http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/2008/06/26/mistaken-identity/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=mistaken-identity n. the principle of good order<br /><br /> "Observe the strange inversion of all order and sense! Dignity debased; how vilely is the function of a consul prostituted!" ~The Craftsman Fri, 10 Feb 2012 02:25:26 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/2008/06/26/mistaken-identity/comment-page-1/#comment-11866 drawbacks Sat, 28 Jun 2008 20:19:33 +0000 http://www.amconmag.com/larison/2008/06/26/mistaken-identity/#comment-11866 Daniel, have you read much Christopher Lasch? I notice some similarities in your writing, for instance this (not especially relevant) passage from The World Of Nations: 'Mormons as a religious group have no reason to seek national political office, especially now that they have nothing to fear from the federal government. Even when they did so in the past, they had no wish to govern a country which they believed was doomed to moral destruction. "We do not intend to have any trade or commerce with the gentile world," said Brigham Young. "... I am determined to cut every thread of this kind and live free and independent, untrammeled by any of their detestable customs and practices." If George Romney shared these sentiments, he would never have sought federal office. The larger implications of this fact, however, if one considers them carefully, are dismaying, because they show how far religion has lost its power to influence the world of affairs, politics in particular. Elsewhere we find Quakers leading the cry for war. It is not a question of hypocrisy. What has happened is that religious questions have been arbitrarily defined as questions of private belief that have no application to public life.' Daniel, have you read much Christopher Lasch? I notice some similarities in your writing, for instance this (not especially relevant) passage from The World Of Nations:
‘Mormons as a religious group have no reason to seek national political office, especially now that they have nothing to fear from the federal government. Even when they did so in the past, they had no wish to govern a country which they believed was doomed to moral destruction. “We do not intend to have any trade or commerce with the gentile world,” said Brigham Young. “… I am determined to cut every thread of this kind and live free and independent, untrammeled by any of their detestable customs and practices.” If George Romney shared these sentiments, he would never have sought federal office. The larger implications of this fact, however, if one considers them carefully, are dismaying, because they show how far religion has lost its power to influence the world of affairs, politics in particular. Elsewhere we find Quakers leading the cry for war. It is not a question of hypocrisy. What has happened is that religious questions have been arbitrarily defined as questions of private belief that have no application to public life.’

]]> http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/2008/06/26/mistaken-identity/comment-page-1/#comment-11840 conradg Fri, 27 Jun 2008 00:08:38 +0000 http://www.amconmag.com/larison/2008/06/26/mistaken-identity/#comment-11840 Frankly, I don't think this problem is solvable. If Jesus and his disciples had practiced cannibalism, but the practice had later been outlawed by Church leaders of a later generation, I think no matter how hard you tried to argue that Christianity wasn't about cannibalism, the link would have been forever established in many people's minds, and rightly so. It's one thing to have splinter sects which practice some unsavory interpretation of the original teachins of a religion, but when the founders of a religion do so it's hard to claim it's some kind of aberration. In the case of Mormonism, I think everyone knows that if it weren't for intense cultural and political disapproval from the outside, Mormons would still be practicing polygamy. And if ever social mores changed such that polygamy were more socially acceptable, it's a pretty good bet that the Mormon church would once again allow it, and perhaps even encourage it. Because of that simple fact of life, people will forever conflate Mormonism with fringe splinter sects that still practice polygamy in defiance of the CLDS church policy, seeing the CLDS as betraying the original intent and practices of the founders of Mormonism for political expediency. After all, aren't they? Frankly, I don’t think this problem is solvable. If Jesus and his disciples had practiced cannibalism, but the practice had later been outlawed by Church leaders of a later generation, I think no matter how hard you tried to argue that Christianity wasn’t about cannibalism, the link would have been forever established in many people’s minds, and rightly so. It’s one thing to have splinter sects which practice some unsavory interpretation of the original teachins of a religion, but when the founders of a religion do so it’s hard to claim it’s some kind of aberration. In the case of Mormonism, I think everyone knows that if it weren’t for intense cultural and political disapproval from the outside, Mormons would still be practicing polygamy. And if ever social mores changed such that polygamy were more socially acceptable, it’s a pretty good bet that the Mormon church would once again allow it, and perhaps even encourage it. Because of that simple fact of life, people will forever conflate Mormonism with fringe splinter sects that still practice polygamy in defiance of the CLDS church policy, seeing the CLDS as betraying the original intent and practices of the founders of Mormonism for political expediency. After all, aren’t they?

]]>