As
members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, we are told we are
to be “a peculiar people” (1 Peter 2:9),
and judging by some of our beliefs and parts of our culture, that statement
might be more true then we’d like to admit… Just think green Jello and carrots
and you’ll see what I mean. But if you want to look at a REALLY peculiar people…look
at Democratic Mormons, now that is peculiar! After all, don’t all members of
the church believe the same things? And if they all believe the same things,
wouldn’t that mean they would all vote the same way? Could you even venture to
say that “Mormonism” is a political identity? In all reality, Democratic
Mormons are just as Mormon as Republican Mormons. In fact, Democratic Mormons
are not that peculiar after all. According to a Pew survey of Religion, 17% of
Mormons either identified themselves as Democrat, or democratically leaning
(Pew). So this then leads us back to our question of “Is Mormonism a Political
Identity”. Personally, I do not believe it is for a few reasons.
The
biggest reason I do not believe that Mormonism is a political identity, is
because the church itself has said it’s not! According to the official
statement of the church, the church does not:
Endorse, promote or oppose political parties,
candidates or platforms, allow its church buildings, membership lists or other
resources to be used for partisan political purposes, attempt to direct its
members as to which candidate or party they should give their votes to (This
policy applies whether or not a candidate for office is a member of The Church
of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) [or] attempt to direct or dictate to a
government leader. (LDS Newsroom)
There you have it folks straight from the church itself, the
church does take part in forming the political identity of its members. I
understand that for some of you, the church saying it’s not a political
identity means little or nothing as to the fact of whether it really does or
not. After all, how could a religion where 83% of its members identify with the
same religion NOT be a political identity?
As true
is it is, that 83% is a very large percentage of people in the same group, it
does nothing to prove that that is the identity of the group. For example,
according to the 2010 census, 91.9% of Utah’s population is Caucasian. If we
base identity on percentage as we have with Mormon Democrats, then Utah’s
racial identity is white. I think you will find plenty of people of Hispanic
and African American decent in Utah who would be very quick to disagree with
that. In reality, being a Mormon does not make you any more Republican than
living in Utah makes you Caucasian.
We
cannot prove causation wherever there is correlation. Religions are not focused
on shaping our political identities, but rather, they are concerned about
shaping our moral identities. These are two very different aspects of our
lives. While there may be some spill over between the two, I simply do not
believe that a religion a reason by itself that would cause a majority of
people to vote, or not vote, for a candidate, which is a major factor of
political identity that we discussed in class. Just because I’m a Mormon, does
not mean I cannot in good conscience vote for President Obama in November.
Works
Cited
1 Peter. The
King James Bible: A Short History from Tyndale to Today. Cambridge:
Cambridge UP, 2010. Print.
"Mormons in America -
Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life." Mormons in America - Pew
Forum on Religion & Public Life. Pew Forum, n.d. Web. 12 Oct. 2012.
<http://www.pewforum.org/Christian/Mormon/mormons-in-america-politics-society-and-morality.aspx>.
"Political
Neutrality." Www.mormonnewsroom.org. The Church of Jesus
Christ of Latter-Day Saints, n.d. Web. 12 Oct. 2012.
<http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/official-statement/political-neutrality>.
"Utah QuickFacts from
the US Census Bureau." Utah QuickFacts from the US Census Bureau.
United States Government, n.d. Web. 12 Oct. 2012.
<http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/49000.html>.
I really appreciated your blog. I wrote about how there was an LDS political identity, and it was interesting to read your perspective. I also liked your style of writing. You write a "blog essay" very well.
ReplyDeleteThank you very much :)
DeleteI as well argued that there is an LDS identity and its interesting to see another point of view. I think your argument is very sound in that it explains why there isn't an identity straight across the board.
ReplyDeleteThank you :)
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteYour blog was great. I also took this stance and referenced the Mormon Newsroom. Your writing was entertaining and had perfect sources to back it up. I'm glad you said that religion is not about making a political identity, but rather moral identities.
ReplyDeletethank you :)
DeleteI really liked the amount of outside support you utilized in your argument and blog. However if you would not say that 83% is enough to qualify a political identity how much would you propose? Also do you feel that religion is not a big enough of a factor in the voting process to exert a significant influence, and thereby qualify it as a form of political identity? Just curious as to further perspectives.
ReplyDeleteAs I kind of tried to say, in the article, I don't believe that you can base an identity based on a percentage until that percentage is 100%. 100% of Mormons say they are Mormon... That's an identity. 100% of Utahans are not white though so a Caucasian Identity for Utah simply would not work. Does that make sense? haha. As far as religion and voting, I believe that although voting may play a part in the voting process, I do not believe that it plays enough to be considered an identity. Although the morals created by religion and social issues often cross, overlap and connect, social issues are only a small factor. There are many other issues that connect to our vote that in my opinion are independent from morals or religion. For example, foreign policy, tax reform, and quite frankly pattern baldness (we have not had a bald president since the debates became televised and TV's became a part of the average home).
DeleteVery interesting prospective on the issue. I thought the style of the blog was very nice, mine always seems to be more like a paper for school. However I would say that 83% is a fairly large percentage and enough to make a political identity. And based on my experience as a missionary and a member there is no chance that 100% of Mormons would say they are a Mormon there are many less actives that are Mormons but would not claim it.
DeleteAlthough I believe that argument has merit, if they do not claim it, can they really be considered part of the group?
DeleteI feel as if this post had more appeal to emotion than to data. I would have appreciated more concrete sources talking about Democratic Mormons and their views. That said, it was an engaging post.
ReplyDeleteThank you for that constructive feedback :)although I felt that the platform of the party to which Democratic Mormons belong if fairly well known. That being said, I do understand that there are some deviations from standard party platform by LDS Democrats which I should have perhaps acknowledged.
DeleteThe comments have been really positive thus far and with good reason (with the singular exception of Payden), so being the contrarion I am, I'm going to go in for the critique :D Here it goes, and I hope it helps rather than offends. I wouldn't do this, but you seem to be a good sport about it, so I thought I'd give it a shot.
ReplyDeleteI follow, with some difficulty, your thought process. There are three major problems with it. One, you can be excluded from the group, even the church, for your political choices. It very rarely happens, but the fact that it can is very important. Perhaps you were not aware, but the church came out and told members in California how to vote on Proposition 8. That's where it got the nickname the “Mormon Proposition,” which spawned a movie of the same title (plus an “8:” in front). Not only that, but the church leaders called for members to hoist signs, knock on doors, work at phone banks, etc.; in short, do everything that you can do POLITICALLY to support the issue. Countless arguments in Sacrament Meetings, countless accusations and counter-accusations, erupted as a direct result of this. People who were uncertain as to their personal feelings on Gay Marriage were sometimes hesitant to participate while others openly questioned church leadership and their membership in the church. On the other side, for many it was what the prophet says is true, therefore you who disagree are wrong, do not follow the prophet/God, and should be kicked out of the church. The rhetoric, and feeling, was that strong. So the majority of the time I think you're right - but the moment the church says it CAN, and HAS, moved into the political arena, it creates a political identity, even if it's a mostly dormant one. Plus, Joseph Smith ran for President – that's very different from just a member running. How comfortable would you be voting against President Monson if he ran – is it your religion making you feel that, or you feelings on the issues?
Problem two. You extrapolate what might (usually) be true of Mormons onto religions as a whole, and that is a huge mistake. Believe it or not, there are still honest-to-goodness theocracies out there, where your position in politics, and even whether or not you're allowed to participate, depend solely on your religious identity - thus politicizing it. How high in the Vatican city council do you think you'd get as a Mormon? There are political parties out there with names like "The Muslim Brotherhood" that made headlines running against secularists (and framing the debate that way). When religion becomes that politicized in one direction, what is the automatic reaction from the minority groups, such as the Coptics? Or even more directly, how big of a political difference has being Shi'a or Sunni been in the Middle East? For an example, look at this article about a tiff between Iran and Saudi-Arabia over the Hajj (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8339936.stm). And religious terrorism - yes, terrorism can count as a political action when it's attacking not another religion or people but rather a country - what about that? You can bet that, once you're in, you perform political acts of terrorism because of your affiliation with a religious group.
ReplyDeleteYes, I'm using extreme examples, but I'm trying to get the point across.
Problem number three. You make a (very sadly) false assumption that people that partake in political actions know what they're doing. The book does this too, actually. Have you seen the SNL skit called “The Undecided Voter”? It's about those vaunted undecided voters, and in mock-election debate style they ask questions, such as – There's an election? We have political parties? Etc etc. You get the idea. I promise you, right now, there is some hopelessly uninformed Mormon that will turn up in the polls come election day and say, well, he's a member of the church and that other guy's not, so I'll go with him. Unconvinced? How about a bunch of teenagers going to a political rally or event because the rest of their church group is going and they don't want to feel left out? Are they going because they believe in the principles at stake, or because they are members of a group (that happens to be religious) that is doing it? Once you take into account that people really are like sheep a lot of the time, pretty much any identity can become politicized. From retirees voting one way because the rest of their bingo club is voting that way and they want to feel like part of the group to employees voting the way their boss wants them too so they don't get fired/do get the promotion, any group can, and often does, become politicized.
And all that doesn't even mentioned the opposite effect, where your association the church keeps you from taking political actions. Example – You're a member of the church under a dictator and you want to rebel, but the article of faith says to honor and sustain the law. If you stick with the church, your association with it has changed your political actions – in some cases what you don't do or vote for is just sa important as what you do do or vote for.
In short, in the United States, most of the time, you're absolutely right, dead on. But you need to remember that the world is a lot bigger place, with a lot of different people doing a lot of different things, and even we have a bigger history than we realize. Never say never :P