Back in the seventies, Francis Schaeffer used the term “co-belligerents” to describe the loose alliance of conservative Christian groups fighting on one side of the culture wars. The term is an acknowledgement that Schaeffer, Phyllis Schlafly and Jerry Falwell would not be natural allies.
For example, the Catholic Schlafly had run into problems in the fifties when Protestant groups refused to work with her organization. But Roe vs. Wade changed that.
The current test is to see whether or not the sphere of co-belligerents can be expanded to include Mormons. Previously I would have said yes, but the prominence of Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign seems to be causing a problem.
Recently, the Evangelical Christian journalist Warren Cole Smith spoke out against the inclusion of Romney in the group of co-belligerents. In a post titled A Vote for Romney Is a Vote for the LDS Church, he argues that you can’t separate the values that social conservative want from the theology they don’t want:
You can’t say that his religious beliefs don’t matter, but his “values” do. The Christian worldview teaches that there is a short tether binding beliefs to the values and behaviors that flow from them. If the beliefs are false, then the behavior will eventually—but inevitably—be warped.
In an interview with Joanna Brooks, a liberal Mormon, some of this came to a head:
JB: Closing thought. You believe Mormons are theologically errant, weird, and unreliable. I have no quarrel with evangelical theology but I find evangelical Christians to be anti-pluralistic, mean, and arrogant. Can we ever get along?
WS: Don’t put words in my mouth. I have tons of Mormon friends. I spent a lot of time in the West. I welcomed the Mormon Church’s involvement in Proposition 8. But the doctrine and worldview are flawed and dangerous, and they will ultimately derail Romney’s presidential campaign.
If you read Smith’s column and interview, you’ll see that Brooks is not putting words into his mouth. Regardless, notice that he “welcomed” Mormon money and votes during Prop 8. But with Romney, Mormons are clearly getting ideas above their station. That’s sort of the classic conservative take on religious minorities: we’ll tolerate you – heck, some of my best friends are minorities – but don’t forget your place.
How can Smith argue that he’s having ‘words put in his mouth’ when he blatantly states that he thinks Mormon views are dangerous and admits he was happy to simply use them for the sake of Prop 8? I’m pretty sick of seeing the line of argument that amounts to “I’m not actually saying what I am actually saying right now!”
Bullies.
It bugs me when you’re just doing active listening and trying to sum up in your own words what the other person is saying, and they accuse you of “putting words in my mouth.” That doesn’t seem fair to me.
I admit that I owe Romney a huge debt for universal health care in my home state of Massachusetts, but he then recanted it since it didn’t jive with his Republican status. I wouldn’t vote for him, not just because he’s Mormon, although that doesn’t sweeten the deal. What’s worse is that he’s by far the best presidential candidate the Republican party is offering as of yet, and believe me, that’s not saying much.
What’s worse is that he’s by far the best presidential candidate the Republican party is offering as of yet, and believe me, that’s not saying much.
Gary Johnson.
Holy crap, a respectable Republican! He’s got zero chance of getting the nomination.
But I can dream… :)
I don’t think the wiki mentions, but he’s pro-choice, too!
I wish they’d kill each other off without affecting the sane, rational people.
Not that I want them to get together and activate their wonder twin powers, but Mormons and the more fundamentalist Christian groups have a lot in common. I think they could get along if only they would only look past the other’s theological holes as well as they look past their own. I can get along with people of many religious persuasions, but the ones that happen to personally bother me the most have been Mormon or Fundamentalist Christian. Let’s hope they continue to not get along.
If Romney gets the nomination, the fundies will have to accept LDS as a legitimate religion. I’m hoping they run a third party to have at least one “real” christian on the ballot. I think Romney would be the hardest opponent of Obama so I’m hoping a real american AKA Michele Bachman is the republican candidate…. I can dream.
If Romney gets the nomination, the fundies will have to accept LDS as a legitimate religion.
See, I’m predicting if this happens the fundies will have a remarkable and spontaneous change of heart and will accept Mormons as stepbrothers-and-sisters-in-Christ. No bets on whether the love lasts after the election or not; probably has to do with whether he wins.
They certainly got along when trying to tramp all over the rights of gay people in California.
“I find evangelical Christians to be anti-pluralistic, mean, and arrogant. Can we ever get along?”
Then he says in his own words:
“I welcomed the Mormon Church’s involvement in Proposition 8. But the doctrine and worldview are flawed and dangerous.”
Based on this she doesn’t have to put words in his mouth, he does it himself. He’s being mean, arrogant and what he says about Mormons could be an admission of Anti-pluralism.couldn’t it? And isn’t she correct in saying that he thinks, based on what he says, that “Mormons are theologically errant, weird, and unreliable.”
“The Christian worldview teaches that there is a short tether binding beliefs to the values and behaviors that flow from them. If the beliefs are false, then the behavior will eventually—but inevitably—be warped.”
Because “warped” equals “not Christian”? This belief cannot die quickly enough.
If you value order and cooperation, if you value human life, then you will respect other people, treat them kindly, and refrain from doing harm to them. No gods, no saviors, no hells required. If people around the world from every religion are basically moral people, where is the difference in Christianity?
And some people have had the nerve to tell me that secular morality is a parasite of religious morality. No, religious morality takes logical, practical ethics and distorts it by including unnecessarily divisive (at best) and actively harmful (at worst) elements into morality.
There is a short tether binding beliefs to values and behaviors – and it’s the value of human decency, of cooperation and mutual benefit, found in all religions and not found solely in Christian dogma. Why must organized religion take a short tether like that, and make it into a long tether, through indoctrination, custom, and ostracism of dissenters – and then have the arrogance to claim that Christianity is the short tether, that Christianity is all that is necessary and essential?
It doesn’t matter if you’re a Protestant evangelical, a Catholic, or a Mormon if you treat other people with the respect and decency they deserve. The extra label makes zero difference.