The good news for Mitt Romney, according to polling data released by the Pew Research Center last week, is that Mormonism will not hurt his bid for the presidency. Only 8 percent of Republicans surveyed indicate that they will not support Romney because he is a Mormon. Even evangelical Christians who express reservations about the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints pledge to support Romney over President Obama by a margin of nine to one.
But for millions of Americans Mormons not named Mitt Romney, the news from the Pew survey is less encouraging. Half of the voters surveyed report knowing little or nothing about Mormonism. Two-thirds perceive Mormons as having beliefs "very different" than their own. Only 18 percent reported positive associations with Mormonism. These numbers, unchanged since the last Pew survey in 2007, suggest that many Americans harbor a persistent sense of uncertainty about Mormonism -- an uncertainty that seems remarkable given that Mormonism is an American-born Christian faith whose members promote conservative social values, patriotism, community service and industriousness.
Curiosity about Mormonism will intensify as Romney continues his march towards the Republican nomination. The question is whether increased media attention will advance understanding or indulge the sensationalism that has followed Mormonism for 180 years.
Since its beginnings in 1830, Mormonism has often attracted the wrong kind of attention. Founder Joseph Smith's claims that he received visitations from angels and discovered new books of scripture incurred suspicion among Mormons' early neighbors in New York, Pennsylvania, and Ohio. After Mormon migration to the Midwest in the 1840s, Mormon leaders' theocratic ambitions and polygamy incited anti-Mormon mob violence in Missouri and Illinois.
Negative attention followed the Mormon exodus to Utah in the 1840s and 1850s. In 1856, the national platform of the Republican Party placed Mormon polygamy alongside slavery as the "twin relics of barbarism." 19th century political cartoons routinely depicted Mormons as alien, deceptive, and menacing. In 1903, the election of Utah Senator Reed Smoot, who was also an LDS Church leader, occasioned a year-long national show trial on the issue of Mormons' fitness to serve.
A century later, 14 members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints serve in the U.S. Congress, but Mormonism continues to be the object of sensationalism. Comedians routinely lampoon elements of Mormon belief and practice, while political commentators like Lawrence O'Donnell have delivered diatribes targeting the faith and its founders. In October, Pastor Robert Jeffress stole the national spotlight when he declared Mormonism a "cult" in what may have been an opportunistic bid to promote his forthcoming book. Media personalities who target Mormonism often do so with a curious degree of intensity. Heavy Mormon participation in divisive campaigns against same-sex civil marriage may have only aggravated this intensity of feeling about LDS people, especially among liberals.
Mormons have developed strategies for coping with alienation from the American mainstream. From the 1840s through the 1930s, geographical isolation in the intermountain west fostered an almost ethnic sense of Mormon identity. Old patterns of guardedness and social insularity still remain within Mormon culture. For their part, LDS Church officials prefer a highly-managed communication style that minimizes controversial aspects of the faith and emphasizes commonalities with conservative Christianity.
These coping strategies may actually contribute to Americans' uncertainty about Mormonism. The public sees sensationalized media depictions of ultra-orthodox Mormon polygamist communities, like those led by convicted FLDS leader Warren Jeffs, as well as carefully manicured images of conservative likeability projected by Mormons like Romney. Who is the real Mormon: the self-proclaimed polygamous prophet, or the cautious candidate with the Donny Osmond smile?
The truth, of course, is more complicated than such a duality allows. What is needed now is substantial coverage that places controversial elements of Mormon history -- including Smith's reported unearthing of the Book of Mormon, the practice of polygamy, and the historical ban on priesthood participation by men of African descent -- within a humanizing context featuring a diversity of Mormon perspectives. American voters also deserve thoughtful coverage of the globalization of the Mormon faith, its treatment of women and gays, and LDS institutional styles of decision-making, management, and communication. All of these matter to how Romney, for whom Mormonism is not only a family heritage, a culture, and a faith but also a primary shaper of his leadership style, would preside.
It is time to step beyond the old cycle wherein Mormon difference and insularity engender public distrust and antagonism, which in turn aggravate Mormon alienation. Both Mormons and voters who consider the prospect of a Romney presidency deserve better.
Follow Joanna Brooks on Twitter: www.twitter.com/askmormongirl
Mormonism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I think americans are waking up to this anti-social cult.
He was in France, enduring the hardships, while trying to convert Camembert and Brie into Velveeta and Cheese Whiz
I mean, the two of them actually sat down together! Mitt noticed Garon's military-themed hat and tried to get him to talk about his military experiences! Mitt answered Garon's questions, twice, without flip-flopping! Oh, and by the way, gave essentially the same answer any other Republican hopeful would have given! Then he offered to shake hands with Garon, and wished him good luck!!
It was just helladisrespectful. I was shocked, shocked!
after that;..I perceived them them as one more intolerant and hypocritical religion trying to impose their views on society.
Mormons want everyone to accept them and their religion but have no problem attacking gays and lesbians for who they are....it goes both ways.
Considering the Mormon church's history with african americans .....doesnt surprise anyone that the church engages in such behaviour against other minorities.
I think people are waking up to the church's interference in our society.
I think the IRS should review the LDS Church's tax exempt status. It seems to be up to its ears in politicking.
We are doomed if we can not rid ourselves of these primitive myths and superstitions.
And yes, I have a copy and I have read much of it. And like countless other people, I believe its nothing but a man made fabrication cover to cover, invented and dictated by a convicted con man.
Joseph Smith was a criminal, con-man and bigamist....
the book of mormon is simply a book of fiction.
The LDS church has a lot of nerve targeting gays and lesbians as immoral when their founder was nothing more than a criminal huckster.
Older faiths have their precepts clouded by the veil of time . However, in both cases people should be free to believe as they wish. It is only when it is brought to the public square when it is open for debate.The old saying that everyone is entitled to their own beliefs, but not their own facts applies to all theologies.
It is amusing for me as an agnostic to watch other religions attack Mormonism as a "cult", or state that it has it's "facts" wrong about Jesus etc. Like two people arguing over who is a better superhero, Batman or Superman.
And both are fictional characters.
Thank you for a perfect analogy.
I've known too many Mormons in my life to count them all, starting from early childhood. I've been to many "family home evenings". I can honestly say I've never met a Mormon I didn't like. They have great family values and are generous in spirit and deed. They are great neighbors and friends. I also find their beliefs to be very funky and strange, but that is their business and not mine and I've never let that get in the way of my friendships. As many Mormons as I've known, not one of them has ever pushed their beliefs on me. When missionaries show up at my door, I politely tell them I'm not interested and they politely leave.
.
A law with no consequence is no law at all. Therefore a punishment must be attached just as a reward is attached to following the laws.
.
Heavenly Father's ultimate hope for each of us is that we return to live with Him and to grow to be like Him. To do so we must be clean and pure, a state to which we cannot return on our own once having sullied ourselves with sin, as all men do.
.
Therefore, God provided a perfect clean sacrifice, Jesus Christ, who is able to restore our souls to perfect cleanliness because He himself is perfectly clean (aka without sin).
.
For a much better explanation of these principles, read 2 Nephi 2, Alma 40, and Alma 42 in the Book of Mormon.
.
P.S. LDS doctrine says that God the Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost are three SEPARATE beings perfectly united in purpose.
.
Is it odd to the modern mind? Sure. But so are lots of things that are true.
the very idea of a need for a sacrifice from an infinite god does not stand the test of simple logic.
now the good news no one is left behind. all progress some faster than others that variation thing. ie relative phenomenal world is the stuff of life.
2. a law without punishment is still a law. penal systems engage after trial and can be geared to punish or rehabilitate. this god chose punishment. see 1.
3. satan is neither clean nor pure by assumed standards, yet god has no problem hanging out with him. see job.
4. sacrifice is not needed, it was chosen. an all powerful god can clean souls with a bubble bath if he chooses, he chose blood and violence instead. see 1.
5. actually, not believing that 1+1+1 = 1 is not at all odd. obviously it equals 3.
still, that doesn't make the other stuff true.
Smith was actually convicted for crimes twice in his life.
The first was in March, 1826 in Bainbridge, NY, for a misdemeanor, disorderly conduct, for his "glass looking" activities. You can see photo copies of the original court transcript at this site: http://www.utlm.org/onlinebooks/changech4.htm
The second was in 1837, associated with the Kirtland Safety Society. Both Smith and Sidney Rigdon were charged and convicted of banking fraud, and fined $1,000 each. This was the main reason why Smith left Ohio and resettled in Missouri. More evidence of this can be found here: http://www.utlm.org/onlineresources/josephsmithsbank.htm
The incidents in Illinois in 1844, associated with the destruction of the printing press, would have undoubtedly brought further convictions, had Smith lived to stand trial for those crimes.
In the real world if person A wants to influence person B to see his point of view, A will get to know B, find out what B thinks of his beliefs, find out where B got their information, and WHY B thinks the way he does about A's beliefs. Person A would understand that it's only person B's perceptions of A's beliefs that would persuade B to accept A's belief system. What A thinks of his own beliefs has little to no bearing, on whether B would ever accept those beliefs.
What most Mormons do is just the opposite. Mormons want you to accept their beliefs, because MORMONS think their beliefs are good, and normal. If, for some reason, you think Mormon beliefs are weird, they'll tell you that YOU are wrong, and YOU are the one with misconceptions about the church, and YOU need to change the way YOU look at the church. YOU need to believe what they tell you, and not what conclusions about their church you made on your own.
So long as Mormons continue to discredit and discount perceptions of others, calling them sensationalism, etc., and demand that outsiders view their church the way Mormons want outsiders to view them, Mormonism will continue to be viewed by the majority of the world as weird, and a cult.
Missions are not really for converts, but for retention of young members. How likely are you to leave after you've spent two years convincing everyone else to join? If you run into someone who has robust and functional beliefs, they are tragically benighted (well, there's the terrestrial kingdom, at least!); if they actually question your beliefs, they're "anti-Mormon" and can be safely ignored, regardless of the content of their objections.
Like most highly insular belief systems, however, in the rare cases when an RM does start to question and eventually reject LDS belief, there tends to be not merely a change of beliefs, but a sense of betrayal toward the church, as if you were suddenly to realize that dad father was going to jail for bilking the elderly. This is made even worse in the (apparently frequent) cases where kids weren't really that "into" going on a mission because they had unanswered questions, but were pressured into going anyway as a means of gaining a stronger testimony. Exactly upside down, IMO.
I went on a mission to Canada, managed to baptize only 1 person over the space 18 months, then left early after experiencing significant mental and emotional turmoil.
I was always told if I obeyed church leaders, prayed about the Book of Mormon, that I would "feel the spirit" and have a testimony of the truth of the church and scriptures. I tried hard to do exactly that most of my life, I was active in church for nearly 30 years, served faithfully in every calling thrust upon me, attended the temple, etc. But I still never seemed to "feel the spirit" that was promised to me. I was just going through the motions, doing what everyone else was doing.
I left the church a few years ago, after years of studying its early history, and teachings, which I discovered were contradictory, and just plain incorrect. I learned that the Mormon church has fabricated many events of its founding and history, and most especially the Book of Mormon--supposedly the "keystone" of the faith.