In a recent post on her website, Mormon author and blogger Jana Reiss references research conducted by Sociologists Robert Putnam and David Campbell, who reveal data in their book, American Graceregarding which religions are the most disliked in American society. To almost nobody's surprise, Islam tops the list, followed (surprisingly) by Buddhism, while Mormonism took home the bronze medal.
To be honest, I believe that what this research reveals (for the most part) is the fact that Americans are, by and large, astoundingly ignorant when it comes to the topic of religion. Our hatred for Islam, for example, is chiefly driven by misguided prejudice and extreme paranoia. And Buddhism!?! I fail to see how anyone could esteem that religious group as one of the more "undesirable" sects to have around.
Again, I believe that this survey illustrates the fact that Americans are completely illiterate when it comes to religion. In a recent article in the New York Times, Nicholas Kristof notes recent data that I believe supports my general thesis. He writes:
Secular Americans are largely ignorant about religion, but, in surveys, religious Americans turn out to be scarcely more knowledgeable.
“Americans are both deeply religious and profoundly ignorant about religion,” Stephen Prothero noted in his book, “Religious Literacy.” “Atheists may be as rare in America as Jesus-loving politicians are in Europe, but here faith is almost entirely devoid of content. One of the most religious countries on earth is also a nation of religious illiterates.”
Nearly two-thirds of Americans say they believe that the Bible holds the answer to all or most of life’s basic questions. Yet only one-third know that Jesus delivered the Sermon on the Mount, and 10 percent think that Joan of Arc was Noah’s wife. Many Americans know even less about other faiths, from Islam to Hinduism. Several days after 9/11, a vigilante shot and killed an Indian-American Sikh because of the assumption that a turban must mean a Muslim: Ignorance and murderous bigotry joined in one.
All this goes to the larger question of the relevance of the humanities. Literature, philosophy and the arts have come to be seen as effete and irrelevant, but if we want to understand the world around us and think deeply about it, it helps to have exposure to Shakespeare and Kant, Mozart and Confucius — and, yes, Jesus, Moses and the Prophet Muhammad.
As for the extreme disdain that many Americans have towards my own faith (Mormonism), I believe this data reveals at least part of the answer but not all.
Throughout most of its history, Mormonism has been a recipient of bigotry and persecution on the part of the American populace. Everything from the Haun's Mill Massacre, the murder of Joseph Smith and the eventual expulsion to Western territories in its early years, to more recent events like the Reed Smoot hearings and even questions about Mitt Romney's possible church allegiances during his presidential bids, Mormonism has had the proverbial target on its back for some time now. And though these (and many other) events demonstrate just how deep anti-Mormon sentiment can go, I believe there is another mitigating factor that explains why Mormons are one of the most disliked religions in America.
In short, it's OUR fault...and by our fault I mean us Mormons.
As mentioned above, blogger Jana Reiss references a study by Sociologists Robert Putnam and David Campbell, which reveals that Mormons are the third most disliked religion in America. In addition to this finding, the study also revealed what members of each faith thought about their own respective religions. To their surprise, Mormons came out on top:
Mormons ranked highest in “in-group attachment,” a finding the researchers felt was surprising, especially since three of the other groups that made the top five–Jews, Catholics, and Black Protestants–have their bonds cemented by a shared ethnicity. About 85% of Mormons say they feel a great warmth toward their own tribe.
In short, Mormons really, really think highly of themselves.
So what do we make of a study that finds Mormons as one of the most hated religions in America, while at the same time emerging as the religion that loves itself the most? I believe Jana Reiss (a devout Mormon herself) provides the best answer possible:
It would help if we stopped regarding ourselves as the finest people on the planet. We ought to take a long, hard look at the fact that we voted our own group tops in this research. It’s one thing to be proud of our religious group and its teachings, but it’s another thing entirely to communicate, as many Mormons seem to, that we feel we have a monopoly on religious truth and strong families. A dose of humility is in order here.
I couldn't agree more. I for one have grown tired of the old Mormon rhetoric which suggests that we alone are the guardians of all that is right and good in the world. We Mormons pride ourselves on our own delusions of grandeur. We prove more than willing to dismiss or belittle the beliefs of others by clothing ourselves in the blanket of pious superiority. Only our families are eternal, only our baptism counts, and only our priesthood heals.
Don't get me wrong here, I love my faith and I am proud of it. In my estimation, Mormonism is an awesome life choice and it has brought me a tremendous amount of happiness. With that being said, I must also admit that I have seen how we as a faith tend to ignore reality on too many occasions. We prefer the "hear no evil, see no evil" mantra as a way to reassure ourselves that "all is well in Zion." After all, the "church is perfect" isn't it!?!
Sorry, but it isn't that simple. We as members of the Mormon faith need to quit seeing ourselves as a people who are separate and apart from the evils of the world, or as having some sort of preferred status in the eyes of God. We would do well to remember the words of Christ, who reminded the Jews that God could raise up seed unto Abraham from mere stones (Matt. 3: 9). Instead of standing tall on our personal or communal "Rameumptoms" and thanking God for giving us "more truth," "more love," or "more righteousness" like the Zoramites of old (Book of Mormon reference for those not of my faith), perhaps we should first follow the advise of Will Rogers, who reminds us to "never miss a great opportunity to shut up."
***On a side note, have any of my fellow Mormons ever wondered why the Zoramite/Rameumtom story is in the Book of Mormon to begin with? Maybe it was meant for us?***
In addition, there is another reason that we as a faith need to be willing to not think so highly of ourselves and return to earth. Too often, members of the LDS faith suffer from the tremendous burden of having to "be perfect." We succumb to the false portrayals of what a "good Mormon" is supposed to look like, act like, feel like, etc. As a result, we become far too critical of ourselves and of others. We use the excuse of "righteous rebuking" to justify gossip and other forms of trash talk. In so doing, we make life VERY hard on anyone who doesn't fit the Mormon mold. It's no wonder why Utah leads the nation in the use of anti-depressants.
And shame on us! It's time that we as a faith recognize the FACT that not everyone is content in Zion. Popcorn doesn't pop on everyone's apricot tree, some families are not so glad when daddy comes home, there are some houses where love is not spoken there and some people find it too hard to turn their "frowny face" into a smile. And newsflash: IT'S NOT ALWAYS THEIR FAULT!!! Try as they might, they cannot pray away, fast away or obey away all the pain.
There has been many a member who has done a great deal of harm with the best of intentions. We may proudly sing of families being together forever but ignore the fact that some in our respective wards struggle with part member families or "wayward" children. We may give thanks to God during our testimony meetings for our awesome spouses or for heavenly healings granted to sick loved ones, while at the same time ignoring the single mother/father in the audience or the widow whose husband didn't receive divine intervention. Like it or not, maybe there are some instances when it is better for us to guard our tongues than to sing God's praises.
I don't mean to be too critical here. Mormonism is an AWESOME faith! I love it. In my estimation, we do more for one another than virtually any other faith. We care for one another, we pray for one another, we fast for one another, we serve one another, we bond with one another. But do we only do these things for those who "fit the mold?" Unfortunately, I think that sometimes the answer to this question is: yes. Mormonism is awesome when you are one of the 99 sheep, but it's not so awesome when you're the lone black sheep. It is my hope that we as a faith can be less critical of one another, more accepting of those not of our faith (along with their beliefs) and more willing to show Christ-like humility as opposed to ecclesiastical arrogance. When we learn this lesson, I think you will see us give up that unwanted bronze medal for most disliked faith in America.
Some awards just aren't worth having on your wall.
This week, news that Mormon President Thomas S. Monson has been accused by an English court of fraud went public. News outlets of all kinds have been reporting the story since it broke a couple of days ago, each providing its own spin on how these charges will (or won't) play out, along with the impact they will have on the Mormon church.
The criminal complaint that levies these charges against President Monson (and Mormonism in general) are the workings of one Tom Phillips, a former member of the Mormon faith who had served the church in a number of positions, including Stake President and Area Executive Secretary. Long story short, Mr. Phillips withdrew from the church, due to what he calls "the lack of historical evidence, of any kind" to support the church's claims.
Since his departure from the Church, Mr. Phillips has made no qualms about his disdain for Mormonism. As the managing editor of the Mormonthink website, Mr. Phillips has attempted to bring to light many of the issues that have troubled him (and many other Mormons) and eventually led to his departure from the faith. Mr. Phillips is also a regular commentator on the ExMormon website, where he posts under the name "anointedone." The clever moniker is the result of his having gone public about receiving the "Second Anointing" within the walls of the London Temple some years ago (you can listen to his very detailed interview with John Dehlin about this experience by clicking here).
The complaint that Mr. Phillips has levied essentially states that since serving as church president, Thomas S. Monson has acted "dishonestly" and has intended to "make gain for himself" by defrauding one Christopher Denis Ralph, who was "misled" and "induced" to pay tithing to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Below is a copy of the actual court document:
The allegations of fraud center on the claims that President Monson knowingly teaches that which he believes to be false (i.e. that the Book of Abraham, Book of Mormon, etc. are fraudulent documents).
Of course, how one chooses to view these accusations depends greatly on how one chooses to view Mormonism. For the critic, the accusations probably make sense. After all, the Book of Abraham, which has been hailed by Egyptologists as an outright fraud since the 19th century, is a difficult hurdle to jump for even the most devout Mormons. For faithful Mormons, however, these allegations only serve as further evidence that adversity will always come knocking at the doors of the righteous.
Whatever your personal views may be, the fact of the matter is that this case will be judged based on the rules of law. Does Tom Phillips have a case? Has Thomas S. Monson actually committed fraud against Mr. Ralph, thereby enriching himself and the church?
In my opinion, the answer to these questions is a resounding HELL NO!!!
First off the accusations of fraud brought by Mr. Phillips are dependent upon the British Fraud Act of 2006, which "prohibits false representations made to secure a profit or to cause someone to lose money." Based on this law, Mr. Phillips must convince the British court of two things:
1.) President Monson KNOWINGLY made false representations of Mormon beliefs (i.e. he stated that the Book of Abraham, Book of Mormon, etc. are "true" while knowing they were not).
2.) President Monson made these representations in order to profit from others.
The first point is virtually impossible to prove. To ascertain whether or not somebody believes in his/her religious convictions or is simply giving them lip service is completely speculative and hardly a matter for any legitimate court to determine. And even if President Monson were to say that he didn't believe in the tenants of his faith, it is still virtually impossible to prove fraud. Simply put, Mr. Phillips' accusations are more bark than bite. In the words of another English citizen, they are "Much Ado About Nothing."
And I am far from being along in that sentiment. Neil Addison, a former crown prosecutor and author on British religious freedom, responded to this criminal complaint against President Monson by saying:
I'm sitting here with an open mouth. I think the British courts will recoil in horror. This is just using the law to make a show, an anti-Mormon point. And I'm frankly shocked that a magistrate has issued it.
Harvey Kass, a British solicitor, is also stunned by the summons, calling it "bizzare," and adding: "I can't imagine how it got through the court process. It would be set aside within 10 seconds in my opinion." I couldn't agree more. Regardless of how one feels about Mormonism, the right to religious freedom is a fundamental principle that should not be toyed with.
In reality, Tom Phillips' quest to "expose" the "myth" behind Mormonism will probably do more to bolster the faith of Mormons than anything else. It's hard to see how this accusation could be motivated by anything other than resentment for the faith he has left behind...but can't seem to leave well enough alone. In my opinion, this accusation will be dead on arrival.
One of the common cognitive practices of Homo Sapiens is to assign labels and symbols to different types of events, people, places etc. that we encounter throughout our day-to-day existence. It is through labels and symbols that we are able to better understand and process the world around us. Labels afford us the ability to compartmentalize large amounts of data into neat little bundles, thereby making better sense of the experiences we have. It is a simple and efficient process that has served our specie quite well.
But there is a dramatic drawback to labels and symbols. While "labeling" does provide us with a quick and proficient way of understanding things on the fly, it also makes us far too simple-minded in our overall perspective of life. Labeling makes us jump to premature conclusions by enforcing simplistic reasoning. By its very nature, labeling abhors critical thinking and complex problem-solving skills, both of which require more time and effort to employ effectively.
This isn't to say that labeling doesn't have it's place. For thousands of years, Homo Sapiens have needed to quickly classify the different experiences and stimuli of life as threats, dangers, friend, foe, etc. It is an important skill that we have mastered well. But in the 21st century world, labeling is more nuanced than it was for our ancestors. For us, labeling causes us to make hasty and impulsive judgments of one another. To illustrate my point, see what conclusions your mind will jump to when you hear these labels:
- "He/she is a Muslim."
- "He/She is a member of the NRA."
- "He/She is an ardent supporter of the ACLU."
- "He/She is a recovering alcoholic."
- "He/She is a registered Democrat."
All of these labels (and the countless others that we employ) have the capacity to form our base opinions and understanding of others, even when we have no additional information on the subject. For example, I bet your mind didn't picture these people in relation to the labels above:
- The NBA's all-time leader in scoring is a Muslim named Kareem Abdul-Jabbar.
- Michael Moore and Whoopi Goldberg are members of the NRA.
- Helen Keller helped to found the ACLU in 1920.
- Buzz Aldrin, the second man to walk on the moon, is a recovering alcoholic.
- Country stars Faith Hill and Tim McGraw are registered Democrats.
As you can see, labels are a confusing cognitive tool that we humans need to be careful with. In our modern world, labels rarely if ever tell the entire story.
With this in mind, I want to take the concept of "labeling" and apply it to my faith. As an unorthodox Mormon (yes, that self-appointed label doesn't capture my entire story either), I have seen how different members of my religion, each with different opinions and outlooks on life, have been arbitrarily assigned different labels to better explain their views. For example, Mormons who rarely attend and violate certain codes of conduct (i.e. drink coffee, alcohol, etc.) are often called "Jack Mormons," while a Mormon who devoutly walks the line, adheres to all commandments and rarely misses a Sunday is called a "True Blue Mormon." Mormons who may questions basic points of doctrine and history are sometimes referred to as "New Age Mormons," while those who try to "make it work" but cannot embrace every tenant of Mormonism are called "Cafeteria Mormons."
Admittedly, each of these labels, and my corresponding explanations, are far too simplistic to tell the entire story, but THAT'S MY ENTIRE POINT!!! Electing to arbitrarily assign labels to people based on their behavior, beliefs/lack of belief, etc. is about as effective and intelligent as trying to clean a loaded gun.
Humans are complex creatures, even if Lynyrd Skynyrd insists on calling us "Simple Men." A person who may appear to be a "Jack Mormon" may, in reality, have a far greater understanding of Mormon theology and history than any "True Blue Mormon" on the planet (I would actually argue that this is more true than people want to admit). A "Cafeteria Mormon," who struggles with some aspects of the faith, may have a greater testimony and devotion to the religion than any "Molly Mormon." In short, choosing to label flies in the face of what Jesus himself ardently preached at the Sermon on the Mount:
Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye (Matt. 7: 1-5).
But this advise also goes for the struggling and/or departed Mormon who has elected to either distance and/or remove himself/herself from the faith. Your newly "enlightened" path does not grant you the right to ridicule those who stay. You may have problems with the doctrine, history and culture of the Mormon church, but those aren't golden tickets of retribution.
The danger of labeling is not self-evident. It is hidden within layers of arrogance and pride. As President Dieter F. Uchtdorf, 2nd Counselor of the Mormon faith, states:
This sin has many faces. It leads some to revel in their own perceived self-worth, accomplishments, talents, wealth, or position. They count these blessings as evidence of being “chosen,” “superior,” or “more righteous” than others. This is the sin of “Thank God I am more special than you.” At its core is the desire to be admired or envied. It is the sin of self-glorification.
For others, pride turns to envy: they look bitterly at those who have better positions, more talents, or greater possessions than they do. They seek to hurt, diminish, and tear down others in a misguided and unworthy attempt at self-elevation. When those they envy stumble or suffer, they secretly cheer.
[...]
Brethren, unfortunately we see today too often the same kind of attitude and behavior spill over into the public discourse of politics, ethnicity, and religion.
The old adage, "Don't judge a book by its cover" certainly comes to mind when we consider the appropriate way to wield the sword of labeling. And though we will never completely eradicate labeling from our cognitive tray of resources (and I don't think we should to begin with), hopefully humanity will evolve to the point where we can master the practice of labeling effectively...
How much better is it to get wisdom than gold! and to get understanding rather to be chosen than silver! The highway of the upright is to depart from evil: he that keepeth his way preserveth his soul. Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before the fall. Better it is to be of a humble spirit with the lowly, than to divide the spoil with the proud." -Proverbs 16: 16-19
Last week, over 28 million people watched Oprah Winfrey's interview with cycling great Lance Armstrong, who, after over a decade of passionate and pathological denial finally admitted to using performance enhancing drugs throughout the course of his career. And while there is nothing remarkable about an athlete admitting to using PED's in today's society (it has become almost commonplace these days), Lance Armstrong's story is a unique case. Not only did he insist upon his innocence with greater zeal and determination than any other athlete, but he also regularly resorted to great and often hostile means to protect his legacy.
Let me say right from the beginning: I am not a cycling expert. I know little to nothing about the sport and would probably have to strain my brain to come up with even half of a dozen professional riders. Like most Americans, I know of Lance Armstrong almost exclusively due to the reputation he has gained as a seven-time Tour de France winner and as the founder of his cancer charity, Livestrong. And like most people who watched the interview, I too was struck by Armstrong's admission. But it wasn't his admission to using PED's that stood out for me. Instead, it was the detailed and calculated measures that Armstrong resorted to, over the course of a decade, that not only destroyed the lives and reputations of those who dared to challenge him, but also created an atmosphere of absolute defiance to anyone who stood in his way. Essentially, Armstrong considered himself bulletproof. No attack, no matter how personal, no drug test, no matter how thorough, could penetrate the Teflon exterior of cycling's golden boy.
But all of this came to a violent and ugly end last week as Armstrong, under the weight of mounting evidence and departing sponsors, was forced to admit that he had been living a lie. And in the process, America's white knight hero was brought back down to earth.
But the story of Lance Armstrong isn't as cut and dry as we may think. After all, Lance isn't the normal star athlete by any stretch of the imagination. Unlike Alex Rodriguez, Mark McGwire, Marion Jones, or the countless number of professional athletes who have admitted to using PED's, Armstrong's legacy transcends the world of sports. As a cancer survivor and founder of Livestrong, Armstrong has become a walking, talking rally cry for cancer victims all over the world. His inspirational story is undeniable, his impact to those who face this horrible disease immeasurable. His Livestrong charity has raised over half a billion dollars for cancer research while his personal triumph over cancer has inspired countless millions in a way that only a cancer victim can fully understand.
Let me be clear here, it would be arrogant presumption of the highest order for me to assume that I know what a diagnosis of cancer feels like. I have no clue and I hope I never do. The unimaginable shock and horror of such a diagnosis is something that only a cancer patient truly understands. As a result, none of us (or at least very few of us) have any right to pass judgement on Lance or any other cancer patient for how they choose to face this disease. It is for this reason that Lance Armstrong has become a paradox of epic proportions. One the one hand, you have a lying, cheating athlete who used banned substances to achieve excellence and then went to wild extremes to cover it up, often severely hurting those around him. On the other hand, you have a philanthropist of the highest order. A man who has given heart, mind and soul to defeating one of the most horrific diseases in human history. In a very real sense, Lance Armstrong is a 21st century version of Doctor Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. He is fire and ice personified.
But such is often the case with great and inspiring figures. After all, it is easy to love the demigod who rarely if ever makes a mistake. Sure, we would all love to believe that our heroes are the embodiment of perfection but such is rarely if ever the case. Some of the most iconic individuals are also often the most complex and troubled as well. For example, I have always been perplexed by how Thomas Jefferson (my favorite Founding Father) could write, "We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal" while at the same time keeping over 300 human souls in bondage (not to mention having sexual relations and children with one of them). Or how about the case of the great King David, who, as the hero of all Israel, chose to fall to temptation by sleeping with Bathsheba and then cover it up by sending her husband to die on the front lines of battle. And while I'm not trying to equate Lance Armstrong with Thomas Jefferson or King David I do think the illustration is sound. Sometimes great figures have great challenges and the higher they rise the harder they fall.
We live in a cynical society. For whatever reason, Americans love to watch the rise and eventual fall of those in the public eye, and Lance Armstrong's story provides us with ample opportunity to rubber-neck this car crash to our heart's content. With that being said, I believe that Lance deserves our eventual forgiveness. Yes, the man lied and created an ugly situation for himself, leaving a trail of wreckage in his path, but such is life. As the great poet Alexander Pope aptly stated, "To err is human to forgive, divine." There is no doubt that Lance Armstrong has some ugly and difficult days ahead of him, but as he himself stated, "This is not my darkest hour."
And even though I never watched one of his races, nor did I care much for his sport, I am proud to declare today that I am now a Lance Armstrong fan! Yes, I know he lied, cheated and hurt anyone who stood in his way, but I believe that the final chapter to the Lance Armstrong story is yet to be written. I'm a fan of Lance because he is a walking, talking paradox, and as such is yet another example of the complexity of human existence. We are all capable of the most beautiful dreams and the most terrible nightmares. Every one of us walks the tight rope between virtue and vice. But the point is that we never cave to our mistakes. As Armstrong himself stated:
Pain is temporary. It may last an hour, a day or a year, but eventually subside and something else will take its place. If I quit, however, it lasts forever.
Amen, Lance. A professional theologian couldn't have said it better! And no doubt Lance will face his pain and his demons, as we all will. Sure, it is likely that Lance Armstrong will never again recover his reputation but at this point it really isn't about reputation. As Oprah Winfrey said at the conclusion of her interview with Armstrong, "I hope that the moral to your story will be: 'the truth will set you free.'" Hopefully such will be the case with us all.
In the ninth chapter of the Gospel of Mark we learn of a father whose son was afflicted with a "dumb spirit" that caused the child to violently convulse, foam at the mouth and seek death via fire or drowning (some sort of mental illness?). The father, who had already desperately asked Christ's apostles for help, but were unsuccessful in their attempts to assist the young lad, turned to Jesus in his darkest moment of need. After explaining the situation to the Lord, and pleading for his help, Jesus replied to the father that "If thou canst believe, all things are possible." The father, perhaps hoping to hide his frustration and apparent lack of faith, quickly replied "Lord, I believe." But after pausing, or perhaps perceiving that Jesus could sense his lack of faith, the father finally came clean and implored the Lord to "help thou my unbelief." Instead of condemning the young father for his deficiency of faith, or haranguing him on the importance of steadfast devotion, Christ took the father's son into his arms and rebuked the spirit from him, making the child (and almost as certain his father) whole for the very first time.
This "routine" act of kindness on the part of Jesus is common throughout the New Testament. Whether it be those afflicted with leprosy, blindness or "evil" spirits, thousands of faithful believers sought the Christ if for nothing more than to touch the hem of his garment, sincerely believing that such an act would cure them of their frailties. And more times than not, the faith of the afflicted made them whole. When I read these stories I grow to admire the unshakable faith of those who never wavered in their quest for Christ. They are to be applauded for their remarkable allegiance to the King of Kings in the face of tremendous personal difficulty.
And while I recognize the worth of these miraculous accounts, I personally find the story of the frantic, faithless father in Mark 9 to be of particular value. Not because I too have a son suffering from an incurable infirmity, nor have I made personal appeals for aid to God's chosen apostles. I love the frantic father because I too, while cowering in the coldest corners of my own soul, have implored of the Lord not for personal healing or spiritual blessings, but rather, in the naked honesty of my own shortcomings, I have issued this simple petition:
"Help thou my unbelief."
For those who know me, this admission may come as a bit of a surprise. Throughout the majority of my life, I suppose that I appeared very much like the typical "True Blue" Mormon. I attended church, graduated from Seminary, served an honorable two-year mission, married in the temple, served in the church, yadda, yadda, yadda. By all accounts I was very much on the path of "persevering to the end." But as is often the case with life, perception distorts reality and the truth really is stranger than fiction. Reality is that I have, for roughly a decade now, struggled mightily with my faith. It has been one of the most difficult things I have ever had to deal with. To make matters worse, it seems as though the Internet and other media outlets these days are filled with stories of people who have left the church, while the tales of those who have chosen to stay can be hard to find. Perhaps this is due to the fact that many members who have struggled with faith are reluctant to admit so, since some within the church choose to look down upon those who admit to having a crisis of faith. Whatever the reason, I too have been reluctant to "own up" to my own personal crisis of faith, but have chosen to "come out" here and now, in the hopes that my story might be a source of peace or hope to friends, family, eventual descendants and even strangers who tread the sometimes turbulent waters of doubt. To borrow from Enos of the Book of Mormon, "I will tell you of the wrestle which I had before God."
With this being said, I must admit that my personal "wrestle" with the Lord has not ended with a profound heavenly manifestation, a voice from on high or any other from of absolute personal conviction. Instead, I have had to learn how to find solace in the ambiguous nature of faith itself and in the desolate gift (and yes, it is a gift) of honest doubt and uncertainty. What follows is my personal story of struggle and striving with the divine. Please note that you will not find a happy conclusion to my tale because this struggle is still ongoing with no apparent end on the horizon. But instead of looking for that conclusion, I have found that it isn't a glorious end in sight that we should seek for, but rather simply finding joy in the journey. I believe that this is what my story is ultimately about. I have elected to not discuss the particular historical/theological issues that caused my crisis of faith, simply because I don't want to create doubt in others or to come across as "bashing" the Mormon church. In reality, I believe that the specifics are irrelevant, since a crisis of faith can be the result of any number of factors. The compelling matter at hand is how one chooses to deal with the crisis when it comes. Here is how my particular crisis played out:
My Faith Crisis
My crisis of faith began almost immediately after returning home from my mission to northern Chile. Like many return missionaries I decided to begin college (where I chose to study history) and attended my local single's ward and Institute program. As fate would have it, one of the courses I was taking on early American history discussed Mormonism in a way that I had never before heard. I remember listening to my instructor talk about some of the particulars regarding the origins of Mormonism and wanting to call my professor out for his "ignorance." I would leave class feeling angry, confused and determined to prove my teacher wrong. But as I studied the details further, I quickly began to realize that my professor wasn't making stuff up. Of course he may have left out a lot of the "meat and potatoes" of Mormonism from his lecture (this was an introductory class on American history so he couldn't dwell on it too long) but the gist of his argument was sound. As you can imagine, this revelation hit me hard. I immediately wanted to find credible answers that didn't come from "cookie-cutter" Mormon sources, so that I could refute what my professor was saying. But the more I studied, the deeper the proverbial rabbit hole went. I quickly found myself surrounded by mounting evidence that seemed to oppose the very church I had defended during my two-year mission.
Perhaps it was mere coincidence, but the class I had immediately following this particular American history course was Institute. Needless to say, it was an interesting experience to juxtapose what I was hearing from school with what I was being taught in Institute. The two were not agreeing and something had to give. In an effort to come to a resolution on the matter, I began to "conveniently" show up at the Institute building at a time when I knew the instructor would be alone in his office. I would then start up a conversation on Mormon history and would make certain comments that drove at the heart of my growing concerns. The institute director, who I believe really was an inspired man, could tell that I was beginning to question things, but to my surprise he didn't offer me the typical Mormon solutions to these problems. Instead of telling me to pray or fast about things, he provided me with copies of No Man Knows My History, Mormon Enigma, and other books that are well known for their emphasis on the less-than-pleasant aspects of Mormon history. To make a very long story short, these experiences started me down a path which led to my discovering virtually all of the ugly facts of Mormon history.
Side Note: ***I think it is worth noting here that my crisis of faith had NOTHING to do with some sort of personal sin or having been offended by a member of the church. Too often we Mormons assume that anyone who leaves or questions the church does so for these and other trivial issues. And though I am certain that many do leave for those reasons, I also know that many do not. Every day scores of good, honest and virtuous people leave the church for the very issues I am talking about here. These are real, factual and undeniable truths that are often extremely painful when discovered by the sincere believer.***
Over the next decade or so I kept my doubts private and chose to continue down the path of a "righteous" Mormon believer. I held callings, attended the temple and did the other "dutiful" things that were required of me. But the doubts lingered, like an itch on your back that you just can't quite reach. Regardless of the doubt, I was able to effectively keep these issues on the back shelf of my mind, perhaps hoping that they would go away or that a magical answer would reveal itself as I continued down the straight and narrow path.
But the answers didn't come and the itch kept getting worse. Fast forward to 2011. I had recently completed my Master's Degree in history, writing a number of papers on Mormon history and always seeking to defend the church in each of them. But lurking in the private confines of my mind were those same issues that had plagued me for a decade. To make matters worse, I had nobody in which I felt I could confide. My dad, who was himself a big history buff, had died, as had the institute director that I had trusted in the past. I was hesitant to bring this stuff up with others because, as any devout Mormon will tell you, to publicly acknowledge one's questioning of the faith can lead to a number of problems. In addition, I had made the determination that I would NEVER be the cause of somebody else questioning their faith. The dark abyss of doubt and uncertainty can be lonely, ugly and incredibly depressing. I didn't want to introduce anyone to it.
For the first time I began to consider the possibility that I (and every other believing Mormon) had been duped into believing in a fraudulent faith concocted by the cunning of Joseph Smith's mind. This was a horrific thought to consider. After all, I had staked my entire personal tent of eternal salvation on the grounds of Mormonism. If this wasn't true, what was going to become of me? Was my family really eternal? Were my missionary efforts in vain? Were the ugly historical truths about Mormonism being covertly swept away in an effort to "perfect the saints?" "Was there even a God?" If so, I needed to know. I didn't want to waste any more of my time, energy and money supporting a work of fiction, and I needed more than a "warm fuzzy" to answer these legitimate concerns.
But as my mind continued to consider what I believed was a rational and objective approach to the history of Mormonism, my heart (or soul) was on a different journey. Despite all the ugly things I had learned, I could also recall the feelings of peace, love, community, joy, service, charity, sincerity and holiness that had been the result of my membership in the church. These feelings were every bit as real to me as the history I had been learning. They were the feelings that made me love going to church, want to serve a mission and attend the temple. I agreed with President Hinckley when he said that Mormonism makes "bad men good and good men better." But were these positive feelings simply the result of happy endorphins firing off in my brain? Did I love the church simply because I loved the feeling of belonging? Something had to give. The objectivity of my mind was telling me one thing, while the sincerity of my heart said something different. What was I to do? There was only one thing I could do. Like the frantic father before me, I too had but four simple words to utter to God:
"Help Thou My Unbelief."
And though I knew darn well that God wasn't going to rewrite history, nor was he going to give me my own personal Angel Moroni to sort it all out, I do feel as though this crisis of faith has taught me some key truths that I am forever grateful for. They are:
For all have not every gift given unto them; for there are many gifts, and to every man is given a gift by the Spirit of God. To some is given one, and to some is given another, that all may be profited thereby. To some it is given by the Holy Ghost to know that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that he was crucified for the sins of the world. To others it is given to believe on their words, that they also might have eternal life if they continue faithful.
It is a mistake of Mormon culture (and there are MANY mistakes in Mormon culture) to quantify doubt with sin or error. Doubt can be a powerful force for good in the world. It is both right and proper that we humans question EVERYTHING about the world in which we live. I firmly believe that one of the greatest purposes of this life is to learn as much as we possibly can. How is this to be accomplished without sincere doubt? Is not doubt the primary ingredient to the scientific method? How can one possibly exercise faith unless he/she also has doubt? As Joseph Smith himself taught, "By proving contraries, truth is made manifest" (History of the Church, vol. 6, Pp. 428). Honest doubt is every bit as important as honest faith. Don't ever feel bad for questioning things.
But as is the case with all things (the law of opposition), doubt can also destroy faith if taken to an extreme. Much like peanut butter and jelly, we need equal and healthy doses of both faith and doubt to make the perfect sandwich. In his book, The God Who Weeps (a book which everyone should read) Terryl Givens aptly illustrates the importance of both faith and doubt when he writes:
The call to faith is a summons to engage the heart, to attune it to resonate in sympathy with principles and values and ideals that we devoutly hope are true and which we have reasonable but not certain grounds for believing to be true. There must be grounds for doubt as well as belief, in order to render the choice more truly a choice, and therefore the more deliberate, and laden with personal vulnerability and investment. An overwhelming preponderance of evidence on either side would make our choice as meaningless as would a loaded gun pointed at our heads. The option to believe must appear on one’s personal horizon like the fruit of paradise, perched precariously between sets of demands held in dynamic tension. Fortunately, in this world, one is always provided with sufficient materials out of which to fashion a life of credible conviction or dismissive denial. We are acted upon, in other words, by appeals to our personal values, our yearnings, our fears, our appetites, and our egos. What we choose to embrace, to be responsive to, is the purest reflection of who we are and what we love. That is why faith, the choice to believe, is, in the final analysis, an action that is positively laden with moral significance.
The call to faith, in this light, is not some test of a coy god, waiting to see if we "get it right." It is the only summons, issued under the only conditions, which can allow us fully to reveal who we are, what we most love, and what we most devoutly desire. Without constraint, without any form of mental compulsion, the act of belief becomes the freest possible projection of what resides in our hearts. Like the poet’s image of a church bell that only reveals its latent music when struck, or a dragonfly that only flames forth its beauty in flight, so does the content of a human heart lie buried until action calls it forth. The greatest act of self-revelation occurs when we choose what we will believe, in that space of freedom that exists between knowing that a thing is, and knowing that a thing is not.
2.) We Humans Aren't That Smart: Homo Sapiens consider themselves (appropriately so) as the dominant specie on this planet, but the arrogance of this declaration pales when we consider the immensity of the cosmos. Being the top dog on an insignificant little blue rock in the corner of an insignificant galaxy means little to the Master of space and time, especially when only 1% of our genetic makeup separates us from a simple primate. Yet despite this fact, we humans love to pat ourselves on the back for having "discovered" so much. We boast of our technological achievements as if we have become the masters of all knowledge. Reality is that we have as much to boast about as does the simple caterpillar, which does little more than crawl around eating whatever crap it can find to stay alive. We have forgotten the sound words given to us by Paul in 1 Corinthians 13:12, which states:
For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
The imperfections of humanity prevent us from seeing (literally and figuratively) the reality that surrounds us at every moment of every day. Now, I am not suggesting that we humans are incapable of ever discovering reality, or that our minds cannot be trusted. Humanity has made some pretty remarkable advances. In addition, humanity's small place in the universe doesn't negate Mormonism's problems by default. But it does help us to realize that there is much more than meets the eye. We caterpillars may be capable of nothing more than aimless crawling and scavenging (in the grand cosmic sense), but with the help of metamorphosis, we have the capacity to grow wings and one day soar above the trivial nonsense we once esteemed to be of great importance. But it takes a lot of work.
3.) History, Science, Mathematics, Philosophy, etc. are Wonderful Things, but They are NOT the Crystal Balls to All Truth: As somebody who has passionately studied history for several years now, it is sometimes hard for me to accept the fact that there are many things that we will never be able to explain about the past. In addition, much of history (and other disciplines) is subjective, meaning that depending on one's perspective, intentions, source material, etc., you can easily end up with multiple opinions for the same topic. Besides, we cannot forget the fact that these human disciplines are imperfect and will never be able to explain the deep abiding realities of human existence that many "professionals" esteem as "fantasy." Again, from the words of Paul:
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
History, science, mathematics, etc. are all wonderful things, but they are not perfect things. There is much to our existence that cannot be proven or explained through the philosophies of men.
4.) Truth, Regardless of its Source, is a Precious Commodity: It has always puzzled me when I see scientists, theologians, etc. arguing over who has the "most truth" or who comes closest to the truth. Truth is not a palpable track of land waiting to be staked, but rather is a pervasive, all-encompassing force that penetrates everything. One cannot "claim" truth as being something that is exclusively theirs to distribute. Instead, truth is to be found in the public domain for all to enjoy. For me, this means that I am not confined exclusively to the truths of Mormonism, Catholicism, history or science, because truth is not in the domain of Mormonism, Catholicism, history or science. Truth is truth, independent and free of all dogmas and disciplines. It is our job to grasp hold of this truth, wherever we find it, like an iron rod.
For Mormons, this notion has been somewhat distorted over the years. Joseph Smith NEVER taught a rigid, dogmatic faith but was rather a Universalist at heart. He created a Mormon faith that was a big tent with an open door to all, with any and all forms of truth being granted immediate entry. As my all-time favorite Joseph Smith quote teaches us:
"We believe ALL things, we hope ALL things, we have endured many things and hope to be able to endure ALL things. If there is ANYTHING virtuous, lovely or of good report or praiseworthy, WE SEEK AFTER THESE THINGS" (13th Article of Faith. My emphasis).
Which truth claims was Joseph Smith NOT wanting to incorporate into Mormonism? This should be a clear lesson to all members who want to sweep away the TRUTHS of evolution, science, physics, other religions, other holy books, etc. Mormonism is but one small (yet beautiful and important) instrument in the grand symphony of life, and the music of that symphony is what we call truth. The better we can all play our instruments in harmony with one another, the more likely we will be able to discover the truth that lies before us. For me, all truth really can be circumscribed into one great whole.
Should I Stay? Or Should I Go?
And though I would love to be able to report that my faith crisis has led me to a concrete and absolute assurity of the validity of my beliefs, I am forced to admit that doubt is still very much a constant companion in my life. I question things all the time. I occasionally doubt my own personal convictions. I regularly revisit the issues that bother me. But what I have learned, and believe 100% in, is that doubting is NOT a sin, nor is it the same thing as fear. It is a gift to have a questioning heart. Such was the case with Thomas, one of Jesus' original Twelve. It wasn't enough for Thomas to simply see what appeared to be a resurrected Lord. He had to touch, smell and examine Jesus before he believed. But once he did believe, Thomas was the first of Jesus' apostles to fall to his knees and proclaim, "My Lord and my God." So, to those with a doubting heart I say, "God bless you!" You are the gatekeepers who gleefully sift through the mire of blind religious devotion and staunch scientific rationalism to recover those small but precious pearls of truth. Though Mormon culture may, at times, make you feel uncomfortable, know that you have a very special seat at the table.
But most important, know that you are NEEDED!
Mormonism has never been (or at least shouldn't be) about conforming to a very narrow view of life. Jesus' original apostles were a diverse collection of fishermen, tax collectors, and political activists. They argued, fought, disagreed and even betrayed/denied Jesus. But they, like President Hinckley, understood what the main point of Jesus' message was: make bad men good and good men better.
We doubters may never have all of the answers to our legitimate questions and that's ok. We must always keep in mind that those answers (along with the questions themselves) are often irrelevant when the rubber of life meets the road of God. Remember, the first principle of the gospel isn't faith in Mormonism or faith in Joseph Smith, but FAITH IN THE LORD JESUS CHRIST. Mormonism saves nobody. For all of their beautiful and inspiring messages, no book of scripture is capable of delivering you to heaven. Only the Alpha and Omega is capable of that.
So, what would I say to the person who has struggled with their faith like me? What would I advise the person who is at the crossroads of staying in the faith or leaving the church? Here are just 10 quick tidbits of advice:
1.) Time is on your side. Nowhere is it written that you must decide right now whether you fully believe or fully disbelieve. You may never fully make up your mind. You are in no rush. Don't let pressures dictate your course of action. This is YOUR choice so be thorough. Be calculated. Don't rush it.
2.) Don't shun the members. When people experience a crisis of faith (especially when it centers on historical matters) they often think to themselves, "If only the general membership knew what I know, then they might sympathize with my plight." This is nonsense. There are lots of good, faithful members who have been EXACTLY where you are. And even if you can't find any, it is wrong to assume that there are no members out there who care. Sometimes we doubters can become a bit cynical, assuming that all members are cut from the "Utah fabric" and therefore are unwilling/incapable of understanding where we are coming from. This is the wrong way to think. Most members really do care.
3.) Scripture may be bad history, but history is terrible scripture. And yes, there is a difference. Both have their place, but both are not dependant upon the other. One inspires, the other informs. History has its place but so does scripture. Use them both and know their purposes.
4.) Don't follow the crowds. This goes for those who leave the church and those who stay. There is no reason to become the stereotypical Mormon or anti-Mormon. For all of its teachings on communal harmony and responsibility, I am convinced that being a good Mormon means being an individual. You are the captain of your own ship. Decide what Mormonism means to you and then do it. As Dr. Seuss said, "Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." And if you choose to leave, don't become the cynical post-Mormon who leaves Mormonism but then can't leave it alone. And if you decide to stay, don't get on your high horse, acting like your decision was somehow a reflection of how wonderful and virtuous you think you are. Be an individual and not another member of the pro or anti-crowd. Own your decision.
5.) Pray like you mean it. The last person you should try to sugarcoat things for is God. Be raw. Be real. He can take it.
6.) Humility ALWAYS pays off, but is a pain to practice. Remember that you don't have all the answers and never will. Get over it. The fact of the matter is that you aren't entitled to all the answers. God doesn't owe you an explanation but you owe him every explanation. Even if you choose to leave the church be humble about it. And if you choose to stay, be more humble about it. Your experience, and the knowledge you have gained, make you no better than anyone else.
7.) The main thing is to keep the main thing the main thing. Don't lose sight of this. The church isn't about missionary work, memorizing scriptures, giving cool talks/testimonies or having "high" callings. The church is about Christ. Mormonism saves nobody. Christ is where salvation is to be found. Mormonism may be the vehicle to get you there, but in the end it is just an imperfect means to a perfect end. Keep your sights where they need to be and don't get distracted by the rest. Learn to separate sound from noise. Christ is the purpose behind every flavor of Christianity. The rest is just colored bubbles.
8.) Prophets Aren't Perfect. Too often I have heard from people who leave the church that they were "appalled" to discover that J. Smith, B. Young, etc. weren't perfect men and did questionable things. And though I can understand why they feel that way I have to ask: where is it written that a prophet must be a perfect man? Quite often the opposite is the case. Many prophets are (frankly) pathetic men. Abraham was, at times, a coward, Moses killed an Egyptian and then covered it up, Enoch was sort of dumb and not a good speaker, Jacob stole Esau's birthright, Jonah wanted God to kill everyone in Ninevah, David slept with Bathsheba and then sent her hubby to the front lines to die, Peter denied Jesus 3 times, Paul killed Christians and was often a jerk, and yes, Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, etc. were often messed up as well. But remember what the Lord told J. Smith in Doctrine and Covenants 124:
for unto this end have I raised you up, that I might show forth my wisdom through the WEAK THINGS OF THE EARTH.
Perhaps it would be easy to believe in Herculean demigods as the Lord's chosen prophets, but when he chooses the weak and the simple...now that requires some faith. What other reason would God have to tell us all to receive the words of the prophets, "in all patience and faith" if not because he knew they were imperfect men? (Doctrine and Covenants 21:5)
9.) The Lord Expects Progress, Not Perfection. We all need to beat ourselves up a little bit less. I for one am the GREATEST offender of this. There is no harsher critic of each of us than the man/woman staring across from us in the glass. We would all do well to take a collective chill pill. We serve a loving, caring God, not a lightning-throwing, finger-pointing jerk. The god that endowed us with reason and intellect doesn't get pissed when we choose to use it. As I have said before, doubt is a gift. But when things do get a little too much to handle, just remember the words of this famous nursery rhyme:
Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall, Humpty Dumpty had a great fall. All the King's horsemen and all the King's men, Couldn't put Humpty together again... BUT THE KING COULD!
God will work wonders with you...if you let him.
10.) There is Beauty in Desolation. I think that anyone who has undergone a crisis of faith can relate to feeling as though they were walking through a spiritual world of desolation. Prayers seem to go ignored by the heavens, "inspired" leaders give no inspiration, scripture provides no guidance, fasting just makes you hungry and blessings/miracles seem to disappear. In short, anything divine feels more like a fairytale than reality. And though I think much of this boils down to perspective (there can be an abundance of faith, inspiration, etc. if we open our eyes to it) there is absolutely nothing wrong with feeling the emptiness of desolation. In many respects, desolation can be sanctifying. It's easy to have faith when there is an abundance of faith-promoting/spiritual experiences taking place in one's life; it's quite another thing when we experience desolation.
But have no fear. This is normal. Even the great Mother Teresa confided to her journal that she felt as though "heaven from every side is closed." and that she had "Such deep longing for God" but that she was repeatedly "repulsed, empty, no faith, no love, no zeal." Before partaking of the desirable fruit, Lehi reported that he was forced to travel "for the space of many hours in darkness." (1 Nephi 8:8). And before experiencing the amazing wonder of seeing the Earth rise over the lunar horizon, Astronaut Buzz Aldrin described landing and walking on the moon as, "Magnificent desolation":
And make no mistake; desolation can be magnificent. As C.S. Lewis stated:
God allows spiritual peaks to subside into (often extensive) troughs in order for ‘servants to finally become Sons,’ ‘stand[ing] up on [their] own legs—to carry out from the will alone duties which have lost all relish… growing into the sort of creature He wants [them] to be.
How else are we to be molded and shaped if it isn't through those tough, desolate times? There are many ways to make a sword, but the best way of all is by using fire to manipulate the metal. Sometimes the fires of life appear as desolate valleys instead of triumphant mountains.
And to the member who rebukes, belittles or in any way judges the individual who walks the path of doubt, or has chosen to leave the church, I offer up this small critique:
Do not allow arrogant presumption to convince you that all who question/leave the church do so because of sin. This simply isn't the case. In fact, over the past few years, the church has witnessed a massive exodus of some of its finest members. As former Church Historian Marlin K. Jensen stated:
Maybe since Kirtland, we've never had a period of - I'll call it apostasy, like we're having now...It's a different generation. There's no sense kidding ourselves, we just need to be very upfront with them and tell them what we know and give answers to what we have and call on their faith like we all do for things we don't understand.
The overwhelming majority of those who choose to leave the faith do not make this decision lightly. It is usually a heart-wrenching decision that causes extreme stress in their lives. You may not be able to understand it but you should be able to respect it. For thousands of devout Mormons, the intellectual and spiritual shock at discovering the ugly aspects of our faith simply becomes too much for them to handle. As a result, their spiritual and mental shelves cave in. And don't fall into the trap of assuming that you are somehow more choice because your shelves are intact. Some of Mormonism's best and brightest have elected to depart. What they need is love, support, charity and kindness, not judgement, finger-pointing and accusations. Now is the time to practice your faith: "Love one another as I have loved you."
And to those who choose to leave, I say this: you will be greatly missed! I kid you not when I say that you are among the best and the brightest; the cream of the Mormon crop. You are/were leaders, thinkers motivators and disciples. But please know, the door is ALWAYS open for your return. Do not allow cultural and social factors to be what keeps you away. And yes, I will be the first to agree that Mormon culture is often misguided. But if you do choose to stay away, please do so without malice in your heart. Whether you like it or not, Mormonism is a part of you and always will be. Don't let bitterness cloud your mind. It does everyone harm, especially you. Depart in peace, knowing that many still admire you and consider you a friend.
Folks, we are all in this boat together...every single one of us. The believer and the doubter; the saint and the sinner. We all need each other. Besides, in one way or another every single one of us is a doubter. We all need that extra hand to sweep down and scoop us up when we fall out of the boat. Life is tough, but there is no sense in making it tougher by passing judgement, making accusations, pointing fingers or allowing personal prejudice to blind our senses. And when things seem at their worse, and we have nowhere else to turn, when all hope seems lost and we've reached our breaking point, know that you, like the frantic father spoken of in the Book of Mark, can always find solace by proclaiming to the heavens:
If we learned anything from Tuesday night's general election it is this: American demographics have changed. Now, I'm not one of those "doom and gloom" types who think that this change is bad. Quite the contrary. I think that much of this change is good. Demographically, America is NOT the country it was, and that's ok. Throughout our history, American demographics have always been in flux. For example, Catholics, who were largely detested by our founding generation as an undesirable segment of the population, are now the dominant religion in the nation. Irish immigrants were also seen as an unwanted rabble who infested the countryside, eroding America's "pure" culture with each new arrival. Yes, it is safe to say that the old cliche of America being a "melting pot" has not written its final chapter. In today's America, Latinos are, far and away, the fastest growing segment of the population. And they HATE the GOP.
And rightfully so.
The fact of the matter is that the Republican Party has done little to nothing to accept those who do not fit their incredibly narrow vision of what an "American" is supposed to be. In short, it seems as though anything outside of being a White, Evangelical, Bible-thumping, gun-toting, flag-waving, Rush Limbaugh-loving, Muslim-hating, meat-eating, apocalypse-loving "patriot" is unacceptable. And guess what, the GOP has paid the price...big time.
Last night's defeat (not just in the Presidential Election) reveals just how out of touch the GOP has become. Instead of being the party of acceptance, they are the party of exclusivity. Instead of being the party of innovation, they are the party of paranoia. Instead of being the party of the future, they are the party of archaic irrelevance, and if they don't get their act together soon they will continue to pay at the ballot box.
Here are just a few things that I believe need to change with the GOP:
-Climate change is real, Adam and Eve were not the first Homo Sapiens to walk the earth, evolution is a non-debatable fact and creating public policy based on the Book of Genesis is stupid beyond explanation.
-Women who get pregnant as a result of rape is not God working in a "mysterious way."
-Gay people don't cause tsunamis.
-Corporations aren't living beings and there is nothing "socialistic" or "Marxist" about having them pay more in taxes (unless you want to call Adam Smith, Ronald Reagan, Milton Friedman, etc. "socialists.").
-Latinos aren't "taking over" America...but they also aren't going anywhere either.They are, by far, the fastest growing segment of the population. Get used to it.
-Dinosaurs were not on Noah's Ark.
-The "end of days" is not a good campaign slogan, nor is it something to gleefully look forward to.
-The flavor of the "Tea Party" was just sour grapes and that "party" is now officially over.
-Being smart, educated, sophisticated etc. are virtues not vices. Joe the Plumber is NOT the ideal, salt-of-the-earth example to put on a pedestal.
-Conservatives are NOT more patriotic, brave and righteous than any other American of any other "brand."
-Your future rests not with EXCLUSIVITY but with INCLUSION. Quit trying to define people by such a narrow and limited set of ridiculous rules.
-Quit trying to "restore" America to some lost "glory day" when things were better. Bottom line: America has NEVER embraced what the Tea Party was selling...NEVER! There is nothing to restore. Move on.
-Obama isn't a closet Muslim Kenyan who is going to take your guns and put your family into a FEMA camp.
-Ronald Reagan would hate your guts. Sorry, it's true.
-Glenn Beck is an idiot. No joke, he really is a stupid guy.
-There is no secret Muslim plot to infiltrate the American Congress and replace it with Sharia law.
But all hope is not lost. With all of the problems/craziness that has hijacked the Republican Party over the past decade, I still maintain that the GOP could easily become the dominant force in American politics. Of course, changes (more than those mentioned above) will have to be made, but change is a good thing. It is time for Conservatism to replace the crazy with confidence.
The Republican Party is at an important crossroads. On one hand, they could elect to double down on their wacko "we're mad as hell and not going to take it any more" message of fear, doom and gloom and pseudo-patriotism, or they could return to their "glory days" of old. Let us not forget that it was the Republicans who were on the cutting edge of innovation in the 50s and 60s. It was Eisenhower who created NASA, passed the Interstate Highway Act, pulled us out of Korea, avoided entrance into Vietnam, was an early advocate for Civil Rights, encouraged science, math and greater scholastic pursuits, and challenged the Russians on the battlefield of innovation and progress. This is the REAL legacy of TRUE Republicanism.
Plus, I still believe that the Republicans could annihilate the Democrats on economic matters. The free market (when it is truly free for all) is an idea that the overwhelming majority of Americans support. Sadly, Republicans have done more to damage that ideal in the past 25 years than anyone. The notion that deregulation, tax cuts for the rich and "trickle down" economics (which is nothing more than a nice way of telling people to enjoy the scraps) simply does not work. A truly FREE market is one that protects the Middle Class from the greed of those holding all the money. As Adam Smith, the father of capitalism stated:
The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor...The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess...It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. [my emphasis].
It is also time that the GOP accept the FACT that it is time to become more inclusive of others. Let's face the the facts: Latino voters OVERWHELMINGLY supported Obama and the Dems. last night. This was one of the key deciding factors in the election. The GOP has done an atrocious job of courting Latino (and other minority) voters for quite some time and now they are paying the price. If this trend continues, the GOP can forget about residing in the White House (or taking/controlling the Senate/House) for quite some time. It's just a fact.
But, there is hope. To my GOP friends, let me introduce you to a man who not only would bridge the Latino gap but would avoid a lot of the pitfalls that have been mentioned above. He is a man who is pro-life but not in the psychotic way that the Sarah Palin's of the world are. He is a true fiscal conservative who opposed the stimulus, has passionately pushed for limited spending, cutting entitlements and defense, and demanded the balanced budget amendment. He is in favor of energy independence, increased funding for NASA, and accepts the reality of climate change. And though he is far from perfect, he is, in my opinion, the future of the GOP. Ladies and gentlemen, let me introduce you all to the 45th President of the United States of America (yep I am calling it now):
......................
......................
That's right; Marco Rubio is the front runner for the GOP in 2016. This guy is a tough combination of good looks, eloquent speaking and hard-nosed politics. I don't see anyone on the left who could tangle with him (maybe Cuomo?). Plus, he delivers Florida AND closes the Latino gap (hell, he probably swings it to the GOP). This is your guy, conservos. Mark my words: Marco Rubio will be your candidate (if he wants it) in 2016.
Let the campaign ads begin...just give us a few weeks. =)
Unless you have been living under a rock, you are probably well aware of just how polarized American politics has become. It seems that you can't look anywhere these days without seeing some sort of a political spin applied to even the most mundane of daily activities. Everything from Dr. Seuss movies to Christmas trees has become fodder in the never-ending, supercharged, back-and-forth drama that is American politics. The 24/7 media blitz of talk radio and cable news seems to have only exacerbated the problem, as pundits spew hateful rhetoric that depends less on journalistic integrity and more on sensationalized entertainment and doomsday predictions. We have become a society where we prefer to listen to the man/woman yelling at us the loudest through their microphone instead of considering the quiet, steady reflections of level-headed and thorough thinkers.
But this rhetoric isn't limited exclusively to the spoken word. Though political rhetoric does depend greatly on the vocalization of a particular viewpoint, artwork too has an important seat at the table. Whether taking the form of cartoons, posters or campaign ads, the visual image is arguably the most effective and important arrow in the quiver of both partisan and politician. An inspiring painting, a poignant photo, a stirring motif, all have the ability to rouse the soul to higher (or lower) levels of thinking than almost any discourse or poem could hope to accomplish. As the saying goes, a picture really is worth a thousand words!
And sadly, some “artists” have embraced this reality to the point of virtual insanity. Case in point: Jon McNaughton. My Mormon friends are probably more familiar with McNaughton's ilk...er..."art" than are others. As a devout Mormon, his "art" is often a feature in stores like Deseret Book and (until recently) the BYU Bookstore (that is, until BYU became too "liberal" for the uber-sophisticated McNaughton and banned his crap). To put things as simple as I possibly can, Jon McNaughton is a troubled individual. He has taken what I would consider to be a truly remarkable gift (painting) and used it for nothing more than to make a series of cheap, lame, classless, tasteless, mindless, heartless, pointless, idiotic, rude, obscene, hateful and downright pathetic pieces of political propaganda. See for yourself:
Of course, for some, this "art" probably seems like an appropriate summation of "reality." To those of such sentiment I will simply say this: I don't begrudge you your right to your own political views, nor to I deny the fact that Mr. McNaughton has some real talent, but please, for the love of Karl Marx, QUIT BELIEVING EVERYTHING YOU HEAR ON THE DAMN RADIO!!! For once in your life, set your political beliefs aside and consider the following: 1.) Is Jon McNaughton's "art" uplifting in any way, shape or form? 2.) Is Jon McNaughton's "art" the type of stuff that invokes peace and harmony? Or does it breed anger and contention? 3.) Would Jesus, Allah, Buddha, Gandhi, Mother Theresa or any other remarkable person of great character choose to hang Jon McNaughton's "art" in their home? Or would they not even give it the time of day? If you can answer "yes" to any of these three questions, then chances are you probably hate my humble little blog for its "socialist" leanings and have already de-friended me from Facebook for being an evil fascist. That's ok, no hard feelings. Chances are you haven't even read this far into my post anyway, so you won't have the chance to hear me say, "I just won the Mega Millions jackpot and want to buy you a new car!"
The truth of the matter is this: Jon McNaughton is not the problem, but is the SYMPTOM of the problem. McNut...er...McNaughton is the end result of a society that has diluted its political discourse to little more than short, apocalyptic soundbites bent on spreading fear and hate for the "other guy." McNaughton's "art" is essentially a fancy political bumper sticker that tells the world, "My political views are better than yours. Na-na nana boo-boo" Simple-minded men like McNaughton are easy prey for all of the Limbaugh's Hannity's and Beck's of the world. They feel the "call" and begin their "quest" to "save" America from all that is evil in society, which, coincidentally, just happens to be everything found on the other side of the political isle. This is how they can justify creating "scary" pictures of evil, liberal Black presidents burning the Constitution, destroying our freedoms, and receiving the heavenly rebukings of Jesus Christ and our Founding Fathers (while, of course, those of conservative leanings are showered with the gifts of eternal life and always being right). American politics at its best!
We live in a world where religious fervor and political passion are virtually synonymous, so much so that it can be difficult work to separate the partisan politicians, priestly pastors, and philosophical professors from one another. And this convoluted mess has created a labyrinth of confusion that makes almost any sincere political discourse virtually impossible. Any rational or thoughtful inquiry is rendered completely helpless to the impenetrable wall of the prideful partisan mob mentality. This is precisely where Jon McNaughton resides. He is not a critical thinker. He is not a valiant voice crying in the wilderness. He is a bitter, hateful, silly little man. This may sound too harsh or hard but that's ok. I'm sure that Mr. McNaughton is familiar with the verse from the Book of Mormon which states: "the guilty taketh the truth to be hard, for it cutteth them to the very center." Besides, most hate-mongers rarely if ever realize that they are hate-mongers. They see themselves as brave voices of change who are misunderstood by the "evil" majority of their day. In addition, they usually rationalize their hate by appealing to religion as a justification for their actions (i.e. the KKK, Civil Rights opponents, etc.) But these weak appeals to religion serve as nothing more than temporary salves for their cankered souls. Hate, no matter how it is camouflaged, will always be hate.
In conclusion, if given the chance to meet him face-to-face, I would simply say to Jon McNaughton's the following: Don't give up on your passion for politics. Don't give up your religion. Don't give up on your amazing artistic talent. But please...PLEASE spare us this pointless nonsense. You have everything to lose and nothing to gain with the "art" you have produced as of late. As a professional artist, I am guessing that you are probably familiar with the RIDICULOUS work of one Andres Serrano. If not, let me introduce you to him. He is the IDIOT "artist" who created the "Piss Christ." The "Piss Christ" is a picture of a crucifix that was submersed in the artist's urine. According to Serrano, the purpose of the "Piss Christ" was to "get people thinking" and to "question what we believe." Shockingly, this pile of nonsense was even sponsored by the National Endowment for the Arts. Not shockingly, the public saw the "Piss Christ" for what it really was: cheap shock value nonsense masquerading as sophisticated "art."
And though you haven't urinated in any of your own art (more like vomit than urine), isn't your political "art" essentially the same thing, Mr. McNaughton? Like Serrano, didn't you also say that the purpose of your "art" was to "get people thinking." Aren't you just wielding your brush as a weapon of mass DISTRACTION that does nothing but piss people off? You may have avoided urinating on your art itself, but you have certainly pissed all over President Obama. Again, I don't begrudge you the right to your political views. You are entitled to believe what you want to believe. But is that really what you want to call the fruits of your amazing talent? If so, I pity you. But, if not, I look forward to your other art...your REAL art. The good stuff that I would be more than happy to display in my home:
“In the fevered state of our country, no good can ever result from any attempt to set one of these fiery zealots to rights, either in fact or principle. They are determined as to the facts they will believe, and the opinions on which they will act. Get by them, therefore, as you would by an angry bull; it is not for a man of sense to dispute the road with such an animal.” -Thomas Jefferson
