Religion, Nationalism, and Terror

Munson: The most obvious difference between Mitt Romney’s situation today and John Kennedy’s in 1960 is that the Christian Right has become a key component of the Republican Party’s electorate and Romney cannot win the Republican presidential nomination without its support. Kennedy did not need to worry about “Christian conservatives” in running for the Democratic nomination and he was able to win the general election despite the opposition of Christian fundamentalists as well as that of more moderate evangelicals like Billy Graham. (In the 1960s, Christian fundamentalists would never have accepted the label “evangelical” that many fundamentalists today routinely embrace.)

Ironically, the same Christian fundamentalists who continue to view Mormon politicians with suspicion have become accustomed to working closely with conservative Catholics, even though their view of Catholicism as a form of heretical idolatry has not changed. (The justices on the Supreme Court who regularly support the Christian Right’s positions are all conservative Catholics.) The Christian Right has said virtually nothing about Rudy Giuliani’s Catholicism, although many conservative evangelicals are extremely disturbed by his views on abortion and gay rights and his personal history of adultery and divorce.

One reason some conservative evangelicals will end up voting for Romney is the widespread view that Mike Huckabee cannot win the GOP nomination or the general election and that a vote for him is in effect a vote for Rudy Giuliani or Hillary Clinton.

Eventually, Christian fundamentalists will probably become as tolerant of Mormon politicians as they now are of Catholic politicians like Pat Buchanan and Rick Santorum. But they have not reached that point yet. And that is one reason the Romney campaign is in trouble.

Kenneth Woodward, Mitt Romney Is No Jack Kennedy - New York Times, December 5, 2007

INEVITABLY, Mitt Romney’s long-awaited speech on faith and religious freedom tomorrow at the George Bush Presidential Library at Texas A&M will be compared to John F. Kennedy’s 1960 speech to Protestant ministers in Houston, just 90 miles away. Like Kennedy, Mr. Romney faces questions about his religious beliefs and how they might affect his judgments as president. Also like Kennedy, Mr. Romney realizes — and polls demonstrate — that a sizable number of voters (again, mostly Southern white Protestants) oppose him because of his religion.

But the differences are more pronounced than the similarities. In 1960, Kennedy had already won the Democratic nomination and, as a Catholic, faced a phalanx of religious groups working publicly against his election. Among them was Protestants and Other Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, which was opposed in principle to any Catholic as president. An Episcopal bishop, James A. Pike of California, was its best-known spokesman.

Five days before Kennedy’s speech, moreover, a group of prominent Protestant clergymen headed by Norman Vincent Peale and L. Nelson Bell, the editor of Christianity Today and father-in-law of Billy Graham (Mr. Graham himself backed out at the last minute), mobilized the National Conference of Citizens for Religious Freedom specifically to block Kennedy’s bid. In addition, the Baptist state conventions in Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona and Texas had already voted to oppose any Catholic candidate for president. In short, Kennedy knew his adversaries, some of whom were seated right in front of him.

Mr. Romney, in contrast, faces no organized religious opposition he can allude to, no anti-Mormon campaign he can shame — as Kennedy adroitly did — for blatant religious bigotry. On the contrary, most Americans still do not know much about the Mormon Church, and many of them are willing to accept Mr. Romney’s assertion that Mormons are Christians, albeit of a highly unorthodox kind. Unlike Kennedy, he has no ready audience to convince.

The famous folklorist Edward D. (”Sandy”) Ives has Alzheimer’s disease. But the disease is still in an early stage. Sandy sometimes forgets what he wants to say. But he can still carry on a conversation. All those who would like to speak to him can reach him at (207) 866-3541. He lives in Orono, Maine.

The Magnes Zionist: Mazel Tov, Activists and Anarchists — the Latter-Day Maccabees (But with a Better Sense of Humor), December 5, 2007

In a clever and well-coordinated move (what happened to the Shabak?), seventy activists panned out through Tel-Aviv, Jerusalem, and Haifa, and plastered 10,000 electricity cut-off notices to the residents. Of course, the cut-off notices were bogus, but they served to literally bring home to the Israelis that Gaza has been threatened by Israel with a general electricity and fuel shut-off in reprisal for shelling Sderot.

Now, the average Israeli will point out how justified Israel’s actions are. I mean, let’s face it, if the Israelis wanted to, they could just wipe Gaza off the face of the earth. The fact that they only hold a million human beings hostage and pressure them collectively whenever they want to (and their High Court lets them) shows how moral they are. Hell, they are the most moral country in the world. What other country would let the little b-stards lob shells into the city. I mean, Israel pulled out of their overcrowded hell-hole, didn’t it? (”The better to squeeze them, my dear….”)

That’s what the average Israeli says, considering the responses on the websites.

Pity the average Israeli.

Read about it in Hebrew here and here and here and here and here (this has a video clip; you have to wait through a dumb commercial before you get to it, but it’s worth it). And in English here

This protest action was sponsored by a coalition of lefties calling themselves, the Front for the Liberation of Gaza. They include some of the “Anarchists” who have been protesting the systematic expropriation of the lands of Bil’in every week. Lately they have also been involved in protesting the Israelis-only road 443, the most notorious of the roads of hafradah (Hebrew for “separation”; I wouldn’t dignify the ideology behind it with the term “apartheid”) And many other groups were involved.

Remember when Israelis justified checkpoints and closures by saying that they were “inconveniences” at worst? Well, apparently, the inconvenience of removing posters on their doors has been driving some of them nuts. Imagine what they would do if some of them had to stand in line for hours to get past a checkpoint? Of if their wives died in labor, or their children were stillborn because they did not have the right permit? Some of them would be fighting each other to sign up for the Masada suicide terrorist brigade.

Munson: Evangelical support for Baptist minister Mike Huckabee is clearly due, in part at least, to the evangelical view of Mormonism as a “cult.” Some conservative evangelicals have expressed a willingness to support Romney despite his Mormonism–the most notable case being that of Bob Jones III–the archetypal fundamentalist. But for many conservative evangelicals, even in 2007, voting for someone whose religion is based on the idea that the Bible represents a flawed version of the word of God is simply impossible.

Mormons and the Bible, Every Word - New York Times, Dec. 1, 2007

One moment that drew particular attention at Wednesday night’s Republican presidential debate was a video questioner’s asking whether the candidates believed every word of the Bible.

Mitt Romney, a Mormon, hesitated a bit in answering, then was drawn into a thicket of theology underscoring just how complicated the issue of his faith remains as he courts evangelical Christian voters, a crucial constituency in the Republican base.Mr. Romney replied, “I believe the Bible is the word of God, absolutely.”

Then, when asked again — this time by the moderator, Anderson Cooper of CNN — whether he believed every word of it, Mr. Romney added: “Yeah, I believe it’s the word of God. The Bible is the word of God. I mean, I might interpret the word differently than you interpret the word, but I read the Bible and I believe the Bible is the word of God. I don’t disagree with the Bible. I try to live by it.”

While that may have appealed to those evangelicals who believe that the Bible is “inerrant,” Mr. Romney may have tripped himself up among Mormons, who believe categorically that it includes errors.

LDS.org, an official Web site of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, notes: “Latter-day Saints revere the Bible. They study it and believe it to be the word of God. However, they do not believe the Bible, as it is currently available, is without error.”

“As the Bible was compiled, organized, translated and transcribed, many errors entered the text,” the site says, adding at another point: “In addition to the Bible, Latter-day Saints reverence and study the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, the Pearl of Great Price and the words of modern prophets and apostles. All these sources of eternal truth work together to establish, clarify and testify of the plan of our Heavenly Father and to bring people unto Jesus Christ.”

Ruth Marcus - In Iowa, They Like Mike - washingtonpost.com, December 5, 2007

WAUKEE, Iowa — Lori Hommer is threading blue ribbon through contribution envelopes to hang on the Christmas trees at Point of Grace Church, and she scarcely pauses when asked if she’s decided on a candidate in next month’s caucuses.

“Yes, Mike Huckabee,” said Hommer, 50, who teaches at the church. “He has conservative Christian values . . . the same values I have.” As to the man who had been leading in the polls here until recently, she said, “I could probably support Mitt Romney if I had to. I’m just a little leery of him. I’m just not sure he’s genuine.”

…With evangelicals expected to comprise four in 10 Republican caucusgoers, voters such as Williams hold the key to a Huckabee victory — and they could deliver it. In the latest Post-ABC News poll of likely GOP caucusgoers, the former Arkansas governor led Romney 44 percent to 22 percent among evangelical Protestants.

It is no coincidence that Huckabee’s new TV ad opens with a shot of the Southern Baptist minister and the words “Christian Leader.” A little unsettling — imagine an ad touting Joe Lieberman as a “Jewish leader” — and perhaps a subtle effort to reinforce evangelical voters’ squeamishness about Romney’s Mormonism, but no doubt effective: Huckabee’s “Christian values” was the most commented-on selling point I heard here.