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 4 of 8)
46. To: Blackids,
It is an absolute fact. It was even reported in Time magazine when it happened. This was standard LDS church and my friend and her family were heavily involved in it. It was their community and their entire life. And the church elders told her to kick out the black kid or she would be shunned.
She refused and walked away from her church and her entire family. My friend has guts and principles. One of her kids has come back to her, now that she is a little older. Her other kids still won't speak with her, nor will her ex husband. Because the one child no longer shuns her the ex-husband will not pay for that kids college.
But believe me, if you know enough Mormons who have left the LSD church, they have some not so nice practices. Not that Christians or Jews or Islam is any better. There is pologymy and it is not officially sanction, but it sure is unofficially.
cdnbirch at 5:57PM on Aug 13th 2007
47. Mr. D'Souza is the latest of the neo-conservatives to throw his support behind Romney, obviously because the gamemasters behind the party need fresh faces. I would also like to point out that this is exactly the kind of candidate the neo-cons have been hoping for, their own version of Wahaddi-Islam, albeit homegrown. Notice the Mormons as "ideal conservatives." An entire segment of the population zealous to a higher authority, totally sided with the state. Perhaps the Mormons would act as a vanguard of sorts in the continuing wars against Muslim extremists? Or perhaps a bulwark against those pesky free-thinkers and their "degenerate art." Hmm...sounds like Hitler/Goebbles to me. I would invite Mr D'Souza and the rest of neo-con crew to heed the words of Emerson, who in his essay "The Conservative" wrote: "Opposed to progress is the conservative. His only ally is the collected memories of things past, and one cannot build a new city on memories, but merely inhabit the ruins of the present one."
RON PAUL IN '08
Zachariah S. Germaniuk at 1:55PM on Aug 16th 2007
48. The best solution--keep a wall of separation between church and state. This would, of course, preclude such items as government-sponsored prayer (as, for example, in public schools). But that's OK, the government should never be used as a sectarian evangelistic organization (as intelligent churchmen have always known).
Bruce Peterson at 6:07PM on Aug 13th 2007
49. I'd like to see a link to a Time magazine article. I find it very hard to believe the boy was to be kicked out because he was black. I would suspect there were other mitigating circumstances. It is not entirely unheard of for someone to play the race card when the issue is entirely something else. It brings to mind the black man that was shot by a white officer when all he did was come charging at them with a sword. Many came down on the officers involved, claiming it was racially motivated. Personally I would assume anyone running at an officer with a sword would be shot, regardless of color.
As for Polygamy being unofficially accepted, you are just plain crazy. The polygamist colonies belong to a completely different denomination than the mainstream Mormon church. I have known polygamists and they try to stay as low as profile as possible to avoid being persecuted by those in the mainstream Mormon church.
True the church does not go after these polygamists, but then again they are not memebrs of the church. It would be like the church going after a Catholic for drinking coffee. They just leave it up to the authorities in government to prosecute.
Governments have been turning a blind eye to the polygamy issue, and ussually only step in due to mitigating circumstances such as Child abuse, pedophilia, or incest (which unfortunately occur). They intentionally avoid prosecuting others. This is done explicitly to prevent a prosecuted case from gaining traction in being escalated up the court system and thus setting law. A recent case, trying to legalize polygamy based on discrimination (much like gay marraige) was thrown out of the supreme court because the original prosecution also involved child molestation since the child was under the age of consent. The court commented that it would wait to decide the issue once polygamous consenting adults were prosecuted.
One of the sure fire ways to make something legal is to enforce a law against someone that may be able to be determined to step on their basic rights. Look at what happenned to strip clubs in Oregon when they tried to enforce a more strict moral based law.
joel at 11:11PM on Aug 13th 2007
50. MORMONISM IS AN OPPRESSIVE, CONTROLLING RELIGION. IF ROMNEY HAD TO MAKE A CHOICE ABOUT ANYTHING VERSUS MORMONISM, HE WOULD CHOOSE MORMONISM. THEY HAVE VERY WEIRD SECRETIVE RULES CONCERNING THEIR FOLLOWERS. IF HE WANTS TO BE A MORMON, SO BE IT. JUST DON'T EVEN THINK OF HAVING HIM AS OUR PRESIDENT.
Kathy at 6:43PM on Aug 13th 2007
51. TO cdnbirch
Funny I thought this blog was dedicated to candidates. As a researcher at the Institute of Religion I can say with experience that there are more people of color in the LDS faith then there are caucasians. Really! Of the 12 million or so that are active members most outside the United States then in it are not white. A healthy mix of Latin american white asian and black in that order if its importent for you to know the standing of racial balance the white population is almost a minority in that particular faith based on available data. They are a world wide missionary church with more success outside the United States then within it. So the pretty much means the grasp the global nature of humanity pretty well.
patrice ferguson at 6:50PM on Aug 13th 2007
52. Dinesh: You are deluded to say that morality is derived from religion. Morality is derived from reason. Morals without rational and reasonable bases are simply opinions, feelings, prejudices. A non-mormon, I also grew up among mormons, and it was difficult at best. Try it before you start telling us all what great people they are as a group - you need educating!
Shelley at 7:46PM on Aug 13th 2007
53. To: cdnbirch 911
Wheres that dang link to the story about the black kids being kicked out of the cub pack? I need it quick. As a mormon den mother here in Utah I have 3 boys of color in my pack and I better get them outta here pronto so I don't run the risk of being shunned. (now that I think about it my next door neighbor did not wave to me this morning as she left her driveway, mabey its too late!) Anyhoo, I love it when people who know nothing about what they are typing about refuse to let their stupefying lack of knowledge get in the way of their inane rantings. Well, I better get back to being repressed now. I have had a hard day of making snow cones and playing in the hose with my children while my beastly, sexist husband sat around doing nothing but supporting our family by working at his medical practice all day. That jerk than came home and took our six children to the park, where he is still. He thought I looked tired and so he told me not to cook dinner, he will just pick up a bucket of chicken on his way home! All he does is boss me and boss me. Its all so patriarichal. Help me, Help me CDNbirch! Does this mormon hell I live in never end?
Christine Marshall at 8:35PM on Aug 13th 2007
54. Just a minute, let me get my hat and a special brown stone and I can translate it for you. Wow, your wife sure has big hooters, brother!
frank at 8:27PM on Aug 15th 2007
55. In case anyone has forgotten, we're electing a President, not a Pope. In case anyone has forgotten, we're also electing 1/3 of the U.S. Senate and all 435 members of the House of Representatives. Mitt Romney would not be one "god" in Three Divine Persons; he would be the head of one of three branches of the U.S. Government. The election of John Kennedy did not turn America into a Papal State; the election of Richard Nixon did not turn America into a Quaker enclave; the election of Jimmy Carter did not turn America into a tent meeting, and the elections of George Bushes did not turn America into a country club. Romney would have to deal with the two houses of Congress, not to mention the media. So, what are some outwardly-free-thinking but inwardly anti-religious-principle bigots worried about - that more Americans might think about what is right and what is wrong, as did John Kennedy, Jimmy Carter, and Ronald Reagan?
Tom E. at 10:48PM on Aug 13th 2007
56. It's not that simple. Mormonism seeks to control everything its members think and do, and the Mormon hierarchy does not hesitate to interfere with its members' lives. They're all about power, money, and control.
Sonia Johnson was excommunicated for publicly supporting the Equal Rights Amendment. The respected historian Samuel W. Taylor was excommunicated for writing a sympathetic history of the early days of Mormonism that didn't paint Joseph Smith in totally glowing colors. The Mormon bosses make Benedict XVI look like a warm and fuzzy relativistic softie in comparison.
I don't like Romney's social-fascist flip-flops, and I don't want a president who's controlled by a bunch of mean-minded octogenarians in Salt Lake City. The only way I'd ever vote for Romney would be if he were running against a member of an even more controlling cult -- say, a Scientologist.
RW at 11:33PM on Aug 13th 2007
57. It makes me sad that people like cdnbirch, people who obviously choose to be ignorant, actually get to vote. But what is reassuring is how many people can see through cdn's rants for what they are and are choosing to think. Cdn, the more you write the more ridiculous you sound.
Every religeon has beliefs that seem "mythical" and are difficult to accept by people outside their faith and all religeons at their core are just trying to teach people how to be good human beings, so in veiwing Mitt as a candidate, we really ought to take the religeous aspect out and focus on his work as a politician. I mean I'm not a Baptist or Methodist or whatever religeous preference our past presidents have ascribed to, but I still tried to put my faith in them "despite our religeous differences."
Let's just cut the crap and look for a good leader with integrity. I don't know if it's Mitt, McCain, Edwards, Obama or who it is, but that's what I'm looking for.
Oh and cdn....you might want to hurry up with that article. I need to show it to the LDS (Latter Day Saint) wards up in Harlem. Wow, won't their Boy Scout program come to a screeching halt! NOT!
Oh, and Christine, thanks for the fabulous laugh!
Lisa at 11:41PM on Aug 13th 2007
58. Why is revelation strange. The original Chrisitan church was founded on revelation. In fact it taught that without it the church would fail. The LDS believe in revelation which accounts for the so called strange beliefs MC attacks. If I remember right, Christ was attacked and put to death for the very same thing. He introduced new revelation that religionists would not accept.
What is strange is the description of the hellenized Nicene God that was fashioned from years of debate in 325 ad. Can mans wisdom replace Gods? To MC the answer is yes. I find this not only strange but dangerous.
One important reason the LDS church was founded was to restore true knowldege of the Godhead which was lost. The reason LDS doctrine appears strange is the very same reason Christ's doctrines appeared strange 2,000 years ago. Religionists falsely accused him, and made him appear abominable. History truely does repeat itself. Mitt is attacked becuse he is a saint. MC is not attacking him, but God. The day of judgement is at hand.
Robert Decell at 12:21AM on Aug 14th 2007
59. Latter Day Saints, of which the Mormons arer a sect, aren't a sect of Christianity. They're a 'religion' made up by an oddly unusual man. Do some research. You'll find fun facts "such as their 'baptism for the dead' (they're busy posthumously baptizing Jews who died in the Holocaust), the rituals of the Endowment and Sealing, and its doctrinal views on the Godhead; the church was also distinct in that it authorized the practice of plural marriage although it has since been discontinued (NOT). The [LDS] church teaches that it is "the only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth" " - mostly lifted from the LDS wiki. And then there's this bit of Mormon news, "No man or woman in this dispensation will ever enter into the celestial kingdom of God without the consent of Joseph Smith… He reigns there as supreme a being in his sphere, capacity and calling, as God does in Heaven" - Journal of Discourses, Vol.14, p.203".
yabbi at 12:29AM on Aug 14th 2007
60. BT...
What's wrong with you? Why are you so bitterly angry that you just ignore history to get your digs in? Why can you do nothing to advance the conversation? Why are you so obsessed with name calling?
First woman elected to Congress - Rankin, Jeannette, a REPUBLICAN (1916!)
First Hispanic woman in Congress - Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, a REPUBLICAN.
First woman to serve in both the House AND the Senate - Margaret Chase Smith, a REPUBLICAN.
First black member of the House - Joseph Rainey, a REPUBLICAN.
First black member of the Senate - Hiram Rhodes Revels, a REPUBLICAN
First woman in the Supreme Court - Sandra Day O'Connor, nominated by a REPUBLICAN President.
So enough with your nonsense of "47 years after Kennedy, 42 years after the Civil Rights Act" nonsense. It's nothing but typical divisive, revisionist "history." So Democrats have a black man and a woman running for President. BIG WHOOP! Democrats don't hold the mantle, as has been demonstrated AGAIN, for "firsts."
timber at 3:13AM on Aug 14th 2007