Romney: Does it matter that he’s Mormon?

Mitt Romney has many of the attributes Republicans want in a presidential candidate—conservative social views, a spotless personal life, and strong managerial experience, as governor of Massachusetts and head of the 2002 Winter Olympics. Yet for many voters, said John Dickerson in Slate.com, his Mormon faith remains a major obstacle. As Romney battles Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee, and Fred Thompson for the nomination, pressure is growing for him to give a major speech about his religion and explain how it would or would not influence his conduct as president. The GOP’sMormo evangelical base views Mormonism as a cult with heretical beliefs about Jesus Christ, while many more secular voters regard the church’s beliefs and practices—such as the wearing of special chaste underwear—as weird. A recent Rasmussen poll finds that 43 percent of all respondents—and 51 percent of evangelicals—say they “will never vote for a Mormon.”

This is pure religious bigotry, said Jonathan Chait in The New Republic. But by embracing “faith-based politics,” Republicans have brought this ugly situation on themselves. If you support a politician because he shares your theology, “then it also makes sense to oppose public figures who don’t.” For the time being, said Josh Patashnik, also in The New Republic, Romney is balking at having to address his religion in a speech. So far, his strategy has been to downplay the differences between Mormonism and mainstream Christianity—even to the point of irritating some fellow Mormons. He’s called Jesus his “personal savior,” born-again language Mormons never use; has denounced polygamy as “awful” (even though his ancestors and the church’s founders practiced it); and has been evasive, even embarrassed, when asked about the Mormon practice of baptizing the dead of other religions. Romney also has failed to honestly address whether he believes the Mormon teaching that human beings can evolve into gods, said Errol Louis in the New York Daily News, or “that tribes from Israel traveled to what is now America, built ancient cities, and fought epic battles.”

Why should he? said Richard Cohen in The Washington Post. Romney has said he’d keep his faith and his public duties separate, and all the evidence supports that claim. When he was running for office in liberal Massachusetts, after all, Romney was for gay rights, gun control, and legal abortion. Now, to pander to conservative primary voters, he’s completely reversed his positions on these issues. Obviously, he’s “not enslaved by any dogma.” This whole conversation makes me queasy, said Peggy Noonan in Opinionjournal.com. Granted, it’s impossible to fully divorce religion from politics; “presidents bring their whole selves into the Oval Office,” their relationship with God included. “But faith is also personal,” and it’s inappropriate to treat a political candidate as “an exemplar of his faith” who must explain and defend its tenets.

Subscribe to The Week

Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

SUBSCRIBE & SAVE

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

Sign up

Romney, though, may be an exception to that rule, said Christopher Hitchens in Slate.com. He’s not “a mere rank-and-file Mormon”; he has served as a bishop and missionary, and for generations, his family has been part of his religion’s “dynastic leadership.” That leadership was openly racist until 1978, barring blacks from serving as priests or deacons. Even today, the church hierarchy says that it is “prophetic and inspired, and that its rulings take precedence over any human law.” If Romney were a member of the Unification Church or the Nation of Islam, there’d be no hesitation in asking him hard questions about such un-American ideas. To hell with “bogus sensitivities.” If Mitt Romney isn’t willing to provide “clear and unambiguous answers” about what he believes and how it would affect his presidency, then perhaps he should seek a more private—and less important—line of work.