Harry Reid, Pat Toomey and Local Politics
So, Mormons Are a Brainwashed “Cult?”
. . . Couldn’t prove that by Senate Majority Leader – and Mormon – Harry Reid of Nevada. (That links to FOXNews; the original story is in the the SLCTrib.)
Reid, a Democrat from Nevada, is the highest ranking elected official who is a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. He previously has not commented on the flood of Mormon money and volunteers who helped propel Proposition 8 to victory in November.
But three organizers of the past weekend’s National Equality March said Reid brought up the topic during a conversation in his office.
“He said that he thought it was a waste of church resources and good will,” said Derek Washington, a Nevadan who worked as the outreach director for the march. “He said he didn’t think it was appropriate.”
Reid spokesman Jon Summers would not discuss the private meeting, but he didn’t deny the conversation took place.
“While Senator Reid agrees with his church that marriage is between a man and a woman,” Summers said, “he also believes that the resources that went into the Proposition 8 effort could have been put to better use.”
Interesting viewpoint, and one quite common amongst liberals of the Evangelical persuasion. Although I found this from later in the story most fascinating:
Marchers in Sunday’s equality rally, which drew tens of thousands to the U.S. Capitol, repeatedly referenced the Prop 8 defeat in signs, statements and even face paint. But when organizers sat down with Reid, it wasn’t a topic they intended to raise. They wanted to thank him for supporting the march and push him on their desire for federal action giving gay Americans the ability to get married, serve openly in the military and fight workplace discrimination.
Reid signed a letter supporting the march and encouraged a sustained lobbying campaign.
In the meeting, those present touched on issues most important to them. Dan Choi, a veteran of the Iraq War, who was booted from the military under the “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, thanked Reid for lobbying President Barack Obama on his behalf. Robin McGehee, of California, talked about her own family. Then, McGehee said, Reid brought up his LDS faith and discussed a recent meeting with Mormons in which he criticized the Prop 8 efforts.
“He personally said they needed to be focused on other things,” she said, “and he felt it was harmful for the church to focus on such a divisive issue.”
Reid agrees that marriage is between a man and a woman, but then encourages and endorses protesters to the contrary? I am having a hard time doing the mental math on that one. Not really, I am sure he would justify it as supporting their right to protest and be heard, would have to read the specifics of the letter before I could pick on this too hard.
But, of course, what is most fascinating is his open criticism of his church – a church that was portrayed by some last cycle as a cult in which all the members walk lock-step, taking orders from Salt Lake City. Sure does not appear that way to me. This is actually pretty big news. While Reid has, throughout his career, taken stances counter to those taught by his church, this is the first instance I know of of him publicly criticizing his church.
Harry Reid has inadvertently given Mitt Romney a huge boost here. This is a keeper. If the “brainwashed cult” charge comes up again, Harry Reid is the argument against. These Mormons are looking more and more like the rest of us every day.
And yet . . .
Some people, conservatives, insist on singling out Mormons for criticism. (HT: SCVTalk) This is a very local political issue, but a letter writer to a small paper accuses a congressman, Buck McKeon, of endorsing only Mormons?! I have no idea whatsoever if the endorsements McKeon did make had anything to do with their shared Mormon faith or not. More likely it had to do with the fact that they knew each other personally, perhaps because they met in church, but exactly how is that any different than all the votes I cast for Carlos Morehead when he served in Congress because I knew him from church?
An interesting glimpse into where some fo the problems lie.
And Romney Remains Very Smart.
He endorsed Pat Toomey in Pennsylvania yesterday. (”Toomey’s not Mormon,” John said with a smirk.) There is a lot of history behind this one that I do not have the time to go into right now, but it is a really smart move on Romney’s part. It mends a few fences and burnishes his credentials quite a bit. Very smart move.
A couple of comments from Lowell:
First, any Mormon knows that we have members in our church of all political stripes. In my own ward (congregation) we try to avoid even discussing politics at church because we know not everyone feels the same way about such matters. Prop 8 was also not a subject on which all Mormons agreed. So it is no surprise that Harry Reid feels the way he does. The surprise is that he has kept quiet about his views for so long. Second, I live in the Congressional district next to Buck McKeon’s. (He was once my congressman until redistricting moved me out.) The idea that he endorses only Mormons is laughable. There aren’t enough Mormons around running for office for that to happen. L.A. County is not Utah, folks!
Posted in Reading List, Understanding Religion | 5 Comments » | 
Print this post
| 
Email This Post
coltakashi on 14 Oct 2009 at 12:40 pm #
A politician’s endorsement is not an entitlement handed out by the government. It is not subject to the 14th Amendment rules about equality, or the Civil Rights Act requirements about nondiscrimination by race or religion. Every individual, even a politician, has a right to express his or her views on any candidate for any office. He can endorse someone because they are rich or good looking or for any reason whatsoever.
As to someone endorsing a candidate that he or she shares some characteristic with, what is wrong with that? It could be living in the same neighborhood, going to the same church, attending the same college, or even being a relative. No voter is compelled to accept the endorsement as binding on them. It is just one person’s opinion. How much credence or weight you give to it is completely up to you.
Why in the world should having some kind of relationship with the candidate disqualify you from endorsing him? When Barbara Boxer became an in-law of the Clintons, was she barred forever from endorsing Hillary? Are Catholic members of Congress from California prohibited from endorsing Catholics like John Kerry and Nancy Pelosi and Arnold Schwarzenegger? Was George Washington to be indicted for endorsing anyone who was a Mason?
Since the author of the letter has an Asian name, I wondered if she would object if a Chinese-American official were to endorse two Chinese-American candidates. In my experience, most politically active people who identify with minority groups would more likely demand that he endorse people of his own ethnicity as a matter of group solidarity. Did Colin Powell get criticized for endorsing Obama inasmuch as they are both African-Americans?
The First Amendment guarantees the right to pick our own friends, and that is what an endorsement is. Since the letter writer could not even specify in her letter why her own friends were superior to the friends of the congressman, I conclude it is nothing but a cheap shot that appeals to religious prejudice.
Harry Reid: Once again, the majority leader has proven that he is the best argument for the reality of the independent judgment of Mormons on political issues. Until the McGovern campaign radicalized the Democratic Party, it was not difficult for Mormons to be active Democrats, and Mormons in Utah regularly elected Democrat governors and congressmen. Jon Huntsman, the Utah governor who is now ambassador to China has been a very moderate Republican. If the Democrats could be neutral on abortion and gay marriage, they would find plenty of additional support among both Mormons and Evangelicals on other issues. What has happened is that the radical progressives have marginalized the views of religious believers of many stripes, and then claimed that religious people are on the political fringe. Sadly, we may not have Harry Reid to point to for much longer.
Tweets that mention Article VI Blog » Blog Archive » Harry Reid, Elder Dallin Oaks, Pat Tommey and Local Politics -- Topsy.com on 14 Oct 2009 at 12:55 pm #
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Mitt Romney in 2012!, Article VI Blog. Article VI Blog said: New Q Article VI Blog: Harry Reid, Elder Oaks and More – http://bit.ly/GeUTC #hhrs [...]
John Schroeder on 14 Oct 2009 at 4:06 pm #
You realize, of course, that if everyone votes by affiliation, Mormons will likely never get national office again? There is nothing wrong with voting by affiliation, but it sure is not always smart.
TVHall on 14 Oct 2009 at 10:50 pm #
If all other factors are equivalent, affiliation can and likely will tip the scale. On the other hand, I wouldn’t vote for Harry Reid if he were the only other entity on this planet. As my father drummed into each of his kids, “There is a time and a place for everything.” (Yes, Ecclesiastes) The time for affiliation consideration is after more important qualifications have been met. The time for considering Harry Reid, and all others of his ilk, is not in this or any other lifetime.
Northern Lights » Blog Archive » From the Bloggernacle (9-20-09) on 15 Oct 2009 at 8:34 pm #
[...] Harry Reid, Pat Toomey and Local Politics Article IV Blog – October 14, 2009 [...]