Mormon Meltdown on Facebook

[Guest]

-

[Guest]

-

[Guest]

First, Kevin, you've got some beautiful kids.

Hold Obama to the same standard for his radical religion and associations with other radicals and your position will then at least be constant.

Jason, could you explain what you mean by this? Could you please outline the specific radical teachings, beliefs and doctrines found in Obama's radical religion?

Regarding Brother Willard, I do think there are certain questions for which we should legitimately expect an answer, without being accused of religious bigotry. They are really political questions about his support and level of agreement with the LDS church's stances on political and civil rights issues, such as the Equal Rights Amendment, MMX missiles, Proposition 8, and racial equality.

For example: "What were your thoughts regarding the priesthood ban before it was revoked, and did you ever take a stand regarding the policy or work in any way toward its reversal?" (Keep in mind that he was not a kid; he was over 30 at the time.)

[_Yoda]

First, Kevin, you've got some beautiful kids.

Hold Obama to the same standard for his radical religion and associations with other radicals and your position will then at least be constant.

Jason, could you explain what you mean by this? Could you please outline the specific radical teachings, beliefs and doctrines found in Obama's radical religion?

Regarding Brother Willard, I do think there are certain questions for which we should legitimately expect an answer, without being accused of religious bigotry. They are really political questions about his support and level of agreement with the LDS church's stances on political and civil rights issues, such as the Equal Rights Amendment, Proposition 8, and racial equality.

For example: "What were your thoughts regarding the priesthood ban before it was revoked, and did you ever take a stand regarding the policy or work in any way toward its reversal?" (Keep in mind that he was not a kid; he was over 30 at the time.)

What, exactly, was Romney supposed to do? He had no official authority in the Church. The only one who could make that call was the prophet. I am sure that he felt as relieved as the rest of us when the ban was rescinded, which is exactly what he would say, if asked.

[_krose]

For example: "What were your thoughts regarding the priesthood ban before it was revoked, and did you ever take a stand regarding the policy or work in any way toward its reversal?" (Keep in mind that he was not a kid; he was over 30 at the time.)

What, exactly, was Romney supposed to do? He had no official authority in the Church. The only one who could make that call was the prophet. I am sure that he felt as relieved as the rest of us when the ban was rescinded, which is exactly what he would say, if asked.

Yes, you and I know that the church doesn't work that way, because it is an authoritative, top-down organization that taught us all to not question that authority. But a reporter might not, and asking how he felt about the original policy (not the change that made you feel relieved) is a legitimate political question. Remember he claimed to have watched his father in a march with Rev. King, to show he supported the civil rights movement.

Isn't it reasonable, then, that he should have had some opinions about the ban while it was in place and BYU was being boycotted, and that he may have discussed them in his home or in a priesthood meeting somewhere? And did he agree with the apologetic explanation that "the negro" was less valiant in the pre-existence?

All legitimate questions. Of course he would dodge them, but they still should be asked.

[_Maxrep]

Regarding the Romney thing, ok, you make some fair points on how he dodges thought I still am not sure I would go to the level you do. One thing though, I have wondered if Mitt wishes he weren't LDS right about now or that there were not so many ways to get painted into the corner. I still don't worry that his Mormonism would make him a bad president.

If I had to say one way or the other, my impression is that Mitt is a moderate member of the church. Sure he will take advantage of the Mormon vote during the electoral process. Though, if elected, the church will sit absolutely as far back on the burner as it can possibly be placed. I think most members wil expect a distant association at best. He certainly will not be wearing the church on his sleeve.

This was the religion of his birth, and with that comes a life experience within that community. He did not actively choose to find himself as an lds member. He will certainly have to deal with the reality that he is a Mormon in the publics eye, though.

[_harmony]

Isn't it reasonable, then, that he should have had some opinions about the ban while it was in place and BYU was being boycotted, and that he may have discussed them in his home or in a priesthood meeting somewhere?

No, that is not reasonable, not for anyone with any sense of self preservation for all the reasons already expressed here and elsewhere: family ties, social network, community. I'm sure he was aware of the Sept Six, and lived under that cloud for the same reasons as many others. And he was from a prominent family in the church, which is even more reason to duck, if one wants to remain in good standing with one's family.

[_Equality]

Do you think if Rick Santorum or George Bush or Barak Obama were asked such things about some of the more peculiar beliefs about their faith it might hurt them? But nobody expected that out of them.

Actually, whatever criticisms one wants to lodge at George W. Bush, he was a much better missionary for his faith than Mitt Romney is being for his. When Bush was asked in a debate who his favorite philosopher was, he said Jesus Christ. Can you imagine Mitt answering "Joseph Smith"? (And yet, a lot of Mormons would list him as their favorite philosopher. Truman Madsen in his famous lectures said Smith was greater than Plato). Bush wore his religion on his sleeve and was never shy about answering personal faith questions when asked. And he was widely ridiculed for it by secularists. Romney is hiding his light under a bushel. He is afraid to speak up because of the fear of man. He doesn't trust God enough to say when asked about being a Mormon: "Yes siree; dyed in the wool; true blue, through and through." He's a coward. And he's gonna pay the price for it.

[_krose]

Isn't it reasonable, then, that he should have had some opinions about the ban while it was in place and BYU was being boycotted, and that he may have discussed them in his home or in a priesthood meeting somewhere?

No, that is not reasonable, not for anyone with any sense of self preservation for all the reasons already expressed here and elsewhere: family ties, social network, community. I'm sure he was aware of the Sept Six, and lived under that cloud for the same reasons as many others. And he was from a prominent family in the church, which is even more reason to duck, if one wants to remain in good standing with one's family.

Awareness of the events of 1993 would be quite a trick for him to pull off back in the 60s and 70s.

But again, I'm not saying Brother Willard needs to answer for his church's actions, or that he should have been an activist to change them. I'm saying it's not unreasonable to expect him to have had an opinion about the priesthood ban at the time it was in full force and being defended by the brethren, and that pressing him to tell us what those opinions were is definitely not out of bounds. The same goes for ERA, MX, Prop 8, and other political stands made by his church.

I can answer those questions very easily. I bought the church viewpoint hook, line and sinker. I really believed at the time that the ERA would ruin America and that black people must have done something wrong to deserve their fate. Then again, I was a teenager in a tiny southern Utah town who had not yet even met a black person, not a 30-year-old son of a governor who had grown up around Detroit and later claimed to have been an advocate of civil rights.

Asking him whether he believes Satan and Jesus are brothers, and if he believes God was once a man and he will be a god himself one day... those questions are not appropriate and nothing more than a smear attempt. Political and civil rights questions are not.

[_harmony]

But again, I'm not saying Brother Willard needs to answer for his church's actions, or that he should have been an activist to change them. I'm saying it's not unreasonable to expect him to have had an opinion about the priesthood ban at the time it was in full force and being defended by the brethren, and that pressing him to tell us what those opinions were is definitely not out of bounds. The same goes for ERA, MX, Prop 8, and other political stands made by his church.

Not his job, not his task, not his concern. He was born in 1947. He would have turned 30 the year before the 1978 pronouncement. Why would anyone assume his thoughts would have had any bearing on anything... his dad, church policy or national policy at the time? No one cared what he thought, anymore than they cared what you or I thought. He was a nobody then, raising his family and working at his career.

I can answer those questions very easily. I bought the church viewpoint hook, line and sinker. I really believed at the time that the ERA would ruin America and that black people must have done something wrong to deserve their fate. Then again, I was a teenager in a tiny southern Utah town who had not yet even met a black person, not a 30-year-old son of a governor who had grown up around Detroit and later claimed to have been an advocate of civil rights.

Later being the operative word.

And I doubt calling him Willard would embarrass him.