"Any believer in religious freedom, any person who has knelt in prayer to the Almighty, has a friend and ally in me." — Mitt Romney, yesterday
…
"They’re radicals. There’s no talking to them. There’s no negotiating with them." — Mitt Romney in November, on why he would "probably not" have Muslims in his cabinet
Last week, when the New York Times published a preview of Willard’s Grand Oratory on Religious Tolerance in America, the paper of record failed to mention the fact that he made bigoted comments about Muslims just a few days before.
The explanation the reporter gave at the time for omitting this was that he had a 400-word limit and a "half-hour deadline." Weak.
Now, that same reporter who told me that he didn’t have the time to get the story right the first time has written two additional stories about the speech, and still failed to mention Romney’s controversial remarks.
What’s the excuse this time?
This cannot be written off as lazy journalism — the reporter is clearly choosing to ignore Romney’s anti-Muslim remarks (add: or it’s being edited out by someone else), even though his paper’s own blog has the story.
Do you think if Bill Clinton gave a speech on marital fidelity, the New York Times would leave out Monica?
The Times hasn’t just dropped the ball on this. They’re intentionally scrubbing the record. Instead of Mike Luo, maybe they should put Hugh Hewitt on the Romney beat.
Related posts:
- Max Baucus Wastes Months, Fails; New York Times Misses It
- I was the X-Files Editor for the New York Times
- Trickle-Down Lives at the New York Times
- New York Times Collects Silly Questions to Ask Sotomayor
- Frank Gaffney’s Cowardly Backtrack: It Doesn’t Matter if Obama’s a Muslim, Even Though I Just Methodically Detailed Exactly Why He Probably Is
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
Hi Blue Texan!
Good morning Blue Texan!
Howdy. Happy Friday all.
Yep: The YTimes’s Michael Luo is clearly whitewashing. I’ll draft something to the Public Editor–assuming someone has already done this, this more the better.
NYTimes’s Michael Luo…
The talking points have been issued. The MSM is just doing what they are told. Same as always. It’s just a matter of time before Dobson gives his endorsement to Mittens and then the real white-washing will begin. The scary part is that it just might work…remember GWB?
Great post Blue Texan, as usual.
How’s this for religious tolerance:
“…based on the numbers of American Muslims [as a percentage] in our population, I cannot see that a cabinet position would be justified. But of course, I would imagine that Muslims could serve at lower levels of my administration.”
What he’s saying is that we can tolerate Muslims as long as they know their (lower) place – pretty much the same as his tolerance of illegal immigrants that took care of his lawn until they became too much of a political liability.
Who cares about Williard Romney?
Mormons were (and probably still are) racists. No blacks need apply.
They were misogynists and into polygamy.
GET RELIGION OUT OF THE PUBLIC SQUARE.
Struggle for your freedom. Religion is a distraction and a drug. It is a club for intimidation… whatever the religion. You do not need a religion to know right from wrong.
Religion is brain washing. Media loves brain washing because it has become propaganda. Kissing cousins.
Struggle!
I could be wrong, but now that I think about it — I suspect that someone is telling Luo not to include the Muslim-bashing.Otherwise, why didn’t Luo just say in his original e-mail, “I don’t think that’s relevant”?
He surely must’ve known he was going to have to write about it again, and that I would be following it.
That’s why we’re here, madmommy. They could get away with this in 2000. They can’t get away with it now.
could someone please publish mr. luo’s email address, so inquiring minds can contact him? Politely of course.
As we head into the “push comes to shove” of the election, we’ll be seeing a lot more of this spin, and particularly (as we’ve seen since george bush started screwing the rottweiller 5 years ago) of the librul press knowing which questions NOT to ask.
I think the NYT, and the MSM in general are only slightly less frightened by the prospect of the republicans’ top candidates imploding, and of a potential democratic tsunami, than are the goopers, themselves.
The entire conservative construct is at risk in this election. (So is ours, it needs to be said) And to the powerful and wealthy, that is a shit-their-pants situation. Anything they can do to protect the status quo from the reckoning of having to deal with bush’s savage idiocy, and their own complicity in spreading cheeks for it, they will do.
Gonna be a hell of a year…
Also: When in his “famous” speech (and according to some morons, the best of his campaign), Romney said freedom is only for people of faith, he’s excluding 20 million Americans who are either atheists or agnostics.
What PW says.
Demand better…of politicians and the media.
Be better…everybody needs to pitch in the most effective way we can. Raise your voices, citizen activists.
Can’t admit the Mittster has flaws…that upstart Huckabee (who is from Arkansas, and we have loads of experience going after someone from THAT hinterland) makes a much more attractive punching bag. Of course, Rudy is a study in flaws, but he’s boring, we’ve covered him for years. We need Mitt to be the White Knight. Our scenario needs a White Knight, a Rube, and a Wizard of questionable repute. We are as resolute in our story line as Bush is in his. Just because facts come to light is no reason for us to get off message.
The Times, like most of the Establishment are floundering around because every one of their rethug candidates for the presidency is floundering. First it was McCain, who embraced the Iraq tar baby; then Ghouliani, who embraced and then disembraced the irascible Judy Nathan; Romney is all they’ve got left. Huckabee is just too kinky for the Establishment crowd, and Ron Paul is too honest about his reactionary committments. So for the time being it’s Romney. Their end-game candidate will be Michael Bloomberg, who will come in around late January to gather the chips the other losers are leaving on the table.
The Times wants a Republican President. They will endorse the Democrat, unless the thug is Bloomberg, but what they really want is more of the same.
One of the things I noted was that Mitts answer on other serious issues was that he would confer with his attorneys, confer with his advisors, confer with his counter-terrorism guys, etc.
For some reason, speaking to an ark full of evangelicals, he decided that he wouldn’t confer with his elders.
mluo@nytimes.com…
Gotta say you are on target wonderful! Probaly need to start with the kids.
revdeb linked me to juan cole’s
analysis of the speach and man it’s good, here’s a paragraph to quote and repeat
To contact Mike Luo, I just used the form on the Times website. You just click the reporters name and there’s a form “Send an E-mail.” It works — he got my message and responded.
And of course, be extremely polite. Like I said, I suspect he’s getting edited.
Ha, or just use the e-mail addy Biodun must posted.
Hey Bio, I could’ve used that!
No need to worry about Romney.
Authoritarians are about to go out of style nationwide.
read Juan Cole this AM folks!
hey tex, that line made me laugh out load!
Well, it’s been the meme since Regan, god, guns and country…
You can’t have a politician without passing the faith sniff test.
So where did that come from?
Religion IS the place to reach through every class and demographic.. because they all show up once a week to get their dose of brain washing. It’s better than TV… no distraction and they all sit there and dutifully take their dose of mind poisoning. YEA religion.. everyone HAS to get their ass in church, temple, mosque so they can be shepherded in their thinking.
Pols and powerfreaks love them religion cos people do it cos god says so. SO you have all these freaks speaking for god… Robertson and Falwell and all the other freaks of god… power freaks… money whores. When religion went corporate it proved it was on board with the program.
Gotta have some religion.
Ask Marx about religion.
Struggle!
here’s the link
oops
here’s the link
Yup. If Mitt was, say, Howard Dean talking to Tim Russert on MTP about US troop levels in Iraq, that response would not be acceptable — though it was when George W. Bush went on MTP earlier.
Well, to paraphrase Huck Finn “That’s White of you, Mitt”.
I thought that he was making the point that he was hoping that the American people would consider ability and ideas rather than a “religious test”. I guess that doesn’t apply to Muslims.
Given the proportion of Mormons in the United States wouldn’t that mean that no Mormon should even be considered for President since “based on the numbers of American Mormans [as a percentage] in our population, I cannot see that [electing him to the] position would be justified.
Seems like Mitt has a vastly different standard for himself than he would apply for others…he would apply a “religious test” to exclude minorities from his cabinet. Sounds like he would keep out Jews as well.
Phoenix Woman I sure hope you are right! But my faith in the intelligence level of the average American voter has been sorely tested of late, so forgive my cynicism.
We were talking about this yesterday. JFK specifically addressed a major concern of ignoramuses about his religion – that he would have dual loyalty or, worse, that his first loyalty would lie with his religion and would always toe the party line of the Catholic Church. Even in telligent people of other faiths didn’t get alot of things about teh Cathoilc practices and doghma, but that wasn’t really the issue JFK faced. With Romney, the ignorance that matters-to him anyway- really involves evrything about mormanism (if that’s what it’s called.) What they believe. he didn’t address that. My cynical side tells me that Mormanism is really that big a part of his life but he couldn’t say “religion’s no big deal to me so you don’t have to worry.” Wouldn’t fly with the GOP X-tians. Just as Kennedy couldn’t say “Me? Catholic teaching? You know how many chicks I’ve bedded.” I just don’t think Romney addressed the “religious problem” as directly as JFK did in his speech. So i don’t see how anybody can say it was great or even good.
Moveon has a plan.
Just got an e-mail asking for $15 mo.
we can do it!
Religion is evil. I can indulge it not in goverment. It is cultism and extremely dangerous to the well being of Earth. It is selfish and cruel. It is power mad and greedy. It sucks.
madmommy – hang in there! The pressure is building, and soon it will be clear to even the Goopers that If they don’t Impeach Bush and Cheney, Then the Republican Party, as a national political force, will disappear in ‘08.
Many of them can see it already, but Goopers don’t simply accept facts that challenge their previously held beliefs – they get angry first!
And, they’re gonna be angry at Bush all weekend over the NIE, as they slowly begin to realize the enormity of his deception to maintain his UE Above the Law (ie – ‘can smother investigations’) Powers.
We don’t have to do anything, really, except snark under the radar and eat popcorn – Goopers can be dangerous when roused from their stupors!
Only MSM which could bestow the title “Great Communicator” for “there you go again,” and “I’m paying for this mike,” could even compare Kennedy’s speech with this one. I’m not conventionally religious, but the comparison is sacrilege.
1,688 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND..
Citizen Blue Texan and the Firepup Freedom Fighters:
Let’s not waste one more second worryin’ about what ANY of the fascist bastards runnin’ for President has to say about ANYthin’ but especially religion, fer God’s sake (a little Norwegian humor here). Let’s focus our attention on the DEMOCRATS and the dialectic developin’ inside the Democratic Party. We can’t afford to waste any energy respondin’ to or analyzin’ the latest fascist sewage passing for political dialogue…we only serve to telescope the propaganda.
Let’s force the NYT and the WaPost and the corporate talkin’ heads correct the lies they tell about real political action like the FISA bill and keep the pressure on the individual DEMOCRATS runnin for office…forget about the fascists the corporate oligarchy doesn’t want ‘em elected anyway. The rulin’ elite is better served by an ineffectual Democratic Party in control…increasingly the people are left to t0 rely on corporate largess instead of governmental action and protection.
KEEP THE FAITH AND YER EYES ON THE PRIZE…I GOTCHER BACK SO YOU DAMNED WELL BETTER HAVE MINE!!
And religious person who says that the commons are more important this “his eternal soul” is lying crap of shit.
Some of them have taken off the mask on want a theocracy and some even live in them like Israel, or Iran or Saudi Arabia… others are intimidated to call it like it is.
Can we live as if we passed through the age of enlightenment for a few centuries?
Struggle!
Do black, asian, or hispanic Mormoms exist?
Really..you are a crack up. They are dangerous when riled. They are the all time biggest wimps!
Apologies for the o/t:
Sheldon Whitehouse just gave what would appear to be a fabulous speech on the floor (I only caught the latter part).
Can anyone tell me if senators post things like this on their web sites or do I need to try to find it somewhere else? Would *really* like to track this one down b/c it sounded like something in which the Lake would take some interest.
Thanks!
I think Mitt may be more tolerant than most folks realize. My Kos diary from an hour ago explains this.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/…..014/419009
Mormons represent about 3.5% of the population. If Romney is applying some sort of quota system with regards to his cabinet then why shouldn’t the American public select it’s President based on a similar quota system???
Romney is essentially saying he WILL utilize an Unconstitutional “religious test” in selecting his cabinet. If you aren’t from a religion that meets his magic standard in numbers then tough luck. Doesn’t matter how talented or intelligent or adept at policy in that particular area. Tough luck. Don’t bother applying. He’ll probably use the same standard for race and ethnicity as well.
Romney is actually quite a bigot, but a “minority bigot” who, because he has joined the Republican Party, thinks that he should get treated different. This is the same standard that Clarence Thomas, Condi Rice, Elaine Chow, John Yoo, and a bevy of other “rent-a-minority” hacks have applied to themselves.
ironranger asks:
Do black, asian, or hispanic Mormoms exist?
Actually yes they do. When I was stationed in Hawaii, there was (and is) a large Mormon presence. A couple of my co-workers over there were of Chinese descent and had converted to Mormonism and there were many others as well.
Why the question regarding WHY the NYT is kow-towing to republicans? Republicans favor media consolidation. Republicans favor ultra-wealthy media barons’ interests. Reporters, editors, producers and the like work for ultra-wealthy media barons or the wannabe ultra-wealthy in the media. Reporters, editors, producers and the like want their jobs enough to do what they’re told. Reporters, editors, producers and the like dream of vaulting into the realm of the wealthy “media personalities” and so they not only do what they’re told, they get down on their knees ** **** *** *****-******* *****’* *****. (Blacked out text suitable for The Rude Pundit and not for FiredogLake.)
Of course the NYT, Washington Post, CBS, CNN, et al will slant the news. It’s in the self interest of the news organizations to do so.
That’s right, bb – When Podhertz or Fieth get going, it’s ‘Katie bar the door!’
Thanx dakine01. How about Utah?
btw, is there a symbol for snark?
Blue Texan,
You are you going to keep asking The New York Times about this aren’t you?
ps pups digg this, let’s help pressure the Times.
Yes…they do. Blacks were not allowed to be elders for several generations, but the last “Prophet” had a revelation that allowed them into the higher ranks. But even then there were always a few. Mormons brought slaves out with them to Utah and California and when these states were admitted to the Union as territories the Mormons were compelled to free their slaves. Many of the slaves had been brought up in Mormonism, and actually had not other options in Utah. And Mormons have big missionary movements in the Pacific and South and Central America.
Speaking of media consolidation, Murdoch is breaking out the ax and is lopping off heads and installing his lackeys at The Walls Street Journal as we read.
-G
P.S. Sorry for linking to the horrendous David Frum, but he has an interesting tidbit about Saudi links and the need to erase information Abu Zubaydah.
Linky doo.
Well, if Hillary wins the Democratic nomination, the oligarchs win no matter how We The People vote. Our corporate masters will be served no matter which lapdog gets to squat in the Whitehouse for a few years.
I think Flamethrower at 36 makes some good points. We need to focus on the Democratic nomination and let the Republicans worry about which corporate servant they’re going to nominate. Every one of the candidates with a R after his name is good for corporate America (yes, even Ron Paul, though he ruffles some feathers).
The only presidential hopefuls who aren’t full-blown corporate sock puppets are on the Democratic side and we need to find a way to make sure one of them gets the nomination.
In response to the Mittster’s media extravaganza concerning his “faith”, I would note that the Mittster will say anything, will change his position at anytime for anyone, if it will get him elected. He has exhibited no political, moral, or ethical standard. Right now he is triangulating to the religious right. Who knows where he will triangulate next week.
Well, I obviously can’t make the link tool in the tool bar work…Anybody, Bueller?
Here’s the link in raw form.
http://frum.nationalreview.com…..JhOTZmMzY=
-G
I remember seeing some folks from New Orleans, sent to Utah after Katrina. They were interviewed on the news, and acted grateful, but it was apparent they thought they were on a different planet.
selise has said in the past that if you give her the time of the speech so she can find it, she can make a clip of it.
the thought that a momo can do things in a rational matter, or have a reality that anyone else could understand is really absurd and won’t pass anyone’s smell test. You are talking about people that base their religion on someone that they admit was insane.
that we are still talking about religion in a country founded on democracy and to end religion as a form of government is coming 360. I would guess that the people of this country are pretty much like the people of the middle east. dumb as the hatful of rocks they started their idiot religion with.
go read the general if you want to know about the Momo’s and their insanity. Remember, you can’t be a member of the mo and have any free will whatsoever. note harry reid
please everyone, grow up. anyone that even mentions religion and reality in the same breath has to be unstable to a degree that indicates pathology. live with it.
Jim, you may be a cynic, but you are right on.
Old Moral Mitt was liberal enough to get elected governor or Mass….Notice too, that the ‘liberalist’ state in America had no problem voting for a Mormon.
Liberal religious bigotry, ptooey!
-G
Very interesting to learn about history of non-white Mormoms.
you want to see a fabulous speech you have to watch randi rhodes
man, if she would allow a presidential candidate to plagiarize this speech that would be the next president
To quote numerous hacks within the Bush Administration, “Who could have possibly predicted this?”
you just paste the link in the applet the java button brings up, then you type the title of your link by hand in the reply box just before the last /a tag
Instead of Mike Luo, maybe they should put Hugh Hewitt on the Romney beat.
given Hewitt’s fawnings and Mitt’s Winter Olympics resume it would be the “brawn/ski beat”.
Ironranger, my brother’s mother-in-law, a Black Jamaican American has been converted to Mormonism and simply states the allegations of racism among the LDS is not true.
Simple as that. I don’t believe, therefore it is not true.
-G
Greg B-see how easy it is? /s
The mittster is a flip-flopper extraodinaire. If it would get him a few more votes I’m guessing that whole tee-totaling thing would go under the bus, then he could be “the guy you’d like to have a beer with”.
on links, type or paste in the text you want as a link title, then copy the link. Then highlight your text title, click the link button here in the comments box and paste in the link (making sure of course that there isn’t a double http).
Geez, even conservative David Brooks column was better on the speech subject that the “news” coverage. What rock did they find Luo under?
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12…..ref=slogin
On a road trip we once visited the Mormom site (northern Missouri?). There was a large center with Mormon history but I couldn’t recall seeing anything on the non-white story. But then, my memory isn’t very reliable.
The LA Times story is carefully avoiding seeing this too:
Defense of religious liberties?
A impassioned advocacy of a political religious litmus tests and a the scorn and marginalizing of those who are not among the majority of theistic adherents in the US.
-G
Jane’s upstairs with an idea for us
Send An Email To The Network Execs, Tell Them To Give Writers A Fair Share
Thanks but I really, *really*, REALLY want a transcript copy. Just e-mailed (I hope) his office asking if they could provide.
perris -
Would love to watch but when you see my name the first word association to remember is DIAL-UP. :-(
How to do a link, leave out the spaces and substitute carats for [ and ]
[a href=”
http://firedoglake.com/2007/12…..air-share/
“]
Jane’s new thread upstairs
[/a]
gives you Jane’s new thread upstairs
Test
http://firedoglake.com
Test
http://firedoglakehome
[a href=”http://firedoglake.com…..airshare/”]
I hate to appear, uh, slow, but, how to do that link thing exactly?
-MS
I found it interesting that Romney used that apocryphal story about Sam Adams.According to Jacob Duche’ who made the prayer it didn’t happen that way at all. In fact, in this letter to George Washington, he basically states that he was coerced into the position of chaplain for the Continental Congress, and that he had no conception that they were meeting to break away from England. Duche’ was a loyalist, and was appointed to be the one to make the prayers…so it’s doubtful that he was simply a “volunteer” who stepped forward when Adams called for a pious patriot from amongst the gathering. In fact, asides from being there to remind those gathered as REPRESENTATIVES he had little reason to be there. He wasn’t involved in the deliberations, and you won’t find his name on the Declaration of Independence.
http://candst.tripod.com/duche.htm
Duche was arrested by the British because of his role at the Continental Congress, although declaiming to them that he was not a traitor to the King. He wrote the letter to Washington, calling on the nascent United States to surrender, perhaps as a means of proof of his loyalty to England. He was subsequently evacuated to England as his letter to Washington was leaked by the Revolutionaries. He became widely scorned as a British collaborator and turncoat.
In Britain he became attracted to the mystical cult of Swedenborg, who claimed he had encountered Jesus in his Resurrected State and received new spiritual teachings. Swedenborg’s writings became the inspiration for the “New Church” and was treated as a Third Scripture of equal significance to the Old and New Testaments. Thus, in some ways Swedenborg presaged Joseph Smith.
Duche was allowed by John Adams to return from exile, and he attempted to spread Swedenborgianism, but with little success…although there are several famous writers and thinkers who were Swedenborgians. Today there are only about 10,000 throughout the world, however.
http://www.archives.upenn.edu/…..jacob.html
Bit late with this, but one sentence from Juan Cole had me thinking. He says “No religiously based state has ever provided genuine democratic governance.”
Speaking as a convinced atheist I believe most people would agree the UK makes a fair fist at providing democratic government, at the latest since the mid 20th century. Not perfect but not too bad.
But our Head of State is also Head of the Church of England (not Scotland but that’s too complicated….). Thus England at least is at least nominally a faith based state. It didn’t matter too much till God-bothering Blair came along and look where that got us.
Michael,
I’m sorry, let’s use a shorter URL.
Use < for [ and use > for ] and get rid of the spaces below:
[a href=”
http://firedoglake.com
“]
firedoglake
[/a]
http://www.dailykos.com/story/…..014/419009
http://ap.google.com/article/A…..AD8TC2LFO0
I begin with a hard criticism of Mitt’s speech, but in the end I have an epiphany.
And, as demonstrated by the Bush Adminisration, radical, violent neoconservatism — actually a religion — seeks to destroy other innocents. And has. And as history has demonstrated repeatedly, radical, violent Christianity has destroyed untold millions.
Yo, Mitt — you left some stuff out — John Adams also said…
http://www.aynrand.org/…
Adams signed the Treaty of Tripoli (June 7, 1797). Article 11 states:
“The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.”
From a letter to Charles Cushing (October 19, 1756):
“Twenty times in the course of my late reading, have I been upon the point of breaking out, ‘this would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it.’”
From a letter to Thomas Jefferson:
“I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved — the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced!”
Additional quotes from John Adams:
“Where do we find a precept in the Bible for Creeds, Confessions, Doctrines and Oaths, and whole carloads of trumpery that we find religion encumbered with in these days?”
“The Doctrine of the divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity.”
“…Thirteen governments [of the original states] thus founded on the natural authority of the people alone, without a pretence of miracle or mystery, and which are destined to spread over the northern part of that whole quarter of the globe, are a great point gained in favor of the rights of mankind.”
The founders were for the most part DEISTS who spoke of a “creator” as at most a distant architect and nothing more. This creator is not relevant in the realm of government and the recognition of individual rights.
http://www.deism.com/…
Obviously, this is high-falutin’-sounding complete bullshit. Religion and freedom do not require one another in the least. And it appears that you recognize this because you are unable to explain what you mean.
Gee, Mitt, what’s this “religion of secularism?” Since science is secular, is science therefore a “denomination” of this “religion?”
Whoa — I could have sworn the Constitution was nased on REASON. What “foundation of faith” is in or implied by the Constitution, Mitt?
Mitt blanks out.
As along as we’re part of a “religion.” Right Mitt? Atheists, agnostics and secular humanists need not apply (although earlier you said secularism was a religion so I’m a little confused here).
So, Mitt you’d include: (choir humming The Battle Hymn of the Republic in the background)
The Branch Davidians
The Manson Family
Al Qaeda
Heaven’s Gate
The Symbionese Liberation Army
The Tony Alamoists
Environmentalists (Environmentalism has been called a religion by the Right)
The Westboro Baptist Church of Fred Phelps
The Freudians
The Rama Computer Cult
The Church of Scientology
The Secularists (hey, this was from you, Mitt)
The Order of the Solar Temple
The Unification Church
Ho No Nana
The People’s Temple
The Cult of Mithras
Alcoholics Anonymous (hey, they have a “Higher Power”)
The Cult of Quetzalcoatl
The Cult of the Jaguar
The Green Dragon Temple
The Nation of Islam
Rastafarians
Norse Cult of Ingvi-freyr
The Chinese Communist Party (communism has been referred to as a religion many times)
Gnostics
Zoroastrians
and
….the Wiccans.
I have tears streaming down my face as I realize Mitt really DOES want to include everyone after all.
(camera pans above Mitt, fade to Stars and Stripes waving in the breeze as the choir finishes….”his truth goes marching on…”)
Television and Hollywood should hire Mitt Romney’s writers. They did a bang-up job at distraction. Good job, writers.
My grandmother actually got tickets to view the new Mormon Temple when they built it MD in the 70’s (?) (more on that later). If you’ve ever been around the beltway, you’ve seen it. Funny, I almost ran off the road when I first came around a curve and thought I was having flashbacks (in spite of not trying LSD yet).
It was in my devout Presbyterian mother’s words; decadent. Windows only on the first 2 floors and marble cut thin enough to let light in on the rest. They actually had a wedding chapel with coffin stands so they could marry the dead to each other. EVERYTHING was gold plated. I have NEVER seen such plush seating! At the time they made the Scientologists look like panhandlers. They also explained that a lot of their religion was based on the rantings of a child with a 105+ fever that later died.
The church leaders found out that non-Mormons (the tours) had seen the inside of their castle and gutted the inside and rebuilt it. It turns out only the most senior members were supposed to ever get past the entrance.
The impression I got was no matter what they believed, the Mormons didn’t have any problems with spending money on themselves.
I group them with the Scientology.
Actually, they do allow tours of a temple before it’s consecrated. One of my high-school friends visited the one in Oakland: she said the group was deciding where to put the boiling oil when they were looking at it.
As for their beliefs: yep, they’re a bit weird, especially the stuff about being descendants of Jews who fled to the Americas. Probably not any more so than most other conservative types (I have a hard time with any church that thinks that the ‘Song of Solomon’ is an allegory), and some of them are getting out there into the fringe while still being thought of as ‘respectable’. They’re mostly nice people.
(I will give them credit for records preservation, though. If you do genealogy, you have to.)
Bad Reporter:
Mitt: All religions share a common dislike for those who are different.
bwahaha!
I should say that I have know quite a few Mormons and found them to be much more “normal” than some Baptists I know. In fact I don’t really remember ever finding out from a Mormon unsolicited his religion, whereas most Baptists I know won’t let you forget who makes their decisions for them. (not to pick on Baptists in particular).
I now live near Clearwater and know quite a few Scientologists. I’ll take the Mormons any day. So would all the ex-Scientologists I know.
Add to the list the NY Times editorial board who also omitted any mention of his ‘no Muslims in my cabinet’ remark in today’s editorial .
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12…..ref=slogin