Liberal attack on Mitt Romney is wrong - Larry O'Donnell attacks the Mormon faith
Liberal attack on Mitt Romney is wrong - Larry O'Donnell attacks the Mormon faith
By: Tom Deignan | Published Wednesday, May 9, 2012, 2:00 PM | Updated Wednesday, May 9, 2012, 2:00 PM
 |
| Lawrence O’Donnell |
Liberals love to say that right wingers hijack religion and exploit it for political purposes. Maybe. But liberals also made it very easy to do so.
For a group of people who – rightly – like to take credit for defending people’s rights, liberals still have a blind spot when it comes to religion in general and Christians in particular. This is particularly troubling because the liberal Christian tradition in America is so strong.
The latest lefty to fall into this trap is Irish American MSNBC talk show host Lawrence O’Donnell.
Last month, O’Donnell, who once worked as a close aide to sainted Irish American Democrat Daniel Patrick Moynihan, was doing what liberal talk show hosts always do -- bashing Mitt Romney.
Nothing wrong with that. In fact, Romney’s charge that Barack Obama is trying to “establish a religion in America known as secularism” is desperately in need of correction.
But what did O’Donnell do? Instead of taking Romney to task for wildly exaggerating Obama’s dedication to an anti-religious agenda, O’Donnell went after the Mormon faith.
“Religiously, Mitt Romney lives in the glass house of American politics,” he said.
O’Donnell then added, “Mormonism was created by a guy in upstate New York in 1830 when he got caught having sex with the maid and explained to his wife that God told him to do it. Forty-eight wives later, Joseph Smith’s lifestyle was completely sanctified in the religion he invented to go with it, which Mitt Romney says he believes.”
First of all, as O’Donnell later admitted in an apology, this is inaccurate. Most scholars believe Smith had his religious awakening prior to the scandal involving the maid.
But that is far from the most important point here. Irish Catholics, in particular, should be quite wary of pointing out the peculiarities in a given religion as proof that a candidate is somehow unfit for office.
After all, O’Donnell used to work with Moynihan, who was not only a senator but a first-rate scholar of the kind of bigotry Irish Catholics faced as they climbed the social ladder in America. More than that, Moynihan worked for the first Catholic president!
Lord knows, back in 1960 many people said things like this, “John F. Kennedy believes in a religion led by a guy who wears a funny hat, who never gets married, and claims to be infallible. They also decided that it’s OK to eat meat on Thursdays and Saturdays, but not Fridays. They also put ashes on their foreheads once a year.”
Every religion is open to criticism such as this. Which is why O’Donnell should not have attacked Romney the Mormon.
Instead, he should have attacked Romney the Republican. Or Romney, the exploiter of religious fear, which is what the Republican candidate was doing by implying that Obama -- who many
Republicans still believe is a Muslim -- holds anti-religious views.
Yes, it is true that O’Donnell ultimately apologized, but it really never should have come to that. There have been countless times where people on the left side of the political spectrum, who show respect and stand up for the rights of Jews and Muslims and atheists, nevertheless bungle the matter when it comes to Christians of varying stripes.
The reasons are obvious. Liberals tend to view conservative Catholics and Protestants as part of the power structure.
And, since they are in favor of taking on the power structure, liberals generally believe they are acting
bravely when they tackle issues cherished by religious conservatives.
But there are some problems here. First of all, in the case of Romney, he is, by every definition, a member of a religious minority.
To slam aspects of his faith, but then give others a free pass -- like, say, all those Democrats who call themselves Catholic but support abortion and the death penalty -- is unfair.
More importantly, liberals and their inability to debate religion well have created a truly bizarre scenario -- Christians who feel persecuted in the United States!
Yes, we have this state of affairs partly because right wingers are so savvy at exploiting this.
But they’d have nothing to exploit if O’Donnell and his colleagues didn’t consistently make such blunders.
If attacking Romney the Mormon is the Democratic plan for success in November, it’s going to be a long campaign.
(Contact “Sidewalks” at tomdeignan@earthlink.net or facebook.com/tomdeignan.)
44 Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Switch to the desktop site to post a comment.BigDaddy | Aug 11, 2012, 12:07 PM EDT
LosLeandros...O'Donnell's "liberal" nature is important in what respect? That he doesn't follow Bronze Age mythology blindly? That any intellectual or scientific advances made by mankind in say the last 2000 years he considers before speaking makes his viewpoint important. Is that what you meant or were you speaking in that thinking Catholic manner to which you referred?
BigDaddy | Aug 11, 2012, 11:57 AM EDT
jamieLM...I understand your POV as I have listened to Rush Limbaugh et al myself. But if helping the impoverished has only caused dependency among the poor, what has tax loopholes, oil depletion allowances, farm subsidies, etc. done for the rich?
hollabackgurl | May 13, 2012, 10:10 AM EDT
Wait till Romney tells us that God has many wives and that the Devil is Jesus' brother and that black people will become white when they did and move to their individual planet. The media -should- do its job and let us know these are Romeny's beliefs. Don't even get me started on the magic underpants.
seanomelb | May 11, 2012, 08:02 PM EDT
Romney is a lightweight when compared to Obama
IrishAndProud | May 11, 2012, 12:19 AM EDT
...and even with both feet in his mouth, he's still a 150% improvement over Barack Hussein Obama -- by far the most non-Irish of all U.S. Presidents.
BrianO | May 10, 2012, 11:54 PM EDT
will he visit the 57 states,will he act stupidly,will he have a son that looks like travon,will he speak austrian,or go bowling like he is in the special olympics
seanomelb | May 10, 2012, 07:50 PM EDT
The left do not have to hate Romney. All the have to do do is wait until he opens his mouth and he's sure to put both feet in it.
Los Leandros | May 10, 2012, 10:32 AM EDT
The important point is that O'Donnell is first and foresmost a liberal. Where Catholic teaching collides with liberal dogma ( particularly pertaining to matters of human sexuality ), O'Donnell's default position is that liberal dogma must prevail. The zeitgeist alway's wins out for these guy's. It is disingenuous to try to assert that O'Donnell's attack on Mitt Romney comes from a Catholic perspective. Quite the contrary, no thinking Catholic could subscribe to O'Donnell's vile views.
jamieLM | May 10, 2012, 09:20 AM EDT
@eiriamach, you're right. The Mormons have done a great job in preserving our genealogical records. They also tend to be loyal and patriotic Americans. Lots of errors were made in names, especially on census records. My Protestant (non-Irish) friends have had just as many misspelled ancestral names as I've had. Many of these census takers were not well educated and had trouble spelling not only ethnic names, but simple names. The 1810 census records lists my English ancestor as "Thomas Mare" (F), whose real name was "Frances Mary", married to James and the mother of his 6 children. Good advice to try alternate spellings.
jamieLM | May 10, 2012, 07:37 AM EDT
The war on poverty was waged first under LBJ and it's result has completely destroyed the black family unit and only encouraged poverty and dependence. The left divides then conquers, under the guise of helping. Robbie, the common man is the individual that needs goverment the least. government takes from the working man to feed the bureaucracy.
Robbie69 | May 09, 2012, 11:34 PM EDT
There are several things about Romney's Mormanism that trouble me. He donated some $30,000 to the Mormons for their political campaign in California to defeat gay marriage. Romney doesn't believe in a separation of church and state, and that is totally different than the situation we had with President Kennedy and his firm belief in the separation of church and state. Romney also lets the ultra-right wackos decide his political stance on so many issues, including health issues for females, the accessibility of health care for all Americans, civil rights for gays, and marriage equality. But despite all that, the thing that worries the most about Romney is that he is a millionaire, fighting for the rights of all billionaires. The working people in America might become poor peasants, but that isn't a concern for Romney. He doesn't care about the common working guy.
BrianO | May 09, 2012, 10:58 PM EDT
and so it begins, the hate of the left can set its eye on romney
Eowyn77 | May 09, 2012, 10:39 PM EDT
I appreciate the author's position that attacking a candidate's religion rather than his politics is wrong, and not just because I'm a Mormon. In 2008 I thought the claims about Obama being Muslim were both ridiculous and irrelevant. Thank you for your well-thought article! In reading the comments, though, I find it curious (especially in this forum) that baptism for the dead is so eagerly attacked when the principle behind it is very similar to a Catholic person requesting a memorial mass. Yes, our government is a secular one, meaning that there is no state religion and those who take it upon themselves to run for office have an obligation to protect the rights of all citizens. But 'We the People' are as diverse spiritually as we are ethnically, politically, socially, sexually and in any other meaningful way we see ourselves. And that is as it should be. I would actively oppose denying homosexual citizens the right to vote simply because they're gay, and I wouldn't criticize them for letting their personal experience influence their voting decisions. I think, by that same token, religious experience can reasonably influence a voter's choice. :)
eiriamach | May 09, 2012, 09:07 PM EDT
But the Mormons don't mind changing God's work, jamieLM. When the Mormon Church's less-than-literate teenagers copied my ancestors' Irish baptismal records for eternal storage in their mountain in Utah, they performed a sex change on one of my great-great aunts! Try persuading them to change a mistake in gender they made in a record--No way. Actually, on the whole, they've made great contributions to gathering genealogical records world wide. If you can't find your ancestors in Mormon records, try misspelling their names and changing male to female and female to male in the search engine.
jamieLM | May 09, 2012, 08:36 PM EDT
I could say I'm going to baptize everyone after they die into my Happy Church. Yeah, right. Just because the Mormons say they can and do baptize people of other religions after death does NOT make it true. Where's the proof? A lot of wishful thinking on their part. God runs the show after death, not the Mormons. There's not one word in the Bible that says a Mormon, or anyone else, has the ability to do anything to anyone after death. If you're an atheist, I don't believe for a NY minute that the Mormons can baptize you either. What a load of nonsense. We could say that we're going to baptize all dead Mormons into the Catholic faith, except we're not that stupid to make such a ridiculous claim.
Murph46 | May 09, 2012, 08:11 PM EDT
Liberals can do what ever they want -look at their Pres.candidate John (I think I'll cheat on my cancerous wife)Edwards!
jamthecat | May 09, 2012, 07:55 PM EDT
I have no problem attacking Romney for being Mormon, considering what the Mormon "church" has actually done -- paid to pass prop H8 using lies and fear and two-faced sanctimony; baptized people into the Mormon faith after they're dead, even if they specifically said they do not want to be, and even if they're devoutly another religion (Ann Frank, for example!!!); excommunicated people for not following their secret masters's dictates when it comes to political and personal beliefs...the list is endless. I'd have no problem attacking Rick Santorum for being Catholic, because he wanted to force the whole country to follow his religion's dictates. And don't get me started on Newt Gingrich's supposed christian conversion. America is supposed to be a secular nation, not one based on one interpretation of god. But the right wing is turning christianity into the modern version of communism, and so far as I'm concerned, anyone who uses their religion to get votes or to justify passing laws that restrict the rights of Americans deserves to be condemned for it.
eiriamach | May 09, 2012, 07:42 PM EDT
hollaback makes an important point about conservatives throwing the mantle of religion over their homophobic (and misogynist) politics. "For example if they can create a consensus that it's somehow off-limits to criticize teaching that gay people are subhuman as long as you wrap it up in religion, that gives them a huge political advantage." They do not even need to go that far. Conservatives are now claiming that their "freedom of religion" as Christian fundamentalists gives them the right to write discrimination into law. This tactic is a betrayal of Christianity and an abuse of the US Constitution. We should not give it a polite, PC, treatment. Religion is a fair target when a candidate bases policy on literal bible reading or papal teaching or some weird idea of God's will. Isn't it relevant to object to a practicing Christian Scientist becoming US Surgeon General? Then we can and should question the right's invoking religion to exempt any policy from criticism.
BrianO | May 09, 2012, 07:07 PM EDT
according to most posters here the only religion qualified for the presidency would be atheist. All presidents, senators and house members have been part of a religious group including Mormons(Harry Reid). Their religous leanings can and will shape their judgement, as long as no law forces a person to belong to a religion then it is up to the people to decide their worthiness of election..
seanomelb | May 09, 2012, 06:43 PM EDT
Romney will never bring religion into debate as the consequences would politically destroy him. His mantra of keeping quiet about religion reminds me of John Cleese "shh- don't talk about the war"
hollabackgurl | May 09, 2012, 06:34 PM EDT
You may feel differently about Mormonism and the distinction between Church and State when they baptize your grandparents and re-write your state laws Mr Deignan.
BrianO | May 09, 2012, 05:19 PM EDT
Most have no idea of what separation of church and state means, you'll be surprised by the answers.
BrianO | May 09, 2012, 05:15 PM EDT
do you fear they will take over the banks, the car industry, the insurance industry, and ultimately the health care system? I am with you in my fear of big government takeovers, much better to really on the people working for their own self interests. (And So It Begins) the bashing and tearing down of what will be one of the dirtiest campaigns in history. A cornered animal is the most dangerous.
slainte39 | May 09, 2012, 05:08 PM EDT
Bill Maher did a pretty good job of bashing Mormonism last week and has done so in the past. Yes, Mormonism is a whacko religion, but to Romney's credit, and unlike Santorum, he rarely brings religion into the debate or his stump speaches...maybe for good reason. What I fear more than their (Mormons) theology, is the church's insatiable desire to own and control businesses...you know, free enterprise. Along with separation of church and state, there should also be...separation of church and business ownership.
BrianO | May 09, 2012, 05:06 PM EDT
is reverend wright a mormon? Certainly not a muslim. But is Obama's spiritual leader. Romney is not the closest to possibly being president that is a mormon, that would be Senate majority leader Harry Reid.
pilib04 | May 09, 2012, 04:42 PM EDT
Britfether, great post. FastEddy, no mormon has been elected President.Romney is the closest one has ever gotten. His daddy dropped out after claiming he had been brainwashed by LBJ.
pilib04 | May 09, 2012, 04:38 PM EDT
I see. It's ok to bash Catholics 24/7, but God forbid someone should go after the Mormon cult. What dead people will they baptise this week. How many wives does it say I can have in the Book of Mormon? I think these Mormons are nuts and anyone who has had to live under their whackjob rule would agree.
britfether | May 09, 2012, 04:14 PM EDT
I'll tell you what. Go and read the Book of Morman and what they believe. Then come back and tell me that they aren't from another planet altogether. I don't care if it's politically correct or not, liberals have every right to be sceptical of any belief that allows someon like Romney to take offense at something like same sex marriage and then turn around and side with his relatives and associates who have more than one wife. If having more than one wife is a conservative value, then that is a new one on me. If he condemns gays, then let him also condemn those in his own religion who practice marriage outside of the law. That is why he is much more a hypocrite than he is a politician and anyone who can't tell is blind. This guy has more sides to him than theinside folds of an accordian. but if he sticks to his religious beliefs in the Book of Morman, then what he believes in makes the gays and lesbians look like a bunch of angels.
TheOldPerfessor | May 09, 2012, 04:07 PM EDT
This hurts, but I will have to agree with you. A man's religion is off-base (including the President's for all of you down there who call him a Muslim without a shred of evidence). Just listen to Romney and you'll find plenty to legitimately criticize (Did he really save the auto industry?)
Mousemess | May 09, 2012, 03:36 PM EDT
Is fear saor-intinneach mise, ach i mo bharuil fein, ni chreidim go bhfuil se riachtanach an rud e sin a bheith magadh faoin gcreideamh daoine eile. Mormannach no duine ar bith eile. I am a liberal-minded man, but in my own opinion (and just speaking for myself and no-one else)I do not believe it necessary to be mocking the faith of other people. Mormon or anyone else.
Bythebay | May 09, 2012, 03:21 PM EDT
Religion should never be part of the Government of the US yet your VP Joe Biden, your described staunch Catholic, brought Catholic bishops into the White House to coerce Obama about the health insurance program. Not much separation of Church and State there.
BrianO | May 09, 2012, 03:13 PM EDT
Sharia law by definition is illegal under the constitution if it indeed was a "law" because it would be a state sponsored religion, Nicomax you would be free to practice all forms of Sharia provided you do not require others to participate or use the government to force said practices on your fellow citizens. Oh and stoning to death your female members for being with a man unsupervised would not be allowed.
Nicomax | May 09, 2012, 01:27 PM EDT
Article VI of the US Constitution, says in part; 'but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States'. Clear enough for all to understand, even those who have their undies in a bundle about Sharia Law.
Scrivner | May 09, 2012, 01:00 PM EDT
O'Donnell ought to be encouraged, this will expose the embedded bigotry of the American left and help elect a GOP prez. Our differences of opinion regarding the devine should not blind us to the substance of the person(s) seeking to lead us. As Murph46 said, "We need a leader who can rebuild the US from ground up."
seanfer7 | May 09, 2012, 12:36 PM EDT
We all know religion is personal We all want to screw as much as we can. So why not believe in the one that offers the most
FastEddy | May 09, 2012, 12:35 PM EDT
We've had Catholics, Mormons, Baptists (and Muslim?) as Presidents in the past ... Another Mormon? No problem found. Re-elect the Muslim? OK by me as long as my taxes don't go up.
phinsman | May 09, 2012, 11:57 AM EDT
Religion should never be a part of the government in the United States. That's what "separation of church and state" mean. Religion is a personal choice. Ethics is what should be incorporated into the US government, which is based on appropriate behavior, not religious rules.
seagreen | May 09, 2012, 11:18 AM EDT
Zzzzzzzzzzz
NYCsheridan | May 09, 2012, 11:06 AM EDT
"Most scholars believe Smith had his religious awakening prior to the scandal involving the maid." Ah, so BEFORE he sexually assaulted the maid, he had his "religious awakening"? Were you wearing your magic underwear when you wrote this, Tom?
jane thomas | May 09, 2012, 10:46 AM EDT
I agree with all comments... Lawrence O'Donnell has a flair for the dramatic occasionally, and he has so much more to criticize with Mr. Romney than his (or anyone's) crazy religion. As a Catholic-turned-Unitarian, I feel knowledgeable in the field! Luckily, the POTUS knows better and is wiser, even now when dear old Joe has put him in a strange position regarding marriage. Sadly, the folks in North Carolina have put another exclamation point on the subject. It will be a tough slog to the White House this year and crazy religions will play a huge role. What ever happened to that church and state separation thing? Sad...
jfoynyc | May 09, 2012, 10:17 AM EDT
"If attacking Romney the Mormon is the Democratic plan for success in November, it’s going to be a long campaign." That is a quantum leap, misstep, to go from O'Donnell to Democrats. Yes, O'Donnell was wrong; he apologized. Move on. I agree plenty of angles to criticize Romney for, e.g., yesterday "Oldsmobile demise" faux pas, etc. ad infinitum and if not at least ad nauseam. Olds was folded into Buick before Obama was elected yet he made it sound as if Olds was closed down and this week!.
Murph46 | May 09, 2012, 10:08 AM EDT
Right on jamieLM,after all Kennedy got elected in spite of claims that the Pope would run America.Nothing of the sort happened.We need a leader who can rebuild the US from ground up.Time only will tell who is best prepared to do that.
jamieLM | May 09, 2012, 09:33 AM EDT
@Tom - excellent column. We should be electing our presidents on the soundness of their foreign and domestic policies, their vision for America, and the direction they want to take the country and not on the basis of their religion, charm, and good looks. We're voting for POTUS, not the h.s. Homecoming King. BTW: some Protestants also put ashes on their foreheads on Ash Wed. I get your point, though. All religions have practices/traditions that seem odd or meaningless to others.
hollabackgurl | May 09, 2012, 09:23 AM EDT
The American right is clearly undertaking a huge project of trying to put right-wing politics beyond criticism by shouting "religious bigotry" any time someone gets in the way of their political agenda. For example if they can create a consensus that it's somehow off-limits to criticize teaching that gay people are subhuman as long as you wrap it up in religion, that gives them a huge political advantage. Taken far enough, merely stating out loud in public that you don't believe gay people are evil could be cause for the fainting couches to be pulled out and accusations that Christians are being oppressed. Sounds ludicrous? Well, consider that we're currently debating whether or not it's oppressing Christians to accurately state what's in the Bible. Anyone who is actually supportive of gay rights shouldn't be playing along with this feigned umbrage. It won't stop until opposing anti-gay actions is considered completely off-bounds on the grounds that it's an attack on religion. The same applies to Romeny's faith. Reason must always have its say against blind obedience.