Mormons behind passage of ENDA? Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.
First, who knew there were 7 members of the Church if Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints in the US Senate? I knew Harry Reid was one, but Dean Heller too? Both senators from Nevada are Mormons? Proportionally, there should only be a Mormon or two in he Senate, but that's another topic for another post.
I sound this alarm as a former Mormon. I know Mormons. My family is still Mormon. Mormons don't do anything without an ulterior motive. Nothing. That seven Mormon Senators voted for ENDA shows that there was a concerted and covert movement. Six of those 7 are Republicans, and it is not only shocking that they crossed party lines to support anything gay, but that they are willing to take the heat for a Church position means that something is coming from the Mormons, something so bad that they felt the need to get out in front of it, to have something to point to and say, "We voted for ENDA! We're not bad people, see..."
Now, you have to understand that Mormons have long believed that they would save the US when it is hanging by a thread, and that would endear them to American hearts. The "White Knight Prophecy" is how it's known in Mormon circles, and for a while, it looked like Mitt Romney was going to be that knight who would come riding to DC to save the nation (although from what I cannot say).
Perhaps the new asshole that we gays ripped Mormons after prop 8 is still stinging, although if they wanted to make amends for that one, they could stop funding NOM. Perhaps the current furor over the NSA and spying on Americans has the Mormons worried (the NSA's multi-billion dollar new spying facility is located in Bluffdale, Utah) and they're trying to mitigate what could be a PR disaster. And the Mormons are not stupid; they see that gays are Obama's second-largest and most ardent group of supporters, and they are clearly trying to curry favor given that Obama has 3 more years, and the political scene nationally indicates a Democratic president for the foreseeable future.
But there is something else going on. There it's something that the Mormons want, we don't know what it is, and it must be big.
Ex-communicated member here as well. Proudly so. Born and raised...stake president and bishop in my family, the works.
I don't follow the reasoning. Why couldn't the Church simply want to distance itself from the losing side of history? Their doctrines have been remarkably responsible to US political trends.
There's a big difference between being responsive to political trends, and getting out in front and leading on a major breakthrough like this. I mean, it took them until 1977 to admit blacks to the priesthood... not exactly leaders against racism.
And, Mormons are notoriously homophobic. I didn't get the hell out of Utah as soon as I could because it's a warm and inviting place for gay men. Yeah, I know it's changed since I left 30 years ago, but it hasn't changed that much.
OK, OP. You're the one with Mormon bona fides--what do YOU think is brewing?
More Repugs voted for this than ever before when it comes to gay rights.
Politicians are whores. They are merely trying to woo the gay voting bloc which they perceive as the first step in shaping a kinder, gentler corporate oligarchy.
The church could be planning a change. Those 90 year old bigots are dropping like flies.
They know the House won't pass it so it won't become law, so voting for it in the Senate is a painless way to show they aren't bigots when really they are.
Any chance they are trying to get gays interested in the church for tithes? After all, successful gays are usually higher up in the income bracket.
I read somewhere there was a real push within the church for softening the stance on gays.
The Mormon plan:
1) Gain power;
2) Implement Agenda.
If No. 2 really hasn't changed, then No. 1 is your reason. Pretending to make nice with the gays, if it can be done without giving anything up, will take the edge off their political opposition.
Then again, they could be changing. Only the tearoom queens of Bountiful know for sure.
Actually the church has been evolving it's position on the homo. They of course don't advocate marriage or actually doing it, but they are now being more accepting of homos.
They recognize there are homos within their ranks and would be ranks. Why let all the potential tithes to the church get away? Mormonism is big business and this is a business decision
Remember, the version that was passed includes substantial...and controversial...religious protections. Codification of religious bigotry would seem to be the motive.
I thought the British were behind the Passage to India? Mrs. Moore was British, n'est pas?
They supported it because it has no real teeth to go after religious bigots. If we need to amend the Constitution to stop them, so be it.
SLC is now one of the gayest cities in the US. They don't want a storming of the Tabernacle.
[quote] Proportionally, there should only be a Mormon or two in he Senate
Both senators from California are white Jewish females. Not exactly representative of our population, either.
OP, Mormons in NV are a strong voting bloc in state-wide elections. Sen Harry Reid was born Jewish but converted to his LDS wife's faith.
Successful NV politicians reflect the states' distrust of governmental interference and incompetence, with true Libertarian leanings. Still Repubs that are too closely aligned with the Tea Party have lost state-wide elections, in favor of those seen as holding more practical and moderate positions.
In reality the #1 factor is what brings in the most present and future income to the casinos and to the entire State of NV.
R17, Statistically in America there are a very high proportion of White Jewish male and female lawyers, business owners and managers, writers, and other elite professions requiring college degrees as well. I predict that the Asians and Indians (from India) will soon match these rates.
It's a love-the-sinner, hate-the-sin thing; they actually would prefer gay Mormons who will not marry to stay in the church and remain celibate (and miserable!) They couldn't tithe without jobs, could they?
It's also an opportunity for them to get some positive PR with relatively low risk; there's a good chance they're also working on the backside to kill EMDA in the House, IMO.
Mormon posters, how is Harry Reid viewed by members of the Church?
R21, Not LDS but was told a convert does not rank as high as a 5th generation Mormon. Sen Reid's scandal free and low-key personal life is fab PR for the Church.
Fred Karger rightly points out that ENDA wouldn't have passed the Senate without Mormon support, and now thinks the 10 or so Mormons in the House should persuade Boehner to bring it for a vote, which he never will.
That said, I really can't see why the Mormons pushed this. It certainly won't get them any points with the evangelicals, and it is a sore spot for them that the christofacists don't think Mormons are even xtian. It also goes against the grain of everything they have been saying for the last 40 years.
I don't mean to beat a dead horse, but Mormons just wouldn't do this without a reason, and for the life of me, I can't imagine what they're after. I don't have any particular insight to the whole thing despite my background, but I am very wary of the Mormons and their motives.
It also gives them something (or at least they think it does) to take back to the body of members, OP. They are losing members, especially younger ones, right and left. They've even started a special missionary program to contact inactive members and try to bring them back in. They've gone so far as to attempt to address the problem in general conference meetings, something they'd NEVER do otherwise.
It's not going to help, though; even if it did mean something, the other doctrinal issues are still a huge problem. The Internet is killing Mormonism, and the next guy in line to be prophet will speed up the decline. Google "Boyd K. Packer sex" if you're curious about that.
I am with you, OP. Prop 8 taught me about the mormans. They are the original evil empire with a whole lotta money.
However, they are run by a buncha old guys that are out of touch. They will lose just like they lost the Prop 8 fight and they lost the 2012 presidential election.
Harry Reid claims his Mormon bona fides but he is your typical politician. He adopted the religion for political purposes when he was a young man. His mentor, Mike O'Callaghan, was a liberal Democrat. He was Catholic. I'm guessing Mike told Harry to take up Mormonism because it would help his career. It did. Even his Jewish wife converted.
Harry is on the good side on gay issues. He's a politician but he's on our side. Now, women's issues are a completely different story. I can't explain the other Mo's.
Excommunicated LDS here also
The LDS Church's turnaround on gay rights is just as much a mystery as Mitt Romney's willingness to quietly nudge the church elders to bend their attitudes towards gays back in 2009. At the end of 2009 (this was a full 2 years before Romney declared his candidacy for President) he quietly wrote this letter to the church leaders urging them to support gay rights. When the news of that letter broke (note: there was very little coverage of it other then in the gay press) I knew that he (Romney) had political aspirations and planned on running for President in 2012. The church's response to Romney's letter came in the form of backing LGBT- Anti-discrimination laws for Salt Lake City which were approved and talked about being expanded to cover the entire state of Utah. Why Romney never took credit for the church's softening stance in the 2012 election when it could have benefited him with moderate voters is a mystery. Never once was his letter ever mentioned during the campaign. I can only guess he figured it might alienate the bigoted base of Republican voters that he was counting on for support. It is interesting though that a single individual's influence could have such an effect to change policy for an entire religious organization.
Personally I always felt Romney to be somewhat of a bigot from his days as Gov of Mass, and his toleration of gays, was more of an act out of necessity coming from his time as a politician in liberal Mass. Although as Mass gov he showed his true colors trying to eliminate gay/straight alliance outreach programs in Mass high schools and received massive blow back for his attempt to de-fund them that the Mass legislature forced him to reverse his policy and restore the programs. Why he was willing to write that letter to the church a couple of years after leaving Mass when his actions as Gov of Mass suggested he believed in the opposite stance is another mystery. The only answer I can come up with is his position 'evolved' just as the church's public position towards gays has softened.
Another way of looking at, is the church was willing to hold it nose on gays in an effort to prop up their man Romney and help his chances at the national level even though their moderating views never really came into play in the campaign. Had Romney defeated Obama in 2012, the LDS church would have most certainly been first in line with their hands out reaping the benefits from a Romney presidency. Since that never happened, we will never know if the church or Romney would have back-peddled attempting to reverse any gay rights legislation (like DADT) had they achieved power.