I've been away. In the past month, our family has visited Hawaii, Portland, Hermiston, Los Angeles and finally, Flagstaff. Oh, and I guess if you include our impromptu decision to take a weekend road-trip to watch the 70.3 Ironman World Championship, we've been to Las Vegas too. Compounded with the stress and excitement of furnishing a new house and slowly (very slowly) unpacking boxes and suitcases, this is my very credible excuse for being so bad at weekly blog posts. Are my fantasies too grandiose in believing that you've actually missed my ramblings? What is for sure is that I've missed writing them. This blog has been truly therapeutic in helping me sort through thoughts, feelings, beliefs and doubts as I wade through the occasional paradoxes of being a liberal-leaning (but politically independent) Mormon.
A topic that has been pervasive in media news coverage over the past few weeks is Mitt Romney's presidential nomination by the Republican party. As I've said before, I consider myself to be politically independent. I tend to lean left on certain issues, just as I lean right on others. I try not to support a political leader solely based on the identifying letter prefixed to his name ((R) or (D)). I'm inclined to be skeptical of politicians in general as their policies must cater to lobbyists, donors and-most importantly-the left OR the right. If you've followed Romney's campaign journey, you can easily see how he's transformed from a bipartisan moderate to a somewhat staunch conservative in order to appease the GOP. This isn't unique to Romney, of course. All presidential candidates shift their policies to secure a party nomination and win over half of America's population, which is why I think politics are a load of (excuse my French-or should I say Freedom?) le crap. Because of this unfortunate but realistic fact, in my eyes both Romney and Obama are excused from being political shape-shifters just as both the Republican and Democratic parties are excused from forcing their candidates to conform to partisan policies in order to receive their endorsement. It's just the name of the game. What my eyes do not excuse is religious endorsement of political candidates, especially when it happens covertly in Church meetings.
Since the beginning of Mitt Romney's race to secure the presidential nomination, it has become almost implicit that if you are Mormon, you should support Romney. There is a small but outspoken counter cultural group that call themselves "Mormons for Obama", who pledge commitment to the current Democratic president despite their religious beliefs. I think this is quite nice, as it shows diversity within our mostly homogeneous religion. Still, the fact that a group like this has to exist denotes that Mormons are generally expected to support Romney, otherwise there would be no need for a 'rebel' faction. Now I ask: is the Mormon allegiance to Romney based on his politics or his religion? If members of the LDS church support Romney because they agree with his politics, well that's just peachy. But what I'm becoming increasingly aware-of is the religious rhetoric that surrounds LDS political support for Romney: "He was a Bishop!" "He was a Stake President" "He's Mormon!" While these are admirable accomplishments, they should not increase someone's political credibility. Remember that little thing called the Constitution that requites a separation of Church and State?
I don't want to make is sound like I think it's wrong for people to admire Romney because of his religious beliefs, but when religiosity is the primary factor for political endorsement, Romney's political stances become obscured by the fact that he is Mormon. For instance, when Romney was governor of Massachusetts he supported a healthcare reform law that, at the time, was viewed as a bipartisan-if not leftist-move. Many members of the LDS church do not support health care reform, but nonetheless support Romney because-hey! He's Mormon!
The point at which the religious endorsement of Mitt becomes problematic, in my opinion, is when members of the LDS church use Sunday church meetings to endorse him. In the past months, I've witnessed Mitt Romney being discussed as the only viable presidential candidate. I've heard Sunday school teachers praise him, and listened to comments suggesting that we, as Mormons, should rally around Mitt because he is Mormon and thus his political views must obviously reflected our own. Of course it's fine and dandy to express opinions-even political ones-in church. But when opinions are expressed as absolute truth, things get a little hairy. What if there are people in that Sunday school class who do not support Romney? What if they begin to silently feel, as I once did, that there must be something wrong with their faith because they don't endorse the Republican party? What if they are too embarrassed, as I once was, to express their dissenting opinion for fear of ostracism?
There is little else that makes my blood boil quite like the use of Sunday school as a venue to present political opinion as doctrinal belief. What ends up happening is schism within our religion, as those who support Romney feel ratified in their beliefs and contrarily, those who support Obama begin to feel like outsiders in their own religion.
So, let us support Romney. Let us support Obama. Let us support John Stewart, or Stephen Colbert, or Tom Hardy or who ever else we think would best lead this nation as a political figure. But please, PLEASE let us be conscious in separating religion from politics.
I taught Sunday School last week and managed to slip in a sly comment that just because Romney is LDS does not mean I would vote for him ( I f I could ,which i can't and probably wouldn't if I could).). I don't know enough about American politics to really make an educated comment though.
ReplyDeleteThe point I was trying to make in SS was just that as Latter-Day -saints , we will probably be asked about our religious beliefs more than ever now,with Romney in the news. When i was in England,at a Ward I went to,there was even a notice up saying that as LDS's we do not advocate any particular political party!
What about us Mormons who think that Obama is too right-leaning?
ReplyDeleteI also can't help but wonder how many LDS Romney supporters buy into the white horse apocalyptic folk lore and are motivated to vote for Romney, at least in some part, by that belief?
I wish this post would be read from the pulpit, or that the first presidency would send out a letter to all the wards in the U S reminding all the members of exactly this. This is the reason I couldn't stand to attend Sunday school during or short stay in Utah, and why I refuse to have any political conversion with my family or close friends who think "a good member means voting for Romney." With your help though, maybe now I can articulate better exactly how I feel to these family and friends... But seeing how many whole heartily believe Obama is the, and I quote "anti-Christ", I don't know that I have much of a dent on their thought processes.
ReplyDeleteI'm actually surprised it's not more pronounced given the church's entanglement in prop 8. I guess out right endorsing a candidate compromises tax exempt status? I don't know. I think it's great you are doing this, Steph! In terms of sep of church and state, I think that although there isn't an official religion test, I can't imagine a candidate from either major party receiving the nomination w/o at least outwardly claiming to be a Christian.
ReplyDeleteI'm a libertarian conservative, and I find myself rolling my eyes when I hear this stuff in church. Often they are clumsy and intellectually empty. Even though I will support Gov. Romney, I wince when I hear this stuff.
ReplyDeleteThat said, this isn't really new to politics. It's just classic Identity Politics (i.e. I'll vote for him, as he's from my state, or he's my ethnicity or he's my religion)
It is slightly comic that a self proclaimed liberal would chafe at this. The left has classically used identity politics to drive group voting behavior. Now you complain because you are in the minority? I guess you know what conservative women and minorities feel like when everybody on the left assumes that they vote a certain way.
You're absolutely right, Andrew. The point of this blog post was to chafe at politicians in general, not just Romney. I'm not "complaining" or debating about the reality of identity politics, I'm just stating an opinion that Church is not a venue to express political beliefs as absolute truth, nor should religion (or race, or gender) be the determining factor in supporting a political candidate.
DeleteAgain, Steph,you have succinctly written another excellent and timely article.
ReplyDeleteA FB friend recently posted,in part, "Being a liberal, African American, female member of this church has not always been easy. It may come as a surprise, but one of the biggest challenges has been the vocally Republican/"conservative political leanings! This mindset has caused me to question the ability for diversity to exist between the church at large (at least in the U.S) and the rest of the world-because it appeared to me that there has been such a reluctance from church members to embrace progressive thought, to think outside the box,to give attention to issues facing people of color, immigrants, the environment, the poor, WOMEN. . .""My heart has been grieved over this for quite some time".. . "I thought members could be a LOT more sensitive to respecting diverse viewpoints"
Here is a clearly concerned individual with whom I share comaraderie.
Becoming a politically neutral church is seemingly difficult for members to wrap their R's, D's, and I's around. Most of us know what we think and why we do. I sure do not like to discuss 'opinion' and 'negativity' when it comes to my political bent and I wish others wouldn't also.
You have probably never seen someone steaming from the ears as much as I when there is any discussion in church about any political candidate, as if the majority who support them make it alright and they feel comfortable doing it because they are pretty sure they are not going to get pounced on.
Luckily, I have not noticed it very much where I live. There is some ribbing, but usually not anything worse.
Probably, I have set myself up to take some heat, at least on Facebook, because in the last week, I have certainly gotten it. Not many years back, I would have slinked into a corner and not said what I believed or posted anything on Facebook to "play nice" with my church friends. Now I have. Here is a samping of what I have received this week from Facebook friends: "You're killing me with all these political adds. Are my taxes paying for you to be on Obama's payroll? All I posted was "We leave no one behind, We don't turn back, We pull each other up" From another poster I put on Facebook, that about the Obamas not coming from well to do backgrounds and not coming from famous families...someone making an investment in us---I was basically bashed "You must know", "you have been fooled", He is just using you",
"get your heads out of the clouds and be realistic", (You) don't know what you have done", "This is not God's way and you know it" type comments. Sometimes I feel like I am a Facebook police. My battles come with people I align with politically also. Someone posted a nasty comment about our church: "the church of latter day snakes". I jumped on that one asking the person, among other things, if they personally knew any Mormons and that I resented being called a snake and that I do not like anyone knocking someone else's religion, be that what it is. The person said he was "out of line". There is the power of the pen and it runs deeply and can be very effective. Hoping we can all use it wisely.
Someone bore their testimony about mitt romney last testimony meeting. Im so thankful i have a testimony of the true gospel and that mitt has nothing to do with it. But i do worry about the people who are shakey and start getting upset and questioning their beliefs because people sometimes say ridiculous things in church
ReplyDeleteAh, Stephanie. I think if we ever met, we'd be friends.
ReplyDeleteI'm glad I'm living outside of the US at the moment. I grew up in one of the most liberal countries in the world where even the political diversity is enormous. I learned to look at each candidate and their platform and choose the one who I agreed with most. I've never affiliated myself with any specific party. When I became a US citizen 3 years ago, I was happy to declare myself independent. I won't have anything to do with all the backbiting and '"we are better than they are". This week I was shocked to hear my 10-year old daughter assume that we would be voting for Mitt Romney because he is a Mormon, and relieved to hear my husband tell her about the good and bad things about each candidate. It's important for us to know that belonging to a certain group doesn't make anyone superior. I'm still undecided, changing my mind every day. 4 years ago, I wouldn't have had any doubt who I'd be voting for, but this time I don't really want to vote for either. I wish there was more respect and clarity in the campaigning business.
ReplyDeleteI was a little shell shocked at how focused our Sunday School lesson was on politics last week... I think it is particularly concentrated in areas where there is already a conservative majority...such as Arizona. I have never experienced a group so comfortable with turning to politics in the middle of the lesson! I have learned , though, that just because someone's reasons for supporting a certain candidate are not based upon a well researched preference for policy, doesn't mean that their reasons are any less valid. In fact, I myself have started to try and compare candidates based on their moral character, and of course the fact that I can relate to Romney's religious beliefs plays into that. On the other hand, I totally agree that no one should use the power of the pulpit to sway others toward their own political view. I think that the first presidency has made that clear.
ReplyDeleteSeparation of church and state does not mean a person cannot be religious. I think our country could use a few more leaders with a good moral background. Right now, my main concern is getting our economy going and having our country live within its means. So when I look at voting for a lawyer, who has a track record, which is not producing enough jobs to keep up with population growth, let alone economic growth. He also put us much deeper in debt to pay off those that got him elected. The stimulus money did not turn the economy around, nor produce jobs. It did make a some individuals much richer though. The other choice is a business man that has produced numerous jobs, and he happens to be a Mormon. Right now, I would have to go with the business man. If we can get the economy going, it would mean my children and grandchildren would have many more opportunities in life. I know there are a lot of things going on in the world, but if we don't start living within our means and producing jobs, we can look at Greece and see our future. If someone votes for Romney because he's Mormon, I don't get any more worked up than I do when someone votes for Obama because he's black. I think they are both wrong. There are also those that vote against these men for the same reason and I think that's equally wrong. I would like to see people vote based on the track records of the individuals and the needs of our country at that time.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteGary- I agree with you 100%. You put in to words what I managed to miss. Thanks! :)
DeleteThanks for you comments. I have had to deal with this in my ward for the last 4 years. When certain people get up in testimony meeting, I cringe! I know they are going to make some comment (directly or indirectly) about Obama and the horrible state of our country. I was told by my R.S. president that she feels sorry for me because of who I voted for. Really??? I wish the first pres would send out a letter about this problem. There is no place for politics at the pulpit. Anyway, I could go on and on, but you get the point. Thanks for writing!
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteurrrrrr your most recent blog post showed up in my google reader feed and i just read it. came to comment and i see it has since been removed. it was about collusion and such and i just wanted to tell you i read it, i learned, and i loved it. it just takes me back to those IPB classes. you write so well, steph - and in a super academic way with lots of vocab that i have to refamiliarize myself with and i love it. keep going.
ReplyDeleteOh my goodness sake Steph... I swear that you are living in a different world than I am!!! So many thoughts are flooding my mind right now. What is to be said? I am a bit embarassed because I feel like I don't know enough facts to be the one trying to present my case before you- but, I'll take a stab at it and pray that it comes across properly...
ReplyDeleteIt drives me NUTS when this becomes a left vs. right winged topic of conversation. There are as many if not more left sided voters who preach: "To each their own. "We" will be loving and tolerant of your ideas and opinions. Of course we LOVE that you voice your concerns and opinions! JUST... don't do it publicly. Don't do it any forum in which my left winged mind might be present. Don't do it any way that might suggest that anyone else believes the way YOU do. Don't talk about it in church. Don't talk about it on T.V. Don't talk about it over dinner or in my back yard. Have your opinion please... just... keep it to yourself." It is Entirely unfair for anyone to first, preach tolerance of everyone else's ideas and then to turn around and never allow a fair platform for any of those ideas to be spoken of...
I agree, I would probably be the first person to walk out of a Sunday school class if I felt that my entire hour of worship were to be spent listening to what the teacher felt were religious FACTS, supporting that Romney will be the next President. I agree that church is NOT the place to interject politics. Especially because like you mentioned, there are MANY LDS men and women who don't agree with Romney... and who don't agree with Obama. We are all on different sides of this political coin. I happen to LOVE this fact, as it sounds like you do as well!
ReplyDeleteI love that during a recent visit to my Physical Therapist, my Therapist (who is not LDS) took opportunity to ask me who the "church" was voting for in this upcoming election. To clarify I asked, "Do you mean who "I'm" voting for?" And he said, "No. Who is your church endrosing and telling it's members to vote for? Like, what is the church's opinion in the upcoming election? What does your prophet say? What's he telling you in the church?" Kind of confused at first but then with the greatest sense of pride I told him, " My "church" doesn't have an opinion on who I should vote for. As far as I know, there will never be a church wide meeting called to discuss who we have to vote for. Never in our church magazines will any prophet or apostle come out and say who my next President has to be." My therapist said, "No, really... The Catholics get together and they tell their followers who to stand behind. The Protestants, the same. Who does your church stand behind?" Again, I said, " My church doesn't have an opinion on who I choose to vote for. You will never hear the Prophet come out and tell the the church that we HAVE to vote for Romney. Or for Obama. That's not how things work in the church. That's the beauty of our God given agencey. He lets us choose who we want to vote for." He said, "Yeah- but what about the Catholics?" I said, "Scott. We aren't like the Catholics. We aren't like the Protestants. We are LDS and we like that HEavenly Father lets us choose for ourselves." I like how, even if God himself came down and visited every single LDS home in the United States, and told us in a Heavenly Manisfestation, that we HAD to vote for Romney, our total number of members who would add thier vote to the pile, would not be NEAR a large enough number to swing the vote in any direction- one way or the other. We just aren't *that* large in number that it would even matter!
In your second paragraph your first sentence stated, "Since the beginning of Mitt Romney's race to secure the presidential nomination, it has become almost implicit that if you are Mormon, you should support Romney." WHAT THE HECK? Who even says that? This is where I got frustrated and wondered in what World you are emerced in that is SO different than mine! I hate that I disagree with you so much on this statement because again, it's nothing against YOU as a person. It's TOTALLY against your assertion that because I am LDS and conservative, that I am boldly declaring or FORCING the majority of like minded people to vote for Romney. It's just a crazy and unfair as me looking at you with your gorgeous mowhawk and beautiful tatoo and liberal view points and the fact that you support Obama's agenda and then "assuming" and placing you within the group of the Radical Islamic Extremests. Like, no joke, Your overall assumption and statement that it is widely implied and kind of expected that because I am an LDS conservative, that I WILL vote for Romney, is false. It is even greater a falcity to assume that because YOU are LDS, "I" would expect you to do the same.
ReplyDeleteMaybe I'm lucky living where I do, in that people have it all figured out. Maybe our area of the world "get's it" that church is not the place to be promoting a political agenda. Maybe this area of the world has figured out how to be civil and not make assumptions and have found a way to discuss their individual beliefs without lumping the WHOLE of the LDS population in that belief system. I don't really know... But I hope that you can see that the left wing facade of being the mature group of individuals who are ever so open to others opinions is often just a facade. It's just as closed minded if not moreso, I feel, than the right sided group of people. It's like, it totally sucks, I agree, that someone used their Sunday school platform to talk about politics and that they happened to be in support of Romney. But what would you or anyone else have done if that same person was standing up in Sunday school, presenting a very positive case for his/her support of Obama? It just seems that when any case is presented, in any forum, a left minded individual would disagree and then begin to attack the intelligence level of the right minded individual. But when a right minded individual would disagree with a left minded policy, we genuinely look at the intelligent individual and wonder how their intelligence had been fooled. I loved your post Steph, once a gain... a GREAT opportunity for me to sit and think. I love you!!! Interested to hear what you have to say! Glad you all made it to Flagstaff safely :) Much respect- Ashley O.
Hey Ashley, thanks for taking the time to read and think about what my blog post had to offer. I'm really sorry, but I think you wholly misunderstood what I was saying. I'm sure it's partly due to my inability to express what I want to say clearly, so I'll try to restate what the post was getting at...
DeleteI'm not trying to make this a "left vs right" thing. I'm not in any way saying that Mitt isn't a viable, respectable political candidate. I completely support anyone who wants to vote for him. I think it's everyone's right to be able to express their political opinions whenever they see fit, even if I don't agree with them.
What I don't think is right is to express political opinion in church meetings as though it is common sentiment among church members. I've personally been in church meetings (as have many of the people who have commented on this blog) when teachers have expressed support for Romney as though it is a religious duty, in some way. I'm not implying that all conservative Mormons do this, but some do. This is the problem.
Next, I should have been more clear that the Institution of the LDS church-that is the First Presidency-does not endorse any political party. This will never change, I'm sure. What does happen, and I don't know how you can deny this, is that the majority of LDS members will support Romney. Again, I'm not saying this is wrong. All I'm saying is that LDS Romney supporters shouldn't expect all Mormons to endorse him. You don't expect this, but in my experience many members do.
You are enlightened enough to hold your own beliefs and not force them upon others. Many people do not have that type of awareness and objectivity. As a result, many members of the church make the minority of Obama supporters (I'm not one) feel like outsiders. If someone was in Sunday school professing support for Obama, I would say that was equally wrong. What is interesting is that you would get a lot more slack for preaching Obama support in a church meeting than you would for endorsing Mitt. This is undeniable, and I think that alone speaks volumes.
I'm liberal, it's true. I don't think we're the "mature" political group. I don't think we have it all figured out. I just believe in some political ideals that conservatives don't believe in. This doesn't make my beliefs and more "right" or "true" than theirs. It's just a different perspective about life, the world, and human nature. I'm not claiming to be above anyone or anything, and for you to assume that I feel this way is a bit naive and, to be honest, hurtful.
It's also interesting that you assume that because I have a mohawk and tattoos, that I support Obama. I don't, actually. I don't support Romney either. I mostly think politics is a big joke.
So, all in all, I wasn't trying to say that members of the church shouldn't support Mitt. I think that people are free and correct in supporting whoever they want to (see the last paragraph of my blog post). My main concern, which I thought I addressed in my post, is that members of the church (not all, but some) will expect "good" Mormons to support Romney.
Oh, and one more thing... I just found it ironic that you were offended that I would stereotype conservatives, when you just made a whole load of inaccurate generalizations about liberals throughout your comment.
DeleteSorry if this sounds so defensive, I just wanted to reply to your comment as honestly and concisely as possible. Of course I'm not taking this personally, and I hope you don't either!
Much love as always, and I'm so glad we're able to have these debates without making it personal.
As do I (enjoy making our points without making it personal) :) I enjoy this so much because these are thoughts that spin around in my mind and I wonder if they make sense to anyone else? Or I like having an opportunity to interject ideas that may differ from yours. It is so so so great, the opinions that you bring to the table and you are great at expressing your thoughts! A talent I lack.
DeleteI do need to apologize though because in my attempt to express my thoughts, I did end up making false assumptions about you,(I thought from previous posts and then this one, that you ARE supporting Obama) and for that I am very very sorry! I was wrong. I guess I just pulled an example or two that I thought you might relate to vs. trying to state examples from sources I know very little about (which is why I mentioned the hair cut and tatoo. Not to say that because you have those things, that makes you a liberal. I am genuinely and deeply sorry about that!) I mean, it IS somewhat impossible for us to 'not' take personal offense when someone disagrees with our opinions- I think that's why I'm so grateful for your blog and for allowing yourself and others (me) to express their view points and hash out some of the nitty gritty in an attempt to make sense of it all.
I think I took your liberal comments and let them override the fact that you also stated that you do not affiliate yourself with any one party, (R) or (L). And then I made the mistake of assuming that because you disliked the fact that "politics" were being discussed in Sunday school, which was the real issue at hand, not so much the subject matter, of it being about Mitt Romney.
I totally respect your response and even though my face is flushed pink from the embarassment of the verbal smack down I just received, I hope that you can see that my frustrations mirror yours closely, but coming from a woman who is more conservative than liberal. We all just being frustrated wit each otha and stuff ;) Much love and respect!!! Ashley O.
I completely agree, Ashley! That's why it's so interesting when I meet people who take politics so personally. It's really only a difference in worldview, with the exact same values and moral grounding backing conflicting stances on a given issue. I think if you and I wrote down a list of our core values, they would be so similar, although how these values are politically represented might be quite different.
DeleteI'm sorry if you're flushed with embarrassment. That's not at all what I intended! I think you're so incredible and humble and I'd never want to make you feel badly.
Love love :)
Just was directed to your blog, just read thispost, and just read the responses. I am a moderate LDS mom, who did support President Obama, & definitely was called to repentance for it by several people, who are addicted to Fox News. I liver in Vancouver Wash, Portland OR's largest suburb. My daughter at BYU has been harassed & "called to repentance" multiple times for being a Democrat & driving a hybrid (with the air quality issues there, you'd think it'd be a plus) (I am an independent btw). Your post was eloquent & I thought you made your points very clearly without bias.
DeleteOH! And I agree with this paragraph: "You are enlightened enough to hold your own beliefs and not force them upon others. Many people do not have that type of awareness and objectivity. As a result, many members of the church make the minority of Obama supporters (I'm not one) feel like outsiders. If someone was in Sunday school professing support for Obama, I would say that was equally wrong. What is interesting is that you would get a lot more slack for preaching Obama support in a church meeting than you would for endorsing Mitt. This is undeniable, and I think that alone speaks volumes." EQUALLY frustrating!
ReplyDeleteWe had a lady go up to the pulpit a few months back during fast and testimony meeting who boldly declared that Mitt Romney would be the man to usher in the second coming and hand the keys of the Priesthood to Jesus when he comes again. (This woman is clinically diagnosed as pscysophrenic,) but my point in saying the above is that I 'get' where you were coming from now- in that people lack the ability to filter and say, "this is my personal opinion." A lot of people sadly stand up and try to 'tell us what we have to believe.'
Having said all of the above- your origional post sounded nothing like what you were trying to portray in your response back to me. Had you origionaly posted your thoughts like you did in your response, I would have a lesser argument. Thank you for clarifying!