Mormonism and the presidency: Don't worry

Emile Lester's op-ed column on Mormonism and the presidency.

Date published: 2/12/2012

IT IS A basic rule of politics that liberal and conservative commentators won't find much to agree about in an election year. Apparently, the rule doesn't apply to the subject of Mitt Romney's religious beliefs. Mitt's Mormonism has been the source of concern from prominent pundits on the left and the right.

The most common anxiety about having a Mormon president, voiced by Slate.com's Jacob Weissberg and former Reagan speechwriter Hal Gordon, is the alleged gullibility of Mormon believers. Describing Mormonism as "Scientology plus 125 years," Weissberg concludes that the holding of some religious views are disqualifying for a presidential candidate because they "indicate a basic failure to think for himself."

This gullibility, left-leaning scholar Damon Linker and politically influential evangelical pastor Robert Jeffress have argued, makes for perilous politics because it includes a belief that the president of The Church of Latter-day Saints is a prophet, and the "mouthpiece of God on earth." The LDS is a politically active church, recently pumping millions into supporting California's Proposition 8, a 2008 state referendum banning gay marriage. A Mormon president would have a hard time ignoring a prophet of God's instructions on this and other divisive issues.

NO LESS ABSURD

The gullibility charge is the easiest to sink. Mormonism is not the only religion whose mysteries of faith appear absurd and irrational to those out of the faith. Weissberg's response is that Mormons are more gullible because the religion's origin is so recent, but he never tells us why accepting a religion founded 150 years ago is any less rational than holding religious beliefs despite major discoveries over the last 150 years. After all, atheists might accuse those who maintain a belief in Christian and Jewish theology of irrationality for ignoring the last 150 years of biological evidence since Darwin.

Religious believers could plausibly reply that many atheists blithely assume that Darwin's view of nature as "red in tooth and claw" is compatible with a morality of compassion despite the doubts Darwin himself expressed on this issue. By Weissberg's criterion, finding a qualified presidential candidate who has thought through life's great mysteries thoroughly might be more difficult than finding a camel able to pass through a needle's eye.

AS WITH JFK, THERE'S NOTHING TO FEAR FROM MITT ROMNEY'S 'IRRATIONAL' RELIGION

Emile Lester is assistant professor in political science at the University of Mary Washington. His book "Teaching About Religions: A Democratic Approach for Public Schools" was recently published by University of Michigan Press.