Romney should embrace his faith publicly
A tactful desire to avoid any sensationalizing of Romney’s faith has created a tendency not to give it appropriate due. To read “The Real Romney,” which represents an exception, is to realize the utter centrality of religion in his life. One of the book’s most arresting passages describes a moment when Ann, his wife-to-be and then a Protestant, asks him what Mormons believe. His detailed explanation moves her to tears, perhaps because it’s so heartfelt, perhaps also because he’s so nervous about her reaction.
The news media’s caution about focusing on Romney’s religion mirrors his own reticence, which, as Frank Rich pointed out in New York magazine last week, may be a big reason he can’t connect with voters in a visceral, intimate way. He’s editing out the core of his identity. He’s muffling his soul.
“His church experience is, I think, one of the great humanizing influences in Mitt Romney’s life,” said Patrick Mason, a professor of Mormon studies at Claremont Graduate University. Mason noted that if Romney would embrace that side of himself, he could beat the rap that he’s never been exposed to hardship by recounting his missionary experience. “That’s usually a very spartan lifestyle, and by definition most of the people you’re talking to are going to be poor.”
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
What faith?
He was a pro-abortion Mormon, and I know few of them, until it made sense for him politically to latch on to one of the many, many, MANY inputs his office received to concoct a story and announce he’s pro-life.
Random on February 5, 2012 at 9:48 PM
Even being a bishop is a position of local political/religious power/status. Romney is all about teh status.
Random on February 5, 2012 at 9:49 PM
He’ll embrace his liberalism and move to the left for the general election.
Flange on February 5, 2012 at 9:53 PM
Pro-abortion, anti-gun.
His faith does not fill me with same.
Rebar on February 5, 2012 at 9:56 PM
Obama should embrace his atheism publicly.
forest on February 5, 2012 at 9:56 PM
Huntsman & Reid are Mormons – right?
BHO Jonestown on February 5, 2012 at 9:58 PM
Frank Bruni should embrace his feeble betamale self publicly. Oh that’s right, he does every day.
SuperBunny on February 5, 2012 at 9:58 PM
Unfortunately, Romney served his mission in France mostly in Paris, and lived in a mansion owned by the church.
But he should talk about how his religious past, not run away from it the way Obama did from Rev. Wright.
Wethal on February 5, 2012 at 9:59 PM
Ok, he’s a Mormon.
but:
Anyone but Obama.
Anyone but Obama.
Anyone but Obama.
Wethal on February 5, 2012 at 10:00 PM
Mormonism has some strange tenets, to be sure, but we’ve had decent presidents with wacky beliefs before.
Some, in fact, have actually believed that life originated spontaneously (yuk yuk yuk) from non-living materials (snort, guffaw) billions of years ago! haw haw haw
itsnotaboutme on February 5, 2012 at 10:02 PM
He gave the religion speech back in 2008. What he needs to do is convince conservative voters that HE is a conservative.
SouthernGent on February 5, 2012 at 10:03 PM
Indeed.
Romney’s Mormonism hasn’t adversely affected his political decisions.
Obama’s Black liberation theology has adversely affected his political decisions.
Big-time.
itsnotaboutme on February 5, 2012 at 10:05 PM
Exactly what should Romney do to “embrace his faith”? He’s quite up front about being a committed Mormon believer. It’s not like he tries to hide it or play it down. He seems to embrace his faith about as much as the other candidates.
This isn’t an area there seems to be any point in criticizing Romney on.
J.E. Dyer on February 5, 2012 at 10:05 PM
Viewing the entirety of his YouTube videos gives the impression that he’s either conservative or he’s very good at faking it. Since he’s the only guy who could beat Obama, let’s HOPE for the former.
itsnotaboutme on February 5, 2012 at 10:08 PM
The sooner the better.
astonerii on February 5, 2012 at 10:08 PM
This
Kataklysmic on February 5, 2012 at 10:09 PM
Highlighting Mitt Romney’s creepy, insular religion is not going to do him any favors. At the end of the day, the fact is that this man worships in a building that non-Mormons would not even be allowed inside. The Mormon Church might as well be the religious equivalent of the Bohemian Grove, for all the good focusing on it would do for a Mormon candidate for office.
Armin Tamzarian on February 5, 2012 at 10:12 PM
He can’t, because he isn’t.
F him, and F him hard.
Screw the USA if this is the best those of us supposedly on the “Right” can do.
Screw you GOP, Screw you Romney, I’ll see you in hell before I vote for you (outside of that 1 mil paycheck you wanna write me, after all, I can be bought).
MadDogF on February 5, 2012 at 10:23 PM
How ’bout we quit sweatin’ bullets over peoples’ faith PERIOD, it supposedly being ‘twixt you and God anyway, and WORRY ABOUT WHO IS CAPABLE OF RUNNING THE DAMN COUNTRY!
I am thoroughly SICK of this religious crap.
tree hugging sister on February 5, 2012 at 10:26 PM
Actually, regular weekly services for LDS do not take place inside the (Morman-only) Temple. They take place in a meetinghouse which is open to the public.
LibertarianRepublican on February 5, 2012 at 10:27 PM
How ’bout “Romney should embrace conservatism publicly” instead.
Or, failing that, Newt. I’d like to see that clinch.
Waggoner on February 5, 2012 at 10:32 PM
+1 LibertarianRepublican
The amount of absolute ignorance of the LDS church is amazing but it is mostly from folks back East who maybe have never met a Mormon in real life before. Living in the Western states for a while might be a good experience for them.
Fear the wheat grinder and the green Jell-O, but I wouldn’t worry too much about their church services. I’m not a Mormon but I have been to Mormon weddings and Mormon funerals and even attended one of their services once. They didn’t even make me wear magic underwear.
crosspatch on February 5, 2012 at 10:33 PM
Romney’s best political course might be just allowing voters to think he didn’t pick Mormonism, he was just born into it, and doesn’t spend much time thinking about it. Even people who dislike Mormonism intensely can’t blame someone for adopting the religion they were born into. I’d advise him to just steer clear of it. Let people project their own “best case” on Mitt. For some that’s embracing it, and for some that’s ignoring it.
RBMN on February 5, 2012 at 10:34 PM
The premise of these piece would seem to want to change the subject from actual issues that impact the governing of the country to an issue that has absolutely nothing at all to do with governing the country.
I’d say Romney would be best off telling someone that his religious preference is none of anyone’s business and has nothing to do with executing the office of President of the United States.
crosspatch on February 5, 2012 at 10:35 PM
Mitt does not need to talk much about any subject he will not be the nominee, soon the GOP will wake up from their trance and do something different otherwise the R party will be history.
evergreenland on February 5, 2012 at 10:43 PM
He already did in 2008.
John the Libertarian on February 5, 2012 at 11:18 PM
Hmm, a few comments here are kinda disheartening. I taint no liberal, but I do look forward to the day when people don’t let religion distract them from immediately practical matters. After all, you don’t look be a catholic, protestant or whatever to have an excellent conservative mind.
As for Mr Romney, well, its really hard to say. Honestly his religious service is a plus for me, but I don’t know how many people would share that opinion
WolvenOne on February 5, 2012 at 11:45 PM
A person does not aspire to be a Bishop in the Mormon Church. It is basically forced upon you. They pick the guy they want to do it and then “call” them to that position. Being Bishop is not something one does for “power”. Regarding his living in a Mansion on his mission in France he was not in the Mansion for the entire time he was there. For a large part of it he lived in your typical mormon missionary appointment in whatever part of France he was in. I served in Orange County California and I lived in a little house we called “The Bog” Mormon Missionaries do not live in luxury. For a large part of the time he was in the Mansion he was recovering from a car accident and supervising all of the missionaries in France which is very unusual for someone to do. It is very rare for one of the young missionaries to be entrusted with that responsibility.
Mormons do have their own society within society and it is a very advantageous thing. For instance when I moved from Utah to Pittburgh all I had was what I could fit in my car. The day I got there I instantly had a network of people who would help me with the things I needed. I never had to worry about being on my own at all. There is never a time wherever you live that you feel like you are all on your own.
rushlimbang on February 5, 2012 at 11:52 PM
Whoa is me .. a descendant of those who fought and died for religious tolerance.
Are we not a better people, county and world when more come to God regardless of how they come?
Texas Gal on February 6, 2012 at 2:02 AM
I believe you mean ‘woe is me’ (unless, of course, it’s ‘whoa is me’ in Texas). anyway, religious tolerance is a good thing . . .but it doesn’t mean that we (as Americans who believe in the Constitution and religious freedom) have to like and/or agree with every religion. Romney can choose whatever religion he wants but that doesn’t mean we have to vote for him eithe (just because he says he’s a Republican). Mormons must not think that lying is a sin because Romney’s Republican candidacy is one great big fat lie (he’s a Democrat). God bless America.
Pragmatic on February 6, 2012 at 2:23 AM
No, I meant whoa as in hold me back. And you provided the evidence of why. Religious tolerance of other religions as a founding principle of our country had nothing to do with “like and/or agree with every religion.” Thus is the essence of tolerance.
Texas Gal on February 6, 2012 at 2:59 AM
Freedom of speech is also a founding tenet. . .what’s intolerant about expressing an opinion about the Mormon religion (particularly when it is the religion of someone who wants to be President)? Like it or not, it DOES MATTER WHAT PEOPLE BELIEVE IN OR DON’T BELIEVE IN WHEN THEY ENTER THE PUBLIC SQUARE SEEKING VOTES!
Pragmatic on February 6, 2012 at 3:12 AM
His leadership status is a kooky cult is not a concern to more than 4 people.
What concerns people is everything else. He’s done full on 180s on major issues – abortion, teh gheys, guns, size of government, fiscal policy – and come up with some truly nuanced BS on Romneycare.
His published policies are conservative. It’s just that there are quite a few people who think it’s all an act.
CorporatePiggy on February 6, 2012 at 7:28 AM
He did not serve “mostly in Paris”! He has never been “pro-abortion”. Some of you are so fracking dishonest…And “Pragmatic” has some anger issues, shouting at the top of her virtual lungs. Very Newtonian….
Buy Danish on February 6, 2012 at 7:50 AM
A little nudge from the NYT to keep Romney’s religion in the spotlight. This will happen constantly throughout.
Oh, please.
ddrintn on February 6, 2012 at 8:36 AM
Once again the bitter clinger has zero substance to add to the conversation. The fact is Mitt did not serve “mostly in Paris”. The fact is he was never “pro-abortion”. If your complaint is you don’t like the term “dishonest” how does “ignorant” sound?
And may I note how ironic it is for a Palinksky to be oh so willing to allow falsehoods to stand?
Buy Danish on February 6, 2012 at 8:47 AM
Seeing that it’s the NYTimes I suspect the reasoning on their part is that Romney doesn’t spend enough time talking about his faith…which denies the Left an opportunity to bash him for being “too religious” or whatever. They would prefer that he make it an issue so that they can more easily go after him for it. As it is, they pretty much have to cross a line if they want to attack his faith. But if he were to make a more public issue of his Mormonism then they could argue that he was “asking for” the abuse. It’s similar to the reasoning that the Left uses to go after the children of Conservatives. They claim that the Palin kids – even Trig – are “fair game” because Sarah “makes them an issue.” It’s all BS. Romney shouldn’t change how he approaches this issue. He’s doing just fine. So Frank Bruni needs to keep his worthless opinions to himself and STFU.
cicerone on February 6, 2012 at 9:01 AM
You don’t even know me….’her’? Why don’t you speak directly to the issue of Romney’s Mormonism and what that means (or doesn’t mean)? Why didn’t any of his sons serve in the military? Are they pacifists? . . .is that what Mormonism and their father taught them?. . .these are valid questions that the general public are wondering about. . . Mitt Romney will never get my vote but you should spend your time trying to convince ‘fence-sitters’ instead of turning them off to Romney with your sycophantic protestations about how great Romney is (NOT!). sycophant:
A servile self-seeker who attempts to win favor by flattering influential people.
Pragmatic on February 6, 2012 at 9:17 AM
To: Buy (Stale) Danish:
Where’s your evidence that Romney is anti-abortion?
Did or did not Romney serve in a posh Paris mansion instead of serving his country (not just his Mormon religion) in the U.S. military? Why did he choose not to serve his country? Was/is afraid to serve? Why would anyone want a coward as commander in chief?
Pragmatic on February 6, 2012 at 9:21 AM
How is Romney doing vs. Obama in the polls lately?
Pragmatic on February 6, 2012 at 9:22 AM
No, I’m sticking with Baroque. A true profile in courage.
He’s a spec ops team leader and he’s battle-hardened after he led the raid to take out OBL.
CorporatePiggy on February 6, 2012 at 9:39 AM
No there doesn’t seem to be a point on the surface of it, it looks like a dumb suggestion to make. Basically he saying Romney should wear his faith on his sleeve. Somehow other religious people of other faiths will trust him more by witnessing his devout religiosity. It’s cynical, and apparently feeds into the narrative that religious people are dim and naive easily duped. Not the ones I have met.
The author thinks that it’s pretty simple to manipulate people of faith if Romney makes an overt religious spectacle of himself….go figure the media is full of these kinds of people, who think they are influencing public opinion.
Dr Evil on February 6, 2012 at 9:48 AM
hmmm.
cptacek on February 6, 2012 at 11:30 AM