I believe most of the “separation of church and state” rhetoric is overblown and unfounded (private presidential letters do not make good Constitutional doctrine). But for a church’s sake, it’s generally a good idea to keep the state off at an arm’s distance.
With that in mind, I’ll go out on a limb and say that this is not the best way to start a campaign.
Idaho gubernatorial candidate Rex Rammell will be mixing what he calls doctrines from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints into his gubernatorial campaign in a series of meetings slated for LDS elders only.
In January, Rammell will kick off a series of special meetings targeted specifically at “faithful priesthood-holders of the LDS Church” to discuss the so-called “White Horse” prophecy.
I’m not sure why a gubernatorial candidate wants to kick off his campaign by discussing a highly disputed prophecy when his own church doesn’t. While Idaho’s LDS population is a sizable 24%, isn’t he just asking to tick off that remaining 76%? I’m all for protecting the Constitution, but making a parochial appeal using folk doctrine does not make a winning campaign nor does it put the Church in the best light. (Here’s a copy of his flier, via Article 6 Blog.)
Bonus: Last week, D.C. Mayor Adrian Fenty signed the city’s same-sex marriage legislation in a church! I thought government recognition of same-sex marriage had nothing to do with churches and whether they did the same. Oh well.
(Possibly) Related posts:
-
Having spent some time in the Rexburg area, I will just say that Rammell is nuts. Even the wingnuts in the area do not seem to like him much. He ran as an independent for US Senate in 2008.
-
Looks like we have a long way to go before we reach the bottom. The madness shows no signs of stopping anytime soon.
-
This stuff is not unusual, really. This guy is from the John Bircher wing of the party which still lingers in LDS areas of the west. I would not make any generalizations about the church in the area of even conservative in the area based on Rex.
I had a student with the same last name. I asked if he was related. He said that his dad hated the fact that Rex made everyone with the last name Rammell look crazy.
-
David, I think your paragraph should read “same-sex marriage legislation” and not “same-sex church legislation.” Looks like it was signed in a Unitarian Universalist Church. Does that really count?
-
I don’t know if i’d call the white horse prophecy “highly disputed” so much as “pretty well debunked”. It makes it all the more fun to see people reference it as proof that Mormons are a big deal.
-
I always cringe in a major way, when overtly religious themes are used to prop up political power, be it any party and religion.
It was bad, when Popes anointed kings in Europe, and it was Bad, when Charles came up with “The Divine Rights of Kings”. (Charles, English civil war, right?)
No better if it temporarily seems to further a cause that I would like.
-
This is so embarrassing.
Mr. Rammell’s idiocy was all over the Utah and Idaho press today. I heard a radio interview with him where he relied on a quote from Ezra Taft Benson supporting the prophecy. He claimed that he, personally, was one who would save the U.S. Constitution and he wanted to organize Idaho members to help.
The best part was his description of why he only would invite Mormon men. He claimed that LDS men and women were on the same page. Thus, the husbands could take the word home.
LDS leaders (political & community) need to publicly denounce this lunatic.
-
They can denounce Rammell right after they’re done with Glenn Beck.
-
Isn’t it comforting to know that we can behave as lunatics as much as we’d like and still be counted as members of the Church?
BTW, if the Church denounces Glenn Beck, Reid would have to follow
-
Molly,
I agree with you. It’s not the job of Church authorities to denounce political or any other fringe idiots. By doing so, they would almost be giving legitimacy to what they’re doing/saying.
I am quite certain some people think I do and say outrageous things. If the Bishop thinks I’m doing something wrong, I expect some comments, otherwise it’s between me and my Lord, right?
(I don’t see why the Church should denounce GB? I think he’s the dictionary definition of a wingnut, but hey, it’s a free country!)
-
Are you not missing the point? Rammell’s fear for the survival of the Constitution are well founded and are shared by millions. If anyone doesn’t think the Constitution is in trouble you’ve not been awake. But then that is exactly what Rammell has been trying to do, wake you up!
It’s frustrating to watch everyone side-step the real issue at hand and bicker about whether or not the White Horse Prophecy really came from Joseph Smith and who said what about it through the years. Fact is is this, who cares who said what? Rammell never even mentioned the White Horse Prophecy. Rammell stated he does not represent the Church.
I live in Idaho and I can tell you that the vast majority of Idahoans are extremely worried about the direction of our country. Many wonder if we’ll even see another election. And these are not wackos, these are business owners, ranchers, farmers, teachers, homemakers. And many are LDS.
Let me ask this? Who do you feel safe having as a Governor should *hit hit the fan? Otter, the morally inept good old boy who has been selling us out to the feds when not playing corrupt politics. Allred, who thinks the state should be run on the concensus process, where everyone is browbeat into agreement even though nobody believes and nobody objects. Hmm, yeah, he’ll be defending the Constitution. Or Ullman, the RINO or Kemp the liberal with grow the government big ideas? I’m sorry, but I want someone with some grit in their teeth that will stand up and fight for our freedom and our liberties. If a person is a wacko because they want to defend our rights then I guess I’m voting for the wacko.
And yes, Rammell does create controversy. He does stand apart from the silent majority. Leaders usually do. You can’t lead from within the pack.
-
I guess I really don’t have a dog in this fight (how bout getting that phrase updated?). I don’t vote in Idaho…
Anywho, it is sort of insulting to me, that there are so many people whose comments are so knee-jerk that it feels violent actually. Either side, too.
I think we should be able to have a civil discussion. If we start using epithets and such, we tend to descend into mudslinging very quickly.
Idaho voters should be adults anyway. If they think that constitution is crashing down — not even a next election, come on, people! — now that Obama is the CEO, where were they when the Patriot Act was enacted? That was the greatest hit that the constitution has taken in quite a while.
Oh, and who extended Medicare worth at least in the hundreds of billions on top of Johnson’s Great Society? (Cheat sheet says Bush was the CEO who was “responsible” for the Patriot Act as well as extending Medicare, as well as letting Big Oil drill without paying any compensation that they were legally bound to pay).
-
Mark N,
Glenn Beck has not claimed that his views are an outgrowth of his religion.
The reason the Church would denounce Rammell is not his views but his attempts to present them in a way that makes it seem they are the views of the Church. -
Velska,
If you want to claim to not have a dog in the fight, than do not show your one-sided contempt for others.
The constitution is under attack from all sides. I am the most vocal of critics for Scalia’s bizarre ruling in Employment Divion v. Smith, and I will give Ted Kennedy due praise as a defender of religious freedom.
I am a full supporter of opener immigration policy, and for that very reason dislike Clinton and his efforts to stop the Arab Senator, Michigan’s own Republican Spencer Abraham, in his efforts to increase the number of high-tech visas in the 1990s.
We jetisioned Abraham, in a campaign where he was said to be “like Osama bin Laden”, and now have an anti-immigration Democrat named Debbie Stabenow.
I was the most vocal of critics of Chaffetz in the election, and always said Bennion Spencer’s biggest problem is he cared to much about speaking his feelings and never seemed to want to win. In a district that voted overwhelmingly for Bush, and where your only chance of winning is convincing the Bush-Hatch Republicans who see Juan Hernandez as their brother, not an enemy, that you are a better option than Chaffetz who won’t be able to set up his concentration camps anyway, you don’t say you disagree with Bush policies. You campaign on how you agree with Bush on immigration reform, you emphasize commonality.
However much I think Chaffetz is a grandstander, I do have to say he is a much more vocal advocate of civil liberties than most Democrats.
If the Democrats hate the Patriot Act so much than why have they not repealed it.
This may also illustrate why the gripes of Republican “hypocrisy” are truly overblown.
People forget Bush campaigned as a bleeding heart conservative. He did not campaign for the end of all government oversight of education. You are not a hypocrite if you do what you promised to do. -
John, where is my one-sided contempt, when I explicitly mentioned that I don’t care for party politics on either side? I really don’t think the answer to any big questions are to be found in the Party Faithful of any party, who put the Party ahead of their common sense. And examples of those can be found in all parties.
At any are, just for general information, the Church has issued a public notice that Rammell is a loose cannon, which is about as much as can publicly be expected. Check LDS Newsroom.
-
Velska,
All your attacks were on the actions of George W. Bush. That is why I said you had one sided contempt, because all your contempt was aimed at one person. That does not strike me as the speech of a non-partisan.
16 comments
Comments feed for this article
Trackback link: http://asoftanswer.com/2009/12/23/two-church-state-scrambles/trackback/