Here’s one thing the internet still can’t provide: advocacy ads printed in the NY Times.
The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty has placed a full-page ad in the New York Times today assembling various religious leaders to denounce the recent attacks on the Mormon Church in the wake of Proposition 8. You can see the ad at its companion site NoMobVeto.org.
The ad begins:
We’re a disagreeable lot. We differ about a great many important things. Most, but not all of us, are religious believers. We likewise differ on important moral and legal questions, including the wisdom and justice of California’s Proposition 8, banning same-sex marriage.
Nevertheless we’re united in this: The violence and intimidation being directed against the LDS or “Mormon” church, or other religious organizations – and even against individual believers – simply because they supported Proposition 8 is an outrage that must stop.
This is the latest of efforts to rally behind the Church’s as it has faced backlash in its support for Propostion 8 (also, see AboveTheHate.com and its open letter to President Monson). There has been speculation that the Church’s involvement with Prop has been a “fiasco.” But such handwringing seems to be from the perspective of those who think a boycott of Sundance would hurt Mormons.
Instead, the Prop 8 aftermath appears to have won the Mormon Church new appreciation among social conservatives. Whether that is momentary or incremental remains to be seen. I don’t think that’s necessarily a gain for the Mormon Church, but it is among those religious conservatives who were too religiously blinded to realize the Church should be a natural ally in many causes.
Did Church critics really want to push the Mormon Church closer to the religious right?
UPDATE: The LDS Church expressed appreciation for the ad:
Elder M. Russell Ballard of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles said: “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints expresses its gratitude to the signatories of the full-page advertisement that appeared today in the New York Times. This was a thoughtful and generous gesture at a time when the right of free expression of people of faith has come under attack. We join with those of all religious faiths and political persuasions who have called for reasoned and civil discourse on matters that affect our nation.”
No related posts.
Tags: anti-mormons, civility, evangelicals, proposition 8, same-gender marriage
-
Awesome. Thanks for bringing this to our attention.
-
Great news! Thank you for the heads up and the article.
-
I am unaware of the “violence” referred to. Have there been violent acts perpetrated upon Mormons due to the Proposition 8 vote? Can you give some links or examples of this violence?
-
Curious one –
I think it’s better you take that question up with the people who wrote it as I can’t speak for them. But here’s one example of pre-election violence. If you want a detailed list o f the attempts to intimidate Mormons you can should check out It’s Time to Speak Out Against The ‘Mormon Boycott’.
I don’t think either side should get carried away with claims of martyrdom so it’s good to keep the rhetoric in check. But I would not call burning the Book of Mormon, sending letters with mysterious powder and unruly mobs protesting outside of our temples “peaceful.”
-
Gay activist Wayne Besen calls the signers of the ad “Anti-Mormon Hypocrites,” because several of them have in the past vocally expressed anti-religions bigotry against Mormonism, secular Jews and Islam. He says: “To watch these hypocrites act as the great defenders of the LDS church, and religion in general, is beyond laughable.”
http://www.waynebesen.com/2008/12/anti-mormon-hypocrites-place-mormon.html
Perhaps the LDS involvement in Prop 8 really will be a turning point in its relations with evangelicals and other religious traditions. As it is, the signers of the NYT ad seem to be united only by their common anti-gay world view.
-
So lets see who signed the ad:
1) Bill Donahue – longtime proponent of boycotts. Now that those that bankrolled his anti-Gay crusade are getting boycotted, he’s now opposed to it. But I haven’t seen him apologize for his past boycotts or promise never to do the same. I guess when he advocates boycotts and calls out people he disagrees with its ‘freedom of speech’. When others do it to him, its ‘mob rule’.
2) Chuck Colson – convicted felon. His “ministry” is illegally subsidized by the taxpayers and provides ‘rice christian’ benefits (provided by the taxpayers) to those that accept his anti-Gay beliefs in prison. Hopefully, that will change in the new administration.
3) Alveda King. A professional Anti-Gay (meaning – thats what she does for her pay – be anti-Gay) distant relative of MLK. Corretta Scott King supported Gay rights.
4) Marvin Olasky – a vicious homophobe with a certified history of supporting politicians that advocate throwing all Gays in prison for the ‘crime’ of being Gay. Mr. Olasky has also been funded by notoriously anti-Gay funder Ahmanson. He has also been accused of dominionism.
5) Armando Valladares – A vicious anti-Gay bigot who thinks that Obama is an advocate of terrorists.
6) Roger Scruton – disgraced ‘writer’. It was discovered that not only did he write articles presented as original thought when he had been paid to write them and place them in newspapers by Japan Tobacco without noting the payments made to him by Japan Tobacco. I’m wondering how much the Beckett people had to pay HIM to sign this
7) Chris Seiple – apparently is a “New World Order” conspiracy theorist.
Robert Seiple – is he related to Chris? This could just go on and on. Why wasn’t Fred Phelps a signatory here?
Just curious, who of the signers ‘differed on Prop 8′? I’m not seeing it.And have any Mormons donated any money to the Becket fund recently?
-
Those screaming about some very minor and isolated ‘violent’ events might have some credibility if they all didn’t oppose hate crimes legislation covering the MUCH MORE SERIOUS issue of violence and discrimination against Gay people.
-
Steven B –
I’m not sure what makes those signers anti-Mormon. I don’t think those who don’t agree that Mormons are christians are automatically “Anti-Mormon” although I disagree with them.
If anything, that link proves my point that social conservatives who may not have been as open to Mormons before now have a new found appreciation for them.
Tom in Bogota –
I don’t know a whole lot about the signers other than that Donohue can be over the top sometimes in defending the Catholic Church and that Chuck Colson deserves respect.
I don’t know anything about any Mormons donating to the Becket Fund, but you are probably confusing that with the award they gave to Mitt Romney a few months back.
Attacking these signers rather than discussing the message doesn’t do your side credit. And likening any of these people to Fred Phelps thoroughly discredits you.
Finally, I think its a mistake to be crying that widespread violence has been inflicted against Mormons, but the attempts to systematically harass and financially hurt Mormons is pretty bad enough.
Here’s a thought, how about forgetting about hate crimes against Mormons or gays and just prosecute violence and discrimination against everybody?
-
You mean like the Mormon who lynched Matt Shepard? Maybe he was read the Mormon Anti-Gay tract “To the One” at the ward house or in seminary.
Chuck Colson offers taxpayer paid benefits to prisoners that accept his Anti-Gay teachings. He offers nothing more than “Rice Christian” benefits. And it should be stopped. He is a felon who makes MONEY out of the taxpayers for being Anti-Gay.
-
The only problem is that the Mormon John Birchers in the 70 oppose all hate crimes laws that cover Gays. Otherwise, Utah would have them.
-
And I don’t see a difference between the Mormons and Fred Phelps, except the stick porn. Perhaps you can help draw out differences on public policy issues where Fred Phelps and the Mormon leadership disagree.
Gay Marriage: Fred Phelps and the Mormons agree
Civil Unions: ditto (otherwise Mormon run Utah and Idaho would have them)
Non-Discrimination: ditto
Don’t Ask Dont Tell: ditto
Hate Crimes: dittoThe only difference is that Fred Phelps uses stick porn and the word F*gs.
-
When I wrote Maurine Proctor back in August about some of the stuff that Meridian was putting out there in support of Prop 8, she replied with an article by Roger Severino, legal counsel for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty.
Becket and Ballard were BFF long before my side started with the post-election actions.
In other words: enough with the Kabuki. Give it a rest, OK?
Whatever our philosophical differences, the fact is that the Yes on 8 campaign got the job done. Kudos.
That said, when I read suggestions from folks on your side – who are already on familiar terms with the Becket crew – now complimenting that outfit for their “thoughtful and generous gesture” … I gotta repeat my plea:
You won. Why embarrass yourself by pretending you’ve also won a bunch of new friends?
-
Just caught your latest headline:
“OBAMA: Still smoking …”
What a sad little man you are.
-
Chino –
I’ll take the bait this once but I suggest you lighten up a little.
I thought the Obama smoking story was interesting because he has taken great pains to hide his habit and claimed several times that he was kicking it. That sounded ridiculous as I can’t think of anything more stressful and more unlikely to help to kick the habit than running for president.
But back to the point of this post: a ridiculous amount of Romney campaign coverage was devoted to asking if evangelicals and religious conservatives could accept a Mormon candidate. Although I think the media overplayed the issue it certainly was a factor exploited by Huckabee. But I believe Romney made significant inroads with religious conservatives.
I believe Prop 8 did even more to earn respect for Mormons among the religious right, which certainly hasn’t always been there. In a very concrete and public way, Mormons demonstrated they can be formidable players in the culture wars.
Furthermore, this is all an issue because your “side” won’t accept they lost, won’t recognize what they did wrong but instead prefers to scapegoat a convenient target. Your latest blog post (“Why I’m (still) mad at the Mormon church: a timeline“) demonstrates that clearly.
-
“I believe Prop 8 did even more to earn respect for Mormons among the religious right, which certainly hasn’t always been there. Despite what you may think.”
I agree that Prop 8 may have been a catalyst for greater unity between Mormons and non-Mormon faiths. But I think it is sad that it takes a common enemy to unite the various sects. No matter how you frame the issue, Prop 8 was about writing discrimination against gays and lesbians into the California constitution.
In my opinion, the Becket Fund ad is simply an example of the aggressors claiming to be victims. Who worked tirelessly and aggressively to strip gay and lesbian citizens of their civil right to marry? Who are the real victims of Prop 8?
This ad is just a further opportunity for the extreme anti-gay signers to foment their discriminatory agenda. It is nice to see the LDS getting a pat on the back and support from their coconspirators, but this ad is really just more homophobia from the extreme right-wing wrapped in a cloak of “religious freedom.”
-
Maybe everyone is reading a bit too much into what the Church’s statement regarding the ad says. The statement itself from Elder Ballard is about as beige–even form-letter like–as you can get. He acknowledged the ad, thanked those who ran it–as any gracious individual would do when someone does something nice (independent of an unknown motives), and stated again that everyone should chill out for a bit.
What do you want Elder Ballard to do? Condemn the ad (rude and stupid)? Ignore it (rude)? For crying out loud, all he did was say, “Thanks.” There was no talk of future alliances. There was no hint of bridging gaps between anti-mormons and mormons. There was a simple “Thanks.”
-
Pingback from The Ad Slinging Continues | A Soft Answer on 10 December 2008 at 3:23 pm
-
David -
My comment re the Obama headline was out of line and I apologize for it.
Scott -
What I’d like to see Elder Ballard and the rest of the LDS leadership do is this: demonstrate that they were sincere in their statements made during and after California’s Proposition 8 campaign: “we’re not anti-gay” and “the Church does not object to rights for same-sex couples.”
Re specifics, pls refer to Anastasia Niedrich’s excellent paper published this year in the Hinckley Journal of Politics:
“No More Excuses: Making the Case for Equal Employment Laws in Utah (A Comparative Analysis of Laws, Rhetoric and Arguments on ENDA Legislation)”
Or is that asking too much?
-
@ Chino
Please inform me on how specifically the Church is opposing the rights they claimed to not object to? (This is a sincere question–I don’t know how they have been objecting to any rights (again, we’re only talking about the rights mentioned in the LDS press releases–hospital, domestic partnerships, etc…). Keeping in mind, of course, that “supporting” and “not objecting to” are not even close to synonymous.
-
@ Scott
From the Niedrich paper I mentioned:
http://echols.info/No-More-Excuses.pdf
“From late December 1997 to mid-January 1998, Salt
Lake City protected employees from discrimination based on
their sexual orientation; but the Salt Lake City Council
repealed the ordinance less than a month after its passage.
The Salt Lake City Weekly newspaper even went so far as to
call the short life of the ordinance and its eventual repeal “an
outcome of Mormon politics” because of the documented urgings
of Latter-Day Saint Church Leaders for their followers to
attend the Salt Lake City Council meeting and urge for the
ordinance’s immediate repeal (Biele, 1998).”That was a decade ago? Has anything changed?
I guess we’ll find out when we see what happens with HB 89 and the rest of the Common Ground Initiative.
-
Chino –
I appreciate the apology.
Steven B -
From my perspective I would describe it as a unifying over a common cause to defend traditional marriage rather than to oppose a common enemy. But I imagine we will have to disagree on that.
I guess my question is: Can one be for traditional marriage without being “extreme”, “bigoted”, and full of hate?
I don’t care who gets to call themselves victim. The HRC and others seem to take great umbrage that they are losing that mantle as the Prop 8 backlash is now getting its own backlash.
The religious right are good at doing the same so I don’t want to get carried away with it. But the point still remains that individuals and a religion are being singled out and facing persecution in various degrees because they support a view that is not that controversial with the majority of Americans.
21 comments
Comments feed for this article
Trackback link: http://asoftanswer.com/2008/12/05/ny-times-ad-defends-mormons/trackback/