Romney's Magic Mormon Underpants makes the News (link)

[_KimberlyAnn]

Admittedly, I haven't read much of this thread, but somewhere along the line garments were compared to WWJD bracelets, it seems. I'm unsure of who first made the comparison, but it's way off-base.

I'd like to find one person who has been placed under covenant to wear his or her WWJD bracelet day and night for the rest of his or her life and then be buried in it. WWJD bracelets are worn openly, by anyone who has the dime to buy one, or who is lucky enough to procure one for free from a church Easter egg hunt. WWJD bracelets have no sacred nature, no secret symbols, and no one ever says "My son was in a car wreck yesterday. He's uninjured. Thank goodness he was wearing his WWJD bracelet!" or "This woman at my last church was hit by a truck carrying fireworks and was burned all over except for where she was wearing her WWJD bracelet. Maybe they should make those things a little larger...."

If it is the case that garments are only reminders of covenants, then why not just wear a WWJD bracelet? Jesus would remember his covenants.

KA

[_Doctor Scratch]

Admittedly, I haven't read much of this thread, but somewhere along the line garments were compared to WWJD bracelets, it seems. I'm unsure of who first made the comparison, but it's way off-base.

It was Maklelan. The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced that he made the comparison out of a desire to make Mormon practices seem more "mainstream." As you point out, though, it's a totally false comparison:

I'd like to find one person who has been placed under covenant to wear his or her WWJD bracelet day and night for the rest of his or her life and then be buried in it. WWJD bracelets are worn openly, by anyone who has the dime to buy one, or who is lucky enough to procure one for free from a church Easter egg hunt. WWJD bracelets have no sacred nature, no secret symbols, and no one ever says "My son was in a car wreck yesterday. He's uninjured. Thank goodness he was wearing his WWJD bracelet!" or "This woman at my last church was hit by a truck carrying fireworks and was burned all over except for where she was wearing her WWJD bracelet. Maybe they should make those things a little larger...."

If it is the case that garments are only reminders of covenants, then why not just wear a WWJD bracelet? Jesus would remember his covenants.

KA

At heart, Maklelan is engaging in a Mopologetic defense of the garments, and I don't think his description of their purpose is really much better than the sort of folk explanations that you often get from Chapel Mormons. Mak's interpretation strips the garments of all their meaning. If all you need is a reminder, after all, then why not just wear a bracelet? Why not tie a string around your finger--particularly if you're so terrified / angry over the potential ridicule / offense?

I think that in the end Maklelan hates the "folksy" and supernatural aspects of the LDS Church--he regards these things with a very deep sort of disdain. He thinks that people like Willard Marriott, who believes that the garments physically protected him from fire, are dumb-assed rubes who deserve to be laughed at--or, rather, they deserve to be silenced so that they don't make Prissy, Oxford-Educated LDS Scholars Like Maklelan look "goofy."

This is why I've said elsewhere that Maklelan is a rising Mopologist. The other young Mormon Studies guys don't do this sort of thing. Mak is following in the footsteps of Midgley, Peterson, et al. with his techniques and his brand of resentment, etc.

[_maklelan]

Dear Maklelan:

Thank you for your presentation of bastardized Mormonism as a scholarly exercise, where everything is an abstract symbol or an allegory, and there are no supernatural components.

Obviously scholarly and dispassionate approaches to religion pervert the fact that people's etic and subjective impressions of religion are all that really matters. How silly of me to think that human experience could be evaluated objectively.

I've made my argument, and it's clear you are unwilling and unable to speak intelligently and objectively to the main concerns I expressed. They are still there and they remain unaddressed. All you can do it try to find peripheral flaws, whether real or imagined, that you can exploit for rhetorical capital in the hopes that you'll run me off or confuse me. It's clear a rational and dispassionate approach is not going to be entertained or undertaken by you or Scratch, so I'm not going to waste any more time. I can't argue with people who do not appear to understand what I say, if they even read it. Your ignorant rhetoric has fatigued a reasonable and respectful approach. My faith in rational debate has been shattered. You and Scratch win. Congratulations.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Who here doesn't understand the words Mr. Mak is posting on this forum?

There's a difference between misunderstanding clear and concise words, and disagreeing with them.

I think most here falls into the latter category.

V/R
DRC

[_LDSToronto]

Maklelan, where is the survey? Can you please show your data?

Thanks,
H.

[_zeezrom]

Some people find pinky rings a little silly.

Careful.

[_maklelan]

Maklelan, where is the survey? Can you please show your data?

Thanks,
H.

I didn't want Scratch or Darth to try to screw with the data, but I've made my point. Here's the survey, and here are the result as of last night.

[_maklelan]

Who here doesn't understand the words Mr. Mak is posting on this forum?

There's a difference between misunderstanding clear and concise words, and disagreeing with them.

I think most here falls into the latter category.

V/R
DRC

I understand that many here disagree with my conclusions, but no one has shown that my argument is unsound. Not a single person has directly addressed my actual argument. I think that fact alone shows that the disagreement is purely dogmatic. I've been over this many times.

[_schreech]

I didn't want Scratch or Darth to try to screw with the data, but I've made my point. Here's the survey, and here are the result as of last night.

***EDIT***

I take that back:

What is the point of this poll and who knew about it?

[_maklelan]

***EDIT***

I take that back:

What is the point of this poll and who knew about it?

The point was to counter Scratch's claim that it is an atypical LDS view that garments only protect insofar as they remind the wearer of their covenants. I asserted that it was actually more common than the notion that they have supernatural protective powers. He was shown to be wrong. He also claimed that if he posted such an idea on MDD it would be immediately branded an "anti-Mormon" falsehood. He was shown to be wrong there as well. His suggestions that MDDers are intimidated by my education, that I rigged the poll, that the questions are worded in order to manipulate respondents to answer a certain way, and that the polls actually show he's right are all obviously asinine attempts to mislead.