Utah (and Mormons) Front and Center
Before we get too deep into things, you can go to this “YouTube” and hear Mitt Romney read the introduction to his forthcoming book. (HT: Race 4 2012) The comments at the “hat tip” are fascinating. The first one says a great deal:
While there has been a plethora of books by former candidates (Huckabee, Palin, Obama), each has been about themselves. In many cases (especially in Huckabee’s case), it was a way to settle perceived slights.
However, here is real leadership. Romney is looking beyond the mark into what is best for this nation.
There is some interesting media thought there. The personal actually “sells” in this day and age. Our current president is the king of “I” – people do not always know how to relate to the kind of service and leadership that Romney demonstrates here. My impression is that the nation is quickly returning to more solid underpinnings as we learn the lessons the hard way, but it will be an interesting contrast as we move forward.
As an example of his service mentality, Romney is going to raise money for John Thune’s 2010 Senate run. Thune is quickly joining Pawlenty as the other serious alternative to Romney for the GOP presidential nomination in ’12 – and yet Romney is going to help him. The man is obviously far more interested in getting done what needs to be done than advancing his own possible candidacy.
And before we get to Mormons, we need to look briefly at Evangelicals. Indiana Democrat Evan Bayh, who should be in one of the most secure seats in the nation, finds himself being challenged in the next election. His opponent:
Coats was a key behind-the-scenes force in convincing John McCain to take Sarah Palin seriously as a vice presidential candidate. He was a member of “The Family,” a close-knit group of rigorously evangelical Christians who run, among things, the now well-known C Street rooming house in Washington, D.C. He also lobbied on behalf of Roache Diagnostics during the health battle reform battle.
It will be interesting to keep an eye on this campaign in the ’10 cycle and see how the religious angle plays. It could tell us a lot about religion, Romney and ’12.
And this is unbecoming. I am no fan of Obama or his agenda, but the seriousness of his faith is between him and his God. Technically, this is about his Office on Faith, but the headline and lead are a little too attention grabbing.
Utah . . .
. . . is still in the running for the 2012 GOP convention. Says Jay Evenson of the Deseret News:
Maybe Mitt Romney will be the nominee in 2012. If so, does he want to deliver an acceptance speech in a venue that would draw more attention to his Mormon faith than his leadership abilities? The Salt Lake area is gorgeous and has much to offer, but it offers absolutely nothing politically for the GOP, which already owns this state.
It has got to be hard to be Romney right now. He has done so much for the SLC area with the Olympics and these conventions bring big money into an area, but he must at least want to lobby against this because Evenson is absolutely right – from Romney’s perspective, the convention should be anywhere but Utah.
Mormons . . .
Elder M. Russell Ballard spoke at BYU-Idaho last weekend. Seems like that is the selected venue for Mormon Elders to go to make bold statements. I am not sure this time went as well as last time. Quoth Ballard:
“You remember Mr. (Mike) Huckabee (who was also vying to be the Republican candidate for president), who among other things said that Mormons believe that Jesus and the devil were brothers?” Ballard asked students. “Remember that? It went all over the media.”
“Well they are!” Ballard exclaimed to a laughing student body.
“But they (the media and nonmembers) don’t understand that, because they don’t have the (LDS gospel) restoration. They don’t understand the spiritual relationship that … we are all sons and daughters of God, and that Lucifer was one of those and (that) he chose to use his agency in an unrighteous way.”
Declaring the Mormon belief is fine, but tying it to Huckabee makes it a problem for Romney – particularly that way.
There is a school of thought, one I basically agree with, that Romney should not worry about being called “Christian” – he should just acknowledge that the LDS faith is quite different from traditional Christianity and move on from there. I know how difficult that is given the Mormon conviction that it is Christianity restored, but politically, it’s a loser discussion. For Elder Ballard to point out that Mormons believe very differently from others is a proper move in that direction. But to do so while acknowledging one particular Mormon belief – even with the proper explanation – that most traditional Christians would find very troubling does not help at all.
In this internet age, even this obscure story from a local paper gets picked up and spread widely. Mormons are free to believe whatever they want, but they need to work on media management if they want one of their own to occupy the highest office in the land. After all, W, or his pastor, did not spend any time explaining how the media does not really know what they believe. They just let it go, even though they were grossly misrepresented in the press any number of times. Do the job, worship in church, allow your worship to make you a better person and do your job better and leave it at that. Anything else is picking a fight – in this case a fight that Mormons can only lose.
Lowell adds . . .
I don’t have too much to add, except to note that Mormon belief about Satan’s origins is not that different from the commonly-held Christian notion that Satan (Lucifer) is a “fallen angel.” But that gets into religious doctrine and we do not want to go there – and neither should the news media or any political candidate.
By the way, I heard today that Marco Rubio is outpolling Charlie Crist in Florida in the race for the Republican U.S. Senate nomination there. It is not hard at all to imagine Mr. Rubio as the next senator from Florida. Let me be the first to predict the 2012 GOP ticket: Romney-Rubio! Isn’t speculation fun?
Posted in Reading List | 1 Comment » | 
Print this post
| 
Email This Post
coltakashi on 04 Feb 2010 at 12:22 pm #
John, I think what Elder Ballard was speaking to was the basic inappropriateness of Mike Huckabee injecting religious doctrinal questions into politics. That seems to be the theme of this blog. So what’s wrong with what Ballard said?
Mormon beliefs are out there for all to see. In fact, Mormons are more than happy to tell people about those beliefs, including the traditionally Christian (“Jesus was resurrected”) and the unconventional (“Joseph Smith was a new apostle appointed by Christ”). Mormons teach those things to each other and to other people every Sunday. Professional anti-Mormons, who make their money from scaring people about the “menace of Mormonism”, make a business out of taking Mormon teachings out of context. Even if Elder Ballard and other Mormons said nothing further about Mormon doctrines that some people consider odd, the professional anti-Mormons are going to be publicizing them for us, taking them out of context, and without acknowledging that a lot of secular critics of Christianity think that people who think a man could walk on water are just as looney as we Mormons are.
Elections are not the place where American voters choose their religious beliefs, and electing a Mormon, a Jew, a Buddhist or a Muslim does not make it more likely that you or your children or your neighbors are going to join any of those religions. For gosh sakes, Mormons are elected to public office in Utah, Idaho, Nevada, Arizona, Oregon and California on a recurring basis, but there is NO visible effect on the religious affiliation of the citizens of those states. The election of Barack Obama has had no visible effect in reversing the longstanding downward spiral of membership in the United Church of Christ that he belongs to. Has there been a “Harry Reid bump” in LDS Church membership in Nevada since he was elected? Is his likely defeat in the next election going to decrease Mormon membership in Nevada? Of course not.
The fear that some Evangelical ministers expressed in Hewett’s book, that a Romney presidency would “legitimize” Mormonism, is irrational. But what it would do is undeniably demonstrate that at least one Mormon is an intelligent, well-educated leader of great integrity. It would demonstrate that ministers who have told their congregations that Mormons are stupid, deranged or evil have been lying. Just as was the case for racial prejudice, those who actively engage in teaching bigotry have an investment in continuing bigotry and opposing integration and equality. So, like the sheriff in Birmingham, Alabama, who arrested Martin Luther King, and like Mike Huckabee, they fear a man who puts the lie to their biases.
The Republican Party doesn’t need people who mainly vote their religious prejudices against other people. As you noted recently, the Catholic bishops would see more of their public policy goals achieved if many of the Catholics in Congress were replaced by Mormons and Muslims. There are broad public policies that attract traditional Americans that cut across lines of ethnicity and religion. The way the Republican Party can win elections is by appealing to those unifying themes, not by trying to appeal to people who refuse to grant full citizenship to other Republicans.