Mitt the Mormon

I can’t help myself. I like Mitt Romney. I like his sunny optimism; I like his manifest competence (I really like that); I like most of his political stands; I like his committed marriage; and I like his looks, which I think are usefully telegenic. I recognize, however, that his Mormonism may be a roadblock between him and the White House. In the PBS documentary about the Mormons, a show that is either interesting in a boring way, or boring in an interesting way, and one that I am watching ever so slowly on TiVo, I heard that something like 25-45% of Americans would refuse to vote for Mitt for no other reason than the fact that he’s a Mormon.

I’ve thought about it a lot, and concluded that these worried people are right, because Mormonism is clearly a very scary religion. These people will do anything to gain converts, including beheading people. Oh, wait. That’s not right. It’s the Islamists who behead people to try to get them to convert. The Mormons just send their young men out onto the streets to talk about God’s love and their Prophet Joseph Smith. It’s not a religious message I can get behind, but there’s no violence in the message itself, nor is there violence threatened to those who refuse to listen to the message. So that’s not a reason to fear a Mormon in the White House.

Oh, I know. We should fear a Mormon in the White House because Mormons, if they do succeed in converting people, and those people become apostates (that is, they revert to their former faith), Mormons behead them. Whoops. I’m wrong again. That’s Islamists who kill apostates. Mormons, it turns out, are a little careless about maintaining their new converts, and about 50% of them just drift away never to be heard of again by the Mormon Church, according to the PBS documentary.

But surely we should be worried that, if Romney gains the White House, Mormons will impose their “lifestyle” on us, forcing us to give up pork, cloistering our women or making them wear burqas, mandating polygamy, killing Jews, marginalizing other Christians, stoning adulterers, cutting off thieves’ hands, etc. Oh, darn it. I just can’t seem to keep these things straight. That’s what the Islamists will do if they gain political ascendancy. I think it’s highly doubtful that the Mormons will do anything of the sort, even if they themselves eschew alcohol and caffeine. The fact of the matter is that Mormons have proven themselves to be exemplary American citizens whose only agenda is to thrive in the American way of life and, through positive example, to convince people to join their faith. As I noted, their faith has no attraction to me, but I’m not worried that, should Mitt become President, I’ll suddenly be placed in some fringe Mormon polygamous harem.

So really, if you cut away all the sillY stuff, the concern about Mitt’s religion boils down to people doubting Mitt’s ability to think straight. I mean, how smart can someone be who believes that Joseph Smith was a Prophet who received tablets from an angel recounting an alternative Biblical history that took place in America? Well, he’s as smart as anyone who believes in a specific religious faith. We believe because we believe. I’m not a Catholic, so I don’t believe in transubstantiation, but I don’t think less of those who hold that as a central religious doctrine. I’m not a Christian, so I don’t believe that Christ was the son of God, who was crucified and resurrected. I believe in him only as a great teacher, a Rabbi, and, as President Bush said, a philosopher. But I think all of you know I don’t question your faith, or the fruits of your faith (compassion, humanism, morality), and I stand ready to be proven wrong about my disbelief at the end of days. I’m not even a religious Jew, so I have strong doubts about the religious or supernatural aspects of the Torah, even though, again, I embrace the values flowing from that Book.

And really, values are what it’s all about. To me, faith is faith. For that reason, I would never challenge your belief system. However, I will celebrate your faith if the values that flow from it mesh with my values. To that end, I believe that Romney, through his religious beliefs, has values that are in harmony with mine — and with most mainstream conservatives. If your doubts about his intelligence flow solely from his religious beliefs, it may be a shortsighted mistake to use that doubt to turn your back on a candidate who is manifestly competent, who has a great political track record, and who will not to do you anything you don’t wish to have done.

UPDATE: I was trying to think of a situation in which I would look at a Presidential candidate in the same way those who are concerned about Mormonism look at Mitt. The closest I could get was the Jews for Jesus. I’ve always had a problem with that organization, which I think is theologically untenable. Since about 33 C.E., there’s been a name for Jews for Jesus — Christians.

I mean, the gaping divide between Judaism and Christianity is Christ himself. Once you’ve embraced Christ’s existence and his teachings, you’ve pretty much left Judaism behind. While they spring from the some roots, they’ve developed into different trees. And while I have no problem with people following their beliefs, and respect those who genuinely make the transition from one faith to another, I’ve always thought that Jews for Jesus represent the foolishness of people trying to slither around in an impossible doctrinal no-man’s land, only to end up being neither fish nor fowl, but some misshapen and useless creature in between.

(And I know that, about now, some of you are saying, “Come on, Bookworm. Don’t pull your punches. Tell us what you really think.”)

So, how would I feel if Mitt were a member of Jews for Jesus, a group that really gets my goat, rather than a Mormon, a group I just sort of observe from a distance? Certainly, I’d feel a whole lot less respect for him. I’d have my doubts about his intellect in light of the fact that he’s holding what I consider an intellectually ludicrous position. He’d stop being one of my top choices. BUT (there’s always a but), let’s try a thought experiment in an alternative reality where people’s politics are the same, but their religious beliefs are lined up a bit differently.

Imagine, if you will, an election where Mitt is still Mitt in all respects but one. Rather than being a Mormon, he’s a Jew for Jesus. And imagine that his opponent, whether Edwards, Obama or Hillary, rather than being a mainstream liberal Christian is, in fact, a devout Jew. Under those circumstances, despite my distaste for Mitt’s religious choice, and my concern that it represents a profound intellectual failing, I’d vote for Mitt.

The fact is, I’m not electing these people to be my religious leaders (thank goodness). I’m considering each of them as a potential political leader during times of national uncertainty. And as to that, while Mitt would clearly be someone handicapped by a peculiar religious monomania, I would nevertheless feel safer with the country in his hands than I would if it were in Hillary’s hands, no matter her impeccable (and entirely imaginary) Jewish credentials.

UPDATE II: My sister voiced one other concern about Mormons, which is the fact that Church leaders are still having revelations, something that, in the Judeo-Christian tradition, stopped thousands of years ago. As recently as the early 1970s, the Church leaders had a revelation that their teachings about blacks (that blacks were inferior) were entirely wrong, and they revised Church doctrine to make blacks full members in all respects. At the end of the 19th Century, they had a semi-revelation (it apparently was never stated in official “revelation” form) that plural marriage was a bad thing. I’ve also heard that, after they acquired a large interest in the Pepsi-Cola company they had a revelation that had them backing down on the evils of caffeine, but that may just be an urban legend.

My sister acknowledges that most of the post-Joseph Smith revelations have been aimed at bringing Mormons more in sync with mainstream America, but worries that having a member in America’s most executive position might trigger a different type of religious experience. Thus, my sister can envision a situation in which Mitt is in the White House and the Mormon leaders suddenly have a revelation along the lines of “the President of the United States must (fill in the blank).” Would Mitt feel obligated to fall in line with that revelation, she asks? It’s an awfully good question, and one that I think Mitt has to be willing to answer before Americans can freely vote for him.

Having said that, I’d still take Mitt over the Democratic candidates. I just wouldn’t necessarily elevate him to the top of the heap for the Republican candidates.

UPDATE III: The Captain notes that Mitt is finally making some serious headway in the polls. This should be interesting.