Replies

That’s all well and good, but what do you think about the central thesis of the article - that legitimization of Mormonism (and a subsequent spike in growth of the LDS Church) will not be a result of a Romney presidency?

You are probably correct. In fact since the advent of the Internet, there seems to be little that Mormonism can do to stop the hemorrhage of peole leaving the Church in great numbers.

Perhaps the LDS hierarchy are counting on Romney to stench the flow. Even the 50,000 world wide missionaries are having abysmal results.

Wouldn't it be much simpler if Mormonism gave up their secret oaths, covenants, clothing, ordinances and reliance upon works of the flesh and simply came to Christ for redemption. It seems the only way.

From the article: THE ONLY PROBLEM with those fears is that they don't add up. Evangelicals may be surprised to learn that the growth of church membership in Massachusetts slowed substantially during Romney's tenure as governor. In fact, one could make the absurdly simplistic argument that Romney was bad for Mormonism.

(Oh, yeah, that's it...haven't we heard all those commercials that say, "Yeah, when I grow up, I want to be a governor of Massachusetts just like Michael Dukakis and Mitt Romney"?)

From the article: ...ONE WAY TO GAUGE what might happen under a President Romney would be to look at what happened during the period of the 2002 Olympic Winter Games. Held in Salt Lake City, they were dubbed the "Mormon Olympics." ... Despite all the increased attention, worldwide the Church grew only slightly, and in fact in the year leading up to the games the total number of congregations fell. Overall, from 2000 to 2004, there was a 10.9 percent increase in memberships and a 3.6 percent increase in congregations.

(Oh, yeah, I'm sure there's been even more commercials with kids & teens saying, "Yup...forget about being an Olympic athlete. Running the Olympics administratively is where the action is really at!")

My point: HUGE difference between being a guv & being THE POTUS; HUGE difference between being a Mormon senator from Nevada (Reid) or Utah (Hatch) & being the leader of the free world in terms of being the "exemplar" to emulate for all impressionable folks, especially the young.

Bill Clinton was a presidential role-model disaster for our young generation re: the scandal. Any president the voting block elevates to the highest role model position in our land accords the highest vote of respectability to the public aspects of what that person stands for. Romney is the LDS HQ ticket to mainstream acceptance.

Illustration: If a POTUS candidate was a neatly tucked-away communist who's adopted a mask of "family values," & we elect him president, we are telling our kids that communism is OK to emulate. Furthermore, we are handing proselytizing fuel to communists everywhere. It would fuel their door-to-door boldness and other aggressive campaigns to be able to say, "See. Our respectable Communist leader holds the highest office in the land. Come study what helped make the man he is today!"

"See, our respectable POTUS thinks that all the Christian sects are abominable, corrupt apostates! You, too, can see the religious world anew thru his eyes. Come study the First Vision of Joseph Smith!"

The LDS PR monster machine will kick every pro-Mormon dimension you can think of into the highest gear ever come the election of a Mormon POTUS. It wouldn't even matter what Mitt himself would initiate (or not) from the White House; the Salt Lake City HQ would push having a titled Mormon President into overdrive. Capitalization would be the operative word; in fact, w/their deep pockets, they would "redefine" "capitalization" for the Commercial PR world.