I am still in Utah for a speech and I have spoken to many people here about the current presidential campaign. Many locals here have expressed dismay over the missteps of the Romney campaign. However, David Twede, 47, a scientist and managing editor of the online magazine MormonThink.com, says that his criticism of Mitt Romney has led to his being called to account — and possible excommunication — from the Church of Latter Day Saints. The fifth-generation Mormon says that Church elders demanded names of other Mormons with which he was working on the site. He says he was told “Cease and desist, Brother Twede.” The controversy has now been reported on the Washington Post, Huffington Post and a number of other sites – though primarily as a political story. From a legal standpoint, the case raises a classic conflict between free speech and free exercise that we have discussed in other areas.
I could not find any response to the allegation from the Church on the underlying factual allegations.
MormonThink.com is a site where Mormons engage in scholarly debate about the religion’s history and politics. Twede says that his bishop, “stake president” and two leading members called him to a meeting in a Florida Mormon church. He says that he was informed that he faced charges of “apostasy” for the writings on his blog. He says that he was fingered by a member of the Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research, which includes many professors for Brigham Young University, over his blog. This case is being championed by Steve Benson, the Pulitzer Prize–winning cartoonist for The Arizona Republic and grandson of former secretary of agriculture and Mormon prophet Ezra Taft Benson. Benson left the Church in 1993 and has become a critic of the LDS.
Twede wrote an article about Romney last month titled “The God of Mitt Romney: Why Do Some Claim He’s Not Christian?” The leaders allegedly told him that they did not like to see a discussion of the church or its connection with Romney.
I have always found the LDS community to be very open to dialogue and discussion on controversial issues, including some of the recent stories related to Romney. After all, the Church has not excommunicated Harry Reid. Accordingly, I am a bit surprised by the allegations which raise very troubling questions, including the alleged role of academics at BYU who should be supportive of free speech values. While BYU is closely tied to the Church, it is viewed as the Notre Dame of the LDS — a university founded on church principles but committed to the academic enterprise. If this account is true, the intolerance of dissenting voices will only serve to marginalize the Church and its members. However, this may be an irreconcilable conflict between religious doctrine and free speech.
We have written repeatedly over the dangers of private censorship by companies and universities. Government censorship and harassment is largely deterred by the First Amendment, but the Bill of Rights does not protect people from private forms of retaliation. Yet, religious organizations are present a different question from other institutions in protecting their religious values. I have previously written how I believe free exercise rights and antidiscrimination laws are increasingly in conflict. I view the religious values as trumping such laws in many cases.
Clearly the Church as a right to enforce its religious edicts and values on all of its members. The LDS expects its members to adhere to standards of conduct in their private life and has long incorporated church members into a highly structured church organization that extend from Salt Lake City down to individual neighborhoods. That is part of its tradition and has a high degree of secrecy surrounding its rituals. Thus, LDS officials could argue that this type of feedback and corrective action is part of the Church’s tradition and faith structure. Accordingly, they could argue that, if Twede wishes to remain a Mormon, he must accept the guidance and directions of the Church. Most religious organizations have inviolate values that are the basis for good standing in the Church. It often raises difficult questions since free exercise protects the right of churches to maintain their core traditions and values. Churches are by definition bond in religious dogma and traditions. They are not generally debating clubs on core principles or practices — though some churches are more tolerant of such discussions than others. Individuals have the right to continue to speak but may have to leave such organizations if their views are inherently inconsistent with membership in the Church. While I find such threats to be intolerant and problematic from a free speech standpoint, I am not a member of the LDS and I am not sure of the extent to which LDS members pledge obedience to the church leadership on such questions. Catholic church and other churches have a history of taking measures against those who fail to adhere to church doctrine, including academics in some cases. What is intolerance to some is merely faith-based discipline to others. It is also not clear the extent to which the intervention was over the degree of discussion of internal Church matters that are viewed as inappropriate for public discussion. In my view, the greatest concern is the degree to which the action was taken as a response to the criticism of Romney which seems removed from any direct church doctrine or value. In the end, however, the church determines who may remain a member of good standing. I would hope however that one could remain a member of good standing as a Mormon and still be a critic of Romney.
What do you think?
Source: Daily Beast
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/2443/2443-h/2443-h.htm
Project Gutenberg’s The Story of the Mormons, by William Alexander Linn
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or
re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
with this eBook or online at http://www.gutenberg.org
This link was posted earlier on this site, I thank the original poster for it. It was published in 1901. The author had interviews with some that were
familiar with many of the Mormon contemporaries. To sell snake oil and faith all you need is a huge reservoir of BS.
Speaking of religion, I met a young woman on-line, who after talking about completely different matters, divulged that she had been made a deacon, ie joint leader, in her church at age 17. I assumed it was an evangelical church and did not ask.
She said that after two years she then left the church, the town (naturally) and religion itself behind her.
Obvious reasons. They were crooked as bandits and in no way Christian.
Rafflaw, they are not ordained. ALL Mormon bishops are lay bishops. I don’t know if they have ordination of some sort or other but it’s not like you have to go through some special induction that severs civil ties or anything.
ALL MALE MORMONS have some kind of thing where they’re “aaronic priests” and about half the youths are “elders.” It’s confusing but I don’t think it comes with any exclusionary force (as in, if you’re a bishop you can’t be this or that other kind of thing).
Brother Twede will abide …
Checks and balances has been suggested, more intensive ones that is to say. Do we get a gang war or better justice? Who has the right and on what grounds can a judge be impeached.? I would not trust either Congress or the Prez.
When a judges make statements that cannot be reconciled with healthy judicial temperment and reasoning, they should be subject to the president and congress for an immediate evaluation. Judges have too much power and too much immunity. The idea that they must be independent, fearless to make controversial decisions at all costs, practically speaking, has created a dictatorial monster wielding power outside the parameters of common sense and ethical behavior.
Every “religion” has it’s thought policemen.
Free yourself, Mr. Twede. Just walk, You’ll be free at last.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/story/2012-03-28/mitt-romney-mormon-bishop/53836844/1 Before politics, Mitt Romney was a Mormon bishop
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/30/mitt-romney-mormon-leader_n_1845286.html
I read somewhere that Mitt is a Mormon Bishop. If that is correct, shouldn’t that be a concern?
Roma, Romani, Romney, boma bo bamni,
Romney….
It the guy is a gypsie, the letters proclaim,
you drop the one and say the name..
Like Mitt, MItt ff in f so bitt or
Willard, Willard, f so Willard,
Gypsie!
Oh, I found that one can not use the itchBay word here.
I agree with Zarathustra.
Roma, Romani, Ramanich, Romney… this equals GYPSIE!
Why dont you chumps look at the forehead and understand this?
The mormon thing was a Way to hide the gypsie thing.
I suppose he’s part of the 47%….. It’s not Romneys job to care….
Get with it People, Mormonism, like all the other Religions cares about nothing……… but control of your minds, and your bodies, and having access to your hard earned money….. And they all do the same thing, they use fear to achieve their objectives………..
I grew up in southern Utah (Moab). My personal observation is that as a whole Mormons are no different than anyone else. It should be noted though that Utah usually ranks toward the top among use of female use of anti depressant drugs. Many attribute this to the demands placed on women by the male-dominated church.
The church, especially the leadership, is a whole different. They ran the town we lived in and exacted money from the city as well as their members. They were as much a business as a church. The church controlled everything from the main newspaper, television station, radio stations, largest dairy, and department store (ZCMI). A note of information, any entity with the word ‘Deseret’ in its name belongs to the Mormon Church.
As in many religions, those who aspire to power are the very ones who should never have power. Those running the church have in the past been willing to condone segregation, polygamy (still prevalent), sexual abuse in Boy Scout troops, and have done their best to stifle any dissent of church doctrine. This election is the chance of a lifetime for them and they have shown the willingness to do everything in their power to get a Mormon in the White House.
The actions of the church aren’t surprising; I’m pretty sure they have done much worse and gotten away with it. In a state where 90% of elected officials are Mormon it’s difficult to see how leaders in the church would face prosecution.
This is not a law class, but I can ask.
Does each decision stand as ruling precedent unless appealed and overturned by jhigher instance or the Supremes?
If so, can contrary rulings be created in co-equal
federal circuit courts? And if the date of ruling is decisive, how is that handled in on-going trials?
Is the first ruling support only but not compelling?
AMEN. DIFFERENT TIMES. Perhaps they WERE better then.
rcampbell,
I thought about the same thing. It seems like it should. However, I heard a discussion about the S.C. deliberately ignoring precedent, in fact, blowing past it, to create “laws” based on what they call “originalism”. This seems to have been a successful strategy.
Honestly, I don’t recognize our Constitution in the actions of any branch of the govt. at this time. A few lower court justices go to the mat only to be overturned in a heartbeat.
It was just so interesting to hear such a plain spoken defense of the Constitution. The fact that it sounds foreign to me now, worries me a lot.
If you associate with that Flock, Turley, you will get fleas.
The prayer they used to recite in school began:
“Our father…”
It was a translation of the Roman Catholic “Pater Noster,” I believe.
It was essentially a restatement of the faith of the patriarchal society. Although that obviously could apply as easily to GOVT as to RELIGION, it was presented as religious, and therefore identified as religious, and per se domineering (root word = domin, LottaK, right?) and thus, harmful and damaging to educational pursuits.