they display bigoted behavior towards other religions, in this case Mormonism?
Posted by Newtster
I google for the title referred to in bobo's post. Here's what I found.
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/01/30/what-is-it-about-mormons
Caption to a "debate" on Romney's mormonism.______________________________________________________________
Heading into the Florida primary, Mitt Romney appears to be in the lead. The candidate, whose results so far have been mixed, continues to be stymied by suspicions about his religion. But why are so many Americans uncomfortable with Mormonism?
A recent Pew survey found that Mormons are hard-working and civic-minded. Couldn’t the nation use some Mormon discipline: frugality, morality, self-improvement, worldliness? Indeed, with these traits, shouldn’t Americans be dying to vote for a Mormon?
______________________________________________________________
Such scathing praise of Mormons offends you?
More "bigotry" from the five differing "panelists".
______________________________________________________________
Anyone who has lived among Mormons has observed the sect’s legendarily happy families and tight-knit communities. They are self-satisfied, devout and abstemious; overwhelmingly white and middle to upper class. Hard working, acquisitive, conservative and disciplined. A whopping majority of them consider helping the poor a top priority — an admirable quality even if their anti-poverty efforts are mostly directed at their own ranks. So why aren’t Americans dying to vote for a Mormon for president? Mormonism is a valid issue of concern not as a religious test for office, but for its most distinctive characteristic — male authoritarianism. The controversial and secretive religion is a multibillion-dollar business empire ruled by a stern patriarchal gerontocracy. Only “worthy males” can ascend to positions of power — both now and in the afterlife — and women are relegated to supporting roles. Male dominance is the essence of the faith, as the Mormon feminist Sonia Johnson found when she was excommunicated for her support of the Equal Rights Amendment. In her memoir, "From Housewife to Heretic," Johnson describes a patriarchal world in which everyone is taught that "God, being male, values maleness much more than he values femaleness, that God and men are in an Old Boys’ Club together, with God as president.”
Its founding prophet, Joseph Smith Jr., ran for president in 1844 advocating the overthrow of the U.S. government in favor of a Mormon-ruled theocracy. In the 1850s the U.S. waged “the Mormon War” against the theocracy established in Utah — where the church remains engaged in what a Salt Lake Tribune editor has called “a unique church-state tango.” In light of the theology and divine prophecies of the church, it would seem that the office of the American presidency is the ultimate ecclesiastical position to which a male Mormon might aspire.
Given that Mitt Romney is a high church official and not just a member, voters are right to be circumspect.
______________________________________________________________
Is that bigotry, or just an argument that is crappy because it is based on past mormon practice, not necessarily modern practice.
But yeah, hysteria about Rev. Wright, and claims that Obama was a Kenyan Muslim, a false Christian. We were cool with that. It's the liberal media we're worried about.
______________________________________________________________
In
a gracious Op-Ed in The New York Times recently, an American history professor argued that Mormons should be better tolerated by evangelicals than they appear to be. That’s a step in the right direction for Mormonism, but this generous assessment kept misunderstanding the religion by calling it “Protestant.”
Mormons aren’t Protestants. In fact, in the minds of evangelical voters, that’s precisely the root of the problem.
Historically, Americans are most likely to vote for the candidate with whom they feel an intangible personal connection, even if that person doesn’t always reflect their political views. As a Mormon and a historian, I know what that means: Not Us. There are all kinds of reasons that Republicans won’t want to vote for Mitt Romney in this primary election cycle — he’s too rich, he’s too robotic, his conservative bona fides are dubious on major issues, etc. — but the reason that keeps creeping up to the surface is that he’s Mormon and almost too good to be true.
A recent Pew study, Mormons in America, found that Mormons are hard-working and civic-minded. They volunteer more hours and give more money to charity than most other groups, stay married longer, and consistently value marriage and family as top priorities in life. For example, four out of five Mormons report that being a good parent is one of their most important goals; in the general population half of those surveyed cited this as a primary value.
In short, Mormons uphold many of the exact values that the religious right is supposed to champion. But instead of rallying behind a candidate who practices what he preaches about faith and family and has been with the same woman for 42 years, they’re circling wagons around the bombastic Newt Gingrich, who engaged in repeated adulterous relationships even while working to impeach President Bill Clinton for sexual impropriety. Last week Gingrich said he was "more normal" than "somebody who wanders around seeming perfect."
Mormons really can’t win, and it’s depressing.
I wish that, in their desperate months-long quest for the "Not Romney" (someone! anyone!), my evangelical brothers and sisters would do Mormons the favor of looking beyond theological differences and cast their votes on the basis of record, public service and character. I have done that, and I have decided that if Mitt Romney makes it to the general election, I won’t be voting for him. But that’s not because of his religion, which I happen to share; it’s because of his conservative politics, which I don’t.
______________________________________________________________
Oh she made them sound like such b*stards. How can anyone read this bigotry!?!?!?
It makes you wonder whether the NYT is staffed by Kenyan Muslims.
______________________________________________________________
Americans are impressed that Mormons fast one Sunday a month, and that the money these individuals save is voluntarily donated to the church’s widely respected rapid response system. After Hurricane Katrina, Mormon trucks were the first to arrive. But what was a force for good after Katrina also has a dark side. When it comes to the social agenda, the Mormon Church does not respect separation of church and state. It has used its mobilizing genius to pursue political goals, and individual Mormons have obeyed like sheep.
The church’s role in defeating the Equal Rights Amendment has been documented by historians: Mormons illegally used church pulpits, buildings and deceptively named grassroots groups to enlist supporters against the amendment. Mormon activism grew as the church fought gay rights in Hawaii and Arizona.
In 2008, the church targeted the California Supreme Court’s decision legalizing same-sex marriage. Prophet Thomas S. Monson, the president of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, asked Mormons to give of their “means and time.” Mormon volunteers were bused into California to support Proposition 8, a Constitutional amendment that overturned the court decision by defining marriage as only taking place between a man and a woman. Some $22 million from Utah financed the victory. How much came from the church? It's not clear. Attempts to challenge to the Mormons’ 501(c)(3) tax exempt status have faltered because of the secrecy in which the church shrouds its finances.
In 1960, as a presidential candidate, John F. Kennedy declared his absolute belief in separation of church and state, but also in an America “where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public.” In his 2007 speech on religion, Mitt Romney only said that no authorities of his church would “exert influence on presidential decisions.” What if the church illegally used its money and influence to defeat Roe v. Wade or to pass the Federal Marriage Amendment while Romney was president? Would he protest from the Oval Office? Or would he be a sheep?
______________________________________________________________
Ok, so the writer did reach back a bit far at first, but recent opposition to gay marriage is something I'd like to know about.
Valid reasons to ask Romney of his intentions and consider his record. If you think gay people deserve the Equal Protection of the Law that is. See U.S. Const. Amd. 5, 14.
Just like asking Obama about how much influence Wright had was fair enough, even if misguided.
It was the bigotted assertions that Obama was going to order reparations and that he is a racist against white people that were offensive.
I don't see the writer saying anything like that about Romney, do you?
______________________________________________________________
It's no surprise to me that Mormons rank high on admirable causes like poverty — I saw it all the time growing up in an extended Latter-day Saints family. Whether they were delivering toys to poor families on Christmas, or just turning a blind eye to us broke teenagers raiding the "one-year supply of food" room (we dubbed it the "apocalycloset"), the Mormons I knew were unceasingly kind.
While it's easy to be seduced by a church known for its practicality, its financial acumen and its commitment to both self-betterment and worldly outreach, I wouldn't buy the underwear just yet. Everything comes with a caveat.
Rattling off a laundry list of the ways America could use a Mormon for president is not just an oversimplification, it's cherry-picking. Sure, it seems like our country could use a dollop of the Jell-O and mayonnaise they serve in Salt Lake City, but remember, you don't get to choose which part of Mormonism you like. With a Mormon president, you're in for a penny and a pound.
Mormons typically create their perfect world not by embracing the future, but by fetishizing the past. The very qualities America might want — prudence, thrift, even contentment — come at a price. The Mormon way is steadfastly patriarchal; women can't hold the priesthood, and are encouraged to be as procreative as possible. Their rigid concept of "family" owes more to the early 1950s than the 20-teens.
Their much-vaunted "worldliness" comes from the missionary program, but when the missionaries go to Brazil, Angola or New Paltz, N.Y., they experience those places wholly through the prism of religious conversion. They are there to spread gospel and baptize, not to revel in local custom. In many cases, Mormons see the world, but they don't get it.
With no marriages outside the church, zero tolerance of homosexuality and very little coffee, the L.D.S. worldview would positively smother most Americans. It might be smothering most Mormons; Utah's antidepressant use makes it one of the most-medicated states in the country.
A culture that walks in such tidy lockstep has the advantage of homogeneity, and will always look good on paper. It certainly works for my many cousins, whom I love. But some of us who have experienced the Mormon life firsthand would rather choose a messy, colorful America lurching forward without so many confines — every day and twice on Sunday.
______________________________________________________________
Same response: Ok, but those are reasons to ask Romney and study his records. Not to not vote for him.
But is it BIGOTRY for someone who grew up with the Mormon Church to speak about it?
Strange world you live in, Newtster.______________________________________________________________
American society has long held a wary admiration for Mormons. Today Mormons run major corporations, serve in Congress, promote patriotic sentiments, and extol conservative social ideals. They have a world-renowned choir, named by Ronald Reagan as “America’s Choir.” Clean-cut, wholesome and polite, Mormons are archetypes of the American way.
But just as Mormons seem to be ideal Americans, they also provoke typically American fears. While Mormons embody the economic and moral success endorsed by the American Dream, they also subscribe to beliefs that, to many, seem peculiar — even bizarre. Mormon beliefs, understandings of history, and practices such as temple rituals or a legacy of polygamy (which many — despite endless clarifications — mistakenly believe the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints still sanctions), not to mention their preference to keep some practices out of the public eye, all provoke unease and distrust. How can these people, so like many other Americans, be so different?
I call this double legacy the “invasion of the body snatchers” syndrome: no matter how much Mormon behavior conforms to what most consider admirable (and maybe especially because they look so wholesome), some Americans are convinced Mormons secretly await an opportunity to take over the world. Nothing Mitt Romney or others might say can assuage that deep-seated anxiety. And insisting it has no basis in fact only raises some people’s fears further.
Indeed, once those suspicions ignite, all otherwise admirable qualities of hard work and dedication become further cause for alarm. What if they are turned to the wrong causes, transforming the worker bees into deadly hornets?
I harbor the hope, shared by Mormons in the Pew survey, that such prejudices decrease with greater familiarity of the facts and lessening distrust through relationships across religious divides. Americans should not be dying to vote for a Mormon simply because he (or she) is Mormon. They should be deciding how well a candidate’s principles and actions measure up to the things they value. Judging an entire religious group based on fear and ignorance is the least American value of all.
__________________________________________________________________
Because only a big*ss liberal Bigot would talk about how wrong Bigotry Against Mormons is.
I don't know. What's the idea here? If BDC conservatives claim the sky is red, those they call liberal will stop reading their posts and therefore stop proving their claims meaningless. Then, they can post without opposition and pat themselves on the back for being right?
Or is there such a disease known as "compulsive lying"?
