posted
Oh, still according to the statistics on adherents.com, a *total* recall of Mormons from foreign countries, regardless of nationality, to the US would still only roughly double the number of Mormons in the US. That would be enough to decide the close elections between Republicans and Democrats if they voted as a bloc, but would still be far from that needed for establishing a theocracy. Especially since even that number would be below that (each) of the number of Methodists, Baptists, and Catholics already in the States.
On the other hand, the number of Muslims needed to match that total number of Mormons would only be a tiny fraction of the billion or so Muslims that currently exist.
In other words, I find a total mass migration of Mormons to the States more unlikely than a fractional migration of Muslims to the States required to achieve the same numbers, which is happening if only due to normal rates of migration.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MrSquicky: [QUOTE] Well, I think the answer in the early stages is assimilation. As happened with all immigrant groups, I expect that Mormons who came to this country would come to adopt some of the values and ways of doing things that has been established. This would especially be true across populations. The children of immigrants generally come to embrace the new culture more strongly than their parents.
While this is often true, in the face of perceived prejudice against a minority we often see the third generation phenomenon. While the second generation becomes amalgamated the third generation tires of unfair treatment and typically finds purpose through a renewed interest in their own culture.
quote: If we're looking at a a huge spike in the Mormon population in a given place where they are generally self-isolating, we can't really count on them giving up their drive towards a theocracy where non-Mormons are treated as second class citizens.
Mormons don't exactly have a track record of treating "gentiles" as second class citizens, at least the theology does not exist in their religion. Individuals and even communities can of course be quite rude to nonbelievers. The theology follows the line of logic that the world will fall apart and the Mormons will out of necessity create their own theo-political state. But sure we can discuss the hypothetical where the majority of Mormons believe that we need to create the kingdom of God preparatory to Christ's coming.
quote: In that case, I'm not entirely sure what we should do. There are some ways mainly consistent with our country's principles to limit their growth, such as by limiting immigration. However, they are soft obstacles at best. If we're dealing with a Mormon population that only views the workings of democracy as something that they can use in a demographic might makes right situation in order to destroy the laws and principles of the country that they are settling in, it may actually become a choice between actions not consistent with our principles and surrender to a Mormon enemy bent on conquering us.
Hypothetically speaking.
Could you say then that in the event of the impending doom of our democracy that armed revolt might be necessary? Or would you prefer exile?
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
BB, The third generation has a stronger attraction to the emigrant culture, but they don't generally reject the values of the country are in. Third generation people in America still, in general, think that democracy and individual rights are the way to go, even if the original countries have different systems.
quote:Mormons don't exactly have a track record of treating "gentiles" as second class citizens,
Mormons haven't had a chance to do this. Christians in general didn't have a track record of theology consistent with this, until they got into power.
quote:Could you say then that in the event of the impending doom of our democracy that armed revolt might be necessary? Or would you prefer exile?
Armed revolt? Definitely. Let's say George W. Bush decides not to vacate the White House at the end of his term and he gets sufficient support that it is hard to remove him. Armed revolt would definitely be called for.
In our hypothetical situation, I don't see how that would be the go to solution when you can just restrict immigration, put stricter limits on citizenship or, if we're going to go really outside our principles, disenfranchise people.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mucus, Okay. I accept your numbers. However, let's say that hypothetically, I'm right. It's not like we're really dealing with reality here anyway.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
True. I guess it is a minor quibble whether the (probabilities pulled right out of the air) chance of the first occurring is 0.01 or 0.001 or if its really the other way around. But I get distracted by these minor things.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
