Posted on 06/10/2007 7:24:29 PM PDT by Reaganesque
Sally Denton uses today's Los Angeles Times op-ed page as a launching pad for the movie based on her book, "American Massacre: The Tragedy at Mountain Meadows, September 1857," and as a means to propagate more anti-Mormon bigotry at the expense of Mitt Romney. Denton insists that Romney has to respond about the nature of his faith if he expects to win the nomination for the Presidency -- and uses a lot of 19th-century examples to "prove" her case:
MITT ROMNEY'S Mormonism threatens his presidential candidacy in the same way that John F. Kennedy's Catholicism did when he ran for president in 1960. Overt and covert references to Romney's religion — subtle whispering as well as unabashed inquiries about the controversial sect he belongs to — plague his campaign. None of his responses so far have silenced the skeptics.
Recent polls indicate that from 25% to 35% of registered voters have said they would not consider voting for a Mormon for president, and conventional wisdom from the pundits suggests that Romney's biggest hurdle is his faith. Everyone seems eager to make his Mormonism an issue, from blue state secularists to red state evangelicals who view the religion as a non-Christian cult.
All of which raises the question: Are we religious bigots if we refuse to vote for a believing Mormon? Or is it perfectly sensible and responsible to be suspicious of a candidate whose creed seems outside the mainstream or tinged with fanaticism?
Ironically, Romney is the only candidate in the race (from either party) who has expressed discomfort with the idea of religion infecting the national dialogue. While his GOP rivals have been pandering to the evangelical arm of the party, Romney actually committed himself (during the first Republican debate) to the inviolable separation of church and state.
First, Denton is hardly an unbiased pundit in this regard. She's flogging a book and a movie about an atrocity committed by Mormons 150 years ago. For Denton, 1857 is relevant to 2007, but for most Americans. The suggestion that Romney needs to answer for Brigham Young would be as silly as saying that Democrats have to answer for Stephen Douglas or that Lutherans today have to answer for the anti-Semitic rants of Martin Luther.
Denton first off would have people believe that all Mormons are "tinged with fanaticism," but does nothing to advance that case. She discusses the beginnings of their church in great detail, but her history lessons appear to end at 1857. In the only mentions of any connection to the present, she uses the HBO series Big Love and Warren Jeffs, neither of which has any connection to the modern Mormon church or to Romney's faith. Both the fictional account in Big Love and the unfortunately non-fiction and despicable Jeffs involve polygamist cults -- and in the TV series, are showed as in mortal opposition to the Mormons.
Denton includes this helpful instruction at the half-way point:
It's not a church's eccentric past that makes a candidate's religion relevant today, but its contemporary doctrines. (And it's worth noting that polygamy and blood atonement, among other practices, are no longer condoned by the official Mormon church hierarchy.)
So what contemporary doctrines does Romney need to explain? Denton never says. Instead, she spends her time writing about how Joseph Smith once declared his intention to run for President -- in 1844. She discusses how John C. Fremont's candidacy died on the rumor that he was Catholic -- in 1856. She mentions 1960, in which John Kennedy dealt with anti-Catholic bigotry, but only barely notes that he prevailed over it -- and that was almost 50 years ago.
Denton then frames the question that she feels Romney has to answer:
Do you, like the prophet you follow, believe in a theocratic nation state? All the rest is pyrotechnics.
Unfortunately for Denton, Romney has answered this question every time it gets asked. And somewhat incoherently, Denton appears to forget that she herself acknowledges this near the beginning of the column:
While his GOP rivals have been pandering to the evangelical arm of the party, Romney actually committed himself (during the first Republican debate) to the inviolable separation of church and state.
Romney has no need to enter into the field of religious apologetics in his campaign for the presidency, no more than does Harry Reid in order to run the Senate. He certainly has no guilt to expiate on behalf of a massacre committed almost a century before his birth, and for people like Warren Jeffs who do not have any connection to the Mormon church. In other words, Denton has taken up space at the LA Times to exercise her bigotry and to not-so-coincidentally sell a few books and movie tickets. She and the LA Times should be ashamed.
UPDATE: One commenter suggests that people opposed Keith Ellison on the basis of his religion. Er, not quite. We opposed him on the basis of his association with the notoriously anti-Semitic group Nation of Islam and its leader, Louis Farrakhan, and his association with CAIR, which has supported terrorist groups like Hamas. If Romney had spoken at Warren Jeffs' compound for political donations, then the analogy would be apt. Ellison's problem isn't his religion but the company he keeps, politically, a fact that he and his apologists like to wrap in a false cloak of religious antagonism.
Gideon only had 300!
Is it bigotry to not vote for a Mormon?
It was Enosh you called "furryball". On the "Jesus is Lord" thread #1,034 posted on 06/07/2007. You said to colorcountry "You just a big piehole," #800 posted on 06/06/2007. You are very creative ;)
And AWFUL lot do!
An AWFUL lot do!
You want to be added to the FIP, JR? Just FReepmail me ;)
Well, very very very few people seem to know that Romney is a Mormon. And almost no one knows what they really believe.
If you will notice, most of the threads are posted by Romney supporters. It's strange that they can't find articles that concentrate on other aspects of his candidacy to post here. I don't understand it.
There are more than enough atrocities, committed by the various churches or in the name of churches throughout history, to go around.
What is a p**?
LOL
Is it a term of endearment, do you think?
The Last Straw at the Los Angeles Times
by Arlene Peck
The worst so-called “journalism.”
For years, I’ve been a working member of the press. There was a time when I looked with pride at my life’s accomplishments. Of course, those were the days when such men as Walter Cronkite and Edward R. Morrow were the role models. In recent years, I’ve become increasingly alarmed with the trend that I’ve seen among those who consider themselves ‘reporters,’ as well as those talking heads on the television’s nightly news programs. We listen to dumbed-down, usually attractive, post-puberty ‘experts’ who can only speak in sound bites before they’re interrupted by their co-anchor in the box. They talk about the Middle-East, but I’ll bet if you put a map in front of them and asked them where that is, they wouldn’t have a clue.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1848251/posts
BTW, who came in second in that straw poll.....
“Since this thread is actually about Romney’s Mormon religion, I guess it can’t be a hijack. That is until you all get deep deep into theology, which I imagine will be soon enough.”
But isn’t that our sides point, really? Mitt Romney cannot dare discuss his theological roots, not the history of his church, for fear of being laughed at by the world. It is as if the entire core of his being is off limits.
Seer Stones anyone? Racial bigotry anyone? Celestial wives, but no polygamy on Earth, just your goal in heaven?
It’s a big Pink Elephant standing in the middle of the living room. No matter how hard you guys try, it is going to be impossible to talk around it without your side eventually resorting to jackboot censorship.
Ron Paul ....
http://home.utgop.org/page.php?page_id=4
Presidential Straw Poll Results
Mitt Romney 1042 (80.46%)
Ron Paul 70 (5.41%)
Rudy Giuliani 57 (4.40%)
John McCain 54 (4.17%)
Tom Tancredo 19 (1.47%)
Tommy Thompson 16 (1.24%)
Fred Thompson (write-in) 15 (1.16%)
Mike Huckabee 12 (0.93%)
Sam Brownback 8 (0.62%)
Newt Gingrich (write-in) 1 (0.08%)
Stan Lockhart (write-in) 1 (0.08%)
Don’t you find it interesting that Duncan Hunter didn’t even show up on the list? AND I voted for him. What’s going on in the Republican Party in Utah?
Presidential Straw Poll Results
Mitt Romney 1042 (80.46%)
Ron Paul 70 (5.41%)
Rudy Giuliani 57 (4.40%)
John McCain 54 (4.17%)
Tom Tancredo 19 (1.47%)
Tommy Thompson 16 (1.24%)
Fred Thompson (write-in) 15 (1.16%)
Mike Huckabee 12 (0.93%)
Sam Brownback 8 (0.62%)
Newt Gingrich (write-in) 1 (0.08%)
Stan Lockhart (write-in) 1 (0.08%)
My, my, my, my. You have evidently stumbled on evidence of MORMON BIGOTRY. Only Mormon bigots would poll nearly exclusively for the Mormon candidate. Evidently it is alright to reflexively vote FOR a candidate based on religion, but to vote against them for the same reason is verboten.
People (even conservatives) turn a blind eye to the political cliamate in Utah. This is definetly a case of Mormon bigotry.
They never even announced the results of the poll at the convention, everyone knew what the outcome would be. The party waited and posted the outcome on their internet site.
Mormons if you’re not embarrassed by this poll, you should be.
Don't take offense but my understanding was that Rep. Paul's name had to be written in according to this story. Now why would a candidate who was announced have to be written in? And he still beats St. Rudy...
The RNC better wake up because a certain candidate keeps showing up in their polls for a reason.
Ron Paul WAS on the ballot. What an interesting, but inaccurate article.
A Wahabbist Muslim who lives in peace with his neighbors like Mormons do is as eligible to earn my vote.
Jackboot censorship? Geez, trying hard to be a victim you are. The FR Romney Mormon bashing threads go on for hundreds of posts, and appear fairly free-wheeling. If people object to the interjection of the theological stuff into a thread discussing poll results, is that what you refer to as resorting to jackboot censorship? Or is it hurtful if I refer to you all as FR Flying Imams?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.