Jump to content

Open Season On Mormonism?


Zakuska

Recommended Posts

Media declares open season on Mitt Romney's Mormon faith

• GQ, a men’s magazine of style and culture, printed a blistering piece about Romney’s Mormonism in its August issue. In one particularly repellent sentence, the writer noted that Mormon founder Joseph Smith, “despite having some forty wives, still endeavored to f*** everything in sight.”

• MSNBC anchor Lawrence O’Donnell went on one of his vein-popping tirades about Mormonism, charging that the religion was “created by a guy in upstate New York in 1830 when he got caught having sex with the maid and explained to his wife that God told him to do it.”

• The New York Times Sunday Review section ran an article titled “Why Race Is Still a Problem for Mormons.” The caption accompanying the article said: “Brigham Young, who established the Mormon Temple in Salt Lake City and whose statue stands beside it, relegated blacks to second-class status in the church.”

• ABC “World News Tonight” ran a two-part series on Romney’s Mormonism. This is the same newscast that in 2008 refused to broadcast videotapes obtained by Brian Ross, the network’s chief investigative reporter, showing the Reverend Jeremiah Wright ranting against whites and Jews. Now, with two months remaining in the 2012 campaign, an ABC News reporter hammered home the theme that in the church’s “imposing temples, secret rituals are performed by all-male leaders.”

• NBC, which never felt an obligation to examine Barack Obama’s relationship with the Reverend Wright’s brand of black liberation theology, devoted a full one-hour episode of “Rock Center with Brian Williams” to examining Romney’s Mormonism.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/08/30/media-declares-open-season-on-mitt-romney-mormon-faith/#ixzz25F0KQv5m

And here I thought it was open season on Mormons since the beginning?! :huh:

Link to comment

Some of those quotes are quite distasteful.

This one, however, is true:

• The New York Times Sunday Review section ran an article titled “Why Race Is Still a Problem for Mormons.” The caption accompanying the article said: “Brigham Young, who established the Mormon Temple in Salt Lake City and whose statue stands beside it, relegated blacks to second-class status in the church.”

As for Jeremiah Wright, it's been a long time since 2008, but it wasn't my impression that Obama was getting a free pass on the issue. There was plenty of coverage, and if there wasn't more damage, it was because Obama did a good job of cutting Wright loose and distancing himself from him (read the details of the damage control in the book "Game Change").

The biggest difference is that Romney can't (and obviously shouldn't) distance himself from the LDS Church. If he were being criticized for having attended a particular ward with a kooky Bishop, then he could get away from the issue. But as far as the entire Church and its doctrines are concerned, it's different from the Wright situation.

Link to comment

And you can watch the ABC News reports on Mormonism here:

http://abcnews.go.co...-mormon-church/

What, exactly, do they say that isn't true? I mean, they're interviewing Robert Millet and other BYU professors. And there's a really great summary of the caffeine issue at the end of the first segment.

The second segment has Elder Ballard and Elder Cook. As far as I can tell, not a single non-Mormon commentator is shown on screen. The most sensitive part is the mention of "secret handshakes", but Elder Cook addresses that. And they mention the Temple garments, but don't show them out of respect for the Church members.

All in all, it's a pretty good report, and nothing to be riled over.

Link to comment

Some of those quotes are quite distasteful.

This one, however, is true:

As for Jeremiah Wright, it's been a long time since 2008, but it wasn't my impression that Obama was getting a free pass on the issue. There was plenty of coverage, and if there wasn't more damage, it was because Obama did a good job of cutting Wright loose and distancing himself from him (read the details of the damage control in the book "Game Change").

The biggest difference is that Romney can't (and obviously shouldn't) distance himself from the LDS Church. If he were being criticized for having attended a particular ward with a kooky Bishop, then he could get away from the issue. But as far as the entire Church and its doctrines are concerned, it's different from the Wright situation.

Wright is part of a larger movement of liberation theology. Look it up.

Brigham was about as progressive as Abraham Lincoln in their time. You know separate countries for blacks and all that.

If critics of the church and Romney have to reach back to Brigham Young to find someone who was as controversial as current race agitators like Wright et al. I think the Mormon candidate is on pretty safe ground,.

Link to comment

Of course there is an uptick in Mormon related news. Just like there was a lot of discussion about Catholicism during Kennedy's campaign. We will see the good, the bad and the ugly when it comes to reporting. Those inclined to support Romney will emphasize the volunteer and family aspect of Mormonism. Those inclined to criticize will unearth any unflattering portrayal of Mormonism (no matter how fringe or exceptional from the main body of the church).

Those who are completely ignorant and depend on Burning Man or angry former Mormon websites for their information will make fun of our underwear and our designs on owning planets.

Link to comment

Media declares open season on Mitt Romney's Mormon faith

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/08/30/media-declares-open-season-on-mitt-romney-mormon-faith/#ixzz25F0KQv5m

And here I thought it was open season on Mormons since the beginning?! :huh:

I would rather be condeamed for what I am, than what I pretend to be.
Link to comment

Wright is part of a larger movement of liberation theology. Look it up.

Brigham was about as progressive as Abraham Lincoln in their time. You know separate countries for blacks and all that.

If critics of the church and Romney have to reach back to Brigham Young to find someone who was as controversial as current race agitators like Wright et al. I think the Mormon candidate is on pretty safe ground,.

I suspect they "reached back" to Brigham Young because he was the originator of the ban and is a well known Church leader.

I don't know that anyone is making a connection between Wright/ Obama and LDS Leaders/Romney (or if they should). While there may be some superficial similarities between the two situations, Obama's participation in Wright's Church and disavowal of it hardly have a parallel in Romney's faithfulness and service to the LDS Church.

From what I can tell, Obama's participation in Wright's Church was based more on social, cultural and political considerations, and when it became socially, culturally and politically inconvenient, he dropped Wright like a hot potato (much to Wright's anger, BTW). If Romney had done the same thing with Mormonism, we may not be hearing so much about it (obviously he shouldn't, but I'm pointing out why the situations may not be absolutely similar).

Link to comment

....

From what I can tell, Obama's participation in Wright's Church was based more on social, cultural and political considerations, and when it became socially, culturally and politically inconvenient, he dropped Wright like a hot potato (much to Wright's anger, BTW). If Romney had done the same thing with Mormonism, we may not be hearing so much about it (obviously he shouldn't, but I'm pointing out why the situations may not be absolutely similar).

You don't go to a church for 20 years for strictly social, cultural, and political considerations. You attend that church because it teaches what you believe, love, and support. These are the same reasons that Romney attends his church. To assume anything else seems to be less than honest.

Link to comment

And you can watch the ABC News reports on Mormonism here:

http://abcnews.go.co...-mormon-church/

What, exactly, do they say that isn't true?

I agree, except for a change in their "male leadership" statement. It should be "priesthood leadership" since we have many sisters who are leaders. They should have included the fact that the sisters are at the highest levels of leadership, and give General Conference addresses.

Otherwise it was very positive.

Link to comment

You don't go to a church for 20 years for strictly social, cultural, and political considerations. You attend that church because it teaches what you believe, love, and support. These are the same reasons that Romney attends his church. To assume anything else seems to be less than honest.

I know plenty of people who have attended a church for 20 years or longer for strictly social, cultural or political considerations.

I'm not trying to defend Obama and Wright; I have little respect for both. I'm only saying we can't expect the Romney/LDS situation to be treated the same as the Obama/Wright situation when they were very different in important ways. There may be media bias and other factors at play as well, but they were still very different.

Link to comment

You don't go to a church for 20 years for strictly social, cultural, and political considerations. You attend that church because it teaches what you believe, love, and support. These are the same reasons that Romney attends his church. To assume anything else seems to be less than honest.

Did he "attend" that church for 20 years? Or did he show up on occasion -- like any good Protestant on Easter and Christmas? He might not have noticed Wright's rhetoric, because that rhetoric might very well have been toned down because of the actual occasions.

The thing that bothers me more than any connection with Rev. Wright is Obama's connection with known card-carrying Communists like Frank Marshall Davis. Davis's feelings about the US were similar to Rev. Wright's so far as I have been able to tell, however.

And, lest anyone continue on in this vein, this is veering into poltics and I better not encourage it.

Link to comment

http://abcnews.go.co...very-seriously/

Policy differences aside, President Obama says he admires Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney for his family life, personal discipline and outward practice of his Mormon faith.

“He strikes me as somebody who is very disciplined. And I think that that is a quality that obviously contributed to his success as a private equity guy,” Obama said in an interview with TIME magazine ahead of the Democratic National Convention next week.

“I think he takes his faith very seriously. And as somebody who takes my Christian faith seriously, I appreciate that he seems to walk the walk and not just be talking the talk when it comes to his participation in his church,” he said.

And here I thought Bain Capital and his Mormon faith were detrimental to his run, and was anything but a success.

Something tells me this is the calm before the perfect storm.

Link to comment

Axelrod readies attack on Romney's Mormon faith

Several weeks ago, David Axelrod, the Obama campaign’s maharishi, called together his Chicago gang to discuss what they should do if their mudslinging campaign against Mitt Romney and Bain Capital didn’t do the trick and Romney began to pull even with—or ahead of—Barack Obama in the polls.

According to my sources inside the campaign, Axelrod & Co. discussed what might be called the nuclear option: unleashing an attack on Romney’s Mormon faith via the mainstream media.

As Axelrod knew, many pundits credit evangelical Christians, who are heavily Republican and comprise some 14 percent of voters, with putting George W. Bush over the top in the election of 2004.Axelrod was also aware that Mormonism is a fraught subject among evangelical Christians.…Axelrod calculated that if he could turn 5 to 10 percent of the evangelicals against Romney because of his Mormonism, he could deny Romney victory at the polls in 2012.

Read more: http://times247.com/articles/axelrod-readies-attack-on-romney-s-mormon-faith#ixzz25OINHo6u

http://wizbangblog.com/2012/08/30/edward-klein-axelrod-playing-the-mormon-card/

Link to comment
The New York Times Sunday Review section ran an article titled “Why Race Is Still a Problem for Mormons.” The caption accompanying the article said: “Brigham Young, who established the Mormon Temple in Salt Lake City and whose statue stands beside it, relegated blacks to second-class status in the church.”
As for Jeremiah Wright, it's been a long time since 2008,

It's been a MUCH longer time since BY. I truely believe the Church has overcome this issue as those who bring it up are usually more and more on the fringe and as we all know, the msm is much more fringe-like than it was even 4 years ago. That doesn't mean it's not going to affect voters this cycle, but I'd say it's not going to affect many voters who haven't already made up their minds or are actually susceptible to changing them.

but it wasn't my impression that Obama was getting a free pass on the issue.

He still is. It's typically the more balanced and conservative media that discusses this issue. When the issue is covered by the other spectrum, then one might say he's not getting a free pass.

Link to comment

The Church got slammed in the early 80s for ERA. It only helped the Church.

The Church has a ranch here in Florida, a huge ranch, a 300,000+ acre ranch. During the time of the ERA, some news outlets blasted the Church big time for having such a huge ranch and business and paying no taxes on it. They decried the hypocrisy of the Church for worshiping money, and blah, blah, blah.

Imagine to these critics of the Church when they were informed that, while the ranch didn't have to pay taxes, it paid all sorts of taxes. All these critics had to do was look at the records.

I still have non-members tell me, thirty years later, that the ranch doesn't pay any taxes.

From the ranch's web site:

Deseret’s agricultural operations provide jobs, tax revenue, and other economic benefits to the region. Many of our supplies are bought locally. Employees and their families shop locally, attend local schools, and participate in the community. Although the Ranch is owned by a church, Deseret’s operations pay local, state and national taxes, and Deseret is an equal opportunity employer. For many years Deseret has been a major property tax payer in Central Florida. As a matter of principle, Deseret accepts no government subsidies or taxpayer supported price supports.
Link to comment

The Church got slammed in the early 80s for ERA. It only helped the Church.

The Church has a ranch here in Florida, a huge ranch, a 300,000+ acre ranch. During the time of the ERA, some news outlets blasted the Church big time for having such a huge ranch and business and paying no taxes on it. They decried the hypocrisy of the Church for worshiping money, and blah, blah, blah.

Imagine to these critics of the Church when they were informed that, while the ranch didn't have to pay taxes, it paid all sorts of taxes. All these critics had to do was look at the records.

I still have non-members tell me, thirty years later, that the ranch doesn't pay any taxes.

From the ranch's web site:

Yokels often assume things that are simply not true. They don't understand that Roman Catholic operations of this sort do not pay taxes, while the Mormons do.

Link to comment

Mr. Klein isn't exactly the best source for what Obama does.

Again, Klein is stating what he BELIEVES to be true. Yet, I have never heard of the Obama campaign saying anything in public about Governor Romney’s religious beliefs.

(emphasis mine)

Have you ever heard Obama tell those who campaigning for him and making such types of comments to stop making those types of comments? I haven't. Maybe I missed the message about the message.

Link to comment

From ABC News

The Obama campaign has said it would not make an issue of Romney’s Mormonism during the lead up to the November election — a pledge which it so far has appeared to keep.

“We’ve said that’s not fair game,” senior Obama strategist David Axelrod said of both candidates’ personal religious views in an interview with CNN earlier this year.

Link to comment

I suspect that if Romney's religion is going to be used as a "nuclear option", it would have to be done much closer to the election. The greatest danger will be in the week or two beforehand.

And when it comes to the winner-take-all world of presidential elections, I don't think there is anything that is off-limits. The only reason they wouldn't use Mormonism in their attacks is if they think it would do more harm than good.

Link to comment

From ABC News

The Obama campaign has said it would not make an issue of Romney’s Mormonism during the lead up to the November election — a pledge which it so far has appeared to keep.

“We’ve said that’s not fair game,” senior Obama strategist David Axelrod said of both candidates’ personal religious views in an interview with CNN earlier this year.

And that, children, is what plausible deniability is all about.

Link to comment

And that, children, is what plausible deniability is all about.

Reminds me of Reagan's quip in the presidential campaign debate with Mondale where he turned a common criticism against him on it's head, pledging not to make an issue of his opponent's youth and inexperience.

Romney could say something along this line: "I'm determined not to make religion an issue in this campaign and therefore pledge not to exploit for political gain the fact that my opponent, as of yet, has not been baptized for the remission of sins by one having authority."

(Now watch the spectacle as several people take the above joke too seriously and get all pious and preachy. That seems to be my lot on this board.)

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...