I just read this on an O/T topic, yet the writer is using the term to cover a wide range of denial/acceptance of offensive principles.

The story is about a Muslim woman who is attacking the misogynistic teachings, practices of Islam. I guess to give westerners the concept of what is going on here, they had to come up with examples which Christian Westerners could relate to.

Here's the quote: "If Hirsi Ali had had a strict Baptist upbringing somewhere in the southern United States and left to tell the story of its hypocrisies and closed-mindedness, she would be welcomed and celebrated in such precincts as Brandeis, without anyone uttering a peep of protest.

This is the “Book of Mormon” effect — no one cares about offending the inoffensive. It’s only debate over a religion that is home to dangerous fanatics ripping apart the Middle East and threatening the West that must be carefully policed. http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/03/ayaan-hirsi-ali-a-hero-for-our-time-116404.html?ml=m_b1_1#.VRlfcVLVAdV

Will this phrase/term start catching on? Will enough people understand the concept of "Book of Mormon" effect???

It's simple. Baptists (speaking as one) and Mormons won't bring bombs to your facility or spray an assembly with automatic fire. Even the Westboro "Baptists"* don't pack heat.

*I disavow their use or identity as "Baptists" or, for that matter, "Christians."

And shame on Brandeis, a purportedly liberal institution, for shutting out Hirsi Ali from speaking all because some people "might" have been "offended."

There is no concept of Book of Mormon effect. To make any sense out of the statement in that article depends heavily on knowing the context. I had a little trouble figuring out what they meant even with the context.

So no, I don't expect it will catch on.