Posted on 06/07/2012 5:50:38 AM PDT by Colofornian
Posted // 2012-06-05 - A BBC investigative journalist's interview with Jeffery R. Holland, a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, raises intriguing questions about the LDS Church and its beliefs.
The documentary, released in March but yet to be broadcast Stateside, is called The Mormon Candidate and featured a sit-down interview in the LDS Church Headquarters in downtown Salt Lake City between British reporter John Sweeney and Holland.
Among Sweeney's questions were several relating to whether U.S. presidential candidate Mitt Romney would have pledged to cut his own throat or disembowel himself before revealing the secrets of the LDS temple ceremonies. In edited footage, Holland said, "That's not true." He later says that vows would have been made "regarding the ordinances of the temple." Such penalty oaths were taken out of the temple ceremony some time ago, one Sweeney interview subject said, albeit after Romney would have taken his temple oaths.
Sweeney asked Holland about church members shunning those who leave their faith. Holland noted that he would choose not to cut out of family life one of his children if they decided to leave Mormonism.
Others highlights of the interview include questions relating to the baptizing of dead Holocaust victims, similarities between the LDS Church and Masonic organizations and whether the LDS Church is a cult. By this point in the interview, Holland's distinct unease had unraveled to almost cavalier frustration. "I'm not an idiot," he told Sweeney—nor, he implied, are the 14 million members-plus members of his growing church.
Sweeney also brought up the "Strengthening the Members" committee, a group within the LDS Church that polices polygamists and other vocal apostates or breakaways from the church. Holland acknowledged their continued existence as a group dedicated to protecting the church's membership from dangerous critics.
Perhaps the most interesting question is why the interview took place at all. The LDS Church is not known for allowing media to interview its hierarchy.
Given that Sweeney was responsible for a controversial BBC documentary on the Church of Scientology—including an infamous on-air rant by Sweeney against church media handlers—the wisdom of agreeing to a sit-down with Holland is a head-scratcher, particularly given the way Holland struggled to answer some of Sweeney's unabashedly direct questions.
A PR firm for the church hand-delivered to BBC offices in London a letter complaining about the "ambush" interview, according to The Guardian.
The documentary will be broadcast in the United States later this year—presumably before the election.
How does that work.
Do those of us who don't vote for Romney have to sign a form that says we would have or something? Do they take this form and “create” a voter that goes and then votes for Obama, because I am not going to vote for him either...
Is that a generic “you”, or should I be winching?
generic...
check your FReepmail as well.
Yeah, I should have read my freepmail before the threads. As Litella would say, “Never mind.”
It makes me feel particularly enpowered. Apparently, I'm casting three votes this fall. Vote 1: My non-vote for Romney is a vote for Obama. Of course, if that is true, then the converse is, too. Therefore, Vote 2: My non-vote for Obama is a vote for Romney. Vote 3: My vote for Goode. (/sarcasm)
The biggest problem with the non-vote being a vote for someone else is the failure to recognize that the argument has a mirror image on the other side. Therefore, one non-vote cancels the other non-vote and guess what? The non-vote is a non-vote.
the “not voting for X is a vote for Y” is a great emotion grabber but it is a fallacy, for not voting for X creates no additional vote for Y
The other day, I had a conservation with an ABO who has become an aggressive Mittbot. After hearing the same old lecture on how the Romney non-vote was a vote for Obama and insisting that I must vote for Romney, I told him not to worry - I was voting for Romney - by not voting for Obama. He paused for a second as he thought about what I said, laughed, and told me that he understood my point. I expect that I won't hear that foolish from him again.
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.