Posted on 08/14/2010 1:24:41 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
It is a truism of modern media that few subjects draw more attention than politics. If you're a savvy journalist or blogger looking to attract page views in today's 24-hour news cycle, the shortcut to success requires slapping some political "analysis" on to whatever story you're covering, like so:
"University releases groundbreaking cancer study: What does it mean for Obama?"
Of course, I've been guilty of this to some extent in my (young) journalism career. And having spent the past few months interning at a national news outlet with a website that has scores of competitors, I understand all too well the occasional need to quickly pick a unique angle and go with it. Which is why I was not all that surprised when the press began buzzing with an interesting conspiracy theory connected with a new LDS ad campaign.
The campaign in question consists of commercials airing in nine middle-America markets. Each ad zeroes in on the life of an interesting Latter-day Saint. Seems pretty benign, right? Not if you ask page view-hungry journalists.
On liberal website Salon.com, Alex Pareene writes, "But … are Mormons just trying to convince Americans that Mormons are 'normal,' so that in 2012 they'll consider voting for Mormon King Mitt Romney? (These ads are running in four or five potential swing states, after all.)" He goes on to quote a church spokesman who insists "this has nothing to do with Mitt at all," but of course, by raising the question, Pareene is clearly hinting that it's a legitimate concern.
And he's not the only one. The idea has been floated in several news outlets. I haven't been able to track this theory back to its root, but I suppose it was bound to come up.
The problem, of course, is that it's ludicrous. Even if you believe that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is sinister enough to claim political neutrality and then secretly coordinate PR efforts with a potential presidential candidate, how would such actions benefit Mormonism? As I've written before, a Romney presidency would open the church up to unrelenting attacks from the left and most likely alienate potential converts who happen to be Democrats. If Romney governed like a true social conservative, the church might gain favor among the Republican base, but it's doubtful that we'd see swarms of evangelicals suddenly endorsing LDS doctrine.
In reality, this ad campaign is about what PR ad campaigns are always about: improving public image. The church's central message to the public has become distorted in recent years, especially in the wake of Proposition 8, and these commercials are intended to remind people that Mormons aren't all crazy, self-righteous cultists.
So, what is the central message the church is trying to communicate? Our full-time proselyting missionaries might answer that question with an Article of Faith or a line from Preach My Gospel, but the people in these commercials are not missionaries, and I think one of them explains it very well:
"This is the bottom line to me. The Mormon church teaches good principles. … I think it makes people better. It'll take a bad person and make 'em good, and a good person and make 'em better."
That may not make for a sexy political story, but it has the advantage of being true.
*******
McKay Coppins is a journalism major at BYU. His weekly blog chronicles the Mormon twenty-something experience. McKay's column, "Mormon Twentysomething," appears Fridays on MormonTimes.com.
E-mail: mcoppins@desnews.com
Words like "false" "error" "wrong" "misleading" do not "make it personal."
Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.
I am guessing you are sending the other poster a similar note about accusing me of being a militant anti-Christian, and of attacking the Christian culture of America--or are those things not "making it personal" because I'm an atheist, so anything goes?
This is based on the principle that two wrongs do not make a right.
Much like liberals can be trolls on the News/Activism Forum, atheists can be trolls on the Religion Forum.
Atheists are welcome to participate in theological debate provided their posts have a theological, historical or philosophical context. When the atheist has nothing to bring but ad hominems, I instruct him to leave.
OK. I think in the future it might be helpful to send such responses to both posters, not just one. The appearance of favoritism may be a matter of interpretation, but not an outrageous one.
This is based on the principle that two wrongs do not make a right.
It seems that pointing out one poster's errors in detail, and not another's at least equally extreme ones, is a wrong on top of the one being pointed out--that makes two.
Much like liberals can be trolls on the News/Activism Forum, atheists can be trolls on the Religion Forum.
Sure. I would expect to be asked to leave if I were trolling. I don't think an honest person can say my posts here were any such thing--particularly since I was the one posting to support the point of view of the initial posting, and the other poster is attacking it. Yet *I'm* the one given the warning?
Atheists are welcome to participate in theological debate provided their posts have a theological, historical or philosophical context. When the atheist has nothing to bring but ad hominems, I instruct him to leave.
I think it's clear to any honest reader who isn't looking to play the victim and thus retroactively label the "offending" poster a troll that I posted here in support of religious freedom, and subsequently asked why the religion the thread is about is considered threatening when it did the same things the dominant religion in the land does. I was then called an anti-Christian militant, and you know the rest.
I see these threads are not about folks like myself who are curious about religion even though I am not a believer. Over the years I've gotten very pleasant private FReepmails from believers who prayed for my conversion and so on. These are some of the messages that mean the most to me in my time here. Who knows where my spiritual quest will take me?
But since as an atheist I'm assumed to be bashing Christianity because I ask questions, I won't post on religion threads anymore. The responses I've gotten on this one have ranged from polite from those in support of the actual thread subject, to hostility and, sorry, dishonesty and avoidance of the most basic questions of religion...on a religious thread.
OK, I'm gone, you've got your religion thread back for those who all agree with each other--kind of a weird way to run a thread on a debate site, but it ain't my thread. Thanks for posting these for those who are interested; I've learned a lot from them in the past (and recommended them in a recent thread where I praised my favorite threads here on FR). Can't say I'm not disappointed in the attitude, but whatever.
Have a good one.
What cheese would you prefer with your whine? ... I’m guessing ‘limpburger’, or perhaps a niced ‘stiltson’?
The go-to response of the ignorant loudmouth.
Then why after 180 years of mormon leaders denouncing Christianity, does mormonism NOW demand to be called "Christian"? Why should Christians simply accept the arrogance of mormons deciding at this late date to define Christianity to suit their Christ?
They have denounced and continue to denounce your false Christianity, and they wish to replace it with their true Christianity...I don’t know why that’s hard to understand...many Christian sects have done the same thing for 2000 years...magritte
Bwahahahahaha ... must be such a torture having to read all the posts on all these threads, with an attitude of condescension so thick it oozes from your pores. LOL
As I posted earlier, the arrogance is obvious. From Joseph Smith onward, Christians were willing to allow mormons their version of "true Christianity", but from Joseph Smith onward, mormons have tried to force feed their version to the "gentile" world. If mormons wish to be one with Christians, why do mormons have special name for non-believers? This is a goal very similar to the muslim attitude toward "infidels".
As a matter of fact the mormon/muslim connection continues to grow.
In recent years, respect for the spiritual legacy of Muhammad and for the religious values of the Islamic community has led to increasing contact and cooperation between Latter-day Saints and Muslims around the world.
This is due in part to the presence of Latter-day Saint congregations in areas such as the Levant, North Africa, the Persian Gulf, and Southeast Asia.
The Church has sought to respect Islamic laws and traditions that prohibit conversion of Muslims to other faiths by adopting a policy of nonproselyting in Islamic countries of the Middle East.
NOTE: Why the special conditions for muslims, yet Christians are fair game?
Yet examples of dialogue and cooperation abound, including visits of Muslim dignitaries at Church headquarters in Salt Lake City; Muslim use of Church canning facilities to produce halal (ritually clean) food products; Church humanitarian aid and disaster relief sent to predominantly Muslim areas including Jordan, Kosovo, and Turkey; academic agreements between Brigham Young University and various educational and governmental institutions in the Islamic world; the existence of the Muslim Student Association at BYU; and expanding collaboration between the Church and Islamic organizations to safeguard traditional family values worldwide.
11 The recent initiation of the Islamic Translation Series, cosponsored by BYU and the Church, has resulted in several significant exchanges between Muslim officials and Latter-day Saint Church leaders. A Muslim ambassador to the United Nations predicted that this translation series “will play a positive role in the West’s quest for a better understanding of Islam.” 12
A Latter-day Saint Perspective on Muhammad-LDS.org
Actually, it's not torture at all seeing posters like you being unable to answer what should be the simplest question in the world. It just validates my position over, and over, and over again. LOL!
Ah, but you have not asked a question of me, just spittled on about your superiority. Self-aggrandizement is considered a mental illness when it reaches your level of spittle, skippy. Bwahahahahaha, oyu’re such fun to play with. But alas, I must allow you the last words so your foolishness stands a mute testimony. Have fun
Oh, so you are simply flaming me without even knowing why? Typical.
just spittled on about your superiority.
Don't you people ever get tired of making stuff up? I challenge you to post all of these comments of mine where I state my superiority. (crickets)
Self-aggrandizement is considered a mental illness when it reaches your level of spittle, skippy.
(yawn) First you did the "Whine with cheese" cliche, now you're just babbling. Your entire contribution to this has been calling names like a child. Lying and childish name-calling on a message board--you sure seem to know a lot about mental illness from personal experience.
Bwahahahahaha,
Still can't engage on the simple question I posted, which you've just admitted you didn't even read--so you're posting cliches without even knowing why.
Mental illness...?
oyu’re such fun to play with. But alas, I must allow you the last words so your foolishness stands a mute testimony. Have fun
Anyone can look at your posts and see all you've posted are cliches and ranting, without a SINGLE post of substance because you've even admitted you don't know WHY you're posting.
Keep proving my point, skippy!
Next. :)
I'll take a stab at it noting that I'm posting to at least one confessed atheist and that my explanation is my own. Of course, it may not satisfy your curiosity or answer your question, but the gauntlet has been thrown down and I'm going to attempt to pick it up.
Disclaimer: Since I'm relatively "new" to Christianity, some of my rationale may not pass muster with a true theologian, however, my knowledge of mormonism is sufficient for me to speak on it.
I don't perceive a "threat" from mormons per se. I believe the assumption many make who are not familiar with the LdS religion or the theology, the belief held by many Christians is that the "threat" is faced by the mormons in regards to their eternal salvation. So the Christians "fight" the threat by posting information about the theology and doctrine in hopes of "saving" mormons, or at a minimum, showing mormons what a false doctrine mormonISM is.
I am one of those who was quite surprised to learn many things that I was woefully ignorant of. I then furthered my study by doing the research.
What I take issue with in regards to mormonism is the twisted use of Biblical scripture to claim theirs is the only "true" religion as some others do as well (but that's another conversation). There are many other reasons but I'll offer the one that caused me to leave mormonism. "Men can become gods because God was a man once, just like us."
They claim that their interpretation of Romans (8:14-17):
"14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, [Notice, "led by the Spirit of God", not by lineage or "birthright" do we become sons of God], they are the sons of God.
15 For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.
[Abba is a term of endearment and closeness, similar to "daddy.]
"16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God: [Notice that "with our spirit", not by lineage, but by spirit we are "children of God.]
17 And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with [him], that we may be also glorified together.[That we are heirs to being glorified with Christ, not heirs to godhood.]
specifically verse 17, along with Doctrine and Convenants Sect. 132 entitles them to godhood.
D&C 132: 19 And again, verily I say unto you, if a man marry a wife by my word, which is my law, and by the new and everlasting covenant, and it is sealed unto them by the Holy Spirit of promise, by him who is anointed, unto whom I have appointed this power and the keys of this priesthood; and it shall be said unto them—Ye shall come forth in the first resurrection; and if it be after the first resurrection, in the next resurrection; and shall inherit thrones, kingdoms, principalities, and powers, dominions, all heights and depths—then shall it be written in the Lamb’s Book of Life, that he shall commit no murder whereby to shed innocent blood, and if ye abide in my covenant, and commit no murder whereby to shed innocent blood, it shall be done unto them in all things whatsoever my servant hath put upon them, in time, and through all eternity; and shall be of full force when they are out of the world; and they shall pass by the angels, and the gods, which are set there, to their exaltation and glory in all things, as hath been sealed upon their heads, which glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the seeds forever and ever.
20 Then shall they be gods, because they have no end; therefore shall they be from everlasting to everlasting, because they continue; then shall they be above all, because all things are subject unto them. Then shall they be gods, because they have all power, and the angels are subject unto them.
21 Verily, verily, I say unto you, except ye abide my law ye cannot attain to this glory.
However, they have taken a verse (Romans 8:17) that applied to ALL and have excluded their women folk. Making them completely dependent on their men (working to become gods) in order to reach heaven.
Since the mormons are using the “joint heirs” (Romans) scripture to justify godhood, and the scripture is talking about glorification [like Christ], this presents a problem for the females in mormonism. Especially since only mormon men can become gods.
The scripture is saying that as heirs we all get to be glorified like Christ, yet, the mormons have now inadvertently(?) excluded their women from glorification in order to use it to justify becoming a god.
Some may see no problem with this, however, since almost all mainline Christian churches agree that there is only ONE God, this presents a serious theological issue.
It also creates a problem about the number of gods in mormonISM. They claim there is only one God, yet, their doctrine clearly teaches the opposite. IF all mormon men can become a god, then how many gods are there? Polytheism, much like Buddhism, Hinduism, etc.
There are many more theological problems with mormonISM, but there isn't any further reason to use up FR's bandwidth on it. If one is interested as to why there are folks on FR who continually question the theology of mormonISM, all one has to do is compare the vast amounts of information that can be found on the web.(This one's for you PD.)
I will note as a matter of disclosure, that I am an ex-mormon, recently converted to Christianity (non-denom.), married over 20 years to a fine mormon woman who works in the mormon temple. So, I don't fear or feel "threatened" by mormons. They're salt of the earth folks (for the most part, like any other group).
I have many good friends and Scouting acquaintances as well as co-workers who are mormon. I "fear" for them, for their salvation. Nothing more. I am not "threatened" by their existence. As a Christian, following Christ's admonition, we have a "responsibility" to warn others. I realize that an atheist will have an issue with that, but it should be a part of one's core beliefs and actions after accepting Christ.
I would love nothing more than for my family to come out of the religion. I truly believe, after having done a lot of research(which I didn't do before joining the LdS as a young man) on the religion, that it is false.
YMMV.
FRegards,
SZ
excellent post SZ
As a Christian, following Christ's admonition, we have a "responsibility" to warn others. I realize that an atheist will have an issue with that, but it should be a part of one's core beliefs and actions after accepting Christ.
I have no problem with you or anyone else expressing why your beliefs are different from mine or a Mormon's--that's never been my issue, because that's exactly what *I* wish to do: express my beliefs, discuss differences, etc.
Your post has been very educational, but in the end, I simply don't see this threat in Mormons believing as they do beyond someone thinking what they believe is the wrong belief.
Belief is so very personal that the experience of religious grace is simply non-transferable--your experience isn't THE experience--not everyone will find the rewards in your belief that you do. Look around and that's obvious.
My issue with all of this is that those who believe certain things can't seem to grasp that what works for them--even if they honestly believe it would work for others--sometimes will not work in that way for others.
Years ago I met a young woman whose very first words around me were slams against the Catholic church. She had no idea about my faith or lack of it, she just felt, as many college people do, that the rest of the world gives a damn what her personal views on religion are. We were working together, and she was just droning on about her mother's belief, and how awful it was that she prayed so often, and her conservative beliefs were so "primitive". Then she said, "And they believe THEIR religion is the only true one!" as if this was the crowning argument that couldn't be refuted.
I said to her, "What religion DOESN'T think it's the true religion, and why would you belong to a religion you didn't believe was the true one?"
That shut her up.
My point in bringing this up is that as deeply as Catholics and Christians believe their faith, others will see them as being "wrong" about these issues. Mormons (and Jews, and Hindus, etc.) believe their own faith just as strongly, and as long as they don't do anything to prevent you or anyone else from choosing your own beliefs, I simply don't see this "threat".
Thanks again for your own very interesting thoughts.
And you as well. I understand your point. When I met my wife years ago, one of the first things she told me was that she's a mormon. I told her I didn't care.
At the time and for many years later, I didn't. I won't let her faith/belief affect our marriage, yet, and this is a ticklish point, we "debate" our beliefs. Although I try not to throw rocks in her field, so to speak.
"Mormons (and Jews, and Hindus, etc.) believe their own faith just as strongly, and as long as they don't do anything to prevent you or anyone else from choosing your own beliefs, I simply don't see this "threat"."
Too carry the conversation a little farther, the "threat" I and some others see is their missionary system. The LdS send out over 50,000 a year and every member is called upon to be a missionary ("every member a missionary"). Theoretically, you're talking about a few million missionaries. The use of FR to present an opposing viewpoint, is but one of the few ways non-mormons have to counter what their missionaries teach.
"Belief is so very personal that the experience of religious grace is simply non-transferable--your experience isn't THE experience--not everyone will find the rewards in your belief that you do. Look around and that's obvious. "
True, no argument there.
""What religion DOESN'T think it's the true religion, and why would you belong to a religion you didn't believe was the true one?"
After mormonism, I don't do "religion". I now go to a Bible teaching church. For me, it's just about the Bible. What the Bible teaches, not what a specific "religion" teaches or does.
I dislike the ISM, not the people. Although many would and do argue they're inseparable.
I would submit though, I don't see anyone denying the LdS on FR free expression or the ability to tell what they believe. What I see are folks who believe otherwise and post to offer a counter viewpoint. Now there are some that go overboard in their snarkiness, but many others are quite respectful to those actually engaged in civil debate.
Again, thanks for your insightful comments and polite conversation (it's getting tougher to find that around FR lately). I hope that my comments have been as enlightening to you as yours have been for me.
FRegards,
SZ
I haven’t been able to track this theory back to its root,
____________________________________________
Gosh McKay and you so “bright”
“.. are Mormons just trying to convince Americans that Mormons are ‘normal,’ so that in 2012 they’ll consider voting for Mormon King Mitt Romney? (These ads are running in four or five potential swing states, after all.)”
is not a theory..
Its a battle plan right out of SLC...
Since Joey Smith sent his disciples out knocking on doors around the US of 1844 to get himself elected to POTUS and prophet-in-chief, (he was already “king” of the United States - he had declared himself that)
And uttered his “white horse prophecy” claiming that only the mormons can save the United States..
Mormons from that time on have toyed with the idea that they were the “one” (like Obama ids the “one” right now - the new messiah)
George Romney thought it weas him in 1964 and 1968..
When that didnt work George groomed his youngest son, Williard Mitt Romney to be IT, the king, the POTUS the “savior” of America...
Romneys sense of entitlement transends any clues he has received to the contrary..
Rather than accept defeat when he was not elected as the GOP candidate in 2008, and that the GOP and the TEA Partiers dont want him because he is a lifelong liberal from a liberal family..
Romney’s superiority conplect and ego, and delusionment has to accuse conservatives of being “mormon bashers” and “bigots” and “haters” and “liberals’ and “Obama lovers”
After all why wouldnt we vote for a has been broken down old Saturday Matinee runway model full of Botox, Rogaines and socialism and progression for our dear leader ???
Whatever can be the matter with the Republicans that we dont want a “bishop-in-chief” nominee so in love with himself and blind that he would think abortion and gay rights and gun control and AMNESTY and big government and kissin China is a good thing..
don’t like Mitt Romney but have no issues with Mormons until they start sawing the heads off infidels.
________________________________________
Theyve already done that...
BTW how is murder by beheading different than death by a cut throat or a bullet ???
The innocent infidel/Gentile victims are just as dead...
(The Moslems call us Christians “infidels”
The mormons call us “Gentiles”
Same Same...)
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.