind one very important point the church makes: "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is neutral in matters of party politics."4

The gospel itself is so far superior to our political spectrum. That being said anyone from any political party can be faithful latter-day saints. (except some of the ones like the American Nazi party, and so on.)

Thanks, look forward to your response.

--------------------------------
1.G.B. Hinkley, "What are people asking about us?," Ensign magazine, 1998-NOV, Page 70.
2.Harold B. Lee, N. Eldon Tanner, & Marion G. Romney, "Policies and Procedures: Statement on Abortion," New Era, 1973-APR, Page 29 at: http://library.lds.org...
3.http://newsroom.lds.org...
4.http://newsroom.lds.org...
Debate Round No. 1
gogott

Pro

ok, my second argument is going to be very brief because I have almost no time right now to post, yet I saw that I am close to running out of time. To start, I would like to agree with your comment on the Gospel of Jesus Christ being superior to all political ideology, that is a true comment and I agree wholeheartedly. I would also like to clarify to any reading this that my opponent is correct that the LDS Church does not endorse any political party, and the things said here are only my opinion and are NOT representative of official Church views and doctrines.

My next argument will be surrounding two things. First is the family proclamation to the world. I would like to know how you feel about the view held by many liberals pertaining to gay marriage and adoption of children, that it shoudnot be infringed upon. Obviously the opinion that these things are good for society clash very much with this document, however from what I understand, you do not actually think that these things are good for society (based on your response to abortion) but that they should be allowed anyway. (I apologize if I am incorrect on your views there). My statement would be that true liberalism would say that it is great if gays can marry and have kids. However, our prophets have warned that perversions like this will bring upon society the "calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets". The breakdown of the family is at the forefront of the battle between good and evil, and there is a strong liberal movement not only to make these things legal, but to charactarize those who look down on these things as "judgemenal and intolerant" President Monson warned that "evil often wears the halloween mask of tolerance". This is clearly happening in out society. So my argument may not be that your personal views clash with mormonism, but that liberalism, true liberlism does, in that it celebrates things like gay marriage and abortion in most cases. Or at the very least, demonizes those who wish to put a stop to it. One great evil is partial birth abortion. This is clearly murder, and I have no idea how in the world people justify it. To deliver a child and then end stop it's heart from beating before it is all the way out. This is something that the liberal movement also embraces, and not for the above circumstances of the mother's life being in danger, but for stem cell research. How is this justified? True liberalism is the speartip in the fight against the traditional family, which as you and I both know, is the way the family is intended to be. Because of this, liberalism flies in the face of LDS theology and views in my opinion when it comes to the family. For the sake of time, I will have to save my next argument for my last post, I apoligize.
left_wing_mormon

Con

Well I would like to agree with my opponents first paragraph. I would like to point out that my opponent said "you do not actually think that these things are good for society (based on your response to abortion) but that they should be allowed anyway", but I want to clarify that these are not just my ideas, these are backed up by the church.

But I was disappointed that my opponent who mentioned abortion specificly didn't respond to the Churchs stance on the issue but rather kept bringing it up. Most liberals I know hate partial birth abortion and think that it is a very sad thing. I know it has been done for my aunt who was going to die if it was not done for her. The baby would have died too. Instead this procedure saved her life and allowed her to have another healthy child. Oddly enough, this is justified by the church. I quote again: A competent physician determines that the life or health of the mother is in serious jeopardy.1

So anyways on to gay marriage. I am pretty sure my opponent is not in any way anti-gay but rather afriad that gay marriage will disrupt the tradition of marriage. But than again thats what they said about polagamy. But why do I support gay marraige. I believe that homosexuality is not a choice, and it is a real genetic trait. That being said I do not believe it is my right as a straight man to limit someone elses love for another. Now I agree that homosexual behavior and "homosexual-sex" is sinful. But gays and lesbians are welcomed to the church, but sadly must remain celebate. But an interesting quote from Joseph F. Smith: Sexual union is lawful in wedlock, and if participated in with right intent is honorable and sanctifying. But without the bonds of marriage, sexual indulgence is a debasing sin, abominable in the sight of Deity.2 I believe that right now the church is not open for gay marriage. Gays and lesbians are welcomed to the church, but their reltionships are frowned upon. But someday I believe that they will be able to marry. After all the blacks couldn't hold the preisthood in the church until the 70s, and pologamy was around until the late 1800s. God can do what is right and he knows whats right. But for now I rely on the words of Gordon B. Hinkley: If [referring to those with homosexual struggles] they do not act upon these inclinations, then they can go forward as do all other members of the Church. If they violate the law of chastity and the moral standards of the Church, then they are subject to the discipline of the Church, just as others are.3

My love for Gods childeren is only a trait of my Chrisitan religion not my political beliefs. By refusing gays the rights of straights we are infact discriminating. Just like 1967 when we told a white man and a black woman4 they could not marry becuase it will breakdown the family and yet interacial marriage is allowed today and the familiy remains in tact. If two men are good parents for childeren and raise them to be loving, caring, and intellegent kids are they still not as good as the mommy and daddy who beat their kids? Or are they ok because dad is a man and mom is a woman?

Well, I know that their are celabte gay members of the church, but there is also gays outside of the church who are very good people and want to be able to express their love just as straight couples do. I would like to know howgay marriage will destroy the family first of all.

Thanks, hope to hear from you soon.
*********************************************************
1. http://newsroom.lds.org...
2. Smith, Joseph F. Gospel Doctrine (Salt Lake City; Deseret Book, 1939, 5th Ed.), p. 309.
3. Hinckley, Gordon B. "What Are People Asking About Us? The Ensign 28 (November 1998): 70-72.
Debate Round No. 2
gogott

Pro

I would like to begin by clarfying what I said about abortion above, the point that liberalism supports partial birth abortion for the purpose of embryonic stem cell research, this has absolutely nothing to do with the life of the mother being in danger. And those who support it for this purpose obviously do not think it is all that sad of a thing.

As far as gay marriage, I believe that you insinuated that you believe that eventually the Church will allow gay marriage within the Church. This view could not be less scriptural. I could give probably close to a hundered sources, but should only need one or two. The first presidency of the Church proclaimed in "The Family: A Proclamation to the World" that marriage between a man and woman is ordained of God. President Spencer W. Kimball spoke of homosexuality as the sin against nature and a perversion of God's plan. God is unchangable, and according to LDS theology and scripture, if he were ever to call evil good or change his views, he woud cease to be God. Alma 42:22 "But there is a law given, and a punishment affixed, and a repentance granted; which repentance, mercy claimeth; otherwise, justice claimeth the creature and executeth the law, and the law inflicteth the punishment; if not so, the works of justice would be destroyed, and God would cease to be God."
Alma 42:25 " 25 What, do ye suppose that mercy can rob justice? I say unto you, Nay; not one whit. If so, God would cease to be God." From the beginning of time, marriage between a man and a woman has been a critical part of God's eternal plan, it is the way for his children to be co-creators with him and be fruitful in multiplying and replenishing the earth. It is the only way for his children to fill the measure of their creation. Here is a statement given by Elder Oaks on homosexuality that is approved by the Church for the public affairs. : "This is much bigger than just a question of whether or not society should be more tolerant of the homosexual lifestyle. Over past years we have seen unrelenting pressure from advocates of that lifestyle to accept as normal what is not normal, and to characterize those who disagree as narrow-minded, bigoted and unreasonable. Such advocates are quick to demand freedom of speech and thought for themselves, but equally quick to criticize those with a different view and, if possible, to silence them by applying labels like "homophobic." In at least one country where homosexual activists have won major concessions, we have even seen a church pastor threatened with prison for preaching from the pulpit that homosexual behavior is sinful. Given these trends, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints must take a stand on doctrine and principle. This is more than a social issue — ultimately it may be a test of our most basic religious freedoms to teach what we know our Father in Heaven wants us to teach....Let me just add a thought to that. There is no fullness of joy in the next life without a family unit, including a husband, a wife, and posterity. Further, men are that they might have joy. In the eternal perspective, same-gender activity will only bring sorrow and grief and the loss of eternal opportunities." This is very clear, homosexuality never has been, and never will be part of God's plan for a family in the eternities, and to say that eventually the Church will change this view and accept it is, in my opinion, undermining to the several proclamations by leaders in the Church that the Church does not change with the whims of society. The belief that homosexuality is normal, or that sexual relations within a same gender marriage will be accepted as "honorable and sanctifying" is first a complete misinterpretation and perversion of the Prophet's words, and as far out of harmony with the views of the Church as one can get on the subject.

My final argument was going to be surrounding the constitution and socialism. It is prety common knowledge that socialism and the constitution clash at the very core. I will also assume that all readers of this debate are aware that far left liberalism is almost identical to socialism in many ways. I will post these LDS scriptures from the 98th section of the Doctrine and Covenants:
5 And that law of the land which is constitutional, supporting that principle of freedom in maintaining rights and privileges, belongs to all mankind, and is justifiable before me.
6 Therefore, I, the Lord, justify you, and your brethren of my church, in befriending that law which is the constitutional law of the land;
7 And as pertaining to law of man, whatsoever is more or less than this, cometh of evil.
Ther is an ever important scripture in Mosiah 18. When the people of the Church imparted of their substance to the poor and needy, the Lord was clear in verse 28 on how this should be done. "And thus they should impart of their substance of their own free will and good desires towards God..."

I don't want to make this too long, so I will stop there. Those familiar with LDS Church doctrine should not need to look any further than the assumption that homosexuality will ever be called good in the Church to see how these very liberal views clash with the teachings of the Church.
left_wing_mormon

Con

My opponent is incorrect in his/her first sentence. Partial-birth abortions are only legal when either the fetus is dead or the mothers life is in danger. Oddly enough these are two things that the Church support when dealing with abortion. Thats 1, and 2 stem cell research is embryonic and m yet my opponent is stating that the fetus extracted from partial birth abortions can be used. This is false because ebyronic stem cell research is not compadible with a fetus.

On to gay marriage, my overall opinion is you can;t limit God. If God can give the preisthood to anyone he pleases and keep it away from others for a time is his power or to reinstate pologamy when he thinks it should be. After all he is God. Yes the Prophets in the past have given their opinion on same sex couples and with that being said it is known that homosexual acts (sexual acts) are directly out of line with the law of chastity. But who knows. I just want to see the same rights given to those who love each other. But anyways as I've said the prophets and apostles of the past have given out their opinions. For example Bringham Young was very vocal with the Adam-God theroy. (He believed that Adam of Adam and Eve, was in fact God.) He used to talk about it in sermons, but this doesn't make it doctrine.

But what I think is interesting is you actually brough up Socialism. Socialism is a different political philosophy than liberalism, although they are similar in some beliefs. But you give a 10% tithe as a latter-day saint which goes to things like helping the poor who need help paying medical bills, rent, food, ect. The base for a functioning socialst nation is to have taxes go into the big pot. Which is where tithe comes in. The goals of socialism is not to deprive rights but to help society and all of its people. try and eliminate poor and rich and other ecconomic classes to make all equal, as expressed in 4 Nephi: "And they had all things common among them; therefore there were not rich and poor, bond and free, but they were all made free, and partakers of the heavenly gift" (4 Nephi 1:3). Also the fact that nobody has something better than anyone else doesn't sound like a right-wing belief: "It is not given that one man should possess that which is above another" (Doctrine and Covenants 49:20).
But this is not a debate about socialists, but about liberals.

For my closing my opponent still ignored the fact that my stance on abortion is in line with the church. We also see that as my church welcomes gays, they are held to the same law of chatity that the straight members are. Gay marriage is not acknowledge by the church, but we must also keep in mind niether was interracial preistedholders. Then socialism has similar goals to the church, but again this is about liberals in our free and glorious nation, America.

I don't have much more to say other than I thank my opponent for giving me the chance to defend my religous morals with my political beliefs. Thank you for the debate.
Debate Round No. 3
17 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Ragnar_Rahl 9 years ago
Ragnar_Rahl
Liberalism is not compatible with being left wing. :P
Posted by knick-knack 9 years ago
knick-knack
Any mormon can have any views that they want to.
Liberalism is compatible with Mormonism.
Because there is no political view of the LDS church. :^D+<
Posted by gogott 9 years ago
gogott
It is important to note that Young only spoke of the "Adam-God theory" one time, it was recorded in shorthand once in a listeners journal. The comments themselves have been taken out of context, and even if he did believe that (which all of his other sermons show that he didn't) then he would have been out of harmony with the Church. Furthermore, the Church is not pro-choice in the secular and liberal sense. If it is, then explain to me why a member can be excommunicated for having an abortion. The Church is unwaveringly pro-life except for those very specific and rare circumstances that we have spoken of. When you serve a mission you will find that there are only two sins for which you as a missionary do not have authority to clear someone for baptism, and one of them is abortion. The Church is clear enough on the subject, it is ONLY acceptable if the mother's life is in danger or if the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest, otherwise it is evil and not tolerable by any stretch of the imagination. Pro-choice liberals feel that the mother can choose abortion simply as an out if she doesn't want a kid. Still not sure how some are having trouble seeing the difference between these two stances.

I also want to say that I respect your right to have your own beliefs, I was not trying to disprove your belief pertaining to gay marriage, but just show that it contradicted LDS doctrine, which it clearly did. This is what the voters in the debate saw, I believe it was the gay-marriage argument. That was one that is impossible to fit into Church doctrine, as it is so blatanly contradictory. I do think that a debate on socialism and liberalism would be fun though, let me know if you are interested, (we would of course leave the Church out of this one).
Posted by left_wing_mormon 9 years ago
left_wing_mormon
It is not a question of my warping doctrine, I want to make that clear. My opponent will post his evidence to refute what I say, but thats my belief. Remember, Bringham Young used to include the Adam-God theroy in his sermons which we know today is not doctrine, but he was a prophet and a mighty fine one too. :)

No one but you has said that it is the "liberal" view to support abortion as far as just changing your mind. I believe the "liberal view" is called Pro-Choice. I am Pro-Choice the Church is pro-choice and plan parenthood is pro-choice, thats the "liberal view"

But I thank you for the debate, I still feel like the socialism argument was irrelevent and the abortion topic still is in my favor in this debate. But the votes have spoken and I appreciate you for giving me an oppurtunity to defend my beliefs religously and politically.
Posted by gogott 9 years ago
gogott
You are missing the point, please re-read. I did not say people have been excommunicated for being political, I said people have been excommunicated for preaching that homosexual marriage will one day be embraced. That is not political, that is doctrinal. Furthermore, I have never heard of anyone being excommunicated for expressing political views either way, only for warping the doctrine. However I will remind you that I gave a disclaimer in this debate that the Church does not endorse either political party. As far as my argument not being based in facts, a good, careful and consistent study of the doctrines and teachings of the LDS Church would show that the facts in this issue are on my side. If you have a boyfriend that is a member, then I would encourage you to attend Church with him and even meet with the missionaries, you will be fascinated with what you learn.

Pertaining to left wing mormon: I take it from your last post that you see the problem I had with the gay marriage argument, that makes me glad. I agree that YOUR view on abortion is more in line with the Church, that being that it is bad and only acceptable in circumstances of rape, incest, or the Mothers' life being in danger. I was more going after the more liberal view of it being accepted as something that a person can use if they just change their mind. The Church clearly does not condone this. It seems that you are almost more moderate on that subject than far left liberal. Also, with socialism, we could have a whole second debate on that one (probably a fun one). But that could go back and forth, as some view socialism and liberalism as one in the same and some dont. My main concern was with the changing of Church doctrine concerning gay marriage, a topic where the Church has been very vocal, but it seems that you see that as well now. It was a fun debate, just remember, the Church is true brother
Posted by Phoebe 9 years ago
Phoebe
Actually, my boyfriend is a Mormon, himself. He talked to me about this and he said that members have also been excommunicated for preaching different political beliefs that are conservative and liberal as well, so that is irrelevant. In this argument the claim stands 2 to 1. Your argument is based on your opinions rather than facts and you completely disregard the arguments made by Left wing mormon and that is why I decided to vote for him.
Posted by left_wing_mormon 9 years ago
left_wing_mormon
But my argument for the other two claims you have made stand.
Posted by gogott 9 years ago
gogott
The problem with that Phoebe is that you are (according to your profile) not a Lattr-Day Saint, and are clearly not familiar with LDS doctrine. The argument set forth pertaining to gay marriage by my opponent is so out of harmony with the LDS Church that members have actually been excommunicated for teaching it or attempting to proclaim it in Churches. Research the Churches position on the subjects and then come back and give an EDUCATED opinion.
Posted by Phoebe 9 years ago
Phoebe
I completely agree with left wing mormon. Gogott ignored the main arguments. There was no rebuttle.
Posted by gogott 9 years ago
gogott
What you are failing to understand is that according to YOU God can change. According to LDS Theology he CAN NOT, but IS bound by eternal laws which if he broke he would cease to be God. This is scriptral. Hence, your views are out of harmony with the LDS Church on the character and nature of God. Also, liberalism is on the same end of the spectrum as socialism and the two are inseperably connected. If you would like a source for Prophets speaking on that subject visit the following link:

http://www.ldspatriots.com...

I would strongly advise you to do more studying on the nature of God, and the doctrines of the LDS Church. Remember, part of the growing process is letting go of some of our views which are incorrect, and trying to submit to the will of the Father. A Bishop or other Priesthood leader could also help with this.
14 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by left_wing_mormon 7 years ago
left_wing_mormon
gogottleft_wing_mormonTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by DavidSSabb94 7 years ago
DavidSSabb94
gogottleft_wing_mormonTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:16 
Vote Placed by tmhustler 7 years ago
tmhustler
gogottleft_wing_mormonTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Agnostic 8 years ago
Agnostic
gogottleft_wing_mormonTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by tribefan011 8 years ago
tribefan011
gogottleft_wing_mormonTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Killer542 9 years ago
Killer542
gogottleft_wing_mormonTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Tavadon 9 years ago
Tavadon
gogottleft_wing_mormonTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Phoebe 9 years ago
Phoebe
gogottleft_wing_mormonTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by cooljpk 9 years ago
cooljpk
gogottleft_wing_mormonTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by els21 9 years ago
els21
gogottleft_wing_mormonTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30