As a Mormon, I observed with particular interest the phenomenon of the Mormon liberal.

Here we were in what was obviously an authoritarian, dogmatic, sexist, anti-intellectual, racist (or formerly racist) religion, and yet, a bunch of members still claimed both to be supporters of this religion, AND good liberals. I didn't get it.

I still don't, actually. When Ezra Taft Benson famously said that it didn't seem possible for a devout Mormon who understood its doctrine to be a liberal democrat, he seemed only to be stating the bleeding obvious. How can an atheist also be a believing Catholic? He can't. How can a feminist also be a pro-male chauvinist pig? She can't. How can a true "liberal" also be a supporter of a baldly patriarchal, authoritarian institution, which denies, or has denied, full membership rights to believers based on their race, sex, and sexual orientation, and has a long history of fraud? He can't.

This is why, as a Mormon, I always sided with the Benson-Packer wing - logical consistency was cognitively important to me, and they were the only ones with logical consistency on their side. They just openly admitted their sexism, racism, etc.

By contrast, Mormon liberals were confused. They were walking contradictions-in-terms: on the one hand, they would complain about the church's sexism and racism and "hostility to intellectualism" or what have you, while on the other, they would renew their pledges of allegiance to their cult fuhrers every stake conference, and continue to allow the church to turn their kids into cult zombies. But for me, as for Packer and Benson and all those other bad guys, the syllogism was simple, the logic inescapable:

Premise One: Mormonism was true
Premise Two: Mormonism was sexist, authoritarian, racist (or formerly racist), homophobic, and anti-intellectual;
Conclusion: Therefore, Mormon sexism, authoritarianism, racism, homophobia, and anti-intellectualism were true.

There was no way around this. To accept that Mormonism was true logically required accepting all those other things as true; and if you did, you could not be a liberal. If you didn't, you could not be a Mormon. At least, you could not be these things in any logically coherent (that is, non-nonsensical) sort of way.

At least, that's how it all looked in my head. It still does. That might be why I'd rather live in a community of conservative Mormons than of liberal Mormons: at least the conservative Mormons are logically consistent. The liberal Mormons are just confused, and don't make any sense at all. It's the difference between saying:

A.) A is X (where this is wrong);

and

B.) A is X, but also NOT X, at the same time (as with string theory, this statement does not even qualify as wrong, because it is incoherent);

I can handle people believing that A is X, when it's not...but I just can't handle being around people who believe that A is X, but also NOT X, at the same time, and then talking about their "struggle" to reconcile "X and not X at the same time", posting on their weird blogs about it, or writing long, boring articles in Sunstone about it. I'd rather read The Ensign.

Just one man's two cents.

Is anyone else like this?



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 11/23/2014 09:54PM by Tal Bachman.

I'd prefer to live around people who demonstrate an ability to leave the mormon mindset, even if its just the modest step of having a non-mormon political philosophy. That would demonstrate to me that the person might be capable of some independent thought. It would give me hope they could leave more of the absurdity behind.

Living around people who have demonstrated an inability to deviate from the mormon mindset doesn't demonstrate an application of logic to me. It demonstrates complete adherence to the Prophets, hardly a demonstration of a thinking person.

My dad was a democrat all our lives. Our mother was, too, but my dad was more vocal about how he felt. My dad was ALWAYS capable of thinking for himself. He didn't buy into all of Mormonism. It was his heritage. Thank whomever he was that way as he raised all his kids to be free thinkers. Some of them were just quicker about it than I was. They left in their teens.

I was very devout Mormon and I was very much a democrat. My boyfriend hung the phone up on me when he found out I voted for Carter. I listened to my dad.

I think this is a good example. My daughter is TBM and votes her conscience. When she first went back to the LDS church, she voted for Obama and her Mormon friends were furious. They said "What about abortion, what about gay marriage." And she told them, "There are more important issues facing this country than the ones you are talking about."

Some guy came by one day to collect for something to do with abortion, something pushed by Republicans. I was there and heard him say, "you've come to the wrong place" and then told the guy why he felt the way he did. I have NO DOUBT if Tal could talk to my dad, he'd convince him otherwise. My dad was one the smartest, outspoken, honest men I've ever known. And he was a liberal Mormon.

My dad, as bigoted as he could be sometimes, was so shocked I married someone gay. He told me THEY ARE BOTH THAT WAY.

I should also add that before equal rights, abortion, etc., became BIG issues back in the 1970s, Utah had a lot of democrats in office. Gunn McKay is one who comes to mind. I believe Governor Rampton and Matheson were also democrats. I wonder who voted them in . . .



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/24/2014 07:29PM by cl2.

Mormon Liberal - the oxymoron of all time. FUNNY

Okay, stop giggling. I'm not going to bother, but perhaps he has made a statement somewhere about the how and why he is a polar opposite of most of his church's policies and members.

His name has come up on the RfM board here and there. Anybody?

It is possible (though rare) to believe firmly in a particular dogma or ideology, while allowing others to believe and act differently, and not feel you must impose your belief or ideology on them -- making you 'liberal.'

I agree it's impossible to be a liberal and an all-in chapel Mormon. To be a liberal, an individual needs to be more of a cafeteria Mormon (smorgasbormon?), able to have some measure of independent thought.

But you could replace "liberal" in your subject line with "intellectual" and write a virtually identical post. Accepting the fact of evolution, for example, disqualifies a person from being a chapel Mormon; it opens up too many holes in the orthodoxy.

Joseph Fielding Smith and Bruce R. McConkie remain the doctrinal polestars of chapel Mormonism even as the church desperately attempts to expunge their memory.

In the Benson era (and before, and after), my sister and a gay (male) friend were both both self-described TBMs and democrats.

So, at least in name, it WAS possible for them.

They both enjoyed "shocking" TBM friends by announcing they supported the Democratic candidate during elections.

At the time, I was a bit bewildered, but I quoted my parents who always encouraged us to "stand by your man" in every election.

I have alot of experience with this. Over the years my parents have gone from rush limbaugh conservatives to virtually liberal on every topic except gay marriage. They just can't handle the idea of two men getting it on. Anyway, they overcome the cognitive dissonance by focusing on what they perceive as the more cooperative aspects of mormonism. They view the religion as a socialistic endeavor with a we're-all-in-this-together type of mentality. They think that their tithing, which is easily in the hundreds of thousands of dollars at this point, actually supports charitable causes. They cherish sitting among a group of individuals that seem to face the same struggle and the relationships that they've built as a result. When you look at the way the church operates; with the assigned jobs, dress codes, appearance requirements, herd mentality, and so on it is easy to for them to approach it from this viewpoint. I'm no expert on mormonism but this does seem to be what j smith intended. It's akin to members of the military who are given housing and food allowances, free healthcare, insurance, and many other benefits and despite this obviously socialistic environment, they manage to remain largely conservative because they view the military as something that defends freedom & independence despite their own reliance on an institution.

I served along side another missionary like this- he was my DL-and although I don't remember all of his political views,I do remember him saying that on the issue of abortion he was pro-choice and that he didn't believe that being pro choice necessarily condoned abortion- something about agency etc.-I just remember thinking his views were peculiar.

My mother was a liberal Democrat and a devout Mormon. So are some of my friends. I was always liberal,but that was one of my issues with the church.

I could make a strong case for being liberal Mormon based on teachings about common consent, the United Order, King Benjamin's sermon, and of course the New Testament. And of course, there was once a time when people with liberal views occupied positions of prominence within the church.

Funny how all of these things are rarely talked about anymore in today's cult.

Anyhow, my drastic change in politics pre-dated my leaving the cult by about 5 years. I would use the arguments I just mentioned to support my views. However, I eventually came to see things the same as you Tal.

The ETB quote that you mentioned used to piss me off to no end. Eventually I came to realize that he was absolutely right.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/24/2014 03:04AM by Strength in the Loins.

The mormon liberal is hoping a flawed church will change for the better over time. That has in fact been happening.

It is not that complicated. Don't overanalize it. ETB rigidity is hardly the only acceptable way to be a mormon. In a great many mormons' opinions, it is not even a very good way to be a mormon.

I think it will take another generation or two before any meaningful change will become evident. The Benson/Packer/McConkie/JFS years are still deeply embedded in today's church leadership and it will take time for that to die out.

I think the unwritten article of faith is "We believe the Republican party is true and unerring."

This mindset is one of the peculiar facets of mormonism that doesn't translate well in other countries.

My aunt/uncle were serving as missionaries in Sweden back in 2008 when Obama was elected. Apparently everyone there, including the Swedish church members, were ecstatic EXCEPT my American/Utahn aunt/uncle who seemed to be VERY upset, but, of course, kept their mouths shut about it.

There are some very devout families in my last ward who are liberal and proud of it. Bumper stickers on their car, FB postings, etc.

It helped us all remember that not everyone needs to think and feel the same way to be associate together and be friends.

Makes me even more glad I didn't have to ever live in Utah.

a mormon liberal is one who wears plaid pants.

Brother of Jerry

Yeah, I guess that is true. The more the church creates wiggle room around formerly rigid positions, the more it becomes possible to be both a liberal and a Mormon. Twenty five years ago, Benson flat out said that mothers should not work outside the home. Now, no one at the top even mentions anything about that.

The doctrinaire days seem to be ending...

People tend to compartmentalize beliefs that may be opposite those their religion may teach--it helps them keep their friendships and families together.

With the possible exception of the current pope, the heads of most mainstream religions with large U.S. populations are conservative. I suspect that a lot of that conservativism has to do with the wishes of these leaders to gain wealth and influence and to proselytize at will.

Tal, I love your posts - articulate, expressive, vivid, making a clear and usually wonderfully made point.

But you really don't get it because you are trapped in black and white thinking. You don't see nuance, the complexity of human thinking and you don't understand how liberal people think.

And yes, liberals as others can be wildly inconsistent in their thinking, liberal in some ways but conservative in others. It is a part of being human and trying to understand your universe as you experience it - and as you emotionally need it to be.

It's a long story. But yes you can be liberal and Mormon.

But can you be a conservative musician?

Perhaps.

A conservative jazz musician?

Speaking from personal experience, it is in some ways analogous to the experience of gays. They/we do not choose it. It is a natural part of us and so on. We learn pretty early on, however, that our kind is not welcome, and we have no earthly idea of why. We get blamed for choosing the wrong path when in fact we chose nothing. And we expect acceptance by our group the same as anybody else. Mormonism involves a host of social interactions, and we crave admission to those interactions just as much as the staunchest right-wing anti-communist. We cannot understand why they get to stay and we don't. It simply does not make any sense. So the liberal Mormon is left with some very difficult decisions. It used to be much harder, before the internet and the community it provides of fellow outcasts. Before the internet there was Sunstone, but before that there was nothing except loneliness and a sense of betrayal by those closest to us. We do not crave the Mormonism of the far right. We crave a Mormonism that lives up to its promises.

Marv - Black and white thinking cannot see nuance where nuance exists. But in the case of the Mormon Church up until quite recently, and in some cases even now, there *wasn't* any "nuance" in:

1.) The church's position on the inherent spiritual worthiness of blacks;

2.) The church's position on their own authoritarianism;

3.) The church's position on the subordinate role and status of women;

4.) The church's position on homosexuality;

etc.

So what I would suggest to you in reply is that to see nuance where none exists is a kind of projection, or an inability to simply accept reality. There is nothing "liberal", for example, about swearing a death oath of allegiance to a 90 year old religious dictator, who you cannot publicly question without being kicked out of your religion. For that reason, I suggest that it is - or at least, has been - simply impossible to be "liberal" AND support a religion which entails those sorts of doctrines. It is possible to *think* you do; but that would only be an indication of that person's confusion.

Thoughts?

How do we explain Harry Reed? How do we explain the LGBT group "Affirmation". How do they get people like Brandon Flowers from the Killers to do "I'm a Mormon" videos, when his own music can't be played in Mormon dances or Mormon homes?

Tal and his family probably had to face this same hypocrisy, "We love you and your family, just don't be YOU around us!" I'm sure Gladys Knight and many Hollywood stars get the same treatment from LDS leaders and members.

Liberal Mormons...

Some like to think that they are liberal and mormon.

Some like to think they are supportive of LGBT or any other group.

But its usually not so in reality.

A lot of "liberal" mormons who "support" LGBT still maintain that gays will be made straight in the after life, for example. They just think that because they dont actively hate gays they are "supportive" of them, but would still lobby for anti gay marriage.

Tal Bachman Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------
>
> Here we were in what was obviously an
> authoritarian, dogmatic, sexist,
> anti-intellectual, racist (or formerly racist)
> religion, and yet, a bunch of members still
> claimed both to be supporters of this religion,
> AND good liberals. I didn't get it. N
>
> This is why, as a Mormon, I always sided with the
> Benson-Packer wing - logical consistency was
> cognitively important to me, and they were the
> only ones with logical consistency on their side.
> They just openly admitted their sexism, racism,
> etc.
>
> Premise One: Mormonism was true
> Premise Two: Mormonism was sexist, authoritarian,
> racist (or formerly racist), homophobic, and
> anti-intellectual;
> Conclusion: Therefore, Mormon sexism,
> authoritarianism, racism, homophobia, and
> anti-intellectualism were true.
>
> At least, that's how it all looked in my head. It
> still does. That might be why I'd rather live in a
> community of conservative Mormons than of liberal
> Mormons:
>

There is no doubt that you would feel more comfortable living in a commmunity of conservative Mormons..... birds of a feather flock together.

If by "birds of a feather", you mean "people who value coherence" over "people who keep trying to believe that two mutually exclusive propositions can both be true", I guess so...

People who arent hypocrites, really.

It would be highly unusual for a liberal to convert to the Mormon church. I dare say that most liberal Mormons were likely to have been born into Mormonism and then at some point developed the cognitive reasoning to understand the bigotry for what it is while also recognizing the value of other aspects of the religion. These people were not given the choice in their religion, however, neither did they fully embrace the Mormon sexism, authoritarianism, racism, homophobia, and anti-intellectuism as true. However, you evidently did fully embrace the Mormon bigotries as true. It appears that you figured out that Mormonism is false, but have you figured out that Mormon bigotry may be false as well? One doesn't have to be a Mormon to be a bigot. The problem is that changing one's bigotry is easier said than done. It is by far more difficult than leaving Mormonism is. Bigots are more comfortable in a community of other bigots.... birds of a feather flock together.

I think you're spot on.

It would be interesting to know how many racist ex-mormons who claim not to be racist are also against gay marriage, while asserting their opposition to gay marriage is something other than bigotry.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/25/2014 05:29PM by thingsithink.

I should clarify my statement: Bigots are more comfortable in a community of other *like-minded* bigots....

Liberal Mormon:

Critical thinking requires logical consistency; coherence, in other words.

Consider this sentence: "John was born in Las Vegas, Nevada, and also in Paris, France".

This sentence contains two mutually exclusive propositions; both cannot be true. Its statements of fact do not cohere, meaning it is "incoherent".

Recognizing mutually exclusive propositions for what they are, and choosing to avoid incoherent thinking, is not an endorsement of bigotry.

But what of the *content* of Mormon thought, you say? My response is that I prefer to encounter coherent expressions of things I disagree with, to completely incoherent nonsense that doesn't make any sense at all. I would rather hear a man say, "I dislike people born in Canada" (even though I was born in Canada) than "I dislike people born in Canada, and also I like people born in Canada". The first view is objectionable, but the second is completely insane.