Mitt Romney calls Robert Jeffries a 'bigot' based on religious doctrinal views

[bsjkki]

I'm always a bit wary of throwing the word 'bigot' around based on someone's interpretation of religious doctrine. Especially if that person is a pastor and not a politician. I feel, at times Mormon's have been unfairly called 'bigots' based on doctrinal interpretations and not based in how Mormons treat others not of their faith. Was Mitt Romney's critisism fair of Robert Jeffries fair? https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/romney-criticizes-robert-jeffress-ahead-jerusalem-embassy-opening-n873821

He tweeted,“Robert Jeffress says, ‘You can’t be saved by being a Jew,’ and ‘Mormonism is a heresy from the pit of hell,’” ... “He’s said the same about Islam. Such a religious bigot should not be giving the prayer that opens the United States Embassy in Jerusalem.”

Jeffries comment are based on his interpretation of evangelical Christianity. From  the artaicle, 

"Jeffress denied he was a bigot, but added that he believed Mormonism was “wrong,” and said the Southern Baptist Convention had designated it a “cult.”

“Mormonism has never been considered a part of historic Christianity. People may disagree with that view, but it’s not a view unique to me,” he said in an interview with NBC News."

I can see where based on Romney's definition of bigotry,  Mormon's could be excluded from participating in public prayers. 

Here is another interesting take on  this topic. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/if-robert-jeffress-is-a-bigot-then-mitt-romney-is-too

“Bigotry” is a current favorite insult to throw at anyone who holds any firm position to the exclusion of conflicting opinions on matters of faith. But this is often a very inaccurate label. By definition, a “bigot” is someone who is intolerant of someone else’s views and attempts to forcibly compel compliance with another view (usually through government action), not someone who just disagrees with someone else’s position.

Jeffress, like all genuine Christians, has sincerely held religious beliefs that he advocates for, including insisting that Islam, Judaism, Mormonism, and other religious beliefs are in conflict with Christian beliefs. That’s called advocating for a position. Saying that “you can’t be saved by being a Jew” is a position statement on matters of faith, not bigotry toward any other position.

Ironically, Romney is himself advocating for a position that differs from Jeffress, but apparently thinks he may do so without the label of bigot. Why? Romney may not prefer Jeffress to speak at the embassy ceremony, and he is free to voice his opinion on that (for whatever it’s worth). But calling Jeffress a bigot is simply ignorant and actually showing himself intolerant of Jeffress’ beliefs.

One of the best, most wonderful aspects of America is that we have the liberty to disagree with others while allowing the other side to disagree with us. It’s called a fundamental, unalienable right to freedom of speech and free exercise of religion."

 

[rongo]

I think it's embarrassing. It looks like whining. 

I think it would have been best to say nothing. People can see Jeffress for what he is, and judge him for themselves, based on his words and actions. The record speaks for itself, but whining for special victim status as Mormons is embarrassing. It's like when FAIR tried to start a "Mormon Anti-Defamation League." 

[MiserereNobis]

26 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

By definition, a “bigot” is someone who is intolerant of someone else’s views and attempts to forcibly compel compliance with another view (usually through government action), not someone who just disagrees with someone else’s position.

Definition of bigot

: a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices;  especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance

 

I don't see anything in there about forcible compliance through government action.

[RevTestament]

I think it is embarrassing for the President of the US to choose this man to pray at the opening of the US embassy in Jerusalem. 

On the one hand he says: "“The Bible says this land belongs to the Jewish people — period,” he told NBC News in a separate interview in February. "God has pronounced judgment after judgment in the Old Testament to those who would ‘divide the land,’ end quote, and hand it over to non-Jews.”" 

Then he turns around and says ‘You can’t be saved by being a Jew.’ Do we really want him in the land of the Jews, which he acknowledges as their land, telling them they will not be saved? I don't think that is any way to open an embassy - to send someone there who will tell their people they will not be saved. It's an embarrassing and imprudent move - but it seems that is nothing new for Pres Trump. As for Romney, he by all means knows this is nothing knew - or maybe he is not the average Mormon who has heard such stuff their whole life, and is just not used to it. He would do best to go quiet or apologize and move on. If pressed he could say he mispoke, and that "intolerant" would be a more appropriate word. Jeffres suffers the same misconceptions of thousands of other Christians. Romney certainly doesn't win any brownie points with me by calling him a bigot. I picture bigots as being irrationally hateful. Although I disagree with Jeffres rationale, he at least has one for saying what he does. 

Edited May 14, 2018 by RevTestament

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, rongo said:

I think it's embarrassing. It looks like whining. 

I think it would have been best to say nothing. People can see Jeffress for what he is, and judge him for themselves, based on his words and actions. The record speaks for itself, but whining for special victim status as Mormons is embarrassing. It's like when FAIR tried to start a "Mormon Anti-Defamation League." 

Maybe I'm missing something, but the way I'm reading it is that Romney called him a bigot and disagrees with him praying at a U.S. embassy in Jerusalem because of his beliefs about Jews.  I'm not sure what's embarrassing about that, can you clarify?

[rongo]

3 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Maybe I'm missing something, but the way I'm reading it is that Romney called him a bigot and disagrees with him praying at a U.S. embassy in Jerusalem because of his beliefs about Jews.  I'm not sure what's embarrassing about that, can you clarify?

Romney wouldn't have said anything if Jeffress hadn't have trashed Mormons. I agree with Romney that Jeffress was a very poor choice, but that's Trump for you. Once the choice has been made, I think the best thing to do is to just accept it. And not look like you're whining.  

Israelis are ecstatic about the embassy move, and are unlikely to care what this yahoo Jeffress has said about Jews. I don't think Mormons look good whining about things like prayers, snubs, etc. 

[The Nehor]

20 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

I think it is embarrassing for the President of the US to choose this man to pray at the opening of the US embassy in Jerusalem. 

On the one hand he says: "“The Bible says this land belongs to the Jewish people — period,” he told NBC News in a separate interview in February. "God has pronounced judgment after judgment in the Old Testament to those who would ‘divide the land,’ end quote, and hand it over to non-Jews.”" 

Then he turns around and says ‘You can’t be saved by being a Jew.’ Do we really want him in the land of the Jews, which he acknowledges as their land, telling them they will not be saved? I don't think that is any way to open an embassy - to send someone there who will tell their people they will not be saved. It's an embarrassing and imprudent move - but it seems that is nothing new for Pres Trump. As for Romney, he by all means knows this is nothing knew - or maybe he is not the average Mormon who has heard such stuff their whole life, and is just not used to it. He would do best to go quiet or apologize and move on. If pressed he could say he mispoke, and that "intolerant" would be a more appropriate word. Jeffres suffers the same misconceptions of thousands of other Christians. Romney certainly doesn't win any brownie points with me by calling him a bigot. I picture bigots as being irrationally hateful. Although I disagree with Jeffres rationale, he at least has one for saying what he does. 

To be fair the Evangelicals that back our idiot President only support Israel so they can kick off the battle of Armageddon and get Jesus to return. It is not based on any kind of religious respect for the Jewish faith or respect for those living in Israel.

[MiserereNobis]

5 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

To be fair the Evangelicals that back our idiot President only support Israel so they can kick off the battle of Armageddon and get Jesus to return. It is not based on any kind of religious respect for the Jewish faith or respect for those living in Israel.

The fawning over Trump for this is beyond ridiculous. From one Rabbi:

Quote

Enter Donald Trump. With the stroke of a pen, he validated 3,500 years of Jewish history by opening the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem, debunking the global smear campaign against the Jewish State.

It's not much of a history if it requires a pen stroke to validate it. And it's not much a smear campaign if a pen stroke can debunk it.

Certainly Israel can be grateful. But the hyperbole actually undermines their position because it seems to make their history dependent upon whether or not the United States has their embassy in Jerusalem, which is a pretty capricious thing.

[bluebell]

24 minutes ago, rongo said:

Romney wouldn't have said anything if Jeffress hadn't have trashed Mormons.

How do we know this?  Did Romney state that somewhere?

 

[Calm]

I think the whole 'a vote for Romney is a vote for Satan' and Islam promotes pedophilia is enough over the top to qualify Jeffress as a bigot.  As far as condemning it, it points out the quality of Trump's decisions as president and since Romney is, imo, trying to get Trump out, it makes sense to me he would  bring it up.

http://archive.sltrib.com/article.php?id=4840557&itype=CMSID

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-trump-faith-adviser-who-said-all-jews-go-to-hell-to-speak-at-embassy-1.6078561

From wiki, other statements:

Quote

Jeffress referred to Roman Catholicism as a "Satanic" result of "Babylonian mystery religion

 

Quote

What they [homosexuals] do is filthy. It is so degrading that it is beyond description. And it is their filthy behavior that explains why they are so much more prone to disease."

 

Edited May 14, 2018 by Calm

[rongo]

1 minute ago, bluebell said:

How do we know this?  Did Romney state that somewhere?

He said in his tweet, along with "Jews can't be saved," that, Jeffress has said, quote, "Mormonism is a heresy from the pit of hell." 

I'm not sure if that is an accurate quote of Jeffress on the part of Romney (it accurately conveys what he thinks of us), but mentioning this along with his view of Jews shows why Romney was upset. Otherwise, he would have just tweeted outrage due to his statements about Jews. 

[bluebell]

1 minute ago, rongo said:

He said in his tweet, along with "Jews can't be saved," that, Jeffress has said, quote, "Mormonism is a heresy from the pit of hell." 

I'm not sure if that is an accurate quote of Jeffress on the part of Romney (it accurately conveys what he thinks of us), but mentioning this along with his view of Jews shows why Romney was upset. Otherwise, he would have just tweeted outrage due to his statements about Jews. 

If you say so.

[rongo]

7 minutes ago, bluebell said:

If you say so.

Why do you think Romney included "Mormonism is a heresy from the pit of hell" as one of the reasons Jeffress shouldn't have given the prayer?

You don't have to take my word for it . . .  

[HappyJackWagon]

I think Romney nailed this one. The guy is an unabashed bigot. Sending a religiously intolerant preacher to pray in Jerusalem is a political mistake and Romney is making a political calculation by challenging the president on this. Makes sense to me.

[Stargazer]

24 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

To be fair the Evangelicals that back our idiot President only support Israel so they can kick off the battle of Armageddon and get Jesus to return. It is not based on any kind of religious respect for the Jewish faith or respect for those living in Israel.

Well, I think you're overreaching.  There may be some who feel that way, but there are many others who genuinely feel that the land which the Lord promised to Israel should actually have Israelites living in it.

The interesting thing about this is that Israel's presence validates the prophecies of the Bible and from modern-day prophets.  Israel's existence in the modern day is a prerequisite for the Lord's coming in power, opening the Millenium.  If Israel weren't there, they'd have to be put there.  So it doesn't matter that some people want the Jews there so Jesus can return.  That's what is supposed to happen.  If some want it for the wrong reasons, well so what?

And Armageddon takes place AFTER the Millenium, not before.  You're thinking of the Tribulation preceding the Second Coming.

[Calm]

2 hours ago, rongo said:

It's like when FAIR tried to start a "Mormon Anti-Defamation League." 

I believe you are talking about Mormon Voices (it is the only thing that comes close when possible names were being discussed), which was a success for a number of years.  Its purpose was to encourage its members to post comments to correct errors made in media reports.  Like many projects, a few volunteers were involved and when they eventually became unavailable, it was discontinued.  The name is now being used for the coalition of FM, Interpreter, and Book of Mormon Central.

https://mormonvoices.org/

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, rongo said:

Romney wouldn't have said anything if Jeffress hadn't have trashed Mormons. I agree with Romney that Jeffress was a very poor choice, but that's Trump for you. Once the choice has been made, I think the best thing to do is to just accept it. And not look like you're whining.  

Israelis are ecstatic about the embassy move, and are unlikely to care what this yahoo Jeffress has said about Jews. I don't think Mormons look good whining about things like prayers, snubs, etc. 

I don't think you can definitively say Romney wouldn't have said anything if Jeffress hadn't trashed Mormons.

[Scott Lloyd]

9 minutes ago, Calm said:

I believe you are talking about Mormon Voices (it is the only thing that comes close when possible names were being discussed), which was a success for a number of years.  Its purpose was to encourage its members to post comments to correct errors made in media reports.  Like many projects, a few volunteers were involved and when they eventually became unavailable, it was discontinued.  The name is now being used for the coalition of FM, Interpreter, and Book of Mormon Central.

https://mormonvoices.org/

I remember when that was undertaken. I thought at the time it was a good idea. I still do. I'm disappointed to hear that it petered out.

 

[rongo]

12 minutes ago, Calm said:

I believe you are talking about Mormon Voices (it is the only thing that comes close when possible names were being discussed), which was a success for a number of years.  Its purpose was to encourage its members to post comments to correct errors made in media reports.  Like many projects, a few volunteers were involved and when they eventually became unavailable, it was discontinued.  The name is now being used for the coalition of FM, Interpreter, and Book of Mormon Central.

https://mormonvoices.org/

No, this was the "Mormon Anti-Defamation League." It never got off the ground, but the purpose was supposed to be to aggressively respond to misrepresentations in the media, to the point where people feared stepping on Mormon rakes as much as on Jewish rakes (because of the ADL --- this was specifically mentioned in list chatter). This also struck me as whining, like whining about a Mormon-hating evangelical giving the prayer for the new embassy. 

It may have morphed or undergone a name change. I think I ended my list membership around 2011 or so. 

Edited May 14, 2018 by rongo

[rongo]

4 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I don't think you can definitively say Romney wouldn't have said anything if Jeffress hadn't trashed Mormons.

No, you're right. Proving a negative, and all that. 

[Scott Lloyd]

12 minutes ago, rongo said:

No, this was the "Mormon Anti-Defamation League." It never got off the ground, but the purpose was supposed to be to aggressively respond to misrepresentations in the media, to the point where people feared stepping on Mormon rakes as much as on Jewish rakes (because of the ADL --- this was specifically mentioned in list chatter). This also struck me as whining, like whining about a Mormon-hating evangelical giving the prayer for the new embassy. 

It may have morphed or undergone a name change. I think I ended my list membership around 2011 or so. 

As I recall, they started out calling it an anti-defamation league and then the name very soon thereafter was changed to something else. My recollection is that it had more traction than you remember it having.

 

Edited May 14, 2018 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

48 minutes ago, rongo said:

Why do you think Romney included "Mormonism is a heresy from the pit of hell" as one of the reasons Jeffress shouldn't have given the prayer?

 

Because that makes his case more compelling.

It's like the accusations against Bill Cosby. It becomes harder and harder to dismiss them when they number into the dozens.

[hope_for_things]

2 hours ago, bsjkki said:

He tweeted,“Robert Jeffress says, ‘You can’t be saved by being a Jew,’ and ‘Mormonism is a heresy from the pit of hell,’” ... “He’s said the same about Islam. Such a religious bigot should not be giving the prayer that opens the United States Embassy in Jerusalem.”

It seems to me that its somewhat hypocritical of a Mormon to take this position when our doctrine essentially teaches the same thing.  Our doctrine teaches that only ordinances administered through proper authority are efficacious for ultimate salvation/exaltation.   

I think the language that Jeffress uses is definitely divisive and should be critiqued, however, I find it ironic that a member of one exclusivist religion(Mormonism) is calling out a member of another exclusivist religion(evangelical Protestantism). 

[hope_for_things]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

I think the whole 'a vote for Romney is a vote for Satan' and Islam promotes pedophilia is enough over the top to qualify Jeffress as a bigot.  As far as condemning it, it points out the quality of Trump's decisions as president and since Romney is, imo, trying to get Trump out, it makes sense to me he would  bring it up.

http://archive.sltrib.com/article.php?id=4840557&itype=CMSID

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-trump-faith-adviser-who-said-all-jews-go-to-hell-to-speak-at-embassy-1.6078561

From wiki, other statements:

 

 

Wow, this guy sounds pretty bad.  Maybe Romney was right to call him out, even if the execution of his tweet wasn't very well worded.  

[Calm]

3 hours ago, rongo said:

No, this was the "Mormon Anti-Defamation League." It never got off the ground, but the purpose was supposed to be to aggressively respond to misrepresentations in the media, to the point where people feared stepping on Mormon rakes as much as on Jewish rakes (because of the ADL --- this was specifically mentioned in list chatter). This also struck me as whining, like whining about a Mormon-hating evangelical giving the prayer for the new embassy. 

It may have morphed or undergone a name change. I think I ended my list membership around 2011 or so. 

That was one of the names suggested for the original Mormon Voices.  Mormon Defense League was what they were thinking of going with for a time, Mormon Voices is what they went with.

As far as fearing to step on Mormon rakes, that was part of some people's ideas of it.  Others, including the ones in charge, were simply about ensuring an accurate portrayal to the best of our ability.

I have emails that go way back to check as well as just checking with the management list.

From the Nov 2011 FAIR Journal:

Quote

 

In August, FAIR launched a new Website titled "The Mormon Defense League." While FAIRLDS.org and FAIRMormon.org provide responses to criticisms of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, our target audience with FAIR is principally members of the Church.

Members already have the background to understand our articles. But, with the new spotlight in the press, we felt that we needed more of a response to non-members. The message needed to be simpler, shorter, and targeted.

But, as we have worked through the process, we have decided that the name "Mormon Defense League," didn't work well for us. It didn't accurately reflect our process. To better reflect our organizational focus and methods, we have now changed the name to "MormonVoices."

The two words, "Mormon" and "Voices" are brought together in one word, symbolizing the many members of the church, with our varying opinions coming together in this one unifying task of providing a positive response to misrepresentations of our faith. The new website is MormonVoices.org.

There are so many articles now in the news and on the internet, it is impossible for one or two writers from an organization to keep up. This new name better reflects our hope that members become involved in online discussions where positive representation of the Church is needed to offset offensive stereotypes and misinformation.

 

Add-on:  I have it on good authority the name was changed specifically because there was confusion with "Anti-Defamation League".  Mormon Voices was never meant to function like that.

You are not the only one that got that impression.  Shortly after the original announcement, the Washington Post had this to say:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/mormons-using-the-web-to-control-their-own-image/2011/08/11/gIQA1J6BMJ_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.2b3a5860f85a

Quote

It’s not only the official church group that’s got PR chops. This month, an independent Mormon group launched the Mormon Defense League to monitor reporting on the church. The group threatened to confront writers who it believes misrepresent the church.

This led to a list discussion about how MDL was going to have to respond to a media comment about MDL to correct the incorrect info...very meta.  

Also came across this, which were the original instructions that were sent out, I believe, with the first 'call out':

Quote

1.       Only use your real or known online identity.

2.       Do not denigrate the beliefs of others

3.       Do not allow yourself to be drawn into political bickering

4.       Be supportive of the Church

5.       Behave as if you are an ambassador to the Church, avoiding all language or reaction that would reflect poorly on the same.

6.       Do not copy the comments of others, but share your own personal thoughts in your own words.

 

Edited May 15, 2018 by Calm