Article was good but the comments made are tiring-dare I say whacko?
Let's face it, no Mormon is going to win the Republican nomination. In order to
do that, you need the religious right and that's a group which won't support a
Mormon. I have a hard time defining my religion too when it is assumed
that because of a shared religion, I think the same way as a crazy Glenn Beck.
Look, this issue isn't one of religious tolerance, about someone who's faith is
in crisis, or about pushing people out of Church... where do you posters get
these weird ideas?This is simple folks. Huntsman is politically
ambitious and wants to win the presidency of the United States. He sees his
Mormon religion as a liability in achieving his goal, pure and simple.The presidency has been on his mind for a long time now. Since leaving for
China he's done everything he can to distance himself from Utah and his
religion. Almost certainly his advisors have been telling him do so.Mitt Romney chose to do the opposite. He said, come what may, he'll stand by
his faith, even if it costs him the presidency. Not endorsing Romney here, just
showing the contrast of how someone chose a different road in the same
circumstance.So the point is, do people have a right to be upset
when a candidate denies his faith for political gain? If you are OK with that
fine I suppose, just don't freak out when other people of good conscience find
this behavior appalling.
I don't understand those who say to those who don't believe in the church that
they should leave. Aren't we to seek after and minister to those who are lost
and seek to bring them back in? We are all a work in progress. Each of us are
at different levels in our knowledge and testimony of gospel doctrines and
principles. Rather than push Mr. Huntsman or others out the door, why not pray
for them and leave the rest between them, the Lord, and their ecclesiastical
leaders?Evaluate Mr. Huntsman on his public policies for the nation
and for his performance while serving as governor and ambassador. What did Mr.
Huntsman accomplish as governor and ambassador? Compare Mr. Huntman on these
things with other candidates on issues affecting the nation.
"One's opinion on the unseen world has absolutely no bearing on their moral
fortitude."Exactly! I don't care what faith you are, just what
have you done with that knowledge you have. That doesn't mean I
don't think particular faiths don't matter, as they do. But at the end of the
day, it isn't what name you call yourself that matter. It is what you do that
matters.My grandfather had a dream as a boy where in it he was
confronted by his ancestor who asked what he had done with his name. You can
take that one step further and ask what have you dont "to" the name...
have you brought honor to it, or damaged it. And at a high level, that name is
about being a Christian, not a Mormon. I wonder if the answer
Hunstman gave would have been any different had the question been if he was a
practicing Christian rather Mormon? Equally, I wonder what the difference in
reaction would have been.
It is interesting that patriot made the comment about JHJ, " strain at a
gnat and swallow a camel". He completely misused this quote, and
ironically, it applies to him and all of the others who are so concerned about
JHJ's faith. Whether someone is or isn't a self identifying member is
irrelevant. Maybe the nosy, condecending Mormon culture caused him to hedge. It
shouldn't even matter if he were an atheist. One's opinion on the unseen world
has absolutely no bearing on their moral fortitude.
Lindsay. May I refer you to another article posted by the Deseret News that you
aught to read. Your opinion may change upon further review of the important
issues at hand. Look forward to hearing back from you if you do read Brother
Cards excellent article on Mr. Huntsmans response to his religion.
Lindsay Lady: True story. Cast your vote for the best candidate. Not the point
of the hubub though.It appears that Mr. Huntsman is denying his
faith for political expediency. What's alarming is that the author of the
article trivializes this.People may want to appear to be taking the
moral or intellectual high road by saying that it's all good. On a lot of
issues they would be right. It's stupid and annoying that LDS folks get uptight
about other members' eating habits, home-making skills, or politics. I find the
author rather ridiculous in this regard.But this issue is different,
and I'm saying (and I think many others are saying) that what Mr. Huntsman did
isn't something petty or inconsequential.
I find it alarming that so many Mormons base their vote for President on whether
or not someone is Mormon. Have any of you taken the time to see what the
candidates actually stand for? Their "platform"? Or are you just
basing your support on the fact that he/she openly admits to being of a specific
religion??? There is so much more to my vote than someone's proclaimed
religion...like does he/she stand for the same things I do when it comes to
education, the economy, the environment, national security, international
relations......??? Being Mormon does not mean he necessarily believes and
stands for the same things you do when it comes to these issues! I don't take
my vote lightly and I fully intend on educating myself on much more than
someone's religious affiliation before voting for someone. Then if I still
support the "Mormon" it's because of much more than a statement that
he is one!
sounds like a typical politician running for office. lt doesn't matter as long
as Romney ia around Huntsman isnt going anywhere
The writer and many commenters have it completely wrong if they think this is
about diversity within Mormonism. It's silly for people to get hung up on
political afiliation, dietary preferences, home-making skills, or genealogy of
fellow Latter-day Saints. Those things are superficial and irrellevent to
salvation.Denying one's faith is a completely different issue
however. Mr. Huntsman grew up in the Church, served a mission, and knows the lay
of the land. Selling out your religous convictions for political expediency is
a serious thing. For the author of this article to equate his hedging with hair
color preference, knowing how to knit, etc. is extremely ignorant and even
I don't think they were asking him to define Mormonism - they were just asking
him if he was one. That's not really hard to define. I see it as three choices:
Yes, and active; Yes, and not active; non-Mormon (or former Mormon)
I'd like to see a discussion on the actual substance of what Huntsman said.
Personally, I'm interested in his earlier statement to the effect that he finds
wisdom in many different religious/spiritual traditions. I am definitely LDS,
but that statement rings true for me too. I don't believe that something has to
be in the Book of Mormon to be true any more than I believe that something has
to be in the Bible to be true. Also, I'd take a guy who is at least proud of his
Mormon roots over a guy who is outright hostile towards my faith any day.
Huntsman seems like a good man with thoughtful political positions, and I hope
he runs. We could do a lot worse than him as president. I feel the same way
about Romney. I'm glad he apparently shares my degree of LDS faith, but that is
not sufficient, or even necessary in and of itself to guarantee my vote. I also
hope he runs, and is able to articulate his ideas effectively, despite those who
are so eager to dismiss him.
My problem with Huntsman's comments has nothing to do with his personal
religious beliefs. It's that when he's in the state, talking to an LDS audience,
he proudly plays up his membership in the church, but when he's speaking to a
national audience in a magazine, he's suddenly unable to give a simple answer as
to whether or not he considers himself a member at all. When you answer the same
question in two different ways, depending on your audience, it makes you
extremely hard to trust.And to Iggle, you said, "I shudder
every time I hear a Mormon say they were "born a Mormon, raised a Mormon,
die a Mormon." I can't comment on other faiths, but that attitude doesn't
belong in ours."I have to disagree. If you have a firm
testimony of the gospel, why shouldn't that attitude belong in our church? I was
born and raised in the LDS church, and the reason I'm still a member today is
because I believe with all my heart that it's true. I've felt that my entire
life. Why would I expect that to change?
Sad to see so many comments (and their originators) so sure of themselves and
their righteousness. Having to be "right" through defining anyone
else's view of the world as wrong/unrighteous -- no matter how tiny the actual
differences may be -- is a sad commentary on how scared we are of being wrong
Mike Huckabee's backing Jon Huntsman after destroying Mitt Romney's win by
persecuting his Mormonism makes me wonder.
He was parsing, as is this article. And completely lost my respect. He knew
what the question was. Reminds me of Slick Willy -- "I did not have sexual
relations with that intern" when in fact he did except for a twisted
definition designed to hide the truth. That's how Huntsman made me feel. Can't
trust the man. And that being the case, he will never get my vote.
This whole column strikes as me as a bit odd. For people familiar with LDS
culture in general and church operation in particular, church membership is not
"hard to define." Is your name on church records? Do you attend
sacrament meeting with some regularity? If so, you are unambiguously a
"member" of the LDS church. I understand why someone whose name is on
church records but hasn't been in some time might find it difficult to define
his/her status with respect to the church. But Huntsman, according to my
knowledge, doesn't fit that category. The only reason why he'd dodge questions
about his church membership has nothing to do with personal revelation, the word
of wisdom, or any of the other dubious justifications the article mentions. It's
naked politics, and frankly a little disconcerting.
i think that he did the right thing to refuse. Giving an interview where the
interview is later to be edited by a possibly hostile reporter or editor is
almost no-win. Its rather like playing a game of "come on, John, lets see
how long you can hang by this noose before you pass out - we'll cut you down in
time - Promise!"
Some of them even knitted during our session. Knitted! I could not help but
think, "Wow, these women are way more Mormon than me."---I didn't know that knitting was an activity ONLY Mormons
engaged in, or that it defined their degree of Mormonism.Thank you
Jon Huntsman for NOT wearing your Mormonism on your sleeve.
Patriot sez: "The Nov elections were a clear signal of the rejection of
Obama."I doubt it. He was not running. Obama did not write the
healthcare bill. If he had, it would have the public option and thus control
costs. The actual bill is written by members of Congress, in compromise. Gingrich was for the mandate until he got yelled at on radio yesterday by
Limbaugh for not going along with the party line. The party line. I thought
that was a strict liberal socialist concept. Apparently it applies to the GOP
nowadays. You know, Bush's White House wrote the bills in the first 6
years of his terms. Only the highest ranking party members were allowed to see
those Bush bills. The Dems dont write the bills in the White House. You can
call it Obamacare but its the job of the Congress to write the bills. And they
Props to Melinda B. Henneberger for chiming in.
As with Clinton's remark "is,is", "Huntsman's Mormonism hard to
define" was evasive also, but the point is both remarks imply that the
listener is as dumb as a post and can be fooled by evasive answers!
I dont care if Huntsman is republican, democrat, or indepenedent. I think he is
wishy washy. I vote for people based on what they believe more than what party
they are affilated with. My parents were died hard democrats for the most part.
If someone is LDS and democrat, so what? That doesnt make them any less of a
person just because of there poliitcal beliefs. I have voted both democratic and
repubulican but I was fed up with both parties so when it came time to renew my
drivers license I changed to independent.
GO MITT - True Blue all the way through. Mitt will not waiver and will be a
much better President than Jon Jr.
I wrote the TIME article referred to here, and speaking of stereotypes, would
like to clear up one. C. Jane Kendrick writes that, "When a
reporter asks about being a member of the church, are they really asking about
the serious part of the religion, like the promises we make at baptism, or are
they asking about a mix of feelings they've derived from "South Park"
episodes and bits from "Big Love"?"I've written about
religion for years, take it completely seriously, and would have loved to have
spent the whole interview on faith, though I'm not sure Gov. Huntsman would
have. And though it's perhaps not to my credit, I've never seen a whole
"South Park," nor any "Big Love."
"I can't grasp how an active Church member could be a Democrat."WoW ! This is one of the most arrogant comment's I've read in a while, (
although they are often ) this just shines the ignorance of one that bathes
himself in pride and self-righteousness.. Beware Wayne! Check yourself! There are many Mormon Democrats. Many serve as bishops, stake
presidents, general authorities, and even Apostolship!!! I hope you don't go
inactive on that. Many think " how can you be a republican and
be a Mormon"? ... You know, many have different ideologies and they are in
their right to do so. Now if you were an ACTIVE MORMON, you'd find much truth in
Liberalism and Conservatism, ( Elder Oaks talk on Criticism, I invite you to
read it ) .. apparently you are not in the Active Mormon list according to your
Congratulations CJane.Good article --AND you hit a nerve!102 comments and counting.Thats way more than your previous other
11 articles combined! :)
I've tried repeatedly to post a comment here. Something quoted and not up for
debate, but for some reason, the censors choose not to allow it to be read by
others. May I try once more and if it doesn't make it this time, then let the
censor consider deeply why they are not allowing my comment. Joseph F. Smith
has been quoted as saying that he was a "dyed in the wool, true blue,
through and through" Mormon, and this at a time when he was confronted by a
man with a gun in his hand, a professed hater of Mormons, who was asking him if
he was a Mormon. If a man can stand up and say that he IS something even when
death might be imminent, then what is Huntsman's problem? He won't be killed
for not standing up for his supposed beliefs. He doesn't have a chance against
patriotWhat exactly was the Pres. supposed to do in the gulf? Throw
on some SCUBA gear and swim down and turn the spigot? He left it to the
professionals - and yes I do use that term loosely. If you really are a
patriot, you would want your president to succeed and you would do everything in
your power to make that happen. That isn't what you are doing. You hope he
fails so your guy can get back into power. You probably weren't even proud that
osama bin laden was taken out. Your hyper-partisanship is truly sad. We are
all Americans! I did not agree with most of what Pres. Bush did but I never
wished him to fail - ever. Can you say the same?
The first comment on this story? "I can't grasp how an active Church member
could be a Democrat."Gee, who wouldn't want to associate with
these people?More on topic, my first reaction to this is how shallow
and distracted so many people are being to this that they care more about the
religion a person wears on their sleeve than on the quality of that person
themselves. What a sad state of American politics.I think the best
response to this situation was said thusly:"Say nothing of my
religion. It is known to myself and my God alone. Its evidence before the world
is to be sought in my life; if that has been honest and dutiful to society, the
religion which has regulated it cannot be a bad one."~Thomas
re:greenman108You wanted examples of Obama's soft , fuzzy
governing:1. The Gulf Oil Spill: As oil exploded into the gulf for months,
and the governors of the gulf states screamed for action Obama sat like a deer
in the head lights and did nothing - other than trying to place blame on the oil
company. The long term effects of his in-action will be felt for generations.
Obama also dilly - dallied and shut down ALL oil rigs in the gulf (big mistake)
and caused those same rigs to eventually leave the gulf all together along with
the thousands of jobs they provided. Completely irresponsible and incompentent
leadership.2. As the people of Iran were rioting in the streets and trying
to find some support for their efforts to oust their dictator where was Obama?
The man wouldn't even offer moral support but instead decided to vote not
present.The only thing bold and decisive about Obama is how he
rammed his socialized health care down our throats via back room money deals
with no one even taking the time to read the bill. The Nov
elections were a clear signal of the rejection of Obama.
To be fair, Mom of 2, I've seen some blogs and threads online about Tim Pawlenty
and how some (not all, and not the official church) Catholics are leery of him
because he left the Catholic Church for an evangelical church. There was one
particular blogger who was adamant that he would not vote for Pawlenty because
someone who leaves the Catholic Church "lacks discernment and
judgment."Most religions will have some members who get
outraged because they can't handle when people stop believing in what they
believe. It's human nature (read: natural man). I saw it in the one I left. That
doesn't make it OK for LDS or anyone else to do it. All religions need to fight
against this attitude that certainly doesn't come from God.
re:patriotIt was the Republican party that ran up the enormous debt
that you so conveniently blame on Pres. Obama. The prescription drug bill
passed by republicans, a 2 trillion dollar war (wrong country), and massive tax
cuts are to blame for our debt. When are people going to realize that
Republicans are NOT fiscally conservative?
"Consider for a moment if Gov Huntsman would have answered the question
about his Mormon faith differently - basically stating as Mitt Romney has many
times that his Mormon faith and his belief in Jesus Christ is the foundation of
his life and central to his value system. I actually think that sort of answer
would have perhaps put him in the front of the GOP field for 2012...passing Mitt
Romney. "Maybe in Utah. Nationwide he wouldn't even gain 1%
re:JohnJacobJingleHeimerSchmidtObama saved capitalism?? Say what???
HA!!! Not sure where you have been for the past 2 years. The Obama I am talking
about is the one trying to destroy captialism and make government all powerful -
and controlling in our lives. Yes the Obama that has borrowed more (from China)
and produced less than the past 5 presidents put together and now has America
AAA bond rating in jepardy due to our enormous debt. People across America spoke
very strongly and unmistakingly last November in the mid-term elections that
they reject everything Obama - so much so that not only did congress get flushed
of democrats but record governors across America went to the GOP as well. The
election was historic and the message was clear. As far Huntsman goes, I
strongly disagree with your idea that Huntsman's indifference to his faith is of
little consequence. Again, people see Huntsman as a man of no conviction and
that weighs much heavier than anything he might have done in China as far as the
2012 elections go. Watch and see. I doubt Huntsman will be able to raise any
money going forward now and will drop out.
Wayne Rout from El Paso has it backwards! How can an active Mormon be a
Republican? The vast majority of Democratic Party beliefs and goals are shared
by the Mormon Church. It astounds me that most Mormons are Republicans.
Mormons' reactions to Huntsman's comments are exactly why people think Mormons
are a cult. The outrage is ridiculous. Why does it matter to you or your
memberhsip how he responds to questions like that? Other religions don't get so
riled up about stuff like this.
I'm just curious about something. I come from a long line of family and
ancestors who were dedicated to their particular faith. I left that faith 10
years ago ... to join the LDS Church. Did I "sell out"? Should I still
believe what my ancestors and family believe?It's a double standard
to scorn people for leaving (or waffling on) the "faith of your
fathers" in a missionary church that stresses faith is a choice and up to
the individual to find truth for themselves.I shudder every time I
hear a Mormon say they were "born a Mormon, raised a Mormon, die a
Mormon." I can't comment on other faiths, but that attitude doesn't belong
(continued from above)Religion is a private thing. In New England,
for example, it is considered rude to ask someone about their religion.
Governor Huntsman is deeply spiritual and very much Mormon. When asked about
it, he chose not to say "that's none of your business," and instead
responded that it is difficult to define and that he draws from his heritage and
is proud of his Mormon roots. How is that different from any other Mormon? To
those who criticize Huntsman for his honest and thoughtful remarks which you
have judged and very likely misinterpreted:Are your proud of your
Mormon roots?Do you draw from all sides of your heritage? (hint:
culturally and sociologically, all sides of your heritage were passed down to
you)Do you find all of your views on what level of Mormon you are,
to be easy to define? (keep in mind, any summary that is truthful but
incomplete, is inaccurate).Governor Huntsman is just the kind of
person we need. He doesn't oversimplify. He is thoughtful. He is honest. He
doesn't take part in the soundbite sport of our society.Simple
minds, criticize. How judgmental and sad.
@Jonathan"I wouldn't suppose that one would have to claim perfect
obedience to define oneself as a Latter Day Saint but if you can answer
affirmatively to these questions, I think you'd be okay to profess faithful
membership in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. Seems pretty easy
to define for me. "And what if they don't. Like say if Huntsman
isn't trying to raise his kids LDS (I don't mean that to suggest he's a bad
parent, just that the adopted children had different religious upbringings so
I'm going on the notion that he's probably very willing to see them develop
their own religious views themselves). Would he still be a mormon if he only
answers "correctly" to six of the seven questions of yours? Or would
it become... hard to define?
Born and raised in Orem, son of a BYU professor and LDS bishop, I am
disappointed in all the judgmental comments."It's only
difficult to define if you're NOT."I totally disagree. It is simple
to define, for the simple-minded members of our soundbite-oriented society. But
it may not be simple to define for the intellectually honest among us. Like
Governor Huntsman."Huntsman has had a lifetime to define his
religion. It is a simple question that has a simple answer."Wrong
again. See above."I can't grasp how an active Church member
could be a Democrat."I can't grasp why any intellectually honest
person would want to reduce himself or herself politically to a category like
"Republican" or "Democrat" or "Libertarian." I
respect those who study the issues and vote responsibly, not sheep-like."Huntsman's defining Mormonism reminds me of Bill Clinton's, 'It
depends on what the meaning of the word is, is'"I agree, but not in
the snide way you imply. Clinton was exactly right. We just didn't like his
evasive tactics, his dishonesty and his perjury. But his comment about
"is," was correct.
As someone who is outside of Utah and not a Mormon, I find it interesting that
Huntsman lack of clarity is being held against him so strongly when it is
exactly Mitt Romney's lack of clarity on the issues that has doomed his
candidacy. Mitt's reversal's on abortion (twice), gay marriage, gun
control, campaign finance and immigration, in other words the very things that
have made him palatable to the most conservative voters, are killing him with
Independents (who you must win to win on a national level.)So, if
you are interested in a Mormon being president, as an outsider, I can assure you
that Huntsman is the better choice.
I do travel a lot and the first question asked of me is always, "are you a
Mormon"? My answer?? "I used to be". For the first
few years I answered yes, I am. Now however, being from Utah and being a Mormon
has become somewhat of an embarrassment because of the hypocritical and self
serving actions of some of our Mormon politicians.How do I explain
the hot tub incident or the drunk driving incident and the many anti social
bills that our legislature bring up and even pass.Trust me folks,
those message bills do send a message and it's not a pro Mormon message. It is
negative and impossible to explain to our friends of other religions around the
nation.I have to answer for my decisions and you have to answer for
yours. Some of you make it difficult to be associated what some perceive as
Parkite1: Do you know that your postion (and that of the LDS Church)on abortion
is more in tune with the Democratic Party than the postion of the radical Right?
You can't have abortion for rape without a woman having a right to choose.
How can a woman unquestionably prove in court that she has been raped? And Republicans can't choose a black candidate for President. There is
still far too much racism on the Right to allow that to happen.
It's to the point where it's difficult to be involved in politics, regardless of
party affiliation, and be a good member of the LDS Church. Throughout most of
the country, I'd categorize the Republican party as the most anti-Mormon party.
Both major parties promote immoratility, dishonesty and bigotry, just from
different angles. Kudos to those who can maintain their standards, no matter
what religion they are in, while still being a politician.
In attempting to address Huntsman's unwillingness to takes stands on issues for
which he says he has not yet prepared refined positions, Patriot opines:
"Today we have a president who is the ultimate in soft, wishy-washy
character and the result has been disastrous." I find it difficult to
accept that the same man who is accused by the GOP of undermining the 'American
way' by subterfuge which will somehow lead the USA down the path to ruin is the
same person who is wishy-washy. How can the president be so clever and yet so
soft?The propaganda of patriot thus makes no sense. When GOP supporters
post about the sitting president they should give examples, not just
name-calling. From my point of view, the results have been great. The car
industry has been saved for now . Banks have paid back loans.While the GOP
has prevented Congress and the Dems from big changes in the financial area, and
resisted calls to bail out mortgage holders, prolonging the economic slide, our
president has made good on many of his campaign promises.
Comments on CommentsGreat article, being a "Mormon" does
have many different definitions. C. Jane Kendrick could have mentioned the
smoking, drinking and yes, even the gay "Mormons." But Kendrick
might be following certain guidelines, as we all must do, to be published. Over
flavoring her article would have sent some here on a rant. If I am
reading the comments correctly today, Utahns will be supporting either Mitt
Romney or President Obama. Obviously Governor Huntsman has been thrown under
the bus, and no amount of resuscitation will bring him back. Mitt
Romney it seems is "Mormon" enough to be acceptable, but not being a
native is a sticking point. President Obama on the other hand, may
loose a fair amount of support in Utah, for simply being a Democrat.
Utah is the Holier-than-though-state and Mormons here tend to judge much more
than probably anywhere else in the World. As for Democrats vs. Republicans
cannot fathom a TRUE Mormon ever being a Democrat and supporting the
Right-to-Abortion that ends any discussion for me because except in the case of
incest rape or life-threatening to the mother it is pure and simple murder...
I would much rather have Huntsman or ANYONE than the miscreant
buffoon wannabe rockstar aka Mr. President who was largely voted in by mindless
voters who wanted a first black president...shame it wasn't Rice or Powell then
they would have had someone who would have been great for America
patriot | 10:46 a.m. May 17, 2011 Cedar Hills, UT"Today we have
a president who is the ultimate in soft, wishy-washy character and the result
has been disastrous."The same President Obama that has saved
capitalism and ordered the shooting of Bin Laden or are we talking about Bush's
disasters with two unpaid wars costing Trillions, a Prescription plan costing a
trillion and a 700 billion bank bailout plan?Huntsman doesn't have
to live his life any way the rest of you deem fit. His spirituality is between
him and God.What none of you realize is Huntsman role as ambassador
also made him a de facto representative in China. The Chinese watched how he
worked and conducted his staff. He allowed staff to have more family time
unlike the previous ambassador appointed by Bush who had people ditching their
families often to make him look good to Bush. Huntsman's embracing of the family
reflected well on the LDS Church so stop judging. He will be one of the many
people who have paved the way for the LDS Church to open up China to
proselytizing so stop judging.
Consider for a moment if Gov Huntsman would have answered the question about his
Mormon faith differently - basically stating as Mitt Romney has many times that
his Mormon faith and his belief in Jesus Christ is the foundation of his life
and central to his value system. I actually think that sort of answer would have
perhaps put him in the front of the GOP field for 2012...passing Mitt Romney. I
really think Gov Huntsman underestimated the effect of that question and
understands now what Ronald Reagan meant when he said conservatives need to have
bold colors and not pale pastels. People of all faiths - or no faith - want in a
leader bold, clear vision of who they are and what they believe. When people get
the sense that a politician is wishy-washy in something as fundamental has his
faith they wonder (correctly) if that same sense of wishy-washyness will
translate to other characteristics of his governing skill - ability to make
economic decisions, foreign policy decisions etc.... Today we have a president
who is the ultimate in soft, wishy-washy character and the result has been
My great-grandfather owned slaves, doesn't mean I believe in slavery. To say
that based on someone's ancestry his beliefs are the same is saying he is too
weak to form his own beliefs. To say that his ancestor was stalwart in his
beliefs and so Mr. Huntsman should be is a huge leap of logic. I would like to
express again how he has the right to form his own opinions and his religious
opinions and personal choices have nothing to do with his ability to run and be
elected for office. What attributes the US President has need to be decided by
you and for only yourself. Once you've decided that go and vote and make your
What really amazes me is how little attention this story has gotten outside of
Utah and how it's only a controversy for Mormons. As a recent convert to the
Church myself, I completely understand Mr. Huntsman's response. I was a
Southern Baptist before joining the church and wasn't an active member for quite
awhile, but I still considered myself a Christian. To me that should be the
real question to ask Mr. Huntsman. Are you a Christian? That is not a hard to
define answer. His response then would be more of an "issue" then.
@SLC gal, it's hard to imagine how one could come to the conclusion that Obama
"tried to hide his Hawaiian birth;" after all, he was open about it in
his first book in 1995, and he released an official birth certificate during his
candidacy.There are real shenanigans, and then there are imaginary
shenanigans. There are shenanigans committed by politicians and candidates, and
then there are shenanigans committed by their detractors. Which shenanigans do
you want to do away with, and how do you propose it be done?
Here's my issue with this. The reporter for TIME asked if "he still
belonged to the LDS church" to which he hemmed and hawed about how tough it
was to "Define", when a simple yes or no would have sufficed. Sure,
there may be deeper issues revolving around his "membership" and
"testimony", but his Bishop wasn't the one conducting the interview,
it was a REPORTER. The question wasn't if he had an unwavering testimony of
every specific tenet of the LDS faith. I don't feel like the question was in
the same ball park as "are you more religious than your brothers and
sisters? or Do you drink your coke with or without caffeine?" Again, you
don't need to treat the interview like a "confessional". You do need
to be a straight shooter with your answers, if you don't want the American
public to consider you "just another" double talking politician. I
certainly won't vote for a man who can't answer a VERY simple question for fear
of political reprisal. That's much too soft and cowardly position to take if you
truly consider yourself a serious presidential contender.
I firmly believe that all of you who cast judgement on others and Huntsman for
not being "Mormon enough" should pray for a dose of humility.We will all be judged accordingly and unless you are the Lord himself, you
need to stop bashing others spiritually.I find the ones who protest
the strongest are the ones usually sinning in and concealing this.DId you all think Kilpack (DUI) and Garn (naked in hot tun with 15 yr old)
were "good LDS" people only to find out they were
"sinners"?Also, those who held up Jimmer as a
"missionary", something I don't buy, because he "raised the
profile of the Church" then Huntsman also gets credit for making the LDS
Church more well known by that same logic. But in your judgmental eyes Huntsman
is just "not good enough" right? It is silly and judgmental.Don't like his philosophy? Then don't vote for him. He is running for
President of the USA, not President of the LDS Church.
You almost had me until I remembered that his grandfather was David B. Haight, a
stalwart apostle of the Lord. If you had asked Elder David B. Haight his
religiosity, there would have been no "hard to define" in his answer.
Well said! We are a very complicated people with varying degrees of commitment
to our faith. I believe that many LDS members our frustrated with Gov. Huntsman
not because of his "complex" faith, but rather because he seems to be
using this complexity to posture for political gain. If that is the case then I
too am disappointed in his approach.
I should of thought of this one earlier, Hunstman had a great
answer....I see no difference with Jesus answering "tough to
define" when asked if he was Jewish.
I can't judge, but to me it seems like he's playing to the crowd. He's betting
that America is still not ready for an LDS president, so he's going opposite
Mitt Romney, and it almost appears that he's trying to hide something. Like I
said, I can't judge, maybe he does have questions about the church, but either
you are or you aren't. To me there is no middle ground, and if you don't stand
for something, you'll fall for anything. I expect the same from anybody I would
vote for for president. Look what happened when our current
president tried to hide his Hawaiian birth. Do we really want four more years of
that? Can we afford four more years of those shenanigains?
Of course we all know that the most important and thus far unexplained part of
this post was the knitting at BYU Women's Conference! cjane, you somehow missed
that the women were asked to knit scarves, etc., as they listened, as part of a
humanitarian service project. They picked up the supplies at the beginning and
were to return their completed project at the end. They weren't busy being more
Mormon than you, just busier with their hands while you were being busy with
your mouth. Ha ha!
It is a natural experience to question at one point in time your belief system.
The fact that Mr. Huntsman would prefer to do this in private is completely
understandable. I think people aren't looking at the fact that if he is truly
undecided then he has chosen to speak the truth. We don't know where he is or
what he truly believes so instead shift the focus to what matters which is his
viewpoints and whether you think he has the ability to be a good president.
That is what is really important.
I presume Mr. H made certain solemn covenants in certain places which he now
feels doubtful about. Therefore, his ability to put his hand on the Bible and
swear to anything now seems doubtful to me. I don't trust him.
I think that if anyone who has been baptized as a member of The Church of Jesus
Christ of Latter Day Saints is not willing to give a clear and concise response
to a question about his membership in the church, that he is a member in name
only and ought to re-read the covenants that he made when he was baptized.
Most of the above is an attempt by persons to define Jon Huntsman for him. If
he chooses to define his Mormonism through his ancestry that's his privledge.
If you choose to define your Mormonism through your beliefs then that's your
privledge. You don't get to define Huntsman for him. That's his right and
responsibility. Mormonism is many things. It is a blief system,
and it is a culture. It's also a social system. As an ex Mormon, atheist, I
still feel a kinsip to my Mormon heritage, and belive it does help to define who
I am. So if I choose to think of myself as partly Mormon that's my privledge,
and no one gets to deny that for me.
I've spent some time in Europe including 2 years on a mission in Italy. Even
the Catholics who haven't been to church or practiced their religion very
diligently will tell you if they are Catholic or not. They usually qualify it by
mentioning that they haven't attended in years or have problems with certain
beliefs or practices. None of us are perfect at practicing "our
religion", but one should be able to define his personal relationship and
how one measures up. Brother Huntsman could have done a better job - hopefully
he will fill some of the gaps and will have the courage to make a stand.
I am a Mormon. I believe that the LDS church is the sole holder of the
priesthood keys necessary for the saving ordinances of the gospel. I attend my
meetings, pay my tithing, serve in my callings, adhere to the tenets of the
gospel to the best of my ability, and sustain our leaders in their callings. I
love the scriptures and their teachings; I feel comfort and confirmation in the
doctrines.I see the good the Church accomplishes and am moved by the
institutional compassion the church displays and am proud to be a member.Sometimes I look at the Church and can see elements of hypocrisy,
nepotism, and institutional actions that I do not agree with. I am not talking
about individual members; we are all flawed to some degree, but what I observe
at a macro level. Sometimes I am disturbed by what I see. In this,
I have, at times, been considered less than a "Good Mormon". Today, I am probably a "Good Mormon".
Personally, I want to be judged for what I do, how I treat others, how I cary
myself. I want you to know I am honest, that I work hard, that I love my family
and my friends. I want to carry myself in a way that demonstrates that I am a
Christian.The name on the wall of the church, or the leader of that
church are moot points - they don't matter. You should judge me for what I do,
not the church I claim association with. I have seen little to no
relationship between if one is a temple recommend carrying member, and how they
treat others. Some of the most giving and christ like people I know have never
set foot in a mormon church. Likewise, I have met many good people in the
church. But the quality of those people, their devotion to their faith, had
nothing to do with some check list.If you think faith is as simple
as being able to answer to the affirmative to a bunch of questions, you are
grossly underestimating what being christ like really is.
Good article! I am not a Utahn, and I'm only somewhat aware of Huntsman, but I
know he's the grandson of an apostle, the son of a seventy, a returned
missionary, and the former governor of a predominantly LDS state. Thus his
largest support group is committed to LDS theology and culture. It is extremely
rare to find a truly converted, active, Latter-day Saint who attends a variety
of churches (most are too busy serving in one), and I can't imagine a truly
converted LDS person not sharing the fullness of the gospel with his or her
children. It is possible to be Jewish by birth and by culture, but not embrace
Judaism in a religious way, and not have other Jews care. That's because Jews
aren't concerned with being spiritual examples to the world; their religion is a
personal matter. Yes, Huntsman's spongy response makes a dissonant sound in our
LDS ears, but he has his agency. The important question is, "Do his
political principles line up well with mine?" If not, the LDS question is
moot. Otherwise, I'm guessing Romney gets most of the LDS support. Neither will
I voted for the man to become govenor and would again. He did a commendable job
in China for our country in a very difficult time. China was
pressuring Obama and other world leaders to let the Yuan become the world
currency and now thanks to Huntsman and his diplomacy that is not even currently
on the table.Huntsman has let his name be known outside this state
and what he has done should make people here proud. In the new
testament there is a parable of talents and whether or not you agree with his
views or abilities John Huntsman has 5 talents and he is busy using and
developing them.Cudos to him.
It all depends on Huntsman's motives. While I'm disappointed he doesn't just own
up to being Mormon, albeit a different kind, I'm more concerned about his
policies, what he would do as president and (even more) his qualifications. What
has he done that is so unique and transformational?I also find
comical the comparisons of Huntsman vs. Romney where Romney is cast as the one
having a hard time defining himself (ie. the New Republic). It seems easy -
Huntsman has spent most of his life in and around Utah, where Romney (outside
the Olympics and a vacation home) has NEVER lived in Utah. So in my
mind, you have one Utah Mormon trying to not look like a Mormon (why?) and a Non
Utah Mormon who is vocal about his membership but sometimes finds it difficult
to explain the deeper parts of his beliefs. Who do you trust more?And why do some of you in Utah try so hard to distance yourselves from your
faith? Just be yourselves...
Maybe its telling us we are better off not running for pres when we are mormon.
Personally, I will leave JHJ's brand of "mormonism" up to Christ to
judge. Although, He has already hinted at His direction:"I
know thy works, that thou are neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or
hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue
they out of my mouth."I'm ok with JHJ being either in or out,
but pick one and own it. Don't pander.
I'm not so concerned with Huntsman's doubts (everyone has them from time to
time) and if he's doing some serious soul serching about his belief then fine.
However, if you're not living the basics of the church, then don't claim
membership. (BTW I hold this standard to all people not just LDS. If you're
Catholic, you go to mass at least once a week) I have a problem with him
claiming membership in the church and then seldom attending LDS services and
attending other churches. I have a problem with him adopting two children and
then raising them in the faith of their culture. In both of the countries he
adopted from there are LDS members. I have a problem with his daughter getting
married in non-LDS church. You don't hear anything about his children serving
missions (you do about Romney's boys). It just feels like he's LDS when it's
convienent to be. It feels like pandering. BTW - While I don't
always agree with Romney and I'm not one of his supporters, I do respect that he
isn't ashamed of his church membership.
I don't believe in different brands of Mormonism. Everything mentioned in the
article as evidence of different flavors of Mormonism (meat, caffeine, political
party) have nothing to do with Mormonism. Mormonism is about the restoration of
the gospel of Jesus Christ. You either believe that or you don't. I don't
think Jon Huntsman believes that. He may appreciate his Mormon heritage, but
that is not the same as being a disciple of Jesus Christ. I do appreciate that
he doesn't pretend to be something he isn't.
--"are they really asking about the serious part of the religion, like the
promises we make at baptism, or are they asking about a mix of feelings they've
derived from "South Park" episodes and bits from "Big
Love"?"The media seldom (I would say never) are asking
serious questions about the serious part of being LDS. They want
quick, sound-bite, audience-preferred answers. Answers about why
anyone is an LDS member, or the condition of or reason for their personal
feelings is usually not answerable to a reporter anyway.
Wow, I am surprised that half of these comments and posts made it past the
censors. Mine cdertainly did not. Maybe the Tribune would publish what I had to
say about the Governors problem explaining himself and his relationship to his
faith. I believe one should stand up for what they believe. In politics that
would be the thing I would hope for.
There is a proper Wy to Resign from the Church.Give the Toys Back
and move on with you life.Manny people for whom Mormonism has become
a burden to career have done just that.Not my cup of Postum but Oh
well.Because of the nature of the subject, we cannot discuess
Mormonism at its Rawist, Fineist, or true common Dnomenator.If you
do not want to be it Leave It. Good enough for President Bensons Grandson good
enough for John Huntsman. Who by the way is unknown outside of Utah.
Isn't Huntsman just trying to be like Reagan and the Bushs? They were as
Unchurched as possible. They only went to church when it was time for a photo
op. But all their followers considered them (especially Reagan) as very
spiritual people-- up there with Gandhi, etc. Yet who could even say what
church they didn't go to! So Huntsman is trying to be spiritual but not
necessarily religious. It worked before.
The only difference Jon Huntsman's remarks will make will be when Utah decides
who they will support for the Republican Party nomination, Mitt Romney or Jon
Huntsman. I believe the Huntsman supporters will be surprised how the
overwhelming majority side with. For the rest of us, it will be an obvious
My previous post disproves another popular stereotype, this against LDS
politicians, "They will be controlled by LDS Headquarters in Salt
Lake." Huntsman lived in Salt Lake, and still wasn't controlled by LDS
My how judgmental are we? I'm sure like many of us he just has some concerns
about certain aspects of the religion and therefore cannot say without a shadow
of a doubt that he believes it to be true. Is there something wrong with that?
Are we all perfect? Does he have to be a perfect Mormon for Mormons to vote for
him? I sometimes worry about those who are so inflexible that they would judge
somebody like Huntsman for harboring some doubts. Those are the ones I feel
will be most likely to fall by the wayside when they find many in the Church are
just this, fallible. I won't go into detail for fear of having my comment
rejected but as I've grown older I have learned more and more about the mistakes
of those whom I revered as a youngster, those in bishoprics, stake presidencies,
etc. I seem to hear things on a regular basis now about people I know. For a
while I was surprised but I no longer am. Why? Because I know people make
mistakes and that I shouldn't worry about it if it doesn't concern me.
Huntsman is more authentically LDS than many of the wear-it-on-their-sleaves
Mormons, including on this thread.Does anyone really think that
anything he says about the LDS church, or about Jesus Christ would speak louder
or do more good or harm than anything he does in office? Actions speak louder
than words. I have no problem with what he "didn't say."
As a previous poster pointed out, Huntsman Jr's relationship with his church is
of a lot less concern to me than his relationship with the Republican
platform...at least so long as he is campaigning for President rather than for
Bishop.That said, there are direct, courageous ways to answer a
question and there are less honorable ways."I'm a member but
not particularly observant," or "We try to get to church on Christmas
and Easter," or, "I love the doctrines but hate the meetings," or
even, "My faith is a deeply personal matter not relevant to politics,"
are all fine answers.To those saying his answer doesn't matter, I
wonder how you would have reacted had his answer been, "I'm a staunch and
devote mormon and think the country would be wells served by a return to those
traditional values still embraced the many of our churches including the one to
which I belong."It seems to me that Jr has always been a
politician, looking to tell voters what he thinks they want to hear, rather than
the full truth. This non-answer is just the latest example.
I dont understand why so many Mormons act so amazed that another Mormon would be
a Democrate rather than a Republican. It is like they are anxious to tell other
Mormons that they arent "real" Mormons. Isnt that what Evengelical
Christians say about Mormons regarding being Christian?By the way,
there isnt much difference between being a moderate Republican and a
conservative Democrat. Neither side alone represents the gospel and most people
dont agree with everything their party stands for anyway. So in that case,
defining someone by their being a Republican or by being a Democrat doesnt tell
you what they really believe. Still, they define themselves to a large degree by
their party affiliation. That is why Huntsmans difficulty in admitting his
membership in the church is confusing and disappointing. The whole point of the
current Mormon advertising campaign is that there are all kinds of Mormons. He
could have been a good example of that. If he decides to do it the future, lets
just not say he is not a "real" Mormon. There are all kinds.
To Jonathan:To someone outside of Utah not LDS these questions all raise
more questions not answers. You can't explain excommunication, Father and Son,
church standards, prophet, priesthood, etc. in one magazine article.
Let me try this one.1. Were you baptized in the LDS church and are free
from excommunication?2. Do you still believe that Joseph Smith was visited
by the Father and the Son?3. Do you still go to the LDS church and try
your best to live by church standards?4. Do you recognize Thomas Monson as
a prophet?5. Are you trying to raise your family as a Latter Day Saint?6. Do you believe the priesthood keys and ordinances are held inviolate by the
LDS church having come from Christ himself?7. Are you not ashamed to raise
your hand to the square in support of LDS church authority?I
wouldn't suppose that one would have to claim perfect obedience to define
oneself as a Latter Day Saint but if you can answer affirmatively to these
questions, I think you'd be okay to profess faithful membership in the Church of
Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. Seems pretty easy to define for me.
When you grow up outside of Utah, as I did, you learn very early in life how not
to be embarrassed for being different - "way" different, especially
when you grow up in Hollywood, California. When a friend calls across the
Hollywood High School quad, "Hey, Mormon!" and you know there are only
five others of you in the entire school, you turn around and respond with a
smile already knowing they think you are among a rare breed that grows horns out
of your head. I wouldn't have traded it in for anything. It made
me stronger. I understand what it means to be "in the world and not of the
world." I learned to be proud of being a Mormon, however it's defined, and
to have fun with those who seriously asked So how many wives does your father
have? It's too bad that some Utah born and raised Mormons have such
a difficult time with being so concerned about being accepted in the world.
Just be who you are. People may not agree with your religious beliefs, but they
will come to respect you if you live those beliefs.
We all commit sin, even Republicans. The question is, do we repent or redifine
and rationalize our actions. I believe we all do some of each to different
degrees. Even though I detest Democrat policies, I have many Democrat friends.
I am glad that I don't have to Judge what is in his heart, that is between God
and Jon Huntsman Jr. He was a reasonable Governor, I disagree with a lot of his
actions, but agree with a lot more. I will wait and see making a judgment call
on him for President after I have a great deal more information. He has to be
better than President Obama. Well maybe at least not any worse.
I don't understand why people want "yes/no", "black/white"
answers all the time. Sometimes answers are complex because the questions are
complex. Does anyone have a yes/no answer to our countries economic problems? To
terrorism? To energy issues? Religious questions are hardly
black/white questions, if they were we wouldn't spend so much time bickering
about religion. Personally, I find it refreshing that Huntsman
considers questions thoughtfully and truthfully instead of just spouting any
answer without hesitation in order to seem decisive. We have a boatload of
politicians who are answer yes or no without considering that they might be
wrong, they just want their soundbite out on cable news. What is the use in
being decisive if you decide incorrectly?
I am a yes/no, black/white, up or down person. I have trouble with Mr.
Huntsmans statement about his membership in the church. Are you a activemember of the church? yes/no. I love temple recommends questions as they are
yes/no questions. I really get concern when a politician won't give a straight
answer. Don't think i can support this guy. Thank you
Well written article...I suppose we Mormons tend to judge a little
poster wrote about his own father:" He, like Jon Huntsman, also found great
truths in other religions. I think we'd do well to be a bit more
engaging and far less judgmental about such views."I'd like to
know how the poster infers that Huntsman finds great truth in any religion, no
matter the choice. I just re-read the article on the TIME website. All I came
away with is that Huntsman has yet to research his position papers and defers
in-depth discussion until he is better prepared. And he has changed positions
on a couple of topics that are important to the Tea Party, which reeks of
opportunism, that is, politics by polling.
I don't care what religion he is; I just want him to be able to represent
himself well and he didn't. His answer seemed timid and vague which reduced my
trust of him. Why would we send him to China as an ambassador much less elect
him as a president if he can't give a sound bite about his beliefs.
the blogger's comments about differences among his siblings had to do with the
willingness to be disciplined or how food choices relate to health. That is so
different from not even being able to admit membership or more important,
'alignment' with basic tenets.
judge not lest ye be judged
@ Mike Richards:"A Mormon understands the sacrament prayers and
judges his conduct against the covenant he makes every week as he takes the
sacrament. Anything less is fluff."I would like to include that
adding much more to that is fluff as well.BTW, I have read the
scriptures many times, have often watched General Conference over the past 21
years, and have studied Hebrew and Greek in order to better understand the
meaning of the words of ancient prophets. I have been unable to find the
reference to the anointing of the Republican party by someone in authority.
There must be one by the way Mormons in Utah approach the subject. Can anyone
Don't upset the Mormons?The last thing we need is another article or
opinion piece saying religion is under attack.
"Wayne Rout many promiment mormons are or have been gasp Dems including at
least one current member of the seventy. The list inludes Pres Faust, Hugh B
Brown, Pres Tanner, Bruce R McConckie, I could continue. I am not a Dem however
to villify a another LDS for being a democratic is pure hypocrisy and just plain
dumb. "In the days of these Brethren, the Democrat party was
much different from what is stands for today. It would not surprise me if some
of them were here today, they would rethink the philosophy of today's
politicians that the only way to gain office is bribe the voters with promises
of more government programs.Anyone who teaches self-reliance
shudders a bit at how government programs have become sacred cows for them to
Thanks Katamb. You made me laugh and made me feel better.
Jesus would not deny health care to the poor based on a pre-existing condition.
While perhaps Mr. Huntsman doesn't want to commit to how 'Mormon' he is, the
real question should be, how 'Republican' he is, and we already know the truth
about that.Answer-- Not very.We don't need more middle
of the road, environmentalist, trying-to-please-the -democrats Republicans.
Conservative need a candidate that says, 'the buck stops here,' both
figuratively and literally. America is tired of business as usual, and
"let's make a deal." All deals are off. Liberal government is
destroying the country and we don't want anything remotely close to it any more!
Excellent writing and content! Love it and am still laughing! I know several
single women 50-somethings who don't attend church because they don't feel like
the ward has a place for them and it's so hard listening to a lesson on "a
single person is a family too." (Hogwash!) And yet these women have very
strong testimonies and would lay down in the road for you if you were about to
get hit by a car.
Either you are a Mormon or youre not. They didn't ask how devout he was to the
religion. This response from Huntsman has made me change my mind about voting
for him. Maybe Huntsman should figure out who he is before he tries to tell
Americans who they are and what they need. America doesnt need another wishy
" who seem to cling to Democrats even when the Party is openly hostile to
their church teachings (and Israel)."Democrats aren't
hostile to Israel, we just take off the rose-colored glasses and realize both
Israel and Palestinian leadership aren't trying at all to resolve their dispute.
Great article. My father was probably the most serious, eloquent,
educated scriptorian I ever knew. He would privately say to us, his family, that
it was the administration of the ordinances of the gospel by priesthood
authority that were the defining elements of the church. Everything else was up
for debate. He, like Jon Huntsman, also found great truths in other religions.
I think we'd do well to be a bit more engaging and far less
judgmental about such views.
re: NeilT | 5:23 p.m. May 16, 2011" . . . many prominent
Mormons are or have been gasp Dems including at least one current member of the
seventy. . . "Only one at a time is allowed in. You know the
story about one bad apple spoiling the entire barrel . . .
"I can't grasp how an active Church member could be a Democrat.""Well, I can't grasp how an active Church member could be"It looks like people are having trouble understanding why anyone would
do something they themselves wouldn't do. Get over yourselves.
Huntsman finds his faith hard to define because he doesn't practice his faith
anymore. Pretty simple. Mitt doesn't find his faith hard to define and neither
does Mike Lee or Orin Hatch or even Harry Reid. Either you raise your had to the
square every 6 months and fully sustain the first presidency and the twelve or
you don't. Either you answer with confidence the temple recommend questions or
you don't. Either you pay your tithing or you don't Either you accept the first
vision or your don't.... and the list goes on. Pretty simple and really NOT hard
to define unless... you just don't accept all of the above anymore and if so YOU
SHOULD JUST SAY IT!!!! People in this country want a man with conviction in the
white house... not a guy that "strains at knats and swallows camels".
I'm not sure now how I feel about Huntsman. I have always been a Mitt Romney
supporter, and remain so, but was also considering the possibility of supporting
Huntsman. I agree with "seer" above...I also want a president that
knows who and what he is, whether it's popular or not.
It seems like the writer has trouble with simple things. You are or you are not,
even with all of the little differences we each have. It is yes or
no, then you can define what difficult definitions you hold. But
politics/politicians seem to like the gray areas.
Wayne Rout many promiment mormons are or have been gasp Dems including at least
one current member of the seventy. The list inludes Pres Faust, Hugh B Brown,
Pres Tanner, Bruce R McConckie, I could continue. I am not a Dem however to
villify a another LDS for being a democratic is pure hypocrisy and just plain
I think I feel disappointed in Jon Huntsman that he couldn't be a better
example. He has put himself in position where he could do so much good in the
world for the church. I just wish he stood strong for what his heritage is.
Huntsman's defining Mormonism reminds me of Bill Clinton's, "It depends on
what the meaning of the word is, is"
A Mormon understands the sacrament prayers and judges his conduct against the
covenant he makes every week as he takes the sacrament. Anything less is fluff.
Mr. Hunstman was baptized a member of the CHurch from what I understand. Its a
simple yes or no question. He could respond, "yes, I am a member...however
I am not practicing at this time and would prefer to not discuss it" I
dunno. I just keep thinking of that scripture in Romans 1:16 that says "for
I am not ashamed of the Gospel..." To me that means no matter what, I
personally dont deny my membership, under any circumstances. But we are
all individual and can choose for ourselves.@Seer- I agree, he has
had a lifetime to 'define' his membership. I dont want someone in office that
conforms to what someone else what them to.
Personally, I think he was playing it safe politically, trying to paint himself
as being able to relate to all kinds of people. I don't think there's anything
necessarily wrong with that, especially since I don't believe religion should a
factor in politics. In his defense, we as readers aren't privy to
the entirety of the interview. I'm willing to bet that 75%+ of people that are
bent out of shape about his comments, haven't even read the actual article. Most
of them have probably just read and seen news stories about the article.
Journalists often only use part of their questions and material when writing a
story, and editors often remove other information too.
Mr Huntsman was born in a guilded cage which includes the inherited silver spoon
in his mouth. It would have been almost impossible for him to have been a
failure for other than major personal deficiencies. He has ridden in on his
daddy's shirt tail. He lacks having been through the refiner's fire such as
many of us in this self indulgent and spoiled society have not had the
opportunity to do. As a return missionary he should not attempt his light under
a bushel basket under any circumstances. His portrayal of what contitutes his
fundamental foundtion is found wanting in my opinion. Consequently I've begun
saving up for a $20.00 contribution to Mr Romney.
What?! You PAY a babysitter to go to the temple? I bet your ward brothers and
sisters are not happy with you at all about that confession.
"I can't grasp how an active Church member could be a Democrat."Well, I can't grasp how an active Church member could be
If Huntsman doesn't feel comfortable just saying "yes" to the question
of Mormon membership, his reasons are probably very personal. And while
politicians do agree to give up some of their privacy just by running for
office, I don't think he should be required to discuss his religious beliefs any
further than he already has. It's not relevant.And honestly I would
think most Mormons would be happy he left it where he did. I don't know why he
didn't just say yes or no, but lets speculate for a second. Do you want him
discussing some of the stranger aspects of Mormonism he might be questioning? Do
you want him to say, "I'm a member, but I don't have a current temple
recommend because I (fill in the blank.)" For people who are unfamiliar
with Mormonism, a discussion like that would just sound weird and out of context
and wouldn't do Mormons any favors.
It seems that those who comment want to define "mormon" as someone
whose opinions are the same as their opinions, someone who is just like them. I
thought that the article was well written and thought provoking.
@Wayne, as an active Church member and a Democrat, I think I can explain it: you
go to your favorite voter registration place and you mark the
"Democrat" square.Let me add that marking that square
doesn't compel you to agree with everything or anything other people do in the
name of the party. That's also true for those who mark the
"Republican" square, although I get the impression that some of my
Republican acquaintances don't realize that.
Wayne Rout | 3:54 p.m. May 16, 2011 El Paso, TX I can't grasp how an
active Church member could be a Democrat. ============= [Turn
ON sarcasm.]Ya -- and Pres. James E. Faust, or Elder Marlin Jensen,
how can they possibly be Democrats!And Pres. Uchdoft, not even being an
American![Sarcasm, OFF.]BTW - Some of us wonder the
exact same thing regarding Republicans.
"I can't grasp how an active Church member could be a Democrat. "Easy, you just have to ignore everyone who is judging you for being an
What was really revealed by the reactions to Jon Hunstman's comments was how we,
as Mormons, deal with those within our faith who harbor doubts or concerns about
any aspect of our faith. Its not evil for a well-intentioned, faithful,
believing Mormon to work through concerns he or she may have. But, I know from
experience that it is a bad idea to share one's concerns with any of one's
Church associates, even in private because people often react the same way they
did to Huntsman. Many automatically assume the person who has doubt is hiding
serious sins or wants to sow disbelief. These knee-jerk reactions often receive
cause many of doubters to not address their underlying concerns until they leave
the church.I think we need to be more accepting of Jon Hunstman and
other LDS people like him. Let them define themselves how they want, its not our
place to judge their hearts. If someone only believes 50% of the doctrine right
now, show compassion and understanding and hope they will come around to being a
100% believer later on.
I am sure that says more about the poster than it does about Mormon doctrine.
Huntsman has had a lifetime to define his religion. It is a simple question
that has a simple answer.....well...simple if you are not trying to run for
president. The fact that Huntsman may be waiting to gauge the winds
of opinion is really all I need to know. I want a president that has a moral
center, not a tootsie roll center all too ready to morph into whatever it is
that surrounds him.
It's only difficult to define if you're NOT.
I can't grasp how an active Church member could be a Democrat.