Posted on 03/03/2010 12:02:12 PM PST by Colofornian
The MMO takes the media pulse in three areas: slimy tabloids intrude into the Osmonds' sacred space in the wake of a tragedy, the media still can't move beyond Mitt Romney's faith, and U.K.'s Guardian takes a jaded view of Mormon-Catholic cooperation.
Intrusion into a family moment
Leave it up to the tabloid press to exploit the Osmonds once again as they reported on the suicide of Marie Osmond's son, Michael. The Mormon Media Observer will not reprint or link to the myriad of tabloid articles filled with speculation and innuendo. Let's just say this, the kind of press coverage the suicide got in the British and American tabloids is journalism (if you can call it that) at its worst. At least, more mainstream newspapers played the story with a bit more respect, but how do journalists balance celebrity without exploiting it for sensational value. I appreciated the Mormon Times post by cousin Don Osmond which gave us insight into this tragedy. A Belief.net blogger also took a much gentler approach.
Media can't move beyond Romney's Mormonism
On Feb. 22, USA Today ran a front-page story about Mitt Romney, "Is it Romney's Time?" The paper points out that the book doesn't "try to explain or defend his Mormon faith, an issue in 2008." It continues: "And the refusal of some to support a Mormon? 'There will always be some who do, and that's unfortunate,' he says. But for most Americans, 'when it comes to voting, and they think about who's going to lead the country, they select the person that they think will do the best job'."
So the question to the reporter is why this even important to the story? Doesn't the media bear some responsibility for making his faith an issue in the public mind?
Scott Hindes of Gig Harbor, Wash., wrote in a letter to USA Today: "If one wants an explanation of the faith, then read the Book of Mormon, and visit Salt Lake City or a house of worship belonging to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Since when is religion a requirement or a subject that should be raised as an issue?"
A recent article from Reuters also raises the faith issue this way:
"Romney has been a controversial figure in national politics, in part because of his Mormon faith -- he would be the first Mormon president if elected -- and in part because of his personal fortune, estimated at more than $200 million."
So why does his faith make him controversial? Journalists need to do better than just throwing unsupported terms like "controversial" around.
Catholics and Mormons
The U.K's Guardian newspaper picked up on the story of a U.S. Cardinal speaking at Brigham Young University. Could the columnist, Riazat Butt, be any more skeptical? Here's her take:
"So why the cosying up? There is an increasingly secular mood in the US and religious groups are all too aware of it. The Roman Catholic hierarchy knows it cannot rely solely on its congregations to campaign on touchstone issues and a 'vital bulwark' -- in the shape of the devout, wealthy and organised LDS church -- is just what's needed to help it."
Give me a break.
Speaking from experience, what the LDS show the world is not what it is really like more often then not. One of their missionary points is to ‘never do anything to make the CHURCH look bad’ - not Christ, but ‘the Chruch’.
And it doesn’t matter if you like them personally or not, I LOVE many Mormons and still have several LDS friends, their theology is beyond flawed, it is heretical and unbiblical.
Now, if you are not a Christian, then I suppose it doesn’t matter to you. But I have been LDS and I have found a freedom in Christ that NO ONE can have inside the LDS church.
Mitt Romney is no different than Harry Reid
Mitt Romney is a flip-flopping socialist bum!
Some people just don't get the TEA Parties. RINO Romney is just more of the same. Dump him!
The orginal?
There you go then...
How about the Catholics here on FR? Very orthodox in their beliefs.
An indicator of the true Catholc age would be Mother Angelica of EWTN.
And if you want to go beyond that, you need look no further than Pope Benedict XVI.
Have you read any of his book?
All I ask, Cart, is for a bit of consistency: You told BibChr almost 3 months ago: John MacArthur takes a position and articulates it. Good for him.
I take a position as well & articulate it. But apparently you've decided to elaborate a distinct judgment.
If you say so...
Another actually told me that Christians were overly obsessed with Jesus...and mocked them.
- - - - - - - - -
I can easily see that coming from the LDS. When I was LDS, we used to mock the ‘reborns’ or ‘gracers’ all the time.
OTOH, he has a point. Christians ARE obsessed with Christ, why shouldn’t we be? He died in our place and paid the penalty for OUR sins. That deserves the utmost devotion.
You don’t need to ping me. I don’t care.
It was a courtesy ping and I am sorry you do not seem to care about the eternal destination of others. That is very sad.
Bazinga on the zinger there... LOL!
If only it was funny...
It is epidemic. So many people only care about themselves.
Yet, you are still here.
Yes, it’s tragic. My bad!
Yes, because I’m amused.
I just wonder WHICH of Marie’s husbands will call HER from the grave?
It is an important issue to me in every single election. Why should Mitt get a pass?
I just wonder WHICH of Marie’s husbands will call HER from the grave?
- - - - -
The first one she married in the temple unless the ‘sealings’ were broken, then it would be which ever one was a temple marriage.
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.