They Shoot Mormons, Don't They? Religious Bigotry, alive and well today

“I wouldn’t vote for a Mormon for dogcatcher, much less President of the United States!” There’s a lot of that kind of hateful rhetoric going around since Mitt Romney decided to throw his hat in the ring – as if Mormons are some kind of hideous evil monsters. The loudest anti-Mormon shouts, sad to say, are coming from America’s so-called “Christian right”. How can Mitt Romney hope to get a fair shake in this spiritually polluted atmosphere?

There was another man running for President who faced the same dilemma – John F. Kennedy – only he was the target of anti-CATHOLIC bigotry. In his 1960 speech to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association, JFK said the following: “. . .I believe in an America where religious intolerance will someday end - where all men and all churches are treated as equal - where man has the same right to attend or not attend the church of his choice - where there is no Catholic vote, no anti-Catholic vote, no bloc voting of any kind - and where Catholics, Protestants and Jews, at both the lay and pastoral level, will refrain from those attitudes of disdain and division which have so often marred their words in the past, and promote instead the American ideal of brotherhood.” John F. Kennedy Library & Museum (Speeches, 1960). By the way, if you listen to the audio version of JFK’s speech, you will hear the hurt and frustration in his voice and the unfair treatment surely must have caused many a sleepless night.

Fast forward to 2007 where JFK might as well have been “whistlin’ Dixie”. The hostility toward Mormons today, in my opinion, is even worse than that suffered by JFK. Although it is said that JFK lost about a million votes to religious intolerance, Romney stands to lose even more if the anti-Mormon evangelicals hang together.

According to Media Matters for America - “. . . a Web-based, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media” - FOX News is not reporting accurately on the level of evangelical hostility to the Romney run. Media Matters for America points out that among evangelical leaders rejecting Mormons: Shirley and James Dobson (National Day of Prayer and Focus on the Family, respectively), the Southern Baptist Convention (collectively), Pat Robertson (Christian Broadcasting Network), and Dr. D. James Kennedy (Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church in Florida). “Among many conservative evangelicals – who comprise a significant part of the Republican base – Mormonism is considered an un-Christian cult.” Media Matters for America (2007)

While stumping in Florida, a man in the audience stood up during the Q&A portion and said the following to Romney: “You, sir, you’re a pretender. You do not know the Lord. You’re a Mormon.” Media Matters for America (2007). This is the kind of un-American, disrespectful treatment Mitt Romney will apparently have to endure throughout the entire campaign – as if just being a Mormon is reason enough to open the floodgates for free flow of pent-up hatred and vindictiveness.

For the record, the Mormon bashers know full well that the official name of Romney’s church is “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints” and the members should rightfully be called “members of the LDS Church” but the words “Mormon” and “Mormonism” have an aura of negativity so they prefer to use the “M” word as if it were dirty.

Less than five minutes cruising around the official LDS website (LDS.org) will show anyone who’s interested that the Church is a Christian organization, with Jesus Christ at the Head. There are no paid clergy – all are volunteers. Humanitarian aid is legendary. Members of the LDS Church believe in strong family values; they are patriotic, they are law-abiding upstanding citizens of their community. Many LDS young men right out of high school go on two-year missions – you know, the guys on bikes – and during their mission they don’t date, read newspapers, go to movies or watch TV; but rather they dedicate two years of their lives to serving others. Many women go on missions as well, and couples, only theirs is 18 months in length but the obligations are basically the same. Most members do not shop or go out to eat on Sundays – reminiscent of the good old days when shops and stores were closed in obedience to the Commandment, “Remember the Sabbath and keep it holy”. If they can help it, LDS Church members do not work on Sundays, either, preferring to spend the day at church and with their families. Church members are encouraged to store up a year’s supply of food and water so they will be able to care for their families in the event of an emergency. The LDS Church believes in self-sufficiency and self-reliance but in the event of a financial hardship the Church distributes food and supplies through their welfare (Bishop’s Storehouse) program. Members of the LDS Church do not drink alcohol nor do they use illicit drugs; they do not drink coffee and tea. A Mormon in good standing, therefore, will not be found in a drunken stupor puking her guts out at 3 a.m. anywhere in the world. Furthermore, members of the church are encouraged to dress modestly, be polite and courteous. And members of the LDS Church are faithful tithe payers. Come on, people, what’s not to love?

So what on earth is their beef, the anti-Mormon zealots? Why is there such disdain for the LDS Church and its members? In Hugh Hewitt’s book, “Mormon in the White House?” he states his thesis that the fierce anti-Mormon sentiment among main-stream Christians stems from one or two or all three of the following factors (in order of importance):

3) “If there is a Mormon in the White House, Salt Lake City will call the shots, at least on the biggest issues.” Hewitt (2007, p. 221-227)

Hugh Hewitt has written an exquisite book about the Romney campaign and overcoming the “Mormon problem.” It’s a good read and I highly recommend it. Of the three problem points listed in the previous paragraph, Hewitt believes – unless some unforeseen blunder destroys his chances – none of the three is insurmountable for Mitt Romney. (Plus, he has the best hair.)

Well, I’m no Hugh Hewitt, not even close; he’s an icon on the conservative radio talk show circuit. Hewitt could talk circles around me (I’ve seen him in action in Sacramento); he’s brilliant; he’s well educated, well read, no doubt a genius, plus he’s kind of cute. I’m basically a “nobody” – an overweight grandma – but after having researched for this paper, I have come to a totally different conclusion as to why there is such in-your-face angst over Romney’s religion of choice: It’s all about money, power and control (in that order). I think they’re (the evangelical religious bigots, that is) scared half to death and are revving up their attacks, not to save souls, but to save their reputations (which if tarnished would lead to financial ruin).

As I said, all one must do is browse around the LDS official web site to see what the LDS Church believes and stands for. Any reasonable person would conclude that Mormons are not evil monsters at all. In fact, they are God fearing, Christ believing, Holy Ghost following people going about doing good. “You will know them by their fruit” and the LDS has plenty of fruit and they are willing to share.

Earlier, I stated that some high-powered ministries have publicly condemned Mormons: Shirley and James Dobson, the Southern Baptist Convention, Pat Robertson, and Dr. D. James Kennedy – just to name a few. There are hoards of others. Sunday after Sunday, preachers, evangelists, reverends and ministers from all Christian denominations pound the pulpit with anti-Mormon rhetoric. I heard the message loud clear when I was a Baptist and when I tiptoed through evangelical/Pentecostal territories. Was I ever miffed when I later learned for myself the Gospel truth about the LDS Church.

Just think about it, please. If Dr. D. James Kennedy, for example, who wrote the book, The Wolves Among Us, were to admit he’d been wrong in labeling the LDS Church a “cult” that leads unwary ignorant people astray (to hell), what would become of his multi-million-dollar ministry? Suffice it to say, there’s big money to be had by sale of books, tapes, CD’s, videos, and other anti-Mormon propaganda, not to mention speaking engagements and world-wide religious crusades. We’re talking trillions, all told. I realize the anti-Mormon aspect of these ministries is but a small portion of the business, but if the truth came out, that they had been using falsehoods about the LDS Church as a cash cow, their entire empires could tumble.

The ABC News program 20/20 aired on March 23, 2007, exposed the lavish lifestyles of some of the top evangelical preachers – million dollar mansions and personal jets. ABC News - 20/20 (2007) (Again, the LDS Church has no paid clergy.)

It’s nothing new. Severe harassment and persecution has been the lot of the LDS Church since it’s inception in 1820 when a 14-year-old boy named Joseph Smith saw visions and communed with heavenly beings. Rather than discuss the spiritual aspects of the LDS Church, however, let’s stick to facts of history. Taken from a college-level early American history textbook, Joseph Smith, upon experiencing the visions and visitations, believed “that God had work for me to do, and that my name should be for good and evil among all nations, kindreds and tongues.” Ayers, Gould, Oshinsky, and Soderlund (2004, p. 292). The textbook continues, “They were met with hostility virtually everywhere they went . . . . As the movement gathered momentum, hundreds of people joined the church; entire congregations of churches of other faiths joined . . .” Ayers, Gould, Oshinsky, and Soderlund (2004, p. 293)

During the dark time of American history when slavery was flourishing and when Native Americans were forced from their lands, the pioneers of the LDS Church also suffered at the hands of unscrupulous politicians, governmental leaders, and angry hate-filled mobs. “In the face of relentless persecution, Joseph Smith, the founder of the church, had led his flock to Illinois. There they had established the town of Nauvoo, which by the mid-1840’s had become the largest city in Illinois with over 15,000 people. . . In June 1844, a mob of non-Mormons broke into the jail where Smith was being held and killed both him and his brother. . .The Mormons abandoned Nauvoo in the spring of 1846 as anti-Mormons pounded the town with cannon, destroying the Great Temple. In a well-coordinated migration, 15,000 Mormons moved in stages to the Great Salt Lake.” Ayers, Gould, Oshinsky, and Soderlund (2004, p. 334-335) Many walked all the way and many died along the way, including innocent babes.

Joseph Smith at one time was tarred and feathered by a mob. No jury, no trial, no judge – and they had planned to castrate him, too. On October 27, 1838, the then governor of Missouri issued an “extermination order”: “The Mormons must be treated as enemies, and must be exterminated or driven from the State if necessary . . .” Far West History (n.d.) Please note that the order called for exterminating “Mormons” making no distinction between men, women and children, and indeed women and children were subject to the extermination order.

In an event known in LDS history as “the Haun’s Mill Massacre”, precipitated by the extermination order, 30 to 40 LDS families were surprised by some 200 to 250 militia. After the smoke cleared, seventeen LDS people lay dead including a ten-year-old boy. Thirteen LDS members were wounded including a woman and a seven-year-old boy. “A few Missourians returned the next day and took plunder.” LDS FAQ (n.d.) No Missouri militiamen were killed but three were wounded. Just a few years earlier, the LDS folk who died that day had been members of other churches - Congregational or Methodist or Baptist or Presbyterian.

In l976, Governor Bond of Missouri officially rescinded the extermination order and presented apologies for the “unfortunate developments” it caused. Quoting from Governor Bond’s Executive Order: “WHEREAS, Governor Boggs’ order clearly contravened the rights to life, liberty, property and religious freedom as guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States, as well as the Constitution of the State of Missouri; and . . . Expressing on behalf of all Missourians our deep regret for the injustice and undue suffering rescind Executive Order Number 44 dated October 27, 1838, issued by Governor W. Boggs. . .” Far West History (n.d.) The individuals who harassed, abused, and even murdered Mormons in cold blood were never tried for their crimes.

I read Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s Letter from Birmingham Jail and it really touched my heart. There he was, suffering for the Lord in jail, and these religious leaders with highfalutin titles on the outside wrote an open letter (“A Call for Unity”) in which they criticize King’s tactics and basically blame King for the racial turmoil of the time. Though you can tell King is upset and hurt by the attack – made worse because he’s stuck in jail and can’t confront the religious leaders face-to-face – his response is gentle genius. “I wish you had commended the Negro sit-inners and demonstrators of Birmingham for their sublime courage, their willingness to suffer, and their amazing discipline in the midst of great provocation. One day the South will recognize its real heroes.” Barnet and Bedau (2005, p. 881)

King has a few choice words for the Church, too: “If today’s church does not recapture the sacrificial spirit of the early church, it will lose its authenticity, forfeit the loyalty of millions, and be dismissed as an irrelevant social club with no meaning for the twentieth century. Every day I meet young people whose disappointment with the church has turned into outright disgust.” Barnet and Bedau (2005, p. 880)

There’s an eerie commonality between what JFK and MLK endured at the hands of the religious bigots of their day and what Mitt Romney is facing today. I hope and pray that Romney will be able to fend off these undeserved attacks from the religious hypocrites with the same grace, dignity and God-inspired resolve displayed by the other two.

A few popular bumper stickers read: “Honk if you love Jesus” and “Christians aren’t perfect, just forgiven” or “Jesus is my co-pilot”. Yet, apparently, these same bumper-sticker Christians are the ones waging war against Mitt Romney’s run for the Presidency solely on the basis of his chosen faith in a Church that bears the name of the Savior of the world.

ABC News - 20/20 (2007). Philanthropic donations come from your heart, but where do they end up? Ex-money manager says "enough!" to secretive Christian Ministry spending. Glenn Ruppel & John Stossel. United States: ABC News.

Ayers, E. L., Gould, L. L., Oshinsky, D. M., & Soderlund, J. R. (2004). American Passages - a history of the United States - Volume I: to 1877 (2nd ed.). Belmont, California: Thomson/Wadsworth.

Barnet, S., & Bedau, H. (2005). Letter from Birmingham Jail. Current Issues and Enduring Questions - a guide to critical thinking and argument, with readings (7th ed., pp. 867-882). Boston and New York: Bedford/St. Martin's.

Far West History. (n.d.). The Extermination Order and how it was rescinded. Retrieved April 28, 2007, from http://www.jwha.info/mmff/exorder.htm

Hewitt, H. (2007). A Mormon in the White House? 10 things every American should know about Mitt Romney. Washington, D.C.: Regnery Publishing, Inc.

John F. Kennedy Presidential Library & Museum. (1960, September 12). Address of Senator John F. Kennedy to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association. Retrieved April 22, 2007, from http://www.jfklibrary.org

Lds Faq. (n.d.). What was the Haun's Mill Massacre? Retrieved April 28-2007, 2004, from Brigham Young University Web Site: http://ldsfaq.byu.edu/view.asp?q=57

Media Matters for America. (2007). Fox News whitewashes evangelical hostility to Romney's faith. Retrieved April 22, 2007, from http://mediamatters.org/items/printable/200702280002

Should the Mormons of today have to explain why they hold a man, who most likely was involved in ordering the MMM and who spent years denying it and covering it up, in such high regard?

You know what else I find odd?

1870-71 About this time, Young meets with Lee, Haight, Dame, and others involved in the massacre. Historians suggest that Young singles out Lee to take the blame, confident in the belief that Lee will do as he is told at any trial. Lee is excommunicated.

July 23, 1875
The trial of John Lee opens in the courtroom of Judge Jacob Boreman. Payment for Lee's defense is arranged by Brigham Young. The prosecution's star witness is Philip Klingensmith.

Now, why in the world would Young arrange for paying for the defense of a man he had already excommunicated???

Except that I am completely surprise to hear sevenbak say the Relief Society (women’s organization) attends priesthood meetings.

This simply would not have been allowed to take place in any Ward that I was part of.

From what I have seen, contrary to the comments a little earlier about the consistency of the LDS church, there are quite a few things that have changed since I was a member.

As a matter of fact, what I have gathered in reading on other sites, the rules are enforced more harshly in some areas that they were in my area 40 years ago especially the ban against coffee, tea and wine. I won't go into specifics here.

I said:Since there are “No pictures” and no refreshments, and not talking in the sealing room, just don’t go, go to the reception, that’s where all the fun is anyway. Nobody is forcing anybody.

You said:DU, read that paragraph again to yourself. Seems a little callous and unfeeling to me. "Just don't go" isn't gonna cut it with loving parents that have looked forward for years to seeing their child married. And you accuse parents of just wanting to be there so they can chat and take pictures? Cold. "Nobody is forcing anybody!" Lovely.

The reception is the thing not to miss if you are a Mormon and want to be remembered at a wedding, the Sealing room is quite, reverent and the sealer and those being sealed (briefly) are the only ones who speak. Mom and Dad will not be sitting with the bride or groom, Dad does not even get to give the bride away. The sealing ceremony is beautiful, but to someone who does not believe, I can only assume it will be long and boring ceremony.

As for my attitudes about marriage, and what’s fun and what’s not, being cold, or unfeeling. I am a male chauvinist pig, proud to be one. My wife likes me that way, and I care far more about her opinion than anyone else’s

Your posts often smack of feminism and a feminist viewpoint, this is one of them.

We guys really do not LIKE the ceremony, sitting quietly, getting dressed up, we go along with it because we want to be married, but the wedding is for the wife. So as a guy, the reception is more fun (as long as I don’t end up washing dishes again).

As for actually being “Callos and unfeelong; Two of my brothers married Japanese girls, their parents were sitting in that waiting room I was talking about with me trying to explain in sign language what was going on. (Different times, different temples, same me, as I had not yet been to the temple myself)

When I got married, my wife’s father was unable to attend and was sitting in that waiting room, so once again, you have no idea what you are talking about.

From a Guys’ viewpoint:
The reception is more fun.
The food is at the reception.
The reception is where the pictures that you will look at for the rest of your lives will be taken will be taken.
The reception is more important to the Guy than the ceremony, except that the ceremony needs to happen.

You think I am being flip, well, I always am, but this is also true. There are more perspectives than yours. It seems to me that want everyone to agree with YOUR perspective, or else admit that they are wrong.

I have my own views and your perspective does not invalidate my views

This goes back to the whole reason this thread has gone on for so long. Here we are a group of people with differing perceptions of reality. One group trying to get the other to agree with their perceptions at all costs, the other group desperately struggling to protect their perspective thrust an parry, slice and block, feint and spin.

The funny thing is, both sides to me anyway, think they are the ones being attacked.

Of course I have my own perspective, so I am as guilty as the rest.

Okay, I checked at Yahoo but didn’t find any reference to
***** Color, was their not a recent action by the general authorities in SLC removing the Ladies Relief Society from the leadership of women and substituting men?

The LDS site stated
“A new Relief Society general presidency was announced during general conference. Julie B. Beck was sustained as the general president of the Relief Society, and Silvia H. Allred and Barbara Thompson will serve as first and second counselors, respectively.”

The names and the pics are distinctively Female. I don’t follow.

the reality is, the DNC is going to exploit the deep differences in Christian Orthodox beliefs and Mormonism beliefs

Yep. The Mormon-bashing and Mormon, as you put it "proselytizing" (don't think I'd put it that way), is playing right into the hands of the Dems.

IMHO, it's just part of a sad spectacle right now on FR, where the political debate mainly consists of hit-posts on the other candidates rather than supportive posts of one's own candidate. Howard Dean must be loving this - a President with numbers trending below 30 and a divided Republican Party to boot.

As the parents of their first born who happens to be the BRIDE you state, 'Just don't GO?

I am sorry that you were not ready to be a part of something eternal. But the tenor of your post here says some very interesting things, please read this all the way through before you react.

as a matter of FACT, we did because we PAID FOR IT ALL

You paid for it because you love your daughter, and that’s beautiful.

I can assure you, no one in the Bride's family was "having any fun". Were too busy tearing up by this tragedy referred to as a "Beautiful Mormon Wedding.

Were you sad for her, or were you sad for you, be honest.

no you just stole my child away so she could be a part of your CULT!

Did you raise your daughter right? (I expect a yes here)

Is your Daughter smart? (Again I expect a yes here)

Does / Did your daughter know how you felt / feel?

What possible reason could such a beautiful young woman have for causing you such pain? If she is smart, she would not have fallen for some ginned up religions experience and hocus pocus, she would have seen through all that. If she loves you half as much as you judging by your pain love her, then why?

Because she believes it’s true, and a am sure you know what the bible says about leaving the gospel for family.

There will be many (and maybe already are since I seem always to be playing catch-up with this thread) who will echo your sentiments about cults. They are wrong. Ask your daughter if the Gospel makes her happy and if it does than want for her what makes her happy. If you cannot accept that she wants this and him you need to let her be happy anyway.

My oldest is twelve and she is beautiful. I have never yet had to face her going away, but that will happen. When it does, I hope I can concentrate on her happiness, not my sadness that she will be leaving.

My God grant you peace and let you know that his will is always done.

Gen 6:8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.

Why did Noah find grace?

Gen 6:9 These [are] the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man [and] perfect in his generations, [and] Noah walked with God.

Just like:

Gen 26:4 And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed;

Why?

Gen 26:5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.

Seems a little callous and unfeeling to me.
Me too. Other faiths do similar things, and that's too bad.
Of course, this issue has nothing to do with whether or not to vote for someone.

I am a male chauvinist pig (as I have said before, and will again), and my wife likes me that way. I like me this way. I care far more what she thinks than what all freeperdom (Is that a word?) thinks. I am not going to apologize for thinking that. (thought crimes here we come!)

I have been sat out side the temple during a wedding I wanted to attend, My Wife’s father sat out side, I know what that feels like from both sides (just not as a parent yet) so the “you are so mean” posts only remind me of my six year old, but don’t impress me with logical content.

As for the “you are unfeeling” comment You are right! I am unfeeling because I am a high functioning autistic and I will never be able to fully empathize with “Normal” people. I am not going to cry about it. I am not going to blame anyone for it. I am not going to get mad at anyone for it. I will not apologize for being who I am.

If I hurt anyone’s feelings, that I will apologize for.

I am sorry if I hurt your feelings

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.