Win One For the Flipper
This is the fourth post in a series on Obama's support for gay marriage.
Guest post by JBS -
When Obama announced his support for gay marriage, the conservative talk shows accused him of being political - they said that he only supported gay marriage because it would help him win votes in the election.
And maybe this is true? According to a Huffington Post article, Obama expressed support for gay marriage back in 1996. (He was for it before he was against it, and now he's for it again.) As Joseph M. pointed out in his post, The Theory of Evolution, Obama said that he was now supporting same-sex marriage because his position has evolved. But I disagree on this point - it seems that Obama is being disingenuous when saying this. It seems like he has supported gay marriage all along, but in 2008, he said he only supported civil unions because gay marriage was considered unpopular. Now as the climate changes, is it possible that Obama's support of gay marriage is because popular opinion is shifting? Even Jon Stewart asked the question, "What happened?" and then proceeded to offer his own answer: "He became a politician."
But in this election, Obama is not usually associated with the flip-flop. That usually is Mitt Romney. So what about Governor Romney? While his stance on gay marriage has been unchanging, his position on gay rights has seemed to shift overtime. When Romney ran in Massachusetts for the Senate seat against Ted Kennedy, he did an interview with The Bay, a gay newspaper, and expressed support for gay rights. Now in 2012, while running for president, he is trying to stay quiet on the subject.
However, because of Obama's recent announcement of support and the allegations that Romney participated in gay-bashing as a young man, the subject keeps coming up, and Romney is forced into answering questions about his position. Check out this website for a review of Romney's positions over-time. Interestingly, back in Bush's 2004 reelection campaign, the gay marriage issue seemed to nail the coffin shut for the Democrats - although after the election was over, Bush never said anything about the marriage amendment to the constitution again. But now, only eight years later, support for traditional marriage doesn't seem to be a winning issue for Republicans. (And we know that Romney doesn't take a pro-position on any issue that isn't "winning.") However, one cannot be certain that gay marriage is a winning issue for Obama either. If this was so cut and dry, Obama might have come out in support of gay marriage sooner - before he was pushed into it by Biden's preemptive statement of support.
Well, where does that leave me? I support Obama because I feel like he is heading in the right direction on all major issues. I believe he is heading in the right direction on gay marriage as well, regardless if he was for it, then against it, then for it again. The general direction of his campaign is where I would like to see our country go. I know that this may be a difficult issue for some Mormons, but ultimately, gay marriage will be decided by the states. Also, with all the flip-flopping and federal inaction on this issue, why should gay marriage ever majorly factor into someone's vote for president? Additionally, when looking at the big picture of Obama's last four years as a whole, he has consistently provided excellent leadership and has brought dignity and integrity to his office. For this reason, he gets my vote in 2012.
Guest post by JBS -
When Obama announced his support for gay marriage, the conservative talk shows accused him of being political - they said that he only supported gay marriage because it would help him win votes in the election.
And maybe this is true? According to a Huffington Post article, Obama expressed support for gay marriage back in 1996. (He was for it before he was against it, and now he's for it again.) As Joseph M. pointed out in his post, The Theory of Evolution, Obama said that he was now supporting same-sex marriage because his position has evolved. But I disagree on this point - it seems that Obama is being disingenuous when saying this. It seems like he has supported gay marriage all along, but in 2008, he said he only supported civil unions because gay marriage was considered unpopular. Now as the climate changes, is it possible that Obama's support of gay marriage is because popular opinion is shifting? Even Jon Stewart asked the question, "What happened?" and then proceeded to offer his own answer: "He became a politician."
But in this election, Obama is not usually associated with the flip-flop. That usually is Mitt Romney. So what about Governor Romney? While his stance on gay marriage has been unchanging, his position on gay rights has seemed to shift overtime. When Romney ran in Massachusetts for the Senate seat against Ted Kennedy, he did an interview with The Bay, a gay newspaper, and expressed support for gay rights. Now in 2012, while running for president, he is trying to stay quiet on the subject.
However, because of Obama's recent announcement of support and the allegations that Romney participated in gay-bashing as a young man, the subject keeps coming up, and Romney is forced into answering questions about his position. Check out this website for a review of Romney's positions over-time. Interestingly, back in Bush's 2004 reelection campaign, the gay marriage issue seemed to nail the coffin shut for the Democrats - although after the election was over, Bush never said anything about the marriage amendment to the constitution again. But now, only eight years later, support for traditional marriage doesn't seem to be a winning issue for Republicans. (And we know that Romney doesn't take a pro-position on any issue that isn't "winning.") However, one cannot be certain that gay marriage is a winning issue for Obama either. If this was so cut and dry, Obama might have come out in support of gay marriage sooner - before he was pushed into it by Biden's preemptive statement of support.
Well, where does that leave me? I support Obama because I feel like he is heading in the right direction on all major issues. I believe he is heading in the right direction on gay marriage as well, regardless if he was for it, then against it, then for it again. The general direction of his campaign is where I would like to see our country go. I know that this may be a difficult issue for some Mormons, but ultimately, gay marriage will be decided by the states. Also, with all the flip-flopping and federal inaction on this issue, why should gay marriage ever majorly factor into someone's vote for president? Additionally, when looking at the big picture of Obama's last four years as a whole, he has consistently provided excellent leadership and has brought dignity and integrity to his office. For this reason, he gets my vote in 2012.
The Same Rights as Me
This post is the third in a series. Please scroll down to see the previous two posts.
Guest post by Ruby -
I'm happy to say that I support and applaud President Obama's acceptance of gay marriage. Getting here has been a journey for me. I struggled greatly during the Prop 8 backlash (even though I am not a California resident,) and I have discussed this topic at length with friends and fellow members of the church. Here is how I've broken it down and what I hope other members of the church will consider when they think about gay marriage:
Will it hurt me if two people who love each other want to get married? No.
Will my life change in anyway if two people who love each other want to get married? No.
Will my rights be taken away or infringed upon if two people who love each other want to get married? No.
I came to this logic after comparing the marriage debate with the Word of Wisdom. Many members of the church follow the Word of Wisdom by abstaining from alcohol, coffee, tobacco and other harmful substances. (Please note that I said many members live this way and not all.) Most people who are not of our faith do not choose to live this way, but we don't see Mormons standing outside Starbuck's condemning everyone with a coffee cup in their hand.
As Mormons, we understand that traditional (opposite sex) marriage is a lifestyle that we accept and embrace (and love) and that these are principals that we choose for our individual lives. I have also chosen to marry someone of my opposite sex; this is a lifestyle and a way of living that I have chosen for my life, and I shouldn't assume that everyone else will choose the same.
As Mormons, we understand that traditional (opposite sex) marriage is a lifestyle that we accept and embrace (and love) and that these are principals that we choose for our individual lives. I have also chosen to marry someone of my opposite sex; this is a lifestyle and a way of living that I have chosen for my life, and I shouldn't assume that everyone else will choose the same.
I used the words choice, chosen and choose a lot in this last paragraph because an important principal that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believes in is agency. Everyone should have the right to choose how they live, who they love, what they do, what they believe, etc. (Article of Faith #11: 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.)
As for me and my personal life, I will teach my children, my Sunday School class, and those who are interested in learning about the LDS church that I believe marriage should be between one man and one woman. I will also express my gratitude for the Word of Wisdom and the blessings it has brought to my life. I will also explain that there are people who are not members of our church who don't believe the same things we do, and that's their right. As a person who believes in Jesus Christ and the love that he has for each individual, I feel it is my responsibility to also love everyone and to expect that everyone is granted the same rights as me. It is not my responsibility to strip individuals of their rights or tell them how awful they are.
Go President Obama for standing up for the rights for all our brothers and sisters.
Obama, Gay Marriage and Me
This is the second post in a series of viewpoints on Obama's support for marriage equality.
Post by Eric R -
After Obama recently came out in support of gay marriage our housemate, a liberal self-identified atheist, asked my wife if we were going to take the “I’m Voting for Obama, and I’m a Mormon” bumper sticker off of our car. Apparently he assumed that any politician who supported gay marriage would be a politician we couldn’t, as Mormons, support.
While I can understand why he might have jumped to that conclusion, it is unfortunate that the image he had of us was so closely tied to the most vocally conservative of the Religious Right.
While gay marriage is a moral/social issue that I do have feelings about, it is certainly not the only moral/social issue I take into consideration when deciding how to vote. I also believe that how candidates address questions of war, poverty, equality, capital punishment, social programs aimed at supporting our nation’s most vulnerable and the environment as important moral indicators as well. And with respect to each of these moral questions, it is clear to me that Obama, and the Democratic party generally, more closely represents what I believe would be Christ’s position on such issues.
I am not single-issue voter, as no person who is concerned with the bigger picture could be. That said, looking specifically at the issue of gay marriage I see some elements of Obama’s stance that I can support. And it isn’t just me, but the Church as well.
Back in late 2009 the Salt Lake City council was debating a series of non-discrimination ordinances designed to make explicit certain rights for same-sex couples. Weighing in on the controversial topic, the First Presidency released a statement that reads, in part, that the Church "does not object to rights for same-sex couples regarding hospitalization and medical care, fair housing and employment rights or probate rights." The Church also said that it is “not anti-gay”, but rather “pro-marriage between a man and a woman. And there is a huge difference between those two points.”
I spend enough time with non-Mormon lefties to know that many of them have a very hard time distinguishing between those two points, and I would be lying if I said that this issue does not cause some friction between many of my friends and me. That said, it is clear to me that a), God wants us to, first and foremost, treat all of our brothers and sisters with love, and b), that it is completely appropriate to push for equal rights and responsibilities for same-sex couples that heterosexual couples currently enjoy and are subject to – even if we don’t call it marriage.
So while I may not be on the same page with Obama concerning all aspects of his support for gay marriage, I would have to say that our views are compatible on about two-thirds of the issue. While that isn’t 100%, it is a great deal better than the Right’s alternative of continued disenfranchisement and denial of reality.
New Stickers
Just in time for Fathers Day...show your Father you both love him and you support Obama by getting him the version 3.0 sticker here.
An Opposition in All Things
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.
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.
Ere You Left Your Room This Morning...
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.
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.
MormonsforObama.org on RealClearPolitics.com
Some of you may already know this (especially if you searched for this site because of the article by Scott Conroy on RealClearPolitics.com), but MormornsforObama.org received mention in the article, "Pro-Obama Mormons Unswayed by Shared Faith with Romney."
Conroy reflects the views of the many of us who are Mormon and voting for Obama quite well, and Hannah Wheelwright says it perfectly with her quotation in the article: “The fact that I’m a Mormon is why I’m voting for President Obama instead of Mitt Romney. I’m a Democrat because I’m a Mormon. I think there’s so many things in my faith that do promote certain policies in the Democratic Party, and a lot of the reason I support President Obama is his dedication to social programs, equality, and those types of things.”
However, there is one area where I think Conroy didn't get it right (and I'm not referring to when he mistakenly wrote that Laura attends weekly church services at the Seattle Temple); he writes that "there is a significant subsection of younger, liberal-leaning church members who are emphatic supporters of Obama and who cannot relate to Romney as a politician, despite their shared faith." This has not been my experience. I have found that Mormons of all ages plan to vote for Obama. I know many LDS Obama supporters, and I've never noticed that youth was some defining characteristic that linked them together. Even myself, (although I listen to some hip hop and that new song by that band fun.), can hardly be considered young.
[caption id="attachment_912" align="alignleft" width="248"] Seattle Poster, by Jenny Beorkrem[/caption]
I live in Seattle, Washington, and I knew before I moved here that the city was somewhat liberal, but I've been happy to find that this extends to many of my LDS friends and leaders at church as well. I've never been embarrassed, nervous, or ashamed to talk about my political leanings with other Mormons, and sometimes I just assume that everyone votes Democratic, much like Utah Mormons undoubtably assume that everyone is Republican. But even those Mormons who are "conservative" seem fine with all the Democrats around them. I don't know the statistics here, but I would guess that the LDS Democrats in Seattle may not be outnumbered - or if they are, it can't be by much.
But this is my point: while I recognize that many Mormons vote Republican, I don't see that this is some defining characteristic of Mormonism or that youth is a defining characteristic of LDS Dems. The Church has a long-standing position of political neutrality, and this is much more defining of Mormons than a particular party affiliation.
So while it may seem odd to some that we have this website or that we are opting out of voting for the Mormon, for me (and Hannah Wheelwright,) supporting Obama really makes all the sense in the world.
Conroy reflects the views of the many of us who are Mormon and voting for Obama quite well, and Hannah Wheelwright says it perfectly with her quotation in the article: “The fact that I’m a Mormon is why I’m voting for President Obama instead of Mitt Romney. I’m a Democrat because I’m a Mormon. I think there’s so many things in my faith that do promote certain policies in the Democratic Party, and a lot of the reason I support President Obama is his dedication to social programs, equality, and those types of things.”
However, there is one area where I think Conroy didn't get it right (and I'm not referring to when he mistakenly wrote that Laura attends weekly church services at the Seattle Temple); he writes that "there is a significant subsection of younger, liberal-leaning church members who are emphatic supporters of Obama and who cannot relate to Romney as a politician, despite their shared faith." This has not been my experience. I have found that Mormons of all ages plan to vote for Obama. I know many LDS Obama supporters, and I've never noticed that youth was some defining characteristic that linked them together. Even myself, (although I listen to some hip hop and that new song by that band fun.), can hardly be considered young.
[caption id="attachment_912" align="alignleft" width="248"] Seattle Poster, by Jenny Beorkrem[/caption]
I live in Seattle, Washington, and I knew before I moved here that the city was somewhat liberal, but I've been happy to find that this extends to many of my LDS friends and leaders at church as well. I've never been embarrassed, nervous, or ashamed to talk about my political leanings with other Mormons, and sometimes I just assume that everyone votes Democratic, much like Utah Mormons undoubtably assume that everyone is Republican. But even those Mormons who are "conservative" seem fine with all the Democrats around them. I don't know the statistics here, but I would guess that the LDS Democrats in Seattle may not be outnumbered - or if they are, it can't be by much.
But this is my point: while I recognize that many Mormons vote Republican, I don't see that this is some defining characteristic of Mormonism or that youth is a defining characteristic of LDS Dems. The Church has a long-standing position of political neutrality, and this is much more defining of Mormons than a particular party affiliation.
So while it may seem odd to some that we have this website or that we are opting out of voting for the Mormon, for me (and Hannah Wheelwright,) supporting Obama really makes all the sense in the world.
Why I Support President Obama (Part I)
Post by Joseph M-
(Originally posted Feb. 5, 2012)
My principal reason for backing President Obama is his support and initiation of healthcare reform, and ultimately his signing of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act into law in 2010. Republicans have pejoratively labeled it Obamacare; meanwhile President Obama has embraced the term, saying, "I have no problem with people saying Obama cares. I do care." I care too, and this issue is the political lynchpin for me. I cannot support any candidate who does not appreciate or understand the need for an expansion of access to healthcare in this country. Healthcare should not be a privilege of the wealthy, but a right for all. I believe that if we can get behind public monies for libraries, sports arenas, museums, parks, wildlife protection, and Bombs over Baghdad, then we should also ensure healthcare access.
And so you might further see my point: are you aware that through local tax payer money, you (and your children) can check out Saw I, II, III, IV, V, VI, and Saw: the Final Chapter from the Seattle Public Library and the King County Library System? And I just checked - you can get it at the Salt Lake City Library as well.
My belief is that providing healthcare is the right thing to do; it is the Christian thing to do, and this aligns with my Mormon faith. I echo the words written by Boyd Peterson in his essay entitled, Why I'm a Mormon Democrat:
"I believe that the Democratic party takes the strongest position on many moral issues. For example, King Benjamin's address in the Book of Mormon admonishes us to prioritize, 'feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, visiting the sick and administering to their relief, both spiritually and temporally, according to their wants' (Mosiah 4:26). I believe the Democratic party works harder to protect and defend these moral priorities."
And so I feel about President Obama. When I decided to vote for Barack Obama, I did so with the belief that he would bring change to America and especially its healthcare system. Of course, there is more to be done. However, President Obama has fulfilled his promise of change in so many ways; therefore, I will continue to support him and his presidency.
In addressing the specific issue of healthcare, I like these two quotations, one from the US Conference of Catholic Bishops and the second from the American Medical Student Association:
"Our approach to health care is shaped by a simple but fundamental principle: 'Every person has a right to adequate health care. This right flows from the sanctity of human life and the dignity that belongs to all human persons, who are made in the image of God.' Health care is more than a commodity; it is a basic human right, an essential safeguard of human life and dignity. We believe our people's health care should not depend on where they work, how much their parents earn, or where they live. Our constant teaching that each human life must be protected and human dignity promoted leads us to insist that all people have a right to health care."
USCCB - June 18, 1993, "A Framework for Comprehensive Health Care Reform."
"In a time when thousands of people lose their health insurance every day, when health care is becoming elusive to even well-to-do Americans, and when any person is just one pink slip away from becoming uninsured, it becomes clear that health care for all is not just important to achieve, but imperative.
At its root, the lack of health care for all in America is fundamentally a moral issue. The United States is the only industrialized nation that does not have some form of universal health care (defined as a basic guarantee of health care to all of its citizens). While other countries have declared health care to be a basic right, the United States treats health care as a privilege, only available to those who can afford it...
Americans purport to believe in equal opportunity. Yet, in the current situation, those who do not have health care are at risk for financial ruin and poorer health, both of which disadvantage them in society and thereby do not give them equal opportunity...
The Declaration of Independence states there are certain 'inalienable rights', including life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. If Americans believe in an inalienable right to life, how can we tolerate a system that denies people lifesaving medications and treatments? Similarly, if Americans believe in an inalienable
right to the pursuit of happiness, how can we allow millions of dreams to be smashed by the financial and physical consequences of uninsurance?"
AMSA - Aug. 27, 2009, "The Case for Universal Healthcare."
It feels dang good to be on the right side of history on this one.
To see Part 2 of this post click here.
Forward... and my car is famous.
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WbQe-wVK9E]
The Obama campaign has produced a new video establishing some clear reasons for a second presidential term. I am so happy that I am on the right side of history on this one.
Also, my car and its accompanying bumper sticker is now famous... check out Democratic Underground for more on this historic occasion.
The Obama campaign has produced a new video establishing some clear reasons for a second presidential term. I am so happy that I am on the right side of history on this one.
Also, my car and its accompanying bumper sticker is now famous... check out Democratic Underground for more on this historic occasion.
The Bumper Stickers are Now Available!
Here is the design - with a bigger and brighter font - (Some people said that the last one was a little hard to read from a distance on those wide Salt Lake City streets.) Just click here. Those of you that preordered: your stickers are on the way.
[caption id="attachment_844" align="aligncenter" width="540"] I'm voting for Obama, and I buy American[/caption]
[caption id="attachment_844" align="aligncenter" width="540"] I'm voting for Obama, and I buy American[/caption]