| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"Shaky Republican" |
| Date: |
22 Jan 2008 09:17:08 AM |
| Object: |
COMING FULL CIRCLE TO MORMON SLANDER (what goes out comes around) |
Looking for American Tolerance
By Joel Campbell
Mormon Media Observer
Deseret News
Jan. 21, 2008
In January, 1987, my wife and I were working in staff positions in the
U.S. Senate in Washington D.C. when we attended a service at the
Washington National Cathedral to commemorate the life and legacy of
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
Amid the grandeur of the gothic architecture, the voices of a choir
echoed and attendees listened to the interfaith readings that
represented the universal goodness and equality of humankind. A rabbi
read from the Torah, an imam from the Koran, a pastor from the New
Testament and an LDS leader from The Book of Mormon. As idealistic
college students, it was an image and an associated feeling of peace
we remembered as a model for a tolerant America. It was an America to
which we felt included.
Fast-forward to 2008. In many quarters my faith is under attack as
Americans consider a Mormon for president, and I wonder about that
inclusion. One recent author said he felt marginalized if Mitt Romney
is denied the presidency simply -- or primarily -- because of his faith.
Another has explained that it seems like it is "open season on
Mormons".
The LDS rhetorical landscape today is filled with mean-spirited words.
Words like "cult," "un-Christian," "weird" and "racist" grate on
anyone's inclination toward civility and tolerance. However, many LDS
members take it in stride, a recent AP story shows.
Along with the oft-referenced polls that say many would not vote for a
Mormon president, there is a more troubling misunderstanding about
religious freedom in the United States. Just 56 percent of Americans
believe that the freedom to worship as one chooses extends to all
religious groups, regardless of how extreme -- down 16 points, from 72
percent in 2000, according to the "State of the First Amendment 2007"
report released in September 2007. Americans seem to have a problem
with religious tolerance and a basic understanding of the religious
freedom clause of the First Amendment.
And it seems to persist in the Mitt Romney campaign. Three political
science professors argue that saying Romney is flip-flopping is merely
a cover for anti-Mormon sentiment (see also here.)
In the context of the intolerance of the presidential campaign, I've
been yearning for that feeling I had that evening 21 years ago in the
marbled sanctuary in Washington. I think I found some of that in a
recent review of media opinion (please note that the review here
centers on opinion writing which is expected to have a bias rather
than news reporting which is expected to be balanced).
For example, consider the recent work of Denver Post columnist Gail
Schoettler and Chloe Oliver in the Hattiesburg (Miss.) American.
Schoettler said that the media needs to get past the trivial in the
coverage of presidential politics, while Oliver reminds readers that
"those who propose to save us from a monster must be careful as they
employ their tactics. Otherwise, they may become the monster they
seek."
It's heartening that religious writers have expressed similar
sentiment. Although it didn't get much traction among Mormons at the
time it was published in December, I stumbled upon this column by
Abraham H. Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League.
Foxman wrote: "As we said during the 2000 campaign with regard to
Senator Lieberman, candidates should feel comfortable explaining their
religious convictions to voters. At the same time, however, we believe
there is a point at which an emphasis on religion in a political
campaign becomes inappropriate and even unsettling in a religiously
diverse society such as ours. Anyone who legitimately aspires to the
presidency of the United States must be prepared to set an example and
be a leader for all Americans, of all faiths and of no faith."
In its house editorial, the January Christian Century magazine said
Christians should seek a candidate with virtues for governance: "Some
Christians worry that a Latter-day Saint in the White House would give
a public relations boost to Mormonism. But if indeed Romney were
elected and proved to be a president who pursued peace, served justice
and remembered the poor, and if his presidency thereby lent prestige
to Mormonism, we would have to say that the boost was in some sense
deserved. That event too would have to be seen as part of the
paradoxical way that God rules the political sphere."
In a lengthy New York Times magazine opinion, Noah Feldman, tried to
explain "What is it about Mormonism?" The column is an abridgement of
a speech Feldman gave in November 2007 at the Mormonism and America
conference at Princeton University. He also did a recent interview on
anti-Mormon bias on Salt Lake City-based KUER-FM.
Hendrik Hertzberg, who wrote a recent column in the New Yorker
magazine mocking LDS beliefs, should have read Feldman's analysis
before he sat down at the computer and wrote: "And the dogmas of Mitt
Romney's sect are breathtaking." Certainly, "breathtaking" has a lot
to do with one's experience. Sure, the unfamiliar may seem unusual,
but those with open minds don't dismiss it out of hand but rather seek
to understand it.
Compare Hertzberg's take to Feldman's writing. "Still, even among
those who respect Mormons personally, it is still common to hear
Mormonism's tenets dismissed as ridiculous," Feldman wrote. "This
attitude is logically indefensible insofar as Mormonism is being
compared with other world religions.
"There is nothing inherently less plausible about God's revealing
himself to an upstate New York farmer in the early years of the
Republic than to the pharaoh's changeling grandson in ancient Egypt.
But what is driving the tendency to discount Joseph Smith's
revelations is not that they seem less reasonable than those of Moses;
it is that the book containing them is so new. When it comes to
prophecy, antiquity breeds authenticity. Events in the distant past,
we tend to think, occurred in a sacred, mythic time."
So we come full circle to religious tolerance. It's not about making
judgments about each others' faith or even lack thereof. It's
respecting all faiths and beliefs in the context of a tolerant and
civil nation. The news media has a responsibility to set this tone of
respect.
http://www.truthandgrace.com/mormonhistory.htm
http://www.truthandgrace.com/rigdon3.htm
.
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
