Post by Hannah Wheelwright -

Brothers and sisters, there is nothing more dangerous than fear. We learn about that in Sunday school all the time. I want to talk with you a little bit about the fear of being open about political opinions. I am not suggesting that anyone is wrong or ignorant for being quiet about their support for President Obama, and I certainly am not giving expert advice on the topic. But I want to point out a few things on the topic of fear of sharing political opinions. Here’s why:

1.  This is America. You are entitled to freely express your political opinions without fear of repercussion from the federal government. Oftentimes in our culture we extend this to mean that you shouldn’t fear repercussions from anyone simply because of your beliefs. This security to state your stances freely is fundamental to our identity as Americans engaging in the political dialogue of this nation.
2. The concept of declaring your beliefs freely is also deeply engrained in Mormonism. From the oft-quoted Romans 1:16 (For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ) to the brave and heroic examples of our pioneer ancestors, we have a strong tradition of actively making our true convictions known, even when to do so puts us at odds with those around us.
3. Even if, after boldly admitting that you support President Obama, someone were to react negatively such to make you regret being open about it- their intolerance is their problem. As Mormons, we are told to surround ourselves with good people. There are plenty of good people who may not share our political beliefs but appreciate civil discourse and sharing opinions with an open mind. If someone you meet is going to give you a hard time about your beliefs purely because they disagree with you, it might be a good time to evaluate if they will be a good influence on your life in the first place.

Granted: there may be people already in your life, such as friends, family, and coworkers, who may be intolerant and unavoidable. How you handle those relationships is of course a personal decision. Additionally, I am not suggesting that we should risk death or any other extreme outcome in exchange for openly supporting President Obama.

What I am advocating for is a little less fear and a little more faith.

I openly admit that I relish the occasional dirty looks from people who are anti-Obama when they see that I support our President. It reminds me that "there must needs be opposition in all things," and that there is still a lot of work to do to re-elect him.

Every day that goes by when another person finds out that I’m an Obama supporter (it usually becomes known pretty quickly- as I said, I’m extremely open about it) and they get excited to find someone who shares their passion, I am grateful that I put on that Obama shirt or brought my Obama water bottle with me. I cherish the opportunity to connect with like-minded people and to express my deeply held opinion that Barack Obama is the best candidate for President. No amount of insult, derogatory gestures, or rude glances can invalidate that belief. I'm not suggesting that my commitment to Obama is deeper than anyone else's- simply that I choose to risk negative encounters because I value finding those few people in Provo, Utah who do also support the President, and those positive encounters are worth the risk for me.

If we all stood a little taller, spoke a little more freely in the appropriate settings (i.e. not at church), opened our minds to the possibility that those who we thought previously would brazenly disparage our opinion might not be as churlish as we had imagined- who knows what deeper relationships and more significant connections we might develop.

Conversely- for every opportunity we pass up to share our convictions about supporting our President, we’ll never know which voter we may have reached, directly or indirectly, who might have cast the deciding vote for President Obama.

So perhaps now would be a good time to take a minute; think about how you represent yourself and your beliefs. Heading into the heated and controversial campaign season this fall, we could have a little less fear and a little more faith that the benefits of being open about our support for the President will far outweigh the potential for push-back.

106 DAYS UNTIL ELECTION 2012

As the election gets closer, the media attention on the LDS Church intensifies.  This month (and this past weekend in particular) we've already seen an article about missionaries on Facebook, the temple garments, and the Businessweek magazine cover (an article about an article.)  None of these articles address Mitt Romney directly, but of course without his campaign, the attention on the Church would be much diminished or non-existent.  We at Mormons for Obama have received attention as well - we've received a few mentions on different online articles and news reports.  (Salon.com, RealClearPolitics.com, and also here on this Boston local news channel.  But don't blink, or you'll miss it!)

We Mormons are everywhere - all over the internet, TV, (and in some cities - on billboards and the sides of buses) - and never have we received this much scrutiny... and so it is with cautious footing that we run this website.  We say this because our hope is what we do here doesn't put up a wall between ourselves and other more conservative or Republican-leaning Mormons.  We appreciate and love them - (and hopefully not in a patronizing, we-are-better-than-you, way.)  After the dust of this election settles, we will still be at church on Sunday mornings worshiping with our fellow Latter-day Saints, regardless of who they voted for the previous Tuesday and regardless of who wins.  But we don't want to miss this opportunity to represent the strong ideals and beliefs of those of us who will be casting our votes for President Obama.

We received this email from Stephen, who happened across our site, and we believe his comments help to shine light on much of our reasoning in putting together this website:

Thank you for putting up this website. I am not LDS, but I have known quite a number of people who were, as I'm from the Pacific Northwest and was an avid genealogist before the Internet changed the game. With but one exception (in the Army) all (Mormons) that I've met have all been kind, generous, and humble - stunning examples of people who live a good life, performed good deeds, and treated others with respect. They were emissaries, living examples of people who truly aspired to be more like Jesus Christ. The "countenance" described in a recent post is something that even I found easy to spot. I've been in Southern California for some time now, and rarely meet Mormon people here. My memories are faded, and they have been tarnished by what I have seen in Mitt Romney. He has not shown himself to be one who cares about people. His lack of concern for those in need--particularly those his own actions have put in need--really surprised me. I was left to wonder if I had drawn the wrong conclusions. I know everyone is different, and one man is never an example of an entire group, but the writings, and even the very existence of this webpage affirm my early impressions. Reading here has been like Romney tarnish remover.

Thanks again making this effort, and for reminding me of truly good people I had long forgotten.

Sincerely yours,

-Stephen

And thank you Stephen for your kind email, and thanks for giving us permission to post it here.  This political campaign still has some months to go, and we hope that we can continue to participate in the dialogue and discussion of the issues - and we hope that we can do it in a way that is respectful and inclusive of those who believe differently than us.  But clearly, we are not perfect - and so we are trying to do better.

So once again, I am looking over the Mormon Ethic of Civility - an article posted on the Mormon newsroom feed back in 2009.  This is the perfect navigating tool for Mormon Dems and Pubs when it comes to engaging in political discourse.

Also, I really enjoyed this piece by Walter Kirn, the author of Thumbsucker, my favorite (Non-Deseret Book) Mormon fiction after Levi Peterson's The Backslider.   The kindness and inclusiveness of Kirn's Mormon roommates and friends is what we offer each other.  I also found this piece on MormonDems.com entitled, "Stop the Madness!"  We might use this as a reminder of how to bring unity between Democrats and Republicans (inside and outside of the Church.)  And if we are still wondering what we can do to better represent ourselves as Mormon Democrats, we might watch this YouTube video featuring an amazing Utah Mormon Democrat; we all know about Harry Reid (and we aspire to be like him,) but Brian King, member of the Utah State Legislature, is a great example as well:

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hg-rOJ42IpM?rel=0]

With November right around the corner our country is bracing for a barrage of political attacks, skewed data, and faulty logic.  It is our job as citizens to vet these political distortions and hold our politicians accountable.  Forwarding emails, trolling on Facebook, or posting links from partisan blogs does little to support positions and creates a wider divide.  Taking a “good versus evil” stance is unproductive and should remain clear of our civil debates.

How did we get here?

I am often asked how we arrived to such a polarizing environment dripping with angry partisan rhetoric.  My response? Look in the mirror. We have stopped holding our streams of information accountable.  We respond to 30 second sound bites.  We repeat talking points instead of questioning them.  Our media is selling propaganda rather than vetting it.  We now view compromise as political weakness, and “flip-flopping” as a sign of indecision instead of solution building.

With that being said, it’s hard to walk away from Newt Giengrich’s “Contract with America” as a contributing driver of a political downward spiral.  During the 1980’s, Ronald Reagan did a remarkable job uniting our country through compromise and leadership.  Watching 49 states unite in the 1984 election was magical.  This Reagan compromising spirit Newt perceived as weakness and drove the creation of the “Contract with America”.  Newt sold the public on a political agenda in 1994 leading to a remarkable 54 seat swing and Republican control of the house.  Newt then tried to ram legislation through the floor within the first 100 days knowing the Senate would object, creating wide distrust between the parties.   Newt’s rhetoric was so polarizing it led to a government shutdown and eventual loss of the Republican House, and the ripples continue to grow.

What can I do to stop the partisanship?

Turn off the tube.  If your main source of news comes from a 24 hour news cycle which uses irrational conclusions and skewed data to fill their time void, your reasoning skills are declining.  Take a quick gut check – Do you think Fox News is fair and balanced?  Do you view CNN or MSNBC as fact based reporting? Answering yes to either of these questions indicates an addiction to a mind numbing drug called repetition.

Use the shock test.  If you read an email or watch an ad and become “shocked”, take a step back and do some basic fact checking.  It’s amazing what you might learn when challenging a statement you badly want to believe.  No, Obama is not a communist.  No, Romney does not want to fire half of America.  No, illegal immigration is not causing bankruptcy.  No, pro-choice does not mean pro-abortion. No, the NRA does not want anarchy.  No, Liberals do not hate America (my favorite). And Yes, Republicans do care about the poor.  If what you are reading does not sound right, chances are it’s not.  A great piece of advice is to vet all of your email forwards through sites like Snopes, Politifact, or Factcheck which have spent considerable resources documenting data based claims (or lack of).  I have little tolerance for friends and family who send me blatantly obvious pieces of political fabrications.  I have been known to “reply to all” with the fact checking information (this usually gets me removed from their lists).

Stop being a troll!  If you use blanket statements while confronting differences of opinion, you're probably trolling.  Trolls talk in emotional charged opinionated responses.  Trolls also use labels to degrade differences of opinions.  Just because someone disagrees with you doesn’t automatically make them a (fill in the blank).  Terms like RINO, liberal, and conservative are all trolling labels.  Instead of calling President Obama a socialist for Obamacare, why not discuss points of the law you disagree with.  Since Trolls do not bother with data or use fact based dialogue they are tough to pin down and add little value to conversations.

Ask questions!  There will be times when we engage in a heated political discussion.  When debating from absolute positions we become more polarizing and miss persuasive opportunities which can flip opposing arguments.  Recently I started a conversation with a government employee who hated socialism.  After a series of questions about his stated position it was clear the conundrum he was engaged in.  The most persuasive individuals help others reach a conclusion through logic and reasoning primarily driven through questioning.  Nobody likes to be told why they are wrong.

My final thought is making sure we always respect those we love.  Politics is not worth sacrificing friendships for.  I have made it a point to move political conversations to mediums that do not interfere with relationships.  I have not forwarded a political email in several years, I do not post politics on my Facebook page, and I do not start political conversations (but always happy to engage once started).  To some this might seem timid or cowardly, to me its common respect.  Election cycles happen every other year, but families are forever.

“If I had to choose between betraying my country and betraying my friend, I hope I should have the guts to betray my country.” -  E. M. Forster

Post by Joseph M -

Romney has fought hard to keep the campaign about the issues (or issue in his case: the economy,) and he's fighting again; he quickly slammed attempts by a Super PAC to produce an anti-Obama ad that focused on racially charged comments made by Rev. Jeremiah Wright - see Yahoo News story.

Romney stated, "I want to make it very clear, I repudiate that effort. I think it's the wrong course for a PAC or a campaign. I hope that our campaigns can respectively be about the futures and about issues and about a vision for America."

Good for Romney, and good for all of us.  The last thing we need is for the Mormon Republican nominee to call for open season on the shooting range of religious affiliation.  Obama is also trying to stick to the issue(s) by making coordinated attacks against Romney's record as a "job creator" at Bain Capital.  But regardless, social issues have been creeping around the edges of this campaign - like President Obama's admission of support for marriage equality last week (more on that in a later post,) or during the divisive campaign to choose a Republican nominee.  However, even though Romney and Obama are attempting to steer the campaign away from these so-called social issues, enquiring minds still want to know that their Presidential candidate is just like them in every way possible (which is why we only have two viable political parties in the USA?) They want to know that their president supports/doesn't support abortion, is against/for marriage equality, loves/hates poor people, embodies righteousness/evil.

The two-party system has always had its drawbacks.  How can you fit 350 million Americans under two umbrellas of political belief when their cultural, spiritual, and religious perspectives literally fill the whole world?   (And also when half of them don't even vote?)  This must be where the so-called "independents" come into play.  Who are these people anyway?  (I have yet to meet one... although I do have faith that they exist.)

But where does all of this leave us Mormons?   With our belief in the reality of righteousness and sin, the existence of God and Satan, and polarity of good and evil, it might make sense to some Latter-day Saints that the Democratic and Republican parties would fit into the same dichotomous structure.  And this leaves very little room in the middle for fence-sitting (or even for those of us that still insist on sitting on the back row of Elder's Quorum  so we can play Draw Something on our smart phones.)

2 Nephi 2:15 explains that this dichotomy has existed since the beginning:  After (the Lord) created our first parents...it must needs be that there is an opposition: even the forbidden fruit in opposition to the tree of life; the one being sweet and the other bitter.  But while we believe that there is opposition in all things, at what point does this leave the realm of individual practice and personal decision and leap into the world of political affiliation as well?

This might be confusing for some LDS when it comes to choosing a political party or candidate, (i.e., Republicans are pro-life, anti-gay marriage, and advocate self-reliance, so they must be righteous.  Democrats promote abortions, don't let children pray in school, and like to elect Muslims for president, so they must be Satan.)  But forcing the two political parties into a good vs. evil scenario seems to presuppose that God Himself is at the helm of one of these (Republican?) political parties.  It ignores the fact that when we vote, we are participating in an imperfect, earth-bound, and very American political system.

We received a comment on the website that basically asked the question, how could a Mormon support Democrats or Obama when their platform supports abortion?  This question speaks to the simplistic reasoning that some people struggle with and that is encouraged by the two-party system.   Robert Fantina wrote a well-nuanced response on MormonsforObama.org to explain that all is not so simple:

The Democratic platform does support abortion, but the Republicans do nothing to prevent abortions. They will not countenance sex education, and are now making it more difficult for women to obtain contraceptives. And they appear not to care at all about babies once they are born: they will do everything possible to deprive them of health care, Head Start programs, etc...When (George W.) Bush was president, he stopped funding for Marie Slopes International (I think that’s the name of the organization), because they provided family planning, although not abortion, services. MSI estimated that, due to this funding cut, approximately 200,000 women in their serving area who didn’t want to get pregnant, would, and of those, approximately 60,000 would have abortions. So how was he a pro-life president?

Thanks to Robert for the comment and also for the link to his article on Pacific Free Press: What Makes a Romney Win Scary? (Hint: It Ain't Religion)

In short, the issues in this 2012 election are much more complex and nuanced than the few minutes of time it will take to fill out a mail-in ballot would leave one to believe.  However, I recognize that most people understand this.  I have conversations with my Mormon friends and family who are Republican, Libertarian (you know who you are,) and Nader-ists, and the dialogue is almost always engaging, stimulating, and respectful.  By their very nature, political parties are imperfect and fallible, and they don't easily lend themselves to black and white categorization... more like 50 shades of grey.  So I would in turn ask the Mormons who question my faith and allegiance to the gospel because of my support for Obama: how can you so readily assume that because I'm an active and faithful Mormon that I would by necessity vote Republican?

So let's put this simplistic thinking to rest. Choosing Obama over Romney is not the same as choosing the great and spacious building over the tree of life.  But don't get me wrong; I do believe that there are extremely compelling reasons to vote for Obama in 2012, and so I don't mean to trivialize the decision with the following analogy; but maybe it's more like choosing a spinach salad with feta, cranberries, and raspberry vinaigrette over an iceberg lettuce concoction from Jack in the Box.  The iceberg lettuce salad has a form of healthiness, but in the end it is empty, wilted, and undeniably overpriced.

Post by Joseph M -

The Priesthood/Relief Society lesson manual (Teachings of the Presidents of the Church: George Albert Smith) contains a rather instructive quotation.

"Let us pray for the great men and women of the world who need the Lord but do not understand his interest in them. Pray for … our governors, our mayors of cities, the men who have influence in politics in our various communities, that they may do the things that will be better for all of us and make us happier, and please our Heavenly Father. That is our privilege. I say to you that the power of prayer is something that cannot be measured, " (Lesson 9.)

We read this during our joint Elder's Quorum/High Priest Group meeting yesterday, and our instructor asked an interesting question: "Is our nation so partisan that we fail to pray for the great leaders, those who have the fate of nation's in their hands?"  I've been thinking about this for the past 30 hours or so, and I've pondered the fact that even though I am a supporter of our president, I do not often remember to pray for him; this extends also to local leaders in my state and city.  Thus, this lesson has inspired a course-correction on my part.  Additionally, I am realizing that I should take this counsel into consideration regardless of who wins the election in 2012.

So I'm finding myself pausing to consider what this means for me and for each of us, whether we support President Obama or not.  I think many of us in America are too busy filling our mouths with words of divisiveness and accusation to find time for prayer, much less a prayer that petitions the Lord in behalf of the man we have just maligned.

I received an "anti-Obama" email recently - one of those that have been forwarded around and around (and clearly it had made its way around Mormon circles,) and it was so ugly and partisan that I felt myself getting angry.  (And I am not implying that emails that unfairly demean Mitt Romney aren't out there as well - I think both sides need to calm this mess down.)  But this particular email was so out there that I felt particularly frustrated with the Christian right for not acting too Christian.

Clearly this idea of praying for our leaders is not conducive to the ugly partisanship that exists in our nation: the name-calling, the declarations that the only goal is to see President Obama "fail," the racist remarks... none of this is invites an attitude of prayer.

However, I acknowledge that we have real political differences that need to be discussed and debated, but often it goes too far - and I am far from perfect with this myself.  But I am surprised by anyone who would claim that either Obama or Romney are out to destroy our freedom, tear down this nation, or stomp on the constitution.  We started this website with the statement, "we don’t hate Mitt Romney, and we don’t want to character-assassinate him here," and we continue to maintain that position.  Additionally, I would hope that we could collectively (as Mormons, Christians, or Americans,) calm the waters that are swirling around during this election cycle.

I believe taking the time to remember our national leaders in prayer just might do the job, and ultimately, this may be as much for our benefit as it is for theirs.

During the last Presidential election season, I wrote the following letter to the editor, which was printed in a prominent newspaper:

Lost amid the hype about Mitt Romney's religion speech and Mike Huckabee's surge is a story about a church that, unlike most contemporary Christian organizations, does not participate in partisan politics. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, otherwise known as the Mormon Church, has stated for years that it does not "endorse, promote or oppose political parties, candidates or platforms." The Mormon Church also does not allow its church buildings to be used for partisan political purposes; nor does it tell its members whom to vote for.

When many evangelical leaders are eager to blur the line between church and state by endorsing candidates and tacitly (and sometimes explicitly) telling their followers whom to vote for, and when many churches allow candidates to use their pulpits, it is refreshing to know that at least one church is honoring a principle established by the Founding Fathers by keeping religion out of politics. As a practicing Mormon, I am a product of this political neutrality. (By the way, I will not be voting for Mr. Romney.)

Read more

So far, it appears that the person who targeted Democratic Rep. Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona for assassination, in Saturday's shooting rampage that left 6 people dead and many others seriously wounded, was not directly inspired by the virulent and violent political rhetoric that has been dominating the public discourse over the past 2 years and beyond. And in this post, I am not trying to assign blame for the shooting rampage to anyone aside from the deranged, homicidal gunman, Jared Lee Loughner. But this national tragedy has provided an opportunity for us to reflect on the type of political conversation we engage in both in public and in private. Last March, I posted about some of the recent violence and violent rhetoric. In the aftermath of the passage of the health care reform bill, many prominent opponents of the bill used inappropriate and irresponsible rhetoric that included implicit violent and hateful messages.

Read more

The Eleventh Article of Faith of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints states, "We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may." [emphasis added]

It is frankly shocking and disappointing that about 70 percent of Americans apparently oppose the building of an Islamic center that will include a mosque in Lower Manhattan, according to a new poll. This opposition is rooted in bigotry and in ignorance. First a few facts - the proposed Islamic center is to be built on private property located a few blocks away from the World Trade Center site. It is not going to be built on the World Trade Center site. There are two other mosques located in Lower Manhattan very close to the WTC site. They have been there for decades and have not caused any controversy.

Read more

During the most recent LDS General Conference, we heard yet another call for civility in our public dialogue. Elder Quentin L. Cook of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles stated, “many in this world are afraid and angry with one another. While we understand these feelings, we need to be civil in our discourse and respectful in our interactions. This is especially true when we disagree. The Savior taught us to love even our enemies. The vast majority of our members heed this counsel. Yet there are some who feel that venting their personal anger or deeply held opinions is more important than conducting themselves as Jesus Christ lived and taught. I invite each one of us individually to recognize that how we disagree is a real measure of who we are and whether we truly follow the Savior. It is appropriate to disagree, but it is not appropriate to be disagreeable. Violence and vandalism are not the answer to our disagreements.”

Read more

The news over the past few days has demonstrated that elements of the Tea Party and others on the far right have resorted to blatant bigotry and threats of violence in the run up to and in the aftermath of Sunday's House vote on the landmark heath care reform bill. As some Democratic lawmakers were making their way up to Capital Hill on Sunday, Tea Party protesters hurled racial and other epithets, like ni***r and fa***t to a few black congressman and one gay congressman. One black congressman was even spat upon.

Read more