Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Trump's turn: Deseret News publishes his exclusive op-ed piece


Recommended Posts

Posted

Last week, I started a thread linking to the Deseret News's exclusive op-ed piece written by Hillary Clinton.

It was noted then that an exclusive piece by Donald Trump would be published this week by the newspaper. Here it is. Online only, for now. I understand a printed version will follow in this Sunday's edition of the newspaper.

Please note: In the interest of avoiding getting this thread shut down prematurely, as the thread about Hillary Clinton was, I suggest that the comments here be confined to the matter of Mr. Trump's policies and campaign strategy as they pertain to Mormons and Mormonism, particularly as reflected in the op-ed piece linked to here. We all know that it is the kiss of death to a thread here to turn it into something purely political without regard to Mormonism.

 

Posted

A logical fallacy that the principle of free agency points out to us: there can always be someone doing worse than another. Therefore let's not fall for the claim that anyone is better than Clinton.

Posted (edited)

I think the contrast between the two pieces is striking. Hillary laid on the pandering to church members pretty thick, quoting church leaders and recounting Mormon history (my guess is that a current or former church member wrote it). Trump, on the other hand, pretty much repeated his standard positions on his issues, touching only briefly on matters of faith. The reference to the 1954 Johnson Amendment was kind of strange, as most Mormons I know oppose "pastors" supporting or opposing specific candidates (and the use of the word "pastors" seems a little tone deaf for a Utah audience). I wonder if he felt he had to publish this not only because HIllary had, but because he had made those joking remarks about Utah the other day at that Evangelical conference. Maybe it's just me, but the way those remarks were made and received suggested to me that he was emphasizing the way Evangeilcals treat Mormons as allies in some respects but sort of keep them at arm's distance because of theological differences.

In all, I don't think either piece will move the needle much, but I don't think anyone could have imagined that both parties' candidates would feel the need to make even a minimal effort to sway voters in Utah. That's remarkable and a sign of where we are this year. 

BTW, several LDS friends in Utah are telling me they are voting for McMullin. If enough church members stay home or vote for McMullin or Johnson, all bets are off.

Edited by jkwilliams
Posted

They both stated they advocate for religious freedom.  I'm not sure, other than that, there's much in this to talk about as it relates to Mormonism.  Of course, they were just pandering when they said as much.  Religious freedom is not in question.  They just know many Utahns tend to think religious freedom is coming under fire. 

Posted
2 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

Trump has recommended use of religious tests for Muslims, which we should all find troublesome.

I thought there was already some kind of questioning about refugees religious ideals in the process--hoping to uncover any terrorists.  If so, it sounds like he's, at least now, wanting to add to the screening. 

Posted
20 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

They both stated they advocate for religious freedom.  I'm not sure, other than that, there's much in this to talk about as it relates to Mormonism.  Of course, they were just pandering when they said as much.  Religious freedom is not in question.  They just know many Utahns tend to think religious freedom is coming under fire. 

Given Trump's statements about Muslims, his claims ring very hollow. 

Posted

Any appeal to a targeted audience by a politician can be viewed as pandering.

Trump's proposed SCOTUS appointments should be more attractive to Mormons.

Billary's support base is more antagonistic toward LDS standards and beliefs

The abortion issue could be a deal breaker for LDS.

Casting a vote for a third party may be personally satisfying, but it will be a vote for Billary.

An interesting moral dilemma for Mormons on many levels. Both candidates have fatal flaws.

 

 

Posted

My decision will be based on who is more likely to unleash our nuclear arsenal and less likely to ignore Supreme Court rulings and less likely to order the military to arrest Congress in a fit of pique.

A low bar but this is that kind of an election.

Posted (edited)

One thing he got right: He spelled Utahns correctly.

Quite often, easterners betray their provincial ignorance by insisting on spelling it "Utahans."

Edited to add:

On the other hand, it occurs to me he might have gotten it wrong but then our alert copy editors fixed it for him.

Edited by Scott Lloyd
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, stemelbow said:

They both stated they advocate for religious freedom.  I'm not sure, other than that, there's much in this to talk about as it relates to Mormonism.  Of course, they were just pandering when they said as much.  Religious freedom is not in question.  They just know many Utahns tend to think religious freedom is coming under fire. 

I beg to differ. Religious liberty is very much a real and live issue in today's political climate, perhaps more so than in a long, long time, given the recent judicial fiats pertaining to gay rights.

I agree, though, that each candidate put her/his particular spin on it. Clearly, they were both playing to their audience.

 

Edited by Scott Lloyd
Posted
2 hours ago, stemelbow said:

I thought there was already some kind of questioning about refugees religious ideals in the process--hoping to uncover any terrorists.  If so, it sounds like he's, at least now, wanting to add to the screening. 

There are some questions related to well substantiated claims to religious persecution. But we can't design questions to exclude people based on their religion.

Posted
2 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

Any appeal to a targeted audience by a politician can be viewed as pandering.

Trump's proposed SCOTUS appointments should be more attractive to Mormons.

Billary's support base is more antagonistic toward LDS standards and beliefs

The abortion issue could be a deal breaker for LDS.

Casting a vote for a third party may be personally satisfying, but it will be a vote for Billary.

An interesting moral dilemma for Mormons on many levels. Both candidates have fatal flaws.

 

 

Are these the two worst candidates ever? 

Posted
46 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said:

There are some questions related to well substantiated claims to religious persecution. But we can't design questions to exclude people based on their religion.

Then Trump's plan will fail at the outset.  Vote for him anyway cause we can't do what he's saying anyway. 

Posted
24 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Then Trump's plan will fail at the outset.  Vote for him anyway cause we can't do what he's saying anyway. 

That is true of all political promises, but are you willing to bet our country on that? Sorry; I'm not.  BTW I'm not fan of Hilary either.

Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

as they pertain to Mormons and Mormonism,

Dude! No one is against religious freedom! No one is against your right to preach. 

What many don't want (especially we millennials) is religion influencing legislation. 

It is best to live and let live and keep religion out of politics because it is not a good idea to impose your religious beliefs. 

"Yet there have also been times in our history when religion has been invoked to justify serious harm. In years past, opponents of interracial marriage, desegregation and other efforts to protect civil rights too often cited scripture and religion in making their arguments...My concerns lie with the possible consequences of politically-driven legislation which claims to promote religious liberty but instead rolls back the legal protections held by LGBT Americans." Exclusive: Gary Johnson: Clarifying my views on religious freedom, Mormons

Edited by TheSkepticChristian
Posted
4 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said:

Dude! No one is against religious freedom! You one is against religious sermons! 

We many don't want (especially we millennials) is religion influencing legislation. 

It is best to live and let live and keep religion out of politics because you shouldn't try to impose your religious beliefs. 

 

I hope your demonstrated inability to construct an intelligible sentence does not reflect the literacy of the average "millennial."

Stop the personal insults!

 

Posted
17 minutes ago, TheSkepticChristian said:

Dude! No one is against religious freedom! No one is against your right to preach. 

What many don't want (especially we millennials) is religion influencing legislation. 

It is best to live and let live and keep religion out of politics because it is not a good idea to impose your religious beliefs. 

"Yet there have also been times in our history when religion has been invoked to justify serious harm. In years past, opponents of interracial marriage, desegregation and other efforts to protect civil rights too often cited scripture and religion in making their arguments...My concerns lie with the possible consequences of politically-driven legislation which claims to promote religious liberty but instead rolls back the legal protections held by LGBT Americans." Exclusive: Gary Johnson: Clarifying my views on religious freedom, Mormons

Religion has always influenced politics. It is inescapable. What we in the US demand is that any laws have more basis than just religion.

Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I hope your demonstrated inability to construct an intelligible sentence does not reflect the literacy of the average "millennial."

It is against board rules to mock others. Nice Ad hominem! 

I made corrections about 15 minutes ago! Why did you quote the old version?

How Christian of you! 

 

Edited by TheSkepticChristian
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said:

 What we in the US demand is that any laws have more basis than just religion.

Exactly! but that is not what many here demand. 

She was only 10 years old. 

2B6C398E00000578-3200437-image-a-41_1439

 

Edited by TheSkepticChristian
Posted
23 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I hope your demonstrated inability to construct an intelligible sentence does not reflect the literacy of the average "millennial."

I will say again "It is against board rules to mock others. Nice Ad hominem! I made corrections about 15 minutes ago! Why did you quote the old version? How Christian of you!"  

Now get your politics out of MDDB. 

6 hours ago, stemelbow said:

They both stated they advocate for religious freedom.  I'm not sure, other than that, there's much in this to talk about as it relates to Mormonism

Exactly! 

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

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