Quantcast
Faith

LDS Church buys ad space in 'Book of Mormon' musical playbill

Comments

Return To Article
  • John Pack Lambert of Michigan Ypsilanti, MI
    Sept. 12, 2012 11:11 a.m.

    I still wonder if it is wise to spend money to support those who attack the Church. Still, on the whole, I suspect there are some people who will see the Musical for the unjustified, false, non-grounded in fact, over the top production it is and pointing them to where they can find accurate information can not hurt.

  • John20000 Cedar Hills, UT
    Sept. 11, 2012 8:11 a.m.

    Matt 5:44 - But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

    Modern day translation - Buy ad space in the playbill for those that make fun of you.

  • raybies Layton, UT
    Sept. 11, 2012 6:21 a.m.

    I think from the church's perspective this is a brilliant idea. Either people are intrigued by the opportunity to learn about the Book of Mormon or they may even start to think the church is secretly behind the musical, at which point people will lose interest in it and it'll be forgotten. :)

  • J-TX Allen, TX
    Sept. 10, 2012 3:40 p.m.

    Just one point - Scientist states that 8 missions have been closed (consolidated) in the last 5 years.

    However other new ones have been formed in the same time frame. (My son is serving in one - Nevada Reno.) Where is that mention?

    Far too easy to interpret your intent. A half truth is always a lie.

  • Counter Intelligence Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 10, 2012 2:47 p.m.

    @atl134

    Life is full of choices and at some point everyone has to grow up and accept or reject their childhood religious training. Its part of being an adult. Sometimes it is NOT easy (Actually if it is is honest and deep - it is never easy).

    Try being a homosexual who does not follow the party line: I have lost good friends and have been disowned by peers because I have not followed a politically correct path or regurgitated all the latest dogma (which does not mean I am perfect, merely that I am aware). Where is your sympathy for me (oh yea - non-existent)

    So basically what you are arguing is that it is OK to be a perpetrator; if you first claim to be a victim. Do you understand how insincere and dishonest it is to claim to be a voice of tolerance while rationalizing acting out childhood resentments?

    Here me clearly: If you were a victim: you should know better.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 10, 2012 11:53 a.m.

    @Counter Intelligence
    "If you haven't noticed yet, ex's tend to be the most bitter"

    You can't figure out why people who are called insincere or dishonest could get upset at such an assertion? Heck, some people lost close friends or were disowned by family members just because they left the church. Good thing for me that I didn't have to deal with that part at least.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 10, 2012 11:49 a.m.

    @Bill in Nebraska
    "Sorry Scientist but the Church has never published any of the resignations of individuals whether in the Church News or on the website."

    He's not saying that resignations of individuals are published. He's saying that if you use the numbers for last conferences membership, then add in born in church numbers, add in converts, and then compare that to the current membership number... that provides what you need to figure out how many left or passed away (they may or may not give those numbers too, I'm not sure). Basically if the church had 12,345,000 people and 250,000 were baptized either as converts or born in the church members getting to 8 years old, but current membership is 12,545,000 you can infer that 50,000 left/passed away.

    "You have never read the Book of Mormon with real intent and though you may say you have that is a total misrepresentation and fabrication of truth. "

    The arrogance it takes to suggest that not getting your answer means someone is insincere is probably a major turnoff for potential investigators.

  • Counter Intelligence Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 10, 2012 10:46 a.m.

    @Blue AZ Cougar Bill in Nebraska
    Thank you for your responses: I understand your point, but there is the moral quandary regarding actual funding of something profane - I guess LDS PR simply had to make a value judgement; which is worse - helping to finance the musical or failing to counter it. Life choices are not always clear

    @LValfre

    If you haven't noticed yet, ex's tend to be the most bitter

  • LValfre CHICAGO, IL
    Sept. 9, 2012 6:15 p.m.

    @Scientist,

    If you haven't noticed yet, anyone who isn't 'moved' by the BOM isn't practicing humility, doesn't want to know the truth, or isn't worthy. Don't even fight it. There's a reason those who follow the one truth don't consider anything else could possibly be true ...

  • A Scientist Provo, UT
    Sept. 9, 2012 4:47 p.m.

    Bill in Nebraska,

    You presume to judge me? To judge my "intent" and sincerity?

    Sounds like you failed to read Matthew 7:1.

    I repeat, I have read the BOM over a dozen times, and I have done so with a "sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ". I have even attended workshops and seminars at "the Lord's University" from the top scholars in the LDS Church.

    And yet there has been NO "testimony" or manifestation of the "spirit" that the book is "true". My conclusion after all these years of study, investigation, and living among Mormons is that the BOM is fiction, and poorly written, boring fiction at that!

    For anyone to presume to judge my testimony as "false" simply because I did not get "the right answer" is appalling, offensive, and self-deluded.

  • donn layton, UT
    Sept. 9, 2012 2:58 p.m.

    RE: Mister J, I hope to see The Book of Mormon play at the Pantages(L.A) in November with My wife an inactive Mormon and my Brother and sister in law former temple Mormons who left the church. I left the Church when I became a Christian. I’m sure we will have three different perspectives: Mormon, non-Mormon(agnostic) and Christian.

  • Mister J SLC, UT
    Sept. 9, 2012 11:30 a.m.

    re Shazandra

    "Fiction posing as truth will not get my time, either."

    But, do you watch reality TV?

    "Now if they would televise a Q&A about the book, that would prove how serious they are about truly spreading their message."

    Interesting call & not a bad one either.

  • Shazandra Bakersfield, CA
    Sept. 9, 2012 8:44 a.m.

    I'm an evangelical and the Bible is my source of truth. There is no way a vulgar play will get my time or $, popular or not. Vampires or not; not even with my LDS neices begging me to "read the books, Auntie!"... Fiction posing as truth will not get my time, either.

    But I do see the LDS Church's response as a classy way to respond.

    Now if they would televise a Q&A about the book, that would prove how serious they are about truly spreading their message. People get "converted" to things every day that have nothing to do with God. The issue is whether or not He is the source, or one of the fallen angels...

  • Mister J SLC, UT
    Sept. 9, 2012 7:54 a.m.

    re: Bill in Nebraska

    "The promise of Moroni holds true and has for millions. Those who don't honestly don't want to believe it and thus the promise is nill."

    Then, if you want it to be true then it will be? Sounds like Confirmation bias to me.

  • Bill in Nebraska Maryville, MO
    Sept. 8, 2012 8:13 p.m.

    Sorry Scientist but the Church has never published any of the resignations of individuals whether in the Church News or on the website. Therefore, your so called resignation statistics are probably as false as they get. Secondly, consolidating a mission is not closing it. The numbers may be down but the statistics continue to grow.

    You have never read the Book of Mormon with real intent and though you may say you have that is a total misrepresentation and fabrication of truth. The promise of Moroni holds true and has for millions. Those who don't honestly don't want to believe it and thus the promise is nill.

  • Hank Pym SLC, UT
    Sept. 8, 2012 6:16 p.m.

    re: monthigos

    Funmy thing, insecurity?

  • Wally West SLC, UT
    Sept. 8, 2012 6:14 p.m.

    @ Cats 6:24 a.m. Sept. 7, 2012

    And it could be that is the source of their problems.

    In short, RanchHand (7:09 a.m. Sept. 7, 2012) is onto something.

  • monthigos Ogden, UT
    Sept. 8, 2012 4:23 p.m.

    I don't understand why these advertisements are necessary. Doesn't this church already have a massive missionary force? Isn't it enough to just live a good life and lead by example? Surely clever slogans are the methods of corporations trying to sell a product, and I would think a religion wouldn't want that kind of association. Wouldn't that money be better spent on the Mormon church's humanitarian efforts? Surely those efforts are far more moving than clever posters.

  • sharrona layton, UT
    Sept. 8, 2012 3:06 p.m.

    @Bill in Nebraska, "I told the brethren that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth.
    In 3 Nephi 13:12, (Jesus)“And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil”).
    In Mt 6:13 NIV, The correct translation is “ deliver us from the evil one”(Satan). Also verse 13,the doxology in Nephi is not found in earlier and better manuscripts of the Matthew 6:13 doxology.
    LDS scholar William Hamblin. "The evil one [ho poneros]. (John 17:15). This phrase is often understood by modern Christians as a prayer for protection from evil in an Abstract sense. But in its first century context,(ho poneros) meant the Evil One"=Satan.

    JS copied the poor KJV translation and later manuscripts.

  • A Scientist Provo, UT
    Sept. 8, 2012 11:58 a.m.

    Meadow Lark Mark:

    "A scientist. What is the source that you use in stating the numbers that you stated?"

    The data come directly from the official Church Statistical Reports in General Conference and
    published in the Church News and on the Church website.

  • A Scientist Provo, UT
    Sept. 8, 2012 11:53 a.m.

    Bill in Nebraska,

    I have read the BOM over a dozen times.

    The musical is WAY better!

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Sept. 8, 2012 11:06 a.m.

    "The LDS Church is not endorsing this play in the least just giving those who really want to know the truth to get it"

    They may not be endorsing it, but they certainly are supporting it financially. That's what advertising dollars do.

    I do think it is a smart PR move. And the LDS church is as good PR wise as anyone.

  • rightascension Provo, UT
    Sept. 8, 2012 9:35 a.m.

    Not quite sure how to react to this. Usually the LDS Missionary Media Division does not demonstrate a sense of irony. Seems almost as tacky as the French Socialist Workers Party advertising in the Les Miz playbill or plastic surgeons advertising in the "Phantom of the Opera" playbill. Or the Witches Union advertising in the "Wicked" playbill.

  • Bill in Nebraska Maryville, MO
    Sept. 8, 2012 7:14 a.m.

    Mukkake, nothing and I mean nothing will ever be better than actually reading the Book of Mormon. That is the essence of it all. One must actually read the Book of Mormon to become spiritually knowledgable of it. No movie or play will ever replace that. Yes, there are videos and even pictures that portray life in the Book of Mormon. Some may actually help in gaining a testimony of this marvelous book but nothing replaces hearing or reading the actual book.

    That is why Joseph Smith as part of the introduction states, "I told the brethren that the Book of Moromn was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone to our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts, than by any other book."

  • Mukkake Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 7, 2012 7:15 p.m.

    Why see the play or read the book?

    These guys are filmmakers and will undoubtedly make a film version, which will be better than the either two.

  • Bill in Nebraska Maryville, MO
    Sept. 7, 2012 6:49 p.m.

    Counter Intelligence: I'm speaking for myself as to why The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints elected to place an ad in the BOOK OF MORMON play versus the others. I think the reason is really quite simple. It is a satire of the BOOK OF MORMON itself and thus does a diservice to us and to our beliefs. It makes fun of our missionaries as they go around proclaiming the Gospel of Jesus Christ to all the world. In placing an ad it gives those who wish to attend this spectacle a chance to get to know the truth other than the satarical presentation they are attending. The others have nothing at all to do with the Church so it means nothing to place an ad in them. The LDS Church is not endorsing this play in the least just giving those who really want to know the truth to get it. How many who may join is not the reason. IT is only a choice.

    My opinion is that this is good Public Relations for the LDS Church. Years back this play would have never even been seen on broadway or any where.

  • ClarkHippo Tooele, UT
    Sept. 7, 2012 5:51 p.m.

    @PGVikingDad

    Not entirely sure who you are referring to as hypocrites, but I would say the LDS Church's reaction to The Book of Mormon musical as well as the South Park cartoon series has been relatively tame compared to other groups.

    When the South Park show did an episode on the Church of Scientology, one of its cast members, Isaac Hayes, a scientologist himself, left the show in angry protest. Appearently he didn't mind when other churches were targerted for lampoon, just as long as it wasn't his church.

    When the South Park guys made a film several years back called Team America World Police, which in part lampooned liberal celebrity activists, several liberal activists celebrities including Sean Penn demanded the film be pulled.

    Tell me how that is not hypocrisy

  • sallys clovis, CA
    Sept. 7, 2012 4:27 p.m.

    It sounds like the best thing about the musical is the ad you'll see about reading the Book of Mormon. Who cares about another modern musical that caters to worldly tastes, anyway. But the Book of Mormon contains the word of God and backs up the Bible 100%. If you read it, you'll recognize the voice of the Lord, which is how my mom joined the church. At first she had too much respect for the Bible to read that "kooky" Mormon book, but as soon as she read the first page, she immediately recognized it as scripture. She knew it was the Lord speaking, and she read the whole thing right through. Too many people don't even bother to pick up the Book of Mormon, so they don't know its value.

  • Blue AZ Cougar ,
    Sept. 7, 2012 4:08 p.m.

    @ Counter Intelligence

    "If the LDS Church is ok putting an ad in a playbill for a play that is noted for its vulgarity and profanity, how far does that go? Are ads in Playboy OK? Is Family Guy OK? Is The New Normal Ok?"

    I understand your question, but please understand that dirty magazines or television shows have NOTHING to do with the Church and aren't really the types of advertising avenues that would be most influential. People who go to see the play understand that it's a musical about a religious group, and are therefore more likely to be receptive to the actual Book of Mormon. Someone reading a pornographic magazine isn't going to see an ad and say, "ya know, they're right. I'm gonna stop looking at this dirty magazine and go to church."

    Taking out an ad in the play's program is not an endorsement of the play itself. Certainly there are things in the play the Church wouldn't rubber-stamp, but they're using that platform to their advantage and saying "hey, come check out the real thing." I don't see an issue with that.

  • Meadow Lark Mark IDAHO FALLS, ID
    Sept. 7, 2012 3:40 p.m.

    A scientist. What is the source that you use in stating the numbers that you stated?

  • aspsert Kirtland Hills, OH
    Sept. 7, 2012 2:59 p.m.

    Only one word: AWESOME!

  • aspsert Kirtland Hills, OH
    Sept. 7, 2012 2:56 p.m.

    Only one word: AWESOME!

  • Cowboy Dude SAINT GEORGE, UT
    Sept. 7, 2012 2:31 p.m.

    PGVikingDad said, "If you don't have the energy to defend others, don't bother trying to defend yourself."

    That is exactly why I won't see, "Sister Act". If the Catholic Church doesn't like it, I won't endorse it either.

  • PGVikingDad Pleasant Grove, UT
    Sept. 7, 2012 1:47 p.m.

    Matt and Trey have satirized just about every religion under the sun. Now it's our turn, and I love the reaction. I always found it incredibly hypocritical when a particular denomination would throw a fit when their beliefs were toyed with, when South Park had already lampooned so many others without a whisper of protest from the newly offended organization. If you don't have the energy to defend others, don't bother trying to defend yourself.

  • LValfre CHICAGO, IL
    Sept. 7, 2012 12:30 p.m.

    @maximum

    "This is great. I bet "Elder" Parker and "Elder" Stone never thought they would be such a great missionary companionship."

    In this day in age all this exposure does it get people to Google the church. If you think that's a great missionary companionship ... try googling it.

  • ClarkHippo Tooele, UT
    Sept. 7, 2012 12:13 p.m.

    @FT

    You said - "Maybe they'll squeeze the ad right between the ACLU and Planned Parenthood's."

    LOL! Love it!

    @A Scientist

    You said - "So let's just wait and see how the effects of these "Mormon Moments" and Public Relations campaigns show up in the numbers."

    Personally, I don't look at LDS Church numbers in terms of quantity, but quality instead.
    For example:

    - The idea that both the majority leader of the U.S. Senate, along with the GOP nominee for U.S. President would both be active Latter-day Saints would have been laughed at only a few years ago.

    - What about the fact that a book series written by an active Latter-day Saint (Twilight) would become so popular it would spawn a series of equally popular films?

    - And the fact the creators of "South Park" would make a hugely popular Broadway musical about LDS missionaries tells me the LDS Church has made and continues to make an impact on American culture.

  • PhoenixAZ phoenix, AZ
    Sept. 7, 2012 11:43 a.m.

    Genuis!

  • A Scientist Provo, UT
    Sept. 7, 2012 11:38 a.m.

    I do not know when the LDS Church hired an expensive Public Relations firm, but there is no doubt they did it because of slowed growth and activity over the past twenty years:

    - the annual number of Converts per Mission has been on a dramatic decline, from almost 1,200 down to under 800, despite the Church consolidating missions by closing 8 of them in the past 5 years.

    - FT Proselyting Missionary work is decreasing in effectiveness: over a 20% drop in convert baptisms per FT Missionary, despite increasing the total number of FT missionaries by almost 4,000 in the past 5 years.

    - The overall Growth Rate of the Church has dropped almost in half, while the numbers of resignations has increased by an order of magnitude in the past 5 years.

    So let's just wait and see how the effects of these "Mormon Moments" and Public Relations campaigns show up in the numbers.

  • RanchHand Huntsville, UT
    Sept. 7, 2012 11:26 a.m.

    @CounterI;

    For once I agree with you. It's a MIRACLE. The gospel must be true; or not. But you pose a good question.

  • maximum Phoenix, AZ
    Sept. 7, 2012 11:13 a.m.

    This is great. I bet "Elder" Parker and "Elder" Stone never thought they would be such a great missionary companionship.

  • Cowboy Dude SAINT GEORGE, UT
    Sept. 7, 2012 10:52 a.m.

    I won't see the show in L.A. either.

    However, my associates from New York said the take away they got was, "The Mormon Church is NOT a secretive cult, "Blankety Blank" they have 50,000 missionaries that will go to the ends of the earth to tell you about it."

  • Counter Intelligence Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 7, 2012 10:50 a.m.

    The moderator censored me: but it was a legitimate question. If the LDS Church is ok putting an ad in a playbill for a play that is noted for its vulgarity and profanity, how far does that go? Are ads in Playboy OK? Is Family Guy OK? Is The New Normal Ok?

    I simply want to know what distinguishes the profanity in BOM musical from that in other media that the LDS Church would choose to avoid?

    Maybe it is as simple as noting the New Normal or Playboy are NOT about LDS. But I would still like to know the exact reason.

  • FT salt lake city, UT
    Sept. 7, 2012 9:34 a.m.

    Maybe they'll squeeze the ad right between the ACLU and Planned Parenthood's.

  • Conner Johnson
    Sept. 7, 2012 9:09 a.m.

    Can't wait until they build the $100 million broadway theatre downtown, so I can go see the "book of mormon' play for myself!

  • Blue Rampage Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 7, 2012 8:35 a.m.

    I continue to be impressed with the Church's recent ad campaigns and PR savvy. This is how it is supposed to be done.

  • Sneaky Jimmy Bay Area, CA
    Sept. 7, 2012 8:33 a.m.

    The times really are changing. All props to the Church publicity dept. Took guts to step out of the box on this but the message is totally on target. We can laugh at ourselves and by the way you just might like us.

  • very concerned Sandy, UT
    Sept. 7, 2012 8:24 a.m.

    @RanchHand

    "Why does a church need advertising?"

    I understand your sentiment, and if it were a matter of selling soap, I might agree with you. But I believe there is more going on here. In this case, "advertising" is an effective way to impact people's lives for the good. Advertising has proven itself effective over the years. "Advertising" is doing it's small part in spreading the gospel of Jesus Christ by all legal, moral, and appropriate means. It fits in today's culture/vernacular so it is an effective tool for the church. The church has many ways of performing it's scripturally-based mandate of spreading the gospel.

    Think of the web, missionaries, and historically, radio, billboards, pamphlets, TV, video recordings, slide projectors, cassette tapes, compact disks, dvd's, movies, world'a fair displays, tourism (i.e. temple square), and many more. The church has not shyed away from using timely methods/technologies in it's work.

    While some may call it advertising, others see it as an effective message-sending device. Truly, if the church is going to spread the gospel of peace, it needs all legitimate avenues available to it. Just my opinion.

  • Cats Somewhere in Time, UT
    Sept. 7, 2012 7:26 a.m.

    One more comment...for many years the Church has been bombarded by vicious anti-Mormon attacks, many of which the Church could have gone to court over. The Church has never done this. One reason is because they have found that we get a lot of converts as a result. Many people see these attacks, take the time to find out the truth and join the Church.

    The Book of Mormon Musical is just one more conduit for getting the word out, albeit a convoluted one.

  • RanchHand Huntsville, UT
    Sept. 7, 2012 7:09 a.m.

    Why does a "church" need advertising?

  • SLC gal Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 7, 2012 6:25 a.m.

    Parker and Stone might very well be the best unintentional missionaries - EVER!

  • Cats Somewhere in Time, UT
    Sept. 7, 2012 6:24 a.m.

    As always, the Church is brilliant at PR.

  • Liberal Ted Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 7, 2012 5:57 a.m.

    How is the LDS faith hiding their beliefs and unwilling to share? The same church that sends young men and women out on missions to go door to door and person to person to share their message. The same church that asks all of it's members to be missionaries and share the gospel. The same church that puts up billboards, welcome signs, allows anyone to visit temples before they're dedicated, send free copies of the scriptures or church literature to you, broadcast general conference on the internet tv print etc.

    Maybe people should take some time and look at the resources provided. Some people are posting that they should just share their story. But to share their story someone has to listen to it.

    Many people out there won't take the time to listen.

    Remember communication is a two way street.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Sept. 7, 2012 4:48 a.m.

    I never thought that the BOM Musical was trying to be negative against the LDS church per se.

    The creators of the musical satirize all religions. Their South Park Mormon episode, in the end, had a positive message.

    However, there was quite the firestorm on these boards when the musical first came out.

    Hence my remark.

  • ClarkHippo Tooele, UT
    Sept. 7, 2012 4:44 a.m.

    @Qwest Perfected

    You said - "The media campaign to normalize the Mormon church has become a bit pathetic."

    If you don't like the Mormon messages on TV or online or on billboards, I won't force you to watch them and nobody else should either.

    You said - "I agree with the above poster, just own up to your beliefs."

    Latter-day Saints could discuss their beliefs and doctrine until the cows came home and a good number of people would still be unsatisfied. It goes back to the whole, "Nothing you can say will change my mind," philosophy.

    @Henry Drummond

    Maybe I'm in the minority, but as an active Latter-day Saint I totally get the fact a certain number of people don't like my church or agree with its teachings. I get the fact that some people even have strongly negative opinions about my church.

    I would simply tell such people, if you can not accept my faith, I hope we can still live side by side as neighbors and friends.

  • iron&clay RIVERTON, UT
    Sept. 7, 2012 2:15 a.m.

    The musical is making bank on the deliberate fallacy of saying that Joseph Smith was the only one to see and handle the golden plates from which it was translated.

    Meanwhile, the eleven who witnessed the golden plates and signed their names to a document stating that fact has been in the preface of The Book of Mormon since it was first published back in 1830.

    This recent ad of "reading the book is much better than the musical" is a bit of reverse satire on the production.

  • kayster Dublin, CA
    Sept. 7, 2012 1:17 a.m.

    Absolutely brilliant... yea, even inspired.

  • Midwest Mom Soldiers Grove, WI
    Sept. 7, 2012 1:15 a.m.

    All publicity is good. The sincere will ask questions. Those who hate us will not be moved.

  • Blue AZ Cougar ,
    Sept. 6, 2012 10:38 p.m.

    @Qwest Perfected

    I disagree -- I don't see them as pathetic. I think that the Church realized there is a great opportunity to capitalize on the existing media coverage (mostly stemming from the presidential elections). In fact, the Church doesn't have to put a lot of time or energy into these media campaigns because it simply asks its members to open up with their neighbors and acquaintances about their beliefs. We're actually quite normal people, despite what you may think.

    As for not owning up to our beliefs, perhaps there are things about our past as a Church that we don't discuss as regularly as some would like (plural marriage, African-Americans holding the priesthood, etc.), but that doesn't mean we don't own up to them or are unwilling to discuss them. As with any organization, we put our best foot forward when inviting others to explore our faith. Can you imagine a company spending the majority of its time issuing press releases about their dirty laundry? We're not hiding anything, but we're not obligated to focus on the most controversial parts of our religion either.

  • Aggielove Cache county, USA
    Sept. 6, 2012 10:37 p.m.

    Rifleman is smart once again.
    Spot on

  • pocyUte Pocatello, ID
    Sept. 6, 2012 9:00 p.m.

    I think it is great. As a member of the LDS church, I never had a problem with the play in the first place. Getting more people exposed to the Book of Mormon is a good thing, IMO.

    I don't think the LDS church hides from our beliefs, I think there is a lot of misinformation out there. If any of you have any questions about what we believe, I'm happy to answer any questions, and I happen to know a couple of awkwardly clad and groomed, yet well meaning and sincere young men who would be more than happy chat with you as well.
    (Insert smiley face here)

  • iron&clay RIVERTON, UT
    Sept. 6, 2012 8:27 p.m.

    I am laughing. This is pure satire at the expense of the writers and producers of the play.

    The last thing they thought they would be doing is promoting the Church, founded by Joseph Smith who published the Book of Mormon in 1830.

  • Qwest Perfected Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 6, 2012 8:17 p.m.

    The media campaign to normalize the Mormon church has become a bit pathetic.

    I agree with the above poster, just own up to your beliefs.

  • Rifleman Salt Lake City, Utah
    Sept. 6, 2012 7:12 p.m.

    Re: JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    "If you cant beat um, join um."

    They are finding that the audiences are liking the young men who play the part of Mormon missionaries. The unintended consequence is that when real LDS missionaries knock on their doors they are letting them in.

  • Really??? Kearns, UT
    Sept. 6, 2012 6:16 p.m.

    Brilliant marketing plan.

  • Henry Drummond San Jose, CA
    Sept. 6, 2012 6:04 p.m.

    Absolutely brilliant!

    I'm not LDS, but I've never understood why Mr. Walker and my other Mormon friends waste so much time complaining of religious discrimination instead of just telling their own story. A simple measured response to the musical will do more to help people understand the culture of the Latter-day Saints than all the overwrought articles and editorials over "Mormon Bashing" that are usually served up as a response. After Proposition 8, nobody is going to feel Mormons are a picked upon people anyway, so why not just tell folks what you really believe and why? You may not make a lot of converts, but you will finally get people to listen to your side of the story.

  • Dadof5sons Montesano, WA
    Sept. 6, 2012 5:52 p.m.

    Well why not? It might help.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Sept. 6, 2012 5:45 p.m.

    If you cant beat um, join um.

  • desnewsreader Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Sept. 6, 2012 5:25 p.m.

    My only concern is that this might be confusing to some who don't differentiate between the real thing and the musical. I hope it's not viewed as an endorsement of any kind. I'm eager to see how it works out.