Article VI Blog

Orson Scott Card writes in National Review about this weekend’s much-ballyhooed “Big Love” episode.  Much of what he says might as well have been an Article VI Blog post.  For example: 

[W]hile we [Mormons] don’t like what Big Love is doing, we’re not doing much about it. We’ve learned by observation that protests and boycotts merely increase the publicity, and therefore the viewership, of such hostile productions as the Big Love temple episode.

So the church’s official advice to its members is: Ignore it. (See this, for more.)

. . .

Most Mormons are seeing the Big Love temple episode in the context of the recent outpouring of hatred and bile from those who most vehemently opposed Proposition 8.

Mormons have been targeted for business boycotts; some have lost their jobs because they contributed to the campaign to defend marriage.

The result is that few of us have any desire to act as the worst of our opponents have acted. After someone has boycotted a friend’s business, it makes it a bit harder for you to want to call for a boycott.

By and large, while we’d prefer that everybody handle differences of opinion peacefully, we’d rather be persecuted than be the persecutors. The few times in our history when we have departed from that principle, the results have shamed us for generations. Tolerance works better.

I agree with Card, by and large, but I think the difficulty lies in knowing when to speak out, and how loudly, in response to attacks.  In politics, for example, a candidate cannot often turn the other cheek when religiously-based whisper campaigns are under way. 

As far as the HBO show goes, my guess is that this latest kerfluffle will pass without much impact on anyone or anything.

Posted in Issues, Proposition 8 | Comment on this post » |  Print this post |  Email This Post

John and I have batted around the idea of commenting on the controversy over HBO’s “Big Love” program, and have decided not to say very much.  I do want to make a few comments about the subject generally.

I think it is important to note that “Big Love,” which a high-level HBO executive told me was supposed to be the next “Sopranos” for HBO, is struggling, and this may be the show’s final season unless ratings improve.  The same HBO executive told me personally that HBO would be sensitive to Mormon beliefs and would not confuse the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints with the many polygamous sects in the world today, many of which have historical roots in Momonism.

I guess HBO forgot those promises.  HBO’s cynical effort to stir up controversy by televising what purports to be a version of the temple ceremonies of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which are deeply sacred to committed Mormons, must be seen as what it is:  a ratings ploy.  By outraging Mormons and goading them to complain publicly, HBO hopes more people will watch their show.

So, in light of the inevitable attention this little flap will generate, here are a few thoughts and related links that may actually be helpful to those unfamiliar with the main issues:

1.   The relationship between the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (the “Mormons”) and the fundamentalist polygamist sects is like the relationship between Catholics and Lutherans.  They are part of the same faith family, but totally distinct faiths.  The Roman Catholic Church has nothing to do with the modern actions and beliefs of the Lutheran Church, and vice versa.  (By making the analogy, I do not intend to equate Lutherans and polygamous sects; Lutheranism is a major world religion, and a major force in history.  The polygamist sects are very small, reclusive groups.)

2.  As a wise man reminded me yesterday:  ”If you are a Mormon, and you want to be excommunicated from the church quickly,  practice polygamy.  All other sins take longer.”

3.  Daily Variety, of all places, publishes today a fine commentary by a Mormon reader about the entire controversy. It’s really a must-read.

What does all this have to do with politics?  Well, as John and I have argued repeatedly, there is a “for whom the bell tolls” aspect to this episode:  When the mainstream news and entertainment media abuse any religion in this manner, they make it harder for people of faith to be visibly active in the public square.  The best thing any of our readers can do to support the principles underlying Article VI of the Constitution is not to watch “Big Love” this Sunday night, and encourage everyone they know to do the same thing.

Ironically, most Mormons don’t even have HBO – my family doesn’t – because we prefer not to have R-rated programming in our homes.  So if there will be any “boycott” of this Sunday’s “Big Love” episode, it won’t be Mormons who are leading it.

Watch an ennobling movie instead.  I recommend A Man for All Seasons:

Posted in Issues, News Media Bias, Religious Bigotry, Understanding Religion | 3 Comments » |  Print this post |  Email This Post

Here’s some food for weekend thought:  A brief video of Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Arizona, speaking to the libertarian Reason Foundation last November, shortly after the election.  (HT:  Reason.com.)

It’s kind of interesting to note that Rep. Flake is a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.  I don’t think that ever comes up in his re-election campaigns.  But listen to what he has to say.  Does his religion have any bearing on whether or not you want someone in Congress espousing the views Rep. Flake expresses here?

Posted in Issues, Political Strategy, Religious Bigotry | Comment on this post » |  Print this post |  Email This Post

This video is from Catholic Vote and will run during tomorrow’s inaugural:

It’s a little different from our usual material here, but seems quite appropriate.

Posted in Issues | Comment on this post » |  Print this post |  Email This Post

This video seems especially appropriate for this blog, at this time, for several reasons.  It addresses secularism and the role of religion in politics, as well as the critical difference between separation of church and state and the separation of church and politics.  In the wake of the Prop 8 battles and the Romney candidacy, what topic is more appropriate?  Finally, it is from a speech by the late Neal A. Maxwell, who was a member of the Quorum of Twelve Apostles of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.  Mitt Romney has said that Elder Maxwell’s thinking was a profound influence on him, and our blogfather, Hugh Hewitt, was a friend and great admirer of Elder Maxwell.

The video contains several allusions to uniquely Mormon scripture, but we hope our readers do not find that offensive. Almost any American religious conservative will find the ideas expressed very compatible with his or her own.

Posted in Issues, Proposition 8, Understanding Religion | 3 Comments » |  Print this post |  Email This Post

The doom-and-gloom predictions for the election are piling up.  Not my taste – I’m in this to the end and we are winning until we actually lose.  As Geraghty points out the polls are swinging, and at this point in ’04 we thought it was in the bag for. . . Kerry?!  This thing is not over.

Nonetheless, in a post at Beliefnet, Rod Dreher looks at Christopher Buckley’s recent resignation from NR seeing disaster.  But the most interesting thing he has to say is this:

 It was not religious conservatives who caused the GOP to abandon all pretense of fiscal discipline. It was not religious conservatives who brought us the war in Iraq. It was not religious conservatives who brought us Jack Abramoff (though Ralph Reed had something to do with it). Mind you, religious conservatives rarely if ever stood up to any of this, but to say that the “kooks” brought about the collapse of the GOP is simply wrong. It was the Establishment that did it. Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz — these guys are not religious kooks. Neither is George W. Bush. And though he presents himself as a churchman, let no one be under the impression that Tom DeLay did what he did for the glory of the Lord. I am certain that in the wake of the coming disaster for the GOP, there will be an attempt to scapegoat the religious right, so that the Republican Establishment — especially the national security and economic establishment — can escape its own reckoning. We religious conservatives have to accept our share of the blame for what’s happened, but we cannot let ourselves get scapegoated. The things we wanted most of all — Supreme Court justices favorable to the things we believe in — turn out to be the only undeniable triumphs of the Bush years, from a conservative point of view.

Again, it ain’t over ’til it’s over, and even if this election is the disaster that Dreher seems to think it is going to be, all those issues he raises are not the heart of the problem.  There was only one candidate that might have been able to hold the coalition together – Mitt Romney – and it was Evangelical conservatives in their blind, label-following view, that trotted off after a loser like Huckabee and blew it up.

A bit later in the piece, Dreher says this:

There is a conservative Establishment — a political establishment, yes, but also a think-tank establishment and an opinion-leader establishment — that has become ossified in its thinking and, over time, more interested in policing its heretics . . .

Now, when you stack that up against Joel Belz’s deeply bigoted writing, and Mike Huckabee’s “innocent question” to the NYTimes, you have to think you are looking at the definitional case of the “pot calling the kettle black.”

Furthermore, let’s assume, for just a minute, that all those issues he raises are the heart of the problem.   Had the religious right been less myopic and more about the business of governance – had they been in the middle of those things instead of clutching tightly to their few social issues and otherwise not seeming to want to get their hands dirty – then maybe they could have prevented or mitigated the damage done by them. As Dreher points out, “Mind you, religious conservatives rarely if ever stood up to any of this . . . .”

If religious conservatives want to be taken seriously in politics, then it is time for them to do politics seriously.  This gadabout, “politics is really beneath us,” stuff has just got to stop.  And claiming to speak for them by brushing aside that very “I am above you” attitude as insignificant and pointing the finger at the other guy is not a way to do politics seriously.

Oh sure, Dreher says, “We religious conservatives have to accept our share of the blame for what’s happened . . . ,”  which is where he should have ended.  In this individual religious conservative’s experience, the “conservative political establishment” has been more than willing to work with me, as long as I was willing to work with them.

I think it was Jesus that said something about planks, specks, and eyes.  I think religious conservatives might want to keep that little parable in mind before they go making sure they do not get any more blame than “they deserve.”

Lowell adds:  I agree fully with what John has said, and I’ll add my own expression of disgust over Dreher’s insistence on treating religious conservatives as a discrete, insular voter bloc within conservatism (and within the GOP, to a lesser extent).  I never thought I’d see the day when religious voters are flinging recriminations at “those other guys in the movement.”  In politics, there is no leadership in emphasizing differences within your own alliance. 

Besides, as John notes, Dreher is far too forgiving of his own group:  “religious conservatives rarely if ever stood up to any of this.”  Well, isn’t that a stinging indictment?  For a group that wants to have such power within the conservative movement, it simply will not do to blame everyone else for errors, when your group did nothing significant to stop those errors! 

It seems Mr. Dreher wants to have it both ways: To remain “pure” and free from responsibility for a conservative/GOP debacle, but also to stand by and do nothing to prevent the debacle.  These are not people I want in my foxhole with me.

Posted in Electability, Issues, News Media Bias, Political Strategy | 2 Comments » |  Print this post |  Email This Post