Mitt Romney's victory in the Iowa Republican caucus is not, by itself, very significant. But it does show Romney's strength among conservative activists, and it confirms that his candidacy cannot be dismissed. Many analysts across the political spectrum believe that Romney won' t have a chance to be a serious contender until he addresses the Mormon issue. Many political strategists have suggested that Romney make a move similar to the one that John F. Kennedy made when he went before the Baptists and essentially told them that his Catholicism would have no bearing whatsoever on his decisions as president. So should Romney make a similar declaration?
No. What Kennedy did was perhaps politically necessary to diffuse anti-Catholic prejudice. Yet this is not the correct meaning of separation of church and state, which as the founders envisioned it would merely forbid the establishment of a national church or official theological orthodoxy. (In fact the founders had no problem with states having their own established churches, and several of them did.) Nowhere did Washington, Adams, Madison or even Jefferson (perhaps the least devout of the founders) claim that presidents could not be influenced by their own religious convictions. They would rightly have recognized this as absurd. Of course what was absurd for the founders is not necessarily absurd in the Kennedy household. If President John F. Kennedy knew how to govern without his Catholicism, Senator Ted Kennedy's moral values are so private that he refuses to impose them even on himself!
Leaving aside our peculiar Camelot crew, most people cannot separate their religious beliefs from who they are. Romney has a wonderful opportunity to make an important distinction. The distinction is between Mormon theology and Mormon morality. Theology is the province of revelation, and it is in the nature of revelation to be outside the province of rational debate. I cannot, for example, give you reasons why I believe in the Trinity. Morality, however, may derive from religion but it is entirely defensible in terms of reason. I don't need to appeal to the Book of Daniel or Jonah in the belly of the whale in order to convince you why government policy should protect human life or support the family as the institution for raising the next generation. Moral argument is at the core of what democratic debate and democratically-approved legislation is all about, as the debates over slavery and the civil rights movement clearly show.
Mormon theology is, at least for us non-Mormons, very strange. But Mormon morality is not strange at all. In fact, it is generally the same morality espoused by traditional Christianity and also by traditional Judaism, traditional Islam, and traditional Hinduism. Mormons as a group are wonderful people: creatively entrepreneurial, thoroughly devoted to their families, law-abiding and decent. They are, in fact, exemplary Republicans and conservatives. Romney should argue that his Mormon theology is a private belief but Mormon ethics and values are precisely those traditional American principles that built this country and now need to be revived.
Reader Comments ( Page 1 of 8)
1. ddHello. I found Britney Spears Nude video :) Enjoy..
..
http://sexy-tube-world.net/view.php?Britney_Spears_Nude
..
..
odatgpunem at 10:40AM on Jan 24th 2009
2. I live in a Utah county where everyone else is a mormon. One after another, my neighbours tried to covert me to their religion. These mormons don't have any idea what I believe in. They don't even respect my forefather who was a Hindu and accepted Christianity many years ago in India. Now these neighbours don't look at my face, don't talk at all because I did not become a Mormon. As far as I know this mormon society is a male dominated society. Is it immoral to practice pologamy? Once they did, and still some do these days. The abuse, crimes, stealings, divorce are in a mormon society like any other society - come and live in a Mormon state and you will read about it. The jails are almost full here.
Romney's election into a president of United States will only add power to the Multi million dollar Mormon Church and their attacks against other religions.
Varghese Jacob at 8:41AM on Aug 13th 2007
3. DD' Spews - "Mormons as a group are wonderful people: creatively entrepreneurial, thoroughly devoted to their families, law-abiding and decent. They are, in fact, exemplary Republicans and conservatives"
You were doing really good there...
Until that last part.
Insofar as Romney's Religion...
It isn't the "godless" Democrats who have a problem with it.
It's your fellow "christian" conservatives.
BT at 8:55AM on Aug 13th 2007
4. Well Dinesh, you almost managed it. You very nearly went a whole paragraph without tossing in some pointless and disparaging remark about a Democrat, liberal, or atheist. If anything about you was impressive, I'd go so far as to say I'm impressed... only I'm not. One wonders why you have such a compulsion to slander when you write. Could your piece have carried your thoughts about Romney without negative comments about others? Absolutely. If it had, you might have gotten something novel and new, some things you've never gotten before; respect for your writing, point of view, and perhaps even your intellectual integrity, which as far as can be seen is still lacking. Your implication that since Mormons are such decent, law-abiding, creative, family oriented people make such great conservatives, liberals lack those traits was, for you, quite subtle. The real question is, what would this piece have looked like if he was writing about a Democratic Mormon candidate? Somehow I imagine he would be somewhat less flattering about Mormons and the candidate himself. But then, what else do we expect from someone like Dinesh?
Eric
Eric Barlow at 9:00AM on Aug 13th 2007
5. Romney’s Mormon ethics teach service to others, faithfulness to wife and family, hold the U.S. Constitution as divinely inspired, and affirm honoring, obeying and sustaining the law. He has show the ability to work successful with all people both at the 2002 U.S. Olympics in Salt Lake, and as governor of Massachusetts as a Republican. These are simple and pure American beliefs. What it is that I can't believe is that someone so ethical and grounded is finally running for the White House!
Las Vegas, Nevada at 9:11AM on Aug 13th 2007
6. Keep being you, that's why you're here - beautifully expressive.
Sha at 9:16AM on Aug 13th 2007
7. Eric
Come on!!! Dinesh was giving an example of the antithesis of his arguement. He merely transitioned from JFK to TK. Having courage of one's convictions sometimes is in conflict with political gain. Perhaps "our" ambivilience with conviction is one of the reasons why we have seen "progressive thought" be still the same old story for 35 years. Perhaps this serves the politician more than the people and a new generation always seems to fall for the same BS.
John
John Piccione at 10:01AM on Aug 13th 2007
8. No Mohammedans or Mormons for President. Ever.
Now, go ahead and insult me, you stupid PC Moonbat Dhimmicrats! I couldn't care less! So, go ahead, waste your time!
Varghese Jacob (first comment) - I'm sorry you've been harassed by your Mormon neighbors in Utah.
Stephanie at 9:38AM on Aug 13th 2007
9. The funny thing about this is how much it says about the right...
In 1960, Democrats got over their white guy with a different Christian sect issue with the nomination of John F. Kennedy. 47 years later, the two leading candidates are a woman and a black male - Democrats having elected numerous women, black people, Hispanic people, and even non-Chrisitians in the form of numerous Jewish people and a Moslem to Congress...
The Rethuglys - never a group to embrace a progressive idea...
Are still fighting over a white guy with a different version of Christianity...
47 years after Kennedy - and 42 years AFTER the Civil Rights Act.
So much for any claim the right can make on morality, when they haven't progressed beyond anyone but a white, christian male having a seat sitting anywhere near the front of the bus.
BT at 9:59AM on Aug 13th 2007
10. "Theology is the province of revelation, and it is the nature of revelation to be beyond the province of rational debate."
Dinesh, it is also the nature of nonsense to be beyond the province of rational debate. Oh, wait a minute, I believe you just said that.
"I cannot, for example, give you reasons why I believe in the Trinity."
I can tell you, Dinesh. It is because that is what you were taught as a child, and, as a conservative, you have neither the guts nor the brains to question anything that you were taught as a child.
emelpe at 10:14AM on Aug 13th 2007
11.
I particularly liked the comment about Republican family values. How may wifes, ex-wives, mistresses etc does the current crop of GOP candidates have? 15?
As hypocrites the Repubicans really cannot be beat.
But as to Mitt's religion, or anybody's belief system for that matter, yes I think the voter has to take it into account. It says volumnes about who a person is, what he believes in, what he is willing to say he believes in even if he does not, his/her approach to life, ie flexible or rigid, creative or orthodox, etc.
I have been considering Mitt for my choice for President but cannot get beyond the fact that Mormonism is a sexist, racist, autocratic religion with some pretty funny beliefs. My friend was kicked out of the Mormon church and shunned by the her own family and friends when she refused to throw a black kid out her club scout pack.
There is no question that pologymy, ie sexual slavery starting with minor girls, is going on right now in the USA with the Mormon church turning a blind eye. And I guess Mormonism is like Islam in this reqard, once a member, they do not let you walk away easly. I have another friend who has been hiding over 30 years from these people.
But they do put a nice clear, well groomed face forward to the world. And they are hard working. If Rommney would come out against some of the evil aspects of Mormonism, I know I would feel a lot more comfortable; like saying the Mormon church has decided to route out pologmy, and is making steps to move towards equality for women. Otherwise, it is difficult to not to conclude tht that Romney does not believe in racism, and sexism and multipe marriages.
cdnbirch at 10:34AM on Aug 13th 2007
12. Wacky Stephy raves: "No Mohammedans or Mormons for President. Ever. Now, go ahead and insult me, you stupid PC Moonbat Dhimmicrats! I couldn't care less! So, go ahead, waste your time!" It would indeed be a waste of time to insult you, Stephy. After all, what could anyone possibly say that makes you look worse than your own words?
Richter at 10:31AM on Aug 13th 2007
13. Had he stopped at merely mentioning it, you would be correct John. However, he managed to slip in two or three snide, disparaging remarks about morality and other issues. I am with you about conviction however, and I can only hope politicians at some point start acting out of conviction and right, rather than personal gain and tradition or partisanship. BT you raise some good points. Stephanie, care to explain your comments? Do they stem from sheer ignorance, religious and cultural intolerance, or are you just a really bad person? All disgust with your character aside, I would be interested in hearing your justification for such comments and views. It is nowhere in the articles of our Constitution that our president needs to be Christian, or even religious for that matter. Just a tip though, you probably shouldn't throw out a hateful, unsupported opinion and then call those who would disagree with you dim. It really shows nothing but arrogance and ignorance, that you will throw out your thoughts, without even the conviction to support them in a reasonable or logical manner, and then declare that you think anyone who has the temerity to disagree with you is dim. Truly milady, you are a shining example of reason, open-mindedness, compassion, and respect. Wonder what it's like to be so sure my ignorant and intolerant views are absolutely unassailable despite being unfounded and hateful, and that anyone who holds a different view is wrong and stupid. Interesting. Hope to hear from you Steph, maybe you can explain yourself, assuming it's not a waste of time for someone as dim and unreasoning as myself.
Eric
Eric Barlow at 10:32AM on Aug 13th 2007
14. It's not questioning the beliefs you were taught as a child, or even about what religion, sex, or color the candidates for presidents are; it's about their beliefs when it comes to the greater good for our country. In that, you will realize that there will never be a candidate or a president, for that matter, who will completely fit our standards. So, of the candidates we have to choose from, we have to side (no matter democrat, republican, independent, etc.) with the one who fits into our values and beliefs (religious or not).
I loath people who vote for their "side" (dem. or rep.) and don't research the true and important values of those people, but only because of their running category. That is pure ignorance to me. You have a brain - USE IT!
Melissa at 10:35AM on Aug 13th 2007
15. They weren't up when I was typing, but I second the comments made by emelpe and Richter.
Eric
Eric Barlow at 10:36AM on Aug 13th 2007