Al Sharpton, in a debate with atheist Christopher Hutchins, said, "As for the one Mormon running for office, those who really believe in God will defeat him anyway, so don’t worry, that’s a temporary situation."
???
The Romney campaign quickly spoke against Sharpton's comments, calling them bigoted. Sharpton rebutted that his comments were intended to mean that church-goers would reject Romney, not that Romney didn't really believe in God.
Sharpton notes that the comment was taken out of context. I can't disagree with him there-- I've seen summaries of the debate, but not the transcript. Sharpton claims that the Romney campaign is using the comment to strengthen flagging interest in the candidate.
I dunno. It was a stupid thing to say. I hope that Romney doesn't get all persecutified over it though. Let it pass, even if Sharpton doesn't apologize.
Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
Sharpton makes lots of dumb statements. Sorta like romney that way...I wish they'd both drop off the face of the planet
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I think what Sharpton said he meant (that he was excluding his opponent there instead of Romney from the "we who believe in God" group) is possible - he was talking to a notorious atheist (Christopher Hitchens).
However, from what I've read, they weren't talking about Romney at all and Sharpton brought him into the conversation to say the above quote, and it's an odd quote if it was meant to exclude Hitchens. So it could go either way.
I hope it doesn't become a bigger deal than it has been, but it certainly is instructive. I have a "bus friend" who stopped speaking to me once she found out I was Mormon. That doesn't happen often, but it's kind of a reminder when it does.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Paul: Oh. Okay.
Does anyone have a transcript to the debate between Hutchins and Sharpton?
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:That doesn't happen often, but it's kind of a reminder when it does.
Try being an atheist some time. Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Kat--
What do you take it as a reminder of?
I'm reminded that I've been a terrible member missionary in Real Life, and I should probably try to be a better man while I'm at it.
The comment I'm looking to hear is, "You...you don't seem like the kind of Mormon I've read about in church pamphlets."
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I take as a reminder that some people's reaction to meeting a Mormon is to recoil and avoid them.
Posted by Omega M. (Member # 7924) on :
Actually, I've always thought Mormonism to be an interesting (in a good way) religion, probably because I first became aware of it through OSC.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote:I take as a reminder that some people's reaction to meeting a Mormon is to recoil and avoid them.
:gently:
We are going to eat their babies.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I am not freaking out, Scott, nor calling down vengeance. I'm aware of what was happening and if the price of being Mormon is that my bus friend no longer speaks to me, oh well. Her loss.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
Oh, religious weirdnesses. Where would we be without you? We'd have a sight bit tamer campaigns, s'fo right.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Er...I'm not criticizing you, kat.
I think your conclusion is natural and logical.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Okay.
I suspect she asked someone else and was told something negative, because she was fine during the conversation and asked questions, but then the next Monday wouldn't sit next to me and now doesn't acknowledge me at all.
Posted by dawnmaria (Member # 4142) on :
Sharpton is quick to jump on anyone else if they say something he finds offensive. I think it's real cute that he doesn't think anything should be made out of what he said. The old double standard. Do as I say not as I do.
Posted by Occasional (Member # 5860) on :
Did you know that Early Christians were accused of atheism by the Romans? I am not completely sure why, but I think it had something to do with their not acknowledging the Roman gods, the clannishness, and simply ignorance about the religion.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Tom, are you really finding a lot of religious (or unreligious) shunning in Madison? Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
boots, Much of the Romney stuff centers around him running for President and whether it is okay for an LDS to be President. With the country the way it is now, there's not a chance in heck for an uncloseted atheist.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
There are still hotbeds of liberalism. I live in one of them. I am probably know as many atheists or agnostics anyway as I do Catholics. I was born in Madision. It is another college town, chock full of intellectuals. I have a hard time imagining people scooching away from Tom on a bus or backing away in horror because he's an atheist.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
And I imagine that kat or Mitt Romney or whoever would have a mostly comfortable or even favored existence in many parts of Utah. Does that mean that overall bigotry isn't an issue?
Posted by TheHumanTarget (Member # 7129) on :
Why are atheists generally mentioned in the same statement as liberals and intellectuals, as if they go mutually hand in hand?
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
I happen to like Madison, even being the patriarchal, repressive, religious monster that I am. When I was there, at least, it was clean, the people were nice, and there was this great hobby store near the capitol building.
What more does a guy need?
This is an interesting conversation. Let's go capture a devoutly religious person who knows neither athiests nor Mormons. We'll introduce him to me and Tom, and then see which one engenders more disgust.
We'll duplicate the experiment in several different areas of the country, and then take our show internationally.
If I wear the Peter Pan collar Tom suggested I once wore, and if he wears the Jolly Sailor uniform I suggested he once wore, then we can also bring in the shadow of homosexuality...ooh, the possibilities.
But my money is on me. Because Tom would be DASHING in a sailor's outfit, I tell you.
DASHING.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:Originally posted by MrSquicky: boots, Much of the Romney stuff centers around him running for President and whether it is okay for an LDS to be President. With the country the way it is now, there's not a chance in heck for an uncloseted atheist.
boots was responding to a post by Tom that seems to indicate that he experienced shunning by an acquaintance who found out he was an atheist.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
MrSquicky,
Honey, in the years that I have been posting here have I really failed to make clear that I think religious intolerance is a problem? Really?
I can't, for a second, revel in the fact that my beloved hometown is reasonably (or at least comparatively) enlightened without you suspecting that I have forgotten that much of the country is f...screwed up over religion?
THT, I think that being an intellectual and being liberal prohibits (or at least discourages) some kinds of religious belief.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Aw...I was hoping more people would come back and say, "No, NO, Scott! You'd be MUCH more dashing in your Peter Pan collar than Tom in his dreamy, steamy, Jolly Sailor costume..."
Man...I'm going to go write goth poetry now.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Scott, I was too distracted by the pictures in my head to type.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
For what it's worth, I wouldn't vote for Mitt Romney. I would vote for Harry Reid. Go figure.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
quote:I can't, for a second, revel in the fact that my beloved hometown is reasonably (or at least comparatively) enlightened without you suspecting that I have forgotten that much of the country is f...screwed up over religion?
I felt your statement could be taken as a criticism towards Tom's statement of the sort that he doesn't really have room to talk because most people in Madison aren't going to care that he is an atheist or that his overarching pointm that being an atheist in this country is going to net you, in general, more of te sort of behavior that kat was talking about than being most other things.
I'm all for yay! for non-bigotry, but, in my opinion, that's not necessarily how your statement reads.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Is that because we've never interacted before? Or are you one of those New Critics?
Interesting...according to Wikipedia, 16 out of 25 Catholic Senators are Democrats. I adore my Catholic senator (Durbin), but really don't like Sam Brownback.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
I didn't see any criticism kmboots' post.
Posted by sndrake (Member # 4941) on :
Kat said:
quote: I think what Sharpton said he meant (that he was excluding his opponent there instead of Romney from the "we who believe in God" group) is possible - he was talking to a notorious atheist (Christopher Hitchens).
However, from what I've read, they weren't talking about Romney at all and Sharpton brought him into the conversation to say the above quote, and it's an odd quote if it was meant to exclude Hitchens. So it could go either way.
That's kind of where I've come to as well. And given the ambiguity, it would seem to call for a better response from Al Sharpton.
But given his record in similar situations, but Sharpton (based on his behavior) seems to have promised god never to apologize for anything.
Not that he's alone in that camp. Jerry Lewis and GWB also come to mind pretty quickly. Posted by James Tiberius Kirk (Member # 2832) on :
quote:Sharpton makes lots of dumb statements.
Indeed. *nods*
--j_k
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
quote:Is that because we've never interacted before?
I think your statements could be read that way and I felt that, especially in light of them, that what I said added to the wider context of Tom and kat's interchange. I didn't think that it was immediately obvious that you ceased talking about the wider context and instead were entirely focused on the city of Madison and I thought that the wider context should be addressed. I'm sorry if that upsets you.
For what it's worth, I don't think that you personally are insensitive to the wider bigotry against atheists.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
I mean, I look downright SWANKY in this collar.
Posted by Speed (Member # 5162) on :
quote:Originally posted by katharina: I think what Sharpton said he meant (that he was excluding his opponent there instead of Romney from the "we who believe in God" group) is possible - he was talking to a notorious atheist (Christopher Hitchens).
However, from what I've read, they weren't talking about Romney at all and Sharpton brought him into the conversation to say the above quote, and it's an odd quote if it was meant to exclude Hitchens. So it could go either way.
Sharpton says his response was toward the atheist he was debating, but I don't buy it. There are several reasons, but the strongest (for me) is that he didn't say, "those of us who believe in God..." He said, "those of us who really believe in God.
He wasn't contrasting himself against someone who professed atheism, but against someone who was, in his view, faking theism. Seems like that could only have been Romney.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
I agree, especially in light of him pulling Romney in as a total non-sequitor. I think he's trying to cover now.
Posted by Occasional (Member # 5860) on :
And guess how he is covering? The racism issue, surprise, surprise. He is basically calling out Romney to explain the racial history of the LDS Church; claiming the Church was founded out of racism. He is saying anyone (or a whole Church in this instance) who has racist policies can't actually believe in God.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
He's not covering that way, Occ, although his original statement can be interpreted in that fashion.
He's covering by saying that he didn't mean it the way the Romney campaign is interpreting it, and that the Romney campaign is interpreting it in that way so as to drum up publicity for themselves.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Man. Romney couldn't've picked a better person than Al Sharpton to force this issue. If I thought Karl Rove were working for him, I'd speculate that Sharpton got paid to drop his name.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
:whistles, 'The Good Ship Lollipop' for no apparent reason:
Posted by sndrake (Member # 4941) on :
Tom said:
quote:Man. Romney couldn't've picked a better person than Al Sharpton to force this issue. If I thought Karl Rove were working for him, I'd speculate that Sharpton got paid to drop his name.
It wouldn't be the first time Sharpton lived off Republican money.
(starts with 55 seconds of silence for some reason) Hitchens at 25 min. Sharpton at 31 min.
[ May 10, 2007, 02:21 PM: Message edited by: orlox ]
Posted by Occasional (Member # 5860) on :
Well I must say this development is encouraging. I do think that the statement about the LDS Church that,"He apologized, and the Church considers the matter closed," kind of redundant. They considered the whole thing a political squabble to start with.
[ May 10, 2007, 09:15 PM: Message edited by: Occasional ]
Posted by Occasional (Member # 5860) on :
quote:Ron Sirrine, the greatgrandson of one of Mesa’s founders, says that as a Mormon he is against illegal immigration.
“Mormon people are so grounded in patriotism and law-abiding that when we see illegal workers not conforming to what we feel are the ground rules, that is where the animosity comes from,” he said. “That’s your basic cancer.”
Like Sirrine, Sen. Karen Johnson, R-Mesa, also a Mormon, often references church doctrine when discussing her views on illegal immigration.
In addition to the Articles of Faith, which dictate that members must obey the laws of the land, she points to sermons made by a church apostle which say that people can be brought to God “without leaving their homelands.”
“I think that as an LDS person, we are absolutely taught to be honest in all of our dealings with ... the government,” she said.
However, do agree that the Church should continue its political nuetrality on the subject. At the same time, I think they should encourage illegal immigrants to go back home and work on coming to the United States legally.
The point of my talking about this is that the LDS Church is not the "white bread" membership it used to be. That is true in the Western United States, but not as a world organization. Membership in Africa has also increased in large numbers. I think the problem is that race is so politicized in the United States that no one is paying attention (Mormons or not) to what is going on outside of its borders. That includes making claims that (while still holding true in some areas, including the highest leadership) the LDS Church is mostly white-anglo, when that is no longer true.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Side note about my bus friend: I think the problem is her.
She has started speaking to me again. We talked about recent events and I said my aunts came from Texas for my brother's wedding - I'm from Texas originally. She kind of pinched her nose and asked if I liked Texas. "Yes, very much." "Really? It seems-" <shudder>
Well, now she's managed to wrinkle her nose at my religion and at Texas. What's next? Will she insult my mother? Maybe she wants to say something disparaging about how I look? Maybe next time she'll sniff at the book I'm reading. Good grief.
I'm very annoyed at prejudiced, narrow-minded people today.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by Occasional: I found this article onimmigration and the LDS Church rather interesting. I am squarely in the camp that says:
quote:Ron Sirrine, the greatgrandson of one of Mesa’s founders, says that as a Mormon he is against illegal immigration.
“Mormon people are so grounded in patriotism and law-abiding that when we see illegal workers not conforming to what we feel are the ground rules, that is where the animosity comes from,” he said. “That’s your basic cancer.”
Like Sirrine, Sen. Karen Johnson, R-Mesa, also a Mormon, often references church doctrine when discussing her views on illegal immigration.
In addition to the Articles of Faith, which dictate that members must obey the laws of the land, she points to sermons made by a church apostle which say that people can be brought to God “without leaving their homelands.”
“I think that as an LDS person, we are absolutely taught to be honest in all of our dealings with ... the government,” she said.
However, do agree that the Church should continue its political nuetrality on the subject. At the same time, I think they should encourage illegal immigrants to go back home and work on coming to the United States legally.
The point of my talking about this is that the LDS Church is not the "white bread" membership it used to be. That is true in the Western United States, but not as a world organization. Membership in Africa has also increased in large numbers. I think the problem is that race is so politicized in the United States that no one is paying attention (Mormons or not) to what is going on outside of its borders. That includes making claims that (while still holding true in some areas, including the highest leadership) the LDS Church is mostly white-anglo, when that is no longer true.
You need to take into account however that illegal immigrants are proselyted by our missionaries along with the legal immigrants. If they join the church they are doted over by the church community and supported in their decision to live there. Its not as if the church screens a baptismal candidate's immigratory status, nor do they do any checks years after the fact.
Many hispanic people cite this as to why they find Utah to be a good place to move to as opposed to other states. They are not looked down upon as much. Obviously good treatment is not universal to the state, I work right next to a Puerto Rican who is a citizen and claims that White people in Utah treat him badly.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I think the illegal immigration issue is fascinating. Matt's uncle is the bishop of a Spanish ward here in Northern Virginia and a huge percentage of the ward are here illegally. He's not turning anybody over to Immigration.
It is, at the least, complicated.
Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :
That woman sounds pretty obnoxious, kat. I wish I could think of a clever way to counter it without making you seem obnoxious in turn.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
kat, I think you're right...sounds like she just has a major problem with everything.
Posted by Artemisia Tridentata (Member # 8746) on :
If we go clear back to the subject line, someone might be intrested in this. link It looks like Sharpton is doing someting extra to fix the mistake.
Posted by Occasional (Member # 5860) on :
I personally think that Sharpton is doing it for publicity, because he hasn't proven otherwise. I mean, come on, he called the LDS Church godless because of its stances on Blacks before 1978; and that is not from an obscure quote.
On the other hand, the LDS Church leadership has pretty much from the start said the matter is closed. They have endured far worse from both sides of the political and religious fence.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)