Maine and Gay Marriage: “Mormons still to blame, somehow?”
Mollie Hemingway at GetReligion has done a survey and analysis of MSM coverage on Maine’s Question 1, which passed Tuesday night and overturned the Maine Legislature’s approval of same-sex marriage. The entire piece is worth reading. Among other things, Mollie notes the odd way in which the MSM focuses on the religious background of the Yes On 1 campaign’s backers, including the apparently unquestioned assertion that the National Organization for Marriage “is a stalking horse for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.” Here’s one paragraph:
It’s so interesting to me that so many of these stories about the Yes on 1 victory in Maine portray it as a loss for gay activists. But that similar focus isn’t brought to bear on the scrutiny of the groups that are involved in the effort to legalize same-sex marriage. I mean, I’m on a bunch of denominational news list-servs and there were plenty of religious groups fighting this ballot initiative and working to keep same-sex marriage legal in Maine. Why don’t they get the same scrutiny as the Mormons, who actually may have had no discernible role in the Maine campaign? It’s just odd.
It’s my understanding that the LDS Church indeed provided no organizational support to Yes On 1, so it’s all the more curious that its name is being bandied about in the “news” coverage of the election.
John thinks about it a bit:
What fascinated me about the piece was how incredibly convoluted was the argument to arrive at the conclusion that the whole thing was some sort of Mormon plot. It was a conspiracy theory on the order of the bilderburgrs.
These theories gain traction because the proponents of same sex marriage are so convinced of the rightness of their stance that they believe there must be an “unbelievable” conspiracy for them to be defeated. The Mormons are singled out as the conspiracy’s source based in part on the tightly held nature of some of their practices (a vacuum, even an innocent one, is always filled) and because it plays on age old prejudices.
What saddens me is that we have recently been treated to two rather elaborate, and popular, movies that paint the Roman Catholic church in similar conspiratorial terms. Can the rest of Christianity be far behind? Our philosophical and political opponents seek not merely to defeat us in the ballot box, but to portray us as purposefully evil. All the more reason for us to unify, not bicker.
Which brings me to what frightens me. Within the “Tea Party” movement, and the other “true conservative” movements are elements that are looking for such conspiracies. Like some proponents of same sex marriage, some pro-lifers and some opposition to same-sex marriage is so convinced of the sheer rightness of their stance, that they believe opposition must be born of conspiracy. But worse, the same age-old prejudices are at play and so, without realizing it, they buy the conspiracies of the left and look within their own party for the conspiracies. We are then rent asunder and the left prevails because of our disunity.
Which raises the question of whether or not the perceived conspiracy theories of the left are really conspiracy theories at all, or whether they are strategic efforts on the part of the left. Now there is a conspiracy. But then reason prevails and tells us that many on the left are sincere, if misguided, in their conspiratorial concerns, but there are some willing to use that sincerity a bit more cynically. And in turn, they use our “sincerity” to their advantage as well.
Posted in Proposition 8, Same-sex marriage | 7 Comments » | 
Print this post
| 
Email This Post
Doug King on 06 Nov 2009 at 7:00 am #
It hasn’t gotten much national attention, but a pro-gay “Everything but Marriage” referendum passed here in Washington state, but just barely. I never heard a word spoken about it at church, either by leaders or members. However, lack of evidence never slows conspiracy theorists, as evidenced in this comment on Daily Kos:
To answer Mollie Hemingway’s question — “Why don’t they [active Christians] get the same scrutiny as the Mormons, who actually may have had no discernible role in the Maine campaign?” — the answer is simple: Mormons are targeted because of their tiny numbers, their distinct theology and history, and especially because leaders on all sides of the political and cultural spectrums actively promote hatred against them. From Hollywood to the Bible Belt, from Maine to the Pacific Northwest, venting hate against Mormons is not merely socially acceptable, it’s encouraged.
CarlH on 06 Nov 2009 at 10:39 am #
It is probably worth noting here that the WaPo article in question was written by the same writer who wrote the “The Mormons Are Coming!” article that appeared in late May, 2009, and was commented on by Lowell and John at here at A6Blog. (Frankly, it looks like the WaPo might well consider a separate posting at Get Religion–targeted at the New York Times coverage of same-sex marriage advocacy entitled, “From cheerleading to coaching.”)
Also, one of the commenters to the GetReligion noted in Lowell’s post today tries to connect some dots (although it’s not clear whether this effort is an attempt to prop up the WaPo article’s premises or to point the way some of the most vitriolic of the conspiracy-mongering groups).
coltakashi on 06 Nov 2009 at 1:40 pm #
Mollie Hemingway noted that the Washington Post made the unsupported accusation that Mormons were manipulating NOM to oppose gay marriage in Maine. Clearly, the Washington Post thought the notion of Mormon leadership of NOM was newsworthy only because of the widespread negative perception of Mormons among many people, especially in an eastern state like Maine where few people know their Mormon neighbors. Basically, this accusation is newsworthy for the same reason that it would be newsworthy if Arabia’s bin Laden family were a major contributor to NOM, as a way of transferring the negative public image of one entity to the other.
Since religious bias against Mormons is the only reason that accusation was worth printing, why should the Post even bring it up, since giving light to such a claim is an implicit endorsement of the idea that feeling irrational prejudice against Mormons is a legitimate attitude.
For example, what if the accusation was that Orthodox Jews were major contributors to NOM? It would immediately be seen by many more people that this was playing to an anti-semitic bias among many people. But by using “Mormons” as the target, the Post was relying on the widely shared assumption that it is OK to think of Mormons as Inherently Not to be Trusted, and Presumptively Up to No Good, in a way that most people would object to if the accusation were directed against Jews.
Seriously, there is no other point to the Post’s statement. If they had said large numbers of married heterosexuals had contributed to NOM, or it was a front for people who worship God, the sentence would have no meaning. The reader would say “So what?”
Using the Mormons, however, is an invitation to the reader to exercise his preconceived religious bias against a poorly understood minority group. The accusation is, essentially, that the Mormons themselves are so unpopular that they have to have a “front” like NOM in order to carry out a political agenda. If the Post had added the phrase “and, as you know, Mormons are evil and weird”, it would not have added anything to the semantic content of the statement, because it was already implied by the simple fact that they thought associating NOM with Mormons was the journalistic equivalent of revealing that NOM had horns and a pitchfork.
LdChino on 07 Nov 2009 at 1:18 pm #
Or this speculation could simply be the result of NOM finding itself under investigation by the Maine Ethics Commission for reasons I trust we’re all aware. Quoting Maine’s Attorney General: “I would hope that they [NOM] would file before the election,” Mills said. “Why not? What is there to hide?”
Source:
http://pressherald.mainetoday.com/story.php?id=292761
When is a PAC not a PAC? Apparently whenever NOM decides it isn’t. Rather than file (like the rest of us), they decided to sue.
Go figure that pleading for special exemptions might bring heightened scrutiny.
Whiners.
Freespeach on 20 Nov 2009 at 10:51 am #
LdChino apparently has issues with freedom of speech and freedom of religion. The radical proponents of gay marriage are so narrow in their focus to redefine marriage that other inseparable freedoms and civil rights associated with the current definition of marriage hold no weight to their singular agenda. NOM’s decision to sue is directly related to the oppositions’ abuse of existing disclosure laws to systematically harass and influence voters from voting their conscience for fear of reprisal. PAC or no PAC, it is the same. Voter intimidation. Note that even the Commission on Governmental Ethics and
Elections Practices voted 3-2 regarding NOM’s requirement to register in Maine as a PAC. Hardly NOM’s sole idea. Sounds to me like individuals on the commission with more knowledge than you also believe NOM is not a PAC according to Maine law.
There has been no satisfactory justification presented to the same-sex marriage proponent’s unethical approach to voter intimidation (how could there be?). As a result of their actions, we will likely see a shift in disclosure laws. The Courts are an appropriate place to start, and if fairness does not prevail, there will be a voter correction to the laws.
I wish Molly had discussed a little more the characters that inflame the innuendo and suggest pure meanness as the motive for supporting traditional marriage. Fred Karger is so over the top in his “connect-the-dots” conspiracy theory regarding Mormon takeovers and evil strategies that he has no credibility among the moderate majority. He now is clearly damaging the cause he espouses. No one likes a bully.
His strategy, which has been mentioned, is to attempt to destroy a specific minority religious organization and attempt to embarrass and demean its members. All this as a “shot across the bow” to all of conservative Christianity, or other non-Christian religionists that are fighting to preserve the definition of marriage.
I am grateful for the restraint and measured responses that NOM and others defending the definition of marriage are espousing. No organized listing of donors against traditional marriage, no contacting employers, no boycotting businesses, no creating maps to their homes, no researching their lives and posting their personal, yet publicly available info in this electronic age. These disgusting, unethical and yes, evil tactics are unconscionable and dangerous to personal liberties and freedom of speech, association, as well as voter protection laws.
LdChino on 25 Nov 2009 at 7:43 am #
If all you have to offer by way of response is a caricature of your opposition as anti-free speech, anti-religion, pro-voter intimidation, and pro-evil, well then, of course you’re grateful when NOM provides a measured response … because you’re obviously incapable of providing one yourself.
Northern Lights » Blog Archive » From the Bloggernacle (11-15-09) on 29 Nov 2009 at 7:57 pm #
[...] Maine and Gay Marriage: “Mormons still to blame, somehow?” Article VI Blog – November 6, 2009 [...]