Article VI Blog

Dan Gilgoff is trying to get some discussion going at his blog about this quote from Newt Gingrich:

I happen to favor traditional marriage and suspect in the long run we’ll go back to traditional marriage. I don’t believe we’re going to follow Europe down the road of a secularized, nonreligious society. If anything, I suspect that in the next 30 years Europe will become dramatically more religious because what it will find is that a secular society is stunningly sterile and has no natural base on which to organize civilization.

Please go join the discussion there.  It would be bad form for us to co-opt it here, but I will make my comments in this forum.

First of all, it is a near certainty that Europe will become “dramatically more religious” in the next 30 years.  The real question is “what religion?” and “why?”  The answers I see are, “Islamic” and “demographic.”  See here.   Europe’s native birth rate is so low that they are importing Islamic workforces in droves.  They will soon overwhelm the native population.  This is one of the reasons that our efforts in the Middle East and the GWOT in general are so important.  It probably is not a war we can ever win in the sense of defeating the enemy.  But if we can apply enough pressure that Islam will reform in a sense similar to what happened to Christianity a few centuries ago, we can avoid global religious conflict.

Even if Europe were to return to Christianity in the Gingrich predicted fashion, it would be a bit of an ugly thing.  That is not serious religious conversion – its societally-imposed and for reasons other than religious ones.  It would be a pretty sterile religion too.  Which means I am not at all certain how helpful it would be.  Religion changes people, who become; therefore, better people – who in turn make a better society. Using religion as a tool to enforce social mores is the root of the rebellion that created our nation.  People need to choose religion for personal reasons, or it turns ugly fast.  Hence the state of Islam today, or Christianity a few centuries ago.  (Oh, by the way, this paragraph is a clarion call to missionaries of all sorts.)

Finally, the nation can return to traditional marriage without returning to religion.  That will probably happen.  Same sex marriage is a recipe for societal decay with or without a religious component.  Hence the reason every society in history regardless of religion or lack thereof rejected it.  Even the devotedly secular communist regimes of recent times have rejected same sex marriage.

Now, go to Dan’s post and discuss.

Posted in Issues | 1 Comment » |  Print this post |  Email This Post

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