Romney’s quiet first
When Obama was nominated and elected, one of the big deals was that he was the first African-American in that position. And that really was a big deal, given our racial history, and despite the fact that his black ancestry was more recently African.
Romney is a first too. But that first is not such a big deal, except perhaps among Mormons and those who don’t like them. James W. Ceaser explains:
And what of Willard Romney? His nomination also marks an objective first, though the near total silence about this fact is deafening. Romney rarely calls attention to the fact that he is a Mormon. Besides revealing something of his personal style, this reticence reflects the recognition that this first is not being widely celebrated. Why this is so most likely has much to do with the disposition of those who distribute the awards for tolerance. These judges, deriving mostly from the intelligentsia, appear reluctant to celebrate Romney’s first for fear of diminishing the more prized achievement of President Obama, as if the nation were incapable of celebrating more than one feat of tolerance at a time; or, seeing the success of so many Mormons, they may consider that this group does not suffer sufficiently from duress to warrant the acknowledgment of a first, although group success did not deter the widespread celebration of Joseph Lieberman’s nomination for vice president in 2000. It might also be that many do not see Mormons as a genuine minority. Take away Mitt Romney’s religion, and he looks, walks, and talks every bit as much like the perfect WASP as that other non-Protestant nominee, John Kerry. The most likely explanation, however, is that the tolerance-anointers are not very excited about Mormons””they may even have friends who utter less than sensitive comments about them in private company. This last possibility has been artfully deflected by the creation of the impression that only conservative evangelicals oppose the election of a Mormon president. In fact, polls show that by far the greater opposition comes from Democrats.
That last sentence comes as no surprise.
“That last sentence comes as no surprise”
We who live in the South, and in the Southwest, have a knowledge which it sometimes feels as if no one else has: the South and the Southwest are not any more racially prejudiced than any other region of our nation, and often are less racially prejudiced.
Similarly, we evangelical Christians have a knowledge which, it sometimes feels, as if no one else has: evangelical Christians are not any more intolerant or hateful than any other human beings, and often are far more tolerant and far more loving.
Similarly, we who do not worship at the altar of political correctness … have a knowledge which it sometimes feels as if no one else has: the most intolerant Americans are politically correct Americans. They are consistently intolerant, and in multiple ways. And they, vastly, comprise the group of Americans who are intolerant against Mormons. We know this, just from living in America and from observing internet conversation.
My experience as an LDS missionary in Alabama (and my brother’s similar experience) would tend to suggest that there is still a rather strong streak of anti-Mormon sentiment there. It’s no longer evidenced by lynchings and mobs chasing people from their homes, and the infamous Extermination Order is finally off the books, but neither is the pervasive attitude, shall we say, Southern Hospitality.
…sorry for the double post, but I should probably note that my experiences weren’t politically based. I’ve literally no idea who was of what political persuasion down there. It wasn’t something that came up.
…which was kind of nice, actually. We had our hands full just talking about religion.
In my experience since, my observations align with gcotharn up there, that those most sensitive to political correctness are often the most intolerant bunch.
Can you really expect tolerance of Mormons from those who would throw you out of their group for not tasting the right fruit essence in the latest “in” wine? The trend setters among the libs are terrible snobs.
Some have called the Mormon religion strange and “cult like”. The Mormon religion doesn’t bother me a bit. It’s what a person does and how they live that is important to me.
All persons in all major religions are asked to believe some pretty fantastic things if one has an open mind and looks at them objectively. Things like turning water into wine, raising people from the dead, a Supreme Being etching commandments in stone, having the truth of how to live dictated verbatim to a war lord by a Supreme Being, multiple gods with multiple arms and legs, a person blending into the universe and becoming “nothing”, etc.
Full disclosure: I am a WASP culturally and in my religion. I have been very active as a lay leader in the Methodist Church in the past. I don’t believe a lot of things literally but it doesn’t bother me a bit if other people do.
Growing up in NC/MD I was taught that Mormonism was a cult.
I meet my first Mormon (a convert) at my first real job in NY. Nice guy.
When I moved out to AZ/CA/WA/OR, because of my hair color/complexion I was frequently mistaken for a Mormon (or LDS to use their term), and became very good friends with several of them.
BTW, best conversion pitch I ever received: “You should come to our church. There are a lot of good looking women there” (And there are).
While I think their religious beliefs are hooey, I find their general personalities and social network very admirable and enviable. Right up there with the Jews in terms of social support. Apparently generations of persecution result in members geared towards success.
If I could buy into their religion I wouldn’t mind joining them. However, I don’t even have the mustard seed of faith to buy into the religion of my parents (Methodist) let alone a divergent version thereof.
That said I am also aware of some of the Dark Side of the culture. As one Mormon friend said to me “There are too many Mormons from Utah (as opposed to elsewhere) that believe that because they are part of the chosen religion and come from the promised land, Utah, that regardless of what they do their actions will be forgiven. When dealing with such people, beware of immoral behavior.”
.
So, I agree many in the evangelical community will be unhappy with Romney’s religion.
.
However, we have seen the reaction to Mormons in the CA gay-marriage fight. The Left hates the Mormons because the Mormons are open believers in a religious/non-Marxist form of morality and the Mormons are successful and uncowed despite the Left’s control of the culture for the last 40 years.
Therefore, the Left sees Mormonism as a threat to their own beliefs in a way they no longer see Baptists as a threat.
momo: I’ve known quite a few Mormons rather well, and they have all been exemplary people on the personal level.
“Mormons are … uncowed despite the Left’s control of the culture for the last 40 years.”
NOTHING pisses off the left as much as being uncowed.
Mormons may be quirky but it’s a quirky that demonstrably makes for some decent human beings. Then again i may be biased, as i’d vote for a pentecostal rattlesnake preacher from Appalachia over a typical democrat.
@momo, regarding the quote, it’s worth noting that such notions of moral superiority aren’t part of the church’s doctrine… and aren’t exclusive to any given culture.
momo
BTW, best conversion pitch I ever received: “You should come to our church. There are a lot of good looking women there”
I have worked on and off the last decade with a Mormon woman. We have a good working relationship. Years ago she wanted to set me up on a date with a woman from her church. I considered doing so, but later came to the conclusion that it was going to be a “getting to know you- and convert you” experience, so I declined.
She is a bit of a Jack Mormon, as she drinks coffee. But she does go to church.
When I hitched to California before starting college, and met some cousins for the first time, I found out that the best friend of one of my cousins had the same surname as a prominent politician of the Mormon faith. I asked my cousin: was her friend related to this politician? Yes, came the reply.
Mormons have the reputation for being very sober, serious people. The Mormon friend of my cousin was very much like my cousin: much more interested in having a good time than in reading a good book. Yes, her Mormon friend was very good looking. But so was my cousin.
I will neither hold Mitt’s religion against him nor hold his Haavaad degrees against him. Go mit Mitt, I say.
Here is a joke from Guatemala:
What is the fastest way to shut a door? Open it and find a Mormon missionary outside.
I knew a Guatemalan of the Mormon faith. Didn’t try to convert me, and was a good person.
Similarly, we evangelical Christians have a knowledge which, it sometimes feels, as if no one else has: evangelical Christians are not any more intolerant or hateful than any other human beings, and often are far more tolerant and far more loving.
I think the jury is still out.
When I moved out to AZ/CA/WA/OR, because of my hair color/complexion I was frequently mistaken for a Mormon (or LDS to use their term),
“to use their term” Huh? It isn’t a term, it is a shortened version of their name, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. Mormon is the slang term.
And what your hair color/complexion has to do with anything is pretty stupid, IMHO. LDS members come from all over the world and look like people from all over the world. They have an active ministry with Native Americans and with Pacific Islanders just to name two who don’t look like typical WASPs.
However, we have seen the reaction to Mormons in the CA gay-marriage fight.
You do know that Salt Lake City is the #1 gay city in America, right? Yes, outranks San Francisco and Orlando, FL.
And finally, as to drinking coffee or soft drinks. It is the caffeine they object to, not the coffee. I know lots of LDS who drink caffeine free coffee and soda. And the objection is not one on moral grounds, it is based on good health, as the LDS believe our bodies are the Temple of the Spirit and should be treated accordingly. In other words, no habit forming drugs.
I wonder what those Evangelical bigots think about Mitt being invited to give the commencement speech at Liberty University?
One more thing. Back in the ’70s we bought a new house in a brand new subdivision in So. Calif. We were the only non-Mormon family on our block. Not once did any try to “convert” us. We were invited for dinner, we participated in block parties, my son was in a Boy Scout troop of nearly all Mormons with a Mormon leader, etc.
My son, as a 10 year old, who wanted to join the Church basketball team, got me to look into the Church. Best decision I ever made was to let both my son and daughter take part in church activities, especially since their Dad, active duty Navy, was an absentee Dad more often than not, due to deployments. Not one member ever tried to proselytize me or them. They let their example speak for them.
Sara,
Mitt is going to win the election, and it will be “those Evangelical bigots” who put him over the top. I wonder what YOU think about that.
gcotharn: I think it will be great, I just wish they’d shut up now and leave Mitt’s religion out of it. He is a good man, an honest man, a wonderful family man, and very smart and savvy. How he worships shouldn’t even come into play on any level. I still can’t understand why they would want someone like Santorum in, a man with some very “out there” ideas, over Mitt.
It was even weirder to me about Santorum as I grew up in the same area as he did and it was Catholics who were considered heathens and idol worshipers and who often faced discrimination. For him to play the religion card with Romney was bigotry, IMHO. It just made no sense to me at all.
Obama will do more to heal the rift between Mormons and evangelicals than anyone up to this point in history.
Mitt is going to win the election, and it will be “those Evangelical bigots” who put him over the top.
I hope you don’t think that I think all Evangelicals are bigots. I most certainly do not. But, I do think that there are many Evangelical pastors who preach what I would call bigotry and many who don’t question what they are being taught because it comes from the pulpit. LDS have been one of THE most persecuted groups in America, if you look at their history.
Sara,
to my knowledge, the only influential Evangelical who brought Romney’s religion into play in the primary was Pastor Robert Jeffries of First Baptist Church of Dallas. He made thoughtful remarks, with which I disagreed, Also, his remarks, naturally, were not reported inside their full thoughtful context. After the effective end of the primary, Pastor Jeffries publicly endorsed Romney.
After the drop outs of Bachmann, Perry, and Cain, and after Gringrich victory in South Carolina, a group of influential Evangelical leaders met in Texas, and announced their support of Santorum. But, they made no mention of religion or LDS as a factor in their support of Santorum. It was an issues thing.
So, on a national level, influential conservative Evangelicals ARE going to shut up and vote for Romney; already have shut up, already either explicitly or implicitly support Romney. Your desire will come true. If you hear an influential Evangelical criticizing LDS as a reason to oppose Romney, that Evangelical is a Democrat.
Sara #2,
I do not remember Santorum playing a religion card vis a vis LDS vs Catholics. I do remember Santorum leaping into the fray on numerous social issues. However, Santorum’s leaps were, possibly, consistently in alignment with LDS beliefs vis a vis those very same social issues.
Re your remarks which indicate that you are, to some extent, fed up with a number of Evangelical Christians, I invite you to factor in these points of view:
– given the large numbers of Evangelicals in America: as a group, we could be, were we so inclined, much bigger ass@#$%&^ than we already are. We’ve got numbers, funding, and political power. If we wanted, we could ramp up the oppressive aspects of our behavior.
– given our large numbers, OF COURSE there will be large numbers of us who are less graceful human beings than we could be.
– Jesus said: “I came not to call the righteous, but sinners.” Christian pastors consistently say that those of us who are attracted to Christianity are those of us who realize just how depraved and in need we are. When Pastors look upon their congregations, they see very flawed and very humanly fallible persons. We in the congregation came to Christianity for a reason. We were not wonderful persons, and still are not wonderful persons. So, we are, from time to time, going to do some unwonderful things. B/c that is who we are.
In 1954, I lived in Salt Lake City for a year. Salt Lake was becoming less Mormon as non-Mormons moved there for jobs. My experience with Mormons during that time ran the gamut from my ultra-strict Mormon cousin to the “Jack- Mormon” lady from whom I rented my living quarters. My thought: Gee, some are ultra religious and some are barely religious, with everything in between. The main thing I noticed back in those days was that the church took care of their own. Their safety net for church members was substantial, but those who could work were required to do something, even if it was just sweeping sidewalks in Salt Lake. That example of charity coupled with encouraging the work ethic has informed much of what I believe about giving those who are down a hand up, not a hand out.
Anyway, Mormons are generally decent people, they learn self reliance in the church, they encourage hard work, and they strive for sobriety. Romney’s religion is not an issue for me, and I wish all conservatives felt the same.
gcotharn: Sorry if I don’t entirely agree with you. In fact, not 2 minutes ago, I just read how Romney worships a false Christ and that asking a “Christian” to vote for him would be akin to asking Jesus to pick one, Stalin or Hitler.
I have absolutely nothing against Evangelicals or anyone else who lives a good life. I get out of sorts, not with American religions, but with any religion based on the Council of Nicene, which came 300+ years after Christ and was a bunch of old men deciding how the rest of humanity should worship Christ. I think it is all BS. I much prefer to go back to the early 1st century and to the teachings of the Jews of Jesus time and understanding. But that is just me.
Sara,
Did you read the false Christ thing from an influential Evangelical? B/c I have not heard anything like that from anyone who has a significant following.
If we disagree, where do we disagree? Is it your contention that conservative Evangelicals are going to choose Barack over Mitt? are going to choose Rev. Wright and “Goddamn America”? are going to choose Euro Socialism over capitalism? I don’t think you think that. I think you get pissed off over anecdotal evidence of random non influential Evangelicals who spout off on the internet. At least, that is my suspicion. I suspect you and I are relatively sympatico. Random foolish spouter offers kinda piss me off, also.
even though I AM a random foolish spouter offer. Heh.
Actually, I cannot speak at all about who is influential or not regarding Evangelicals. My opinion comes from those I’ve known over the years, those I see commenting publicly, those I’ve dealt with who believe they are the only “true” conservatives, etc.
As I said, I grew up in the same area as Santorum. Back then (in the dark ages) it was Catholics and Southern Baptists who were considered weird and lesser in the eyes of good mainline Protestants. I was raised a Presbyterian. After college and marriage, I was unaffiliated with any church, as they all seemed wrong and had to do more with the rules of men than of any true faith in God or Christ. I had spent a good many years in studying religious history and researching the God concept. I later decided that the LDS church had it as right as it was going to get, short of converting to Judiasm.