Comments on: Mormon Potluck Podcast: Episode 20

By: Rory

Rory — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 23:36:05 +0000

John. Thanks for the link. I too remember the same exact article and the SL Tribune’s take on the matter of membership numbers. There was another one that focused mostly on Utah year of so ago.

By: john

john — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 00:40:26 +0000

The true number of church members is a sticky problem. I wish the church would come clean on it. The following link from the SL trib clears it up.

http://www.sltrib.com/lds/ci_2890645

By: Michelle

Michelle — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 01:25:53 +0000

I think everyone involved in this podcast does realize that individual members hold a wide range of political beliefs. ...The problem is that there is a stereotype in Mormon culture that you are not a “good Mormon” if you’re not a Republican.

For example, I grew up on the East Coast. Both of my parents were converts (so no connection to Utah), but growing up, I still got the sense that “good Mormons” are Republicans. My husband (also the child of converts) grew up on the West Coast and says much the same thing. So I don’t think this is just a Utah issue.

You can argue that Utah culture is Republican and that within the USA, Mormon culture is always going to be linked to some extent to Utah culture because of so many Utah transplants. However, this also means that again, it’s not just a Utah issue.

I graduated from BYU in April (and moved promptly back East because I don’t exactly care for certain parts of Utah culture), so I’ve seen both sides of the issues. The nice thing about BYU is that there actually is a little bit of a healthy discussion of this particular issue. However, I have seen the same stereotype outside of Utah – but oddly enough it’s somewhat taboo to challenge it. (Please note: I’m a Washington DC native – so you’d think that here of anywhere it would be OK to be a non-Republican because there are so many different political groups, ideals, lobbyists, etc. here).

By: J

Wed, 30 Jan 2008 20:54:55 +0000

one other thing – i kind of feel like your political commentary is perpetuating the dialogue that byu students have been having forever… that it is okay for mormons to be democrats. please realize that many mormons are greens, democrats, republicans, socialists, indeps, etc. it just does not matter! obviously, the whole notion that lds should support gop is proposterous and silly, but this whole conversation that sounds more like an argument defending a mormon’s leanings toward the democratic party. these should not even be issues and we should stop talking about them as if they were still issues or problems for mormons. your podcast sounds very utah, and i recommend you broaden your scope – the whole lds can be demmocrats too debate is a very utah issue, and shouldn’t be addressed. just a little not. but i do applaud your efforts in making the podcast. just cut the silliness in the beginning and cut to the chase: interesting mormon culture commentary, etc.
thanks.

By: Jonathan

Jonathan — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 20:41:00 +0000

Thanks, I enjoyed the podcast for the most part. Just cut the crap during the beginning 15 minutes….

By: Drake Steel

Drake Steel — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 02:35:51 +0000

Greetings Gents,
Great show, as always! Also, Rory a very interesting analysis.
I have two thoughts for you:
1. The Dem/Republican thing with the Church goes back to the beginning almost. In 1856 the Republican party was founded to eliminate the twin scurges of Slavery and Polygamy (or as it was known then – The viper on the hearth.) Abraham Lincoln’s administration passed the first law restricting polygamy. The Dem’s interestingly enough fought the inclusion of Utah as a state but were the party in power when it became a state. So I think the political leaning of the Church is most correctly ambiguous, which is a good thing. Elected people should never be able to predict your vote, it keeps them honest.
2. I’ve been interested in politics and even knew that Ezra Taft Benson was a Mormon when he was in the cabinet. Later I heard that he was a right wing zealot and when he became the prophet the Church would be doomed etc. I was at Dixie when he dedicated the Institute building and was primed to hear a political speech and came away with just the most profound understanding of his knowledge of the Savior! In fact I was always struck by his testimony. Politics never entered my mind when I heard him talk.

Oh, and consecration vs communism… Commies and this never has made a lot of sense to me why) don’t believe in God. Consecration is based on charity or the pure love of Christ. One is about things the other is about (whatever) service, love, charity.

Drake Steel

By: Rory

Rory — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 19:12:54 +0000

OK!

I’ve always got something to say. Here are my $.02:

The Church’s stance on certain issues are mostly concerning a single piece of legislation. You may not remember but the Church strongly disagreed against the installation of a missile defense system that the Reagan Administration wanted (Republican president mind you). Why come out against that when several high level administrators were LDS and actually promoted it? Also, please consider that the Church may support an issue, and the members may assume that they must as well follow their lead which will eventually lead to instances where Church policy is not followed. Take a look at the Equal Rights Amendment in the 1970s as well. This was perhaps the first time in the last half century the Church took a strong roll in politics. I think they learned that they wield too much influence and decided to refrain from being so prominent in politics. Many have cited that event as the time when the Church realized they were a nationwide religion.

The Church does follow issues across the world that may impact the work in the Church. They do not have a political office in Washington D.C. or are aligned with any group or coalition of churches that watches political issues (i.e. the Church does not lobby the government nor pays fees for anyone to do so), instead, they rely on members within the government to raise issues that can potentially conflict with the Church. Most often they are items that impact visas in or out of the country and can affect missionary work, so nothing you would hear about in the news. However, in Washington D.C. the Church does have an office mainly as an outreach to all the embassies located there.

One more thing, I worked in Sen. Gordon Smith’s office almost two years ago. Most of his staff were UO or OSU grads. Not one was an LDS member. Yet, for Sen. Hatch and Bennett (both from Utah), I can’t say the same thing. Most staffers were BYU, or UU grads. Our fellow members are active on Capitol Hill, but not because our elected officials are members.

Mitch: The ‘cycle of governments’, I believe that’s our good ol’ friend Karl Marx. Long live the proletariat!