Close X

Jon Huntsman, Jack Mormons, and the question of faith

Kate Ensign-Lewis - August 23, 2011
source: LDS Living

We've seen a lot about Jon Huntsman's particular variety of faith (or, as some have posed, lack of it) in the news. What does this mean about where he stands with Mormons, and should it really matter?

This morning, while going through recent news articles tagged for their relation to Mormonism, I came across an article titled, “Is Jon Huntsman a Jack Mormon?” This was one of those articles I knew would be interesting from the get go. It didn’t disappoint.

I was intrigued by this article for a couple different reasons.

The first (and I wasn’t expecting this) was that it explored the term “Jack Mormon.” Until reading this piece, I didn’t realize that the term referred to people who aren’t really active but still have favorable views toward Mormonism and cultural ties as well. (By this definition, someone like actress Katherine Heigl would be considered a Jack Mormon.)

This term also helps explain what some recent articles (almost all of them covering Jon Huntsman’s Mormon meter) have said about “unorthodox” Mormons being a growing class among members of our faith. Is it really a growing phenomenon for Mormons to be ambivalent, like some Catholics or Protestants?

In short, as this article explains, no. These kinds of Mormon adherents have been around for a long time, but have simply been called Jack Mormons. (The “Get Religion” columnist says this term is not pejorative, but I think I disagree. It at least carries with it some latent negativity.)

But the second (and more important) reason I found this article interesting was for its continued obsession with classifying Jon Huntsman’s faith. I’ve seen a lot of articles come up about this issue since he made his famous “I get satisfaction from many different types of religions and philosophies" statement over a year ago. Perhaps most notable were those in the Boston Globe and CNN (though the topic of his religion also appeared in everything from The Huffington Post to Vogue).

We continue to include some of these articles on Mormon Report because they’re of interest to Mormons (including me), but I’ve started to wonder why. Why does this issue intrigue us so much? Why does it matter? One obvious answer is that we Mormons simply like reading about other Mormons who have influence and how they live their faith. But I think there’s another, slightly darker possibility: we like reading about these things because it gives us something to positively compare ourselves against (as in, “well, I’m doing better than he is”).

I’d like to take it one step further. When we read about Jon Huntsman and unorthodox Mormons like him, are we subconsciously harder on them than we would be on any other person because of a kind of a "you have it but you don't appreciate it" mentality? I would certainly hope we would treat everyone—the active of our faith, people of other faiths, and people of our faith who are on the spectrum between less active and completely dissociated from the gospel—with the same respect. But once again, I wonder.

A testimony is a deeply personal thing—so should we really get hung up on how strong someone else’s is?

I can understand pure curiosity. I can also understand a desire to know just what a “representative” of our religion is really representing. But I also think it’s time to question our motives in this spiritual gossip.

© LDS Living, 2011.
Comments 42 comments

littlemikey said...

05:58 PM
on Aug 23, 2011

Report Abuse

I think you nailed it. In an effort to identify our standing before our Maker, it is such a easy trap to compare ourselves to others. we treat these Mormon Celebrities like mainstream america treats Hollywood elite.

momof9 said...

06:32 AM
on Aug 24, 2011

Report Abuse

Excellent article! I see way to many people the victim of spiritual gossip! It's a culture in itself! Too many turn from the church or lose interest when they continually view this behavior. If something is true it fills your heart with a desire to love others by example. Thanks for a great and honest article!

sukki said...

06:35 AM
on Aug 24, 2011

Report Abuse

For me, people who profess a faith, no matter which faith. and do not live by it's tenants, are less trustworthy on other issues. A politician is one to whom I would want to trust and I register that trust with my vote.

lecriveur said...

06:38 AM
on Aug 24, 2011

Report Abuse

I can see how this rings true for some people. I just like the idea of prominent Latter-day Saints exposed to the rest of the world as, hmm, pretty normal. It helps dispel some of the misconceptions and perhaps will lead to open communication.

jade53 said...

07:10 AM
on Aug 24, 2011

Report Abuse

There may be some truth in your statement that we are harder on a Mormon candidate. But, for myself knowing that I am not perfect as well, still find it disheartening to have those in public service water down their faith instead of being a light to the world. If you take upon Christ's name to stand in the world separate from it, you should take note of what you are broadcasting to the world. You have a greater responsibility as do all of us to stand for Christ at all times and in all places.

jade53 said...

07:10 AM
on Aug 24, 2011

Report Abuse

There may be some truth in your statement that we are harder on a Mormon candidate. But, for myself knowing that I am not perfect as well, still find it disheartening to have those in public service water down their faith instead of being a light to the world. If you take upon Christ's name to stand in the world separate from it, you should take note of what you are broadcasting to the world. You have a greater responsibility as do all of us to stand for Christ at all times and in all places.

gpalm said...

07:32 AM
on Aug 24, 2011

Report Abuse

Agreed--matters of faith and testimony are deeply personal, and it's extremely difficult to know someone's heart. But this discussion is about a man who seeks an office that would have a profound affect on my world/country/community/family/life. I believe we are entitled to some discernment in this matter, and it looks like either crass political opportunism or a deeper reflection of the man's character.

nwcl_indpt said...

07:32 AM
on Aug 24, 2011

Report Abuse

Good article. This is interesting. The first thing about 1 dozen of my "very active" LDS friends said or sent to me when hearing about Jon Huntsman was to comment on how awful it was that he wasn't professing his "true mormonism" and how much better others were than him. It was almost like they wanted him to fail, so they could look better. i notice a few of these slanted comments here, too. Are we more likely to want to remove the "impure" from or welcome in the "imperfect" to our fold?

kateybug said...

07:47 AM
on Aug 24, 2011

Report Abuse

While it's disappointing to see someone leave the Mormon faith, what "irks" me about Jon Huntsman is that he ran for Utah governor TWICE leading citizens to believe he was an active Mormon and leading citizens to believe he was a true conservative. It wasn't until after his 2nd inauguration that he started shedding his conservative clothing and revealing the liberal wolf beneath the conservative clothing. If he doesn't want to be a Mormon--that's fine--it's his salvation, not mine. But don't pretend to be a Conservative when you're not.

gt-mcnaughton said...

08:19 AM
on Aug 24, 2011

Report Abuse

Or, there could be a darker reason, namely that the dominant political group among us Mormons is libertarian Republican and primarily Tea Party. And, this is an attempt to smear a fellow Mormon who does not share their conservative political views.

mabbott said...

08:58 AM
on Aug 24, 2011

Report Abuse

"liberal wolf"?..."his salvation not mine"? Doesn't that say it all? Can't wait to see the looks on Tea Party faces when Christ takes away that substitute for thought.

wheat said...

09:18 AM
on Aug 24, 2011

Report Abuse

To me, he is saying he's a Moderate Mormon. He won't take a stand for, or against. He's in the middle. Or, in other words, he's neither hot, or cold. This is his choice. We are not to judge. However, because he is running for POTUS, if we vote for him, we're voting for a Moderate. I personally can't stand Moderates. They will try to please the Conservatives and turn around and try to please the Liberals. I believe he is saying what he feels is best to help himself politically. However, he is clearly a Moderate and as I mentioned earlier, I don't like Moderates and he won't get my vote.

robertsimbam said...

09:30 AM
on Aug 24, 2011

Report Abuse

Don't be so smug in your criticism of those who are unafraid to exercise what Elder Oaks called "intermediate judgement". By so doing are you not exercising your own judgement and portraying yourself as the truly enlightened one and the truly sensitive one? Get a spine and stand for something or, vote for Obama...AGAIN! :)

jew said...

09:33 AM
on Aug 24, 2011

Report Abuse

I think your reasoning on this articlew is well thoughtout. I however see an aspect that you mentioned as more important as to why we are interested in the news on Momons in the news. When are person like Bro. Huntsman is representing himself to be of our faith and because he is in a position for what he says to be published it gives the wrong impression on people of who we really are. There is enough mis-information about who we really are out there now. We need people of our faith, if they really are still of our faith, to present the true docturines we believe in. I do not believe in evolution nor does the Church to my knowledge however, Bro, Huntsman has made a point to make sure others know he does believe in evolution. Since he is seen as a person of our faith people make the leap that what he says is the position of the Church. That is what is really bad about this whole issue. I would like to have those in positions like this to promote what the Church is about. However they have their free agency to do and say as they so desire.

maryp said...

09:59 AM
on Aug 24, 2011

Report Abuse

I agaree with jew - that having it said that John Huntsman Jr. is a "Mormon" makes one expect him to truly BE A MORMON. But he is a Mormon by paptism only at this point. It makes me sad to see him representing The Church when he doesn't live its teachings (to my knowledge). And no, he's not really representing The Church, but to millions of people, he IS. They don't see the difference.

ezgong said...

10:05 AM
on Aug 24, 2011

Report Abuse

I personally like the fact that Gov. Huntsman is a moderate both in his political views and in his spiritual views. I would take it one step further and say that the reason we are fascinated by these articles is that we either want to judge these people to support our own self-righteousness, or (as is my case) we like to see that there are other moderate Mormons like ourselves.

gt-mcnaughton said...

10:41 AM
on Aug 24, 2011

Report Abuse

Jew, Romney also said that he believed in evolution. He stated his opinion that was how God created. Last time I read the General Handbook of Instructions it indicated an exception from organic evolution only as to Adam and Eve. Brigham Young referred to the Creation Story of Adam and Eve being made out of clay as pure fable. Hopefully, we are not setting political conservatism which has some real problems it has to reconcile with the doctrines set forth by Christ, as some kind of litmus test for being a Mormon.

chorizoandeggs said...

11:14 AM
on Aug 24, 2011

Report Abuse

Here is the problem for me with Huntsman's "strategy" (I don't know if it is a strategy, but it came across as one when he claimed in so many words to "be LDS, but not one of those cooky, devout ones"): If he wants to portray himself as merely a cultural mormon, then I am going to evaluate him as any other non-LDS candidate on his record...and unfortunately for him, his record is really weak (great haircut notwithstanding). <br>He comes across as a rich, entitled guy still trying to figure out what he wants to do with his life and get out from under his Dad's shadow. Kind of a less-successful version of George W., and not really a very appealing choice for President. <br>On the other hand, if he is trying to split the issue by still attracting the mormon vote while also being more appealing to non-mormons, well, he lost my and a lot of my friend's respect for not standing up for his beliefs. Why should I align myself with a guy merely on mormonism, when he comes across to the public as somewhat embarrassed by his religion and heritage...and me, since I am one of those cooky, devout mormons? <br> Forget it, Huntsman. Your strategy is a loser. You kind of remind me of the stories of Jews hiding their heritage so they would be accepted into the Westchester country clubs. They ended up being despised by everybody, and so will you if you persist down this road. You are either in or out, not both. <br>His wishy-washy, mealy-mouthed comments about his religion

gt-mcnaughton said...

11:43 AM
on Aug 24, 2011

Report Abuse

Although I support neither Romney nor Huntsman as their fiscal policies are the opposite of what is needed right now, it is pretty hard to describe either as not being successful. Romney was a successful corporate raider who specialized in busting unions and offshoring profits. Huntsman is probably the best informed candidate out there with regards to trade and specifically trade with China which is the single most important trade issue facing the President. No candidate for the American Presidency should be evaluated on religious grounds.

actiontink said...

01:27 PM
on Aug 24, 2011

Report Abuse

I don't really care what religion a candidate is as much as whether or not they live what they proclaim to believe. I want someone with strong values and who is willing to stick to them. I would prefer a candidate who is strong in their faith, whatever it may be, rather than lukewarm. It's Huntsman's "lukewarmness" that turns me off. I feel like he's trying to use his religious background to his political advantage. He doesn't want to come right out and say he's not active because he doesn't want to lose the Mormon vote, but he won't say he's super active because he doesn't want to scare other voters off. I don't like the political games candidates play in general. I want straight, solid answers backed up by honest action. I've never met him and I could be totally off base in my perception of him, but this is how I perceive him based on the media coverage. Whether that's his fault, his campaign's fault or the media's fault I don't know.

bruce said...

02:18 PM
on Aug 24, 2011

Report Abuse

Though I'm uncomfortable with Jon Huntsman's fuzzy answers about his religious beliefs, on most other counts--his abilities, experience, and positions--I find him an attractive candidate. For those who consider "moderate" or "liberal" to be negative words, I'd recommend a thought from Elder Dallin Oaks: "Those who govern their thoughts and actions solely by the principles of liberalism or conservatism or intellectualism cannot be expected to agree with all of the teachings of the gospel of Jesus Christ. As for me, I find some wisdom in liberalism, some wisdom in conservatism, and much truth in intellectualism--but I find no salvation in any of them" (“Criticism,” Ensign, Feb 1987, 68ff.). Conservatism and liberalism are both respectable political traditions. Neither is perfect, nor are they really completely opposite or incompatible. But if "conservatism" has come to mean opposition to mainstream science and rejection of virtually any community efforts (using the structures of government) as "socialism," then conservatism has lost touch with its honorable traditional roots. By the way, officially the Church neither opposes nor endorses evolution; evolution is taught and accepted as mainstream science at BYU with the full knowledge of the Board of Trustees. LDS Living has linked to an interesting article suggesting why the only Republic cnadidates who seem to accept mainstream scientific views are Mormons ( http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/08/23/jon-huntsman-mitt-romney-s-pro-science-stand-as-mormon-2012-gop-candidates.html ).

edsager said...

02:59 PM
on Aug 24, 2011

Report Abuse

"should we really get hung up on how strong someone else’s [testimony] is?" I would go further to say that if we are discussing how strong Gov. Huntsman's testimony, we are discussing a topic with which we have no way to know if anything we are stating has any factual basis, thus it is opinion. We all know only the Lord knows how "strong" anyone's testimony is. "When we read about Jon Huntsman and unorthodox Mormons like him..." How do we know he is an "unorthodox" member of the LDS Church? Seems like such a statement assumes a lot of opinions as facts and thus, is pretty judgmental in nature. “I get satisfaction from many different types of religions and philosophies" So do I. Can anyone judge my faith or testimony based on that statement? Are we not supposed to combine the knowledge and experience we as LDS members have with the knowledge and experience of other cultures, religions, and philosophies? We do not have a corner on the market of experience and knowledge. The use of the term, "Jack Mormon" seems to be condescending and offensive...at least that is how it is viewed around where I live. "I do not believe in evolution nor does the Church to my knowledge..." Who does not believe that the "strong" in society (whatever strong means can be different in different times) survive and those that are considered "weak" die off? Evolution is not just "we humans were once apes." To my knowledge, the Church does believe in parts of evolution. Just my 3 cents...value gone up due to inflation, not because my statements are worth more.

informed said...

03:41 PM
on Aug 24, 2011

Report Abuse

Socialism/communism with all of their attendant evils destroy the agency of mankind and subject men to the the unrightous compulsion of government at its worst. While I shouldn't vote because of a candidates religion or lack of it, his actions and philosophies should be of great interest to me because they will tell me who or what he is. Huntsman and Romney are both socialists and help to carry out the socialist agenda in our nation today. The Book of Mormon clearly tells us the conditions that will exist in our day. The 8th chapter of Ether describes in great detail the perils we will face because we have allowed and supported those secret combinations to come upon us whose design is to gain control over every nation and people. If socialism is conservatism or liberalism I must reject those philosophies out of hand because socialism is diametrically opposed to the gospel of Christ as I understand it and has been rejected as false doctrine by latter day prophets. So as a follower of Christ I must judge a mans fitness for office not by which church he belongs to, or which party he belongs to, or whether he supports some scientific theory or other but I can judge him based on his political behavior. If he is a socialist and continually supports socialist legislation which destroys my and my fellowmens agency it is not hard for me to make a choice for the candidate I will support. For those of you who are only concerned about whether a candidate can win or not, you will be held responsible by God for the actions of these candidates as they carry out their socialist agenda. Our Republic is in its last hour, God brought our Constitution about through the men he raised up for that purpose. It is a sacred document and we have trampled it and allowed our elected officials to do the same. Wake up America to our awful circumstance and take a stand for freedom.

mesasmiles said...

07:27 PM
on Aug 24, 2011

Report Abuse

We're told not to judge unrighteously. Part of that is not to judge when we don't need to. But this is a man who wants to be president, and, I'm sorry, but I'll be absolutely brutal in how I judge them. And, I think everyone else should be. The times call for a candidate with solid convictions and the courage of those convictions. Sorry, Jon, you don't measure up, in my humble opinion. President Hinckley was asked for his reaction to Bill Clinton's impeachment, and if he forgave Pres. Clinton. He said that yes, on a personal level, we forgive, but when someone wants to be our leader, we have to make a judgment on whether they are fit for that position or not.

grammyk said...

09:15 PM
on Aug 24, 2011

Report Abuse

I appreciate the article and I appreciate the thought it has provoked in me. And truly we judge unrighteously. I know I have! However, my problem isn't a matter of whether or not we have judged unfairly, I want to know the that the person I vote for will Stand up for what he believes in and not be; for lack of a better phrase, dancing around the subject. We have too much of that in our politicians as it is, just say it... don't dance around the subject COME OUT WITH WHAT YOU FEEL AND WHAT YOU BELIEVE! whether he feels like a Mormon or not is not the issue, the issue is TELL THE TRUTH! That makes me either want to trust you, or not want to trust you.

canuk said...

09:54 PM
on Aug 24, 2011

Report Abuse

...so when will we Mormons stop judging people period? Yes, he's a politician, but he's a human being. Let him live and learn. Don't like him? Don't vote for him. It doesn't take only a 'Mormon' to see if someone has integrity.

mosiah2 said...

12:09 AM
on Aug 25, 2011

Report Abuse

Forget the deep, dark psychological explorations. Maybe we are just disappointed that someone we want to trust has failed to stand up and be counted. Brother Romney bears his testimony proudly. Brother Huntsman fears man more than God. Not the kind of character I want to see in a President.

mosiah2 said...

12:36 AM
on Aug 25, 2011

Report Abuse

Bruce: You are in error when you say that the church takes no position on evolution. An official declaration, made in 1909 and signed by the First Presidency, stated unequivocally that man was made in the image of God, and htat there was no man before Adam. Many subsequent statements by General Authorities corroborate this in the strongest terms. Never has the Church announced that it took no stand on this question.

but-i-digress... said...

04:01 AM
on Aug 25, 2011

Report Abuse

I say give Huntsman a break. He is probably mostly distancing/decalring himself out of respect for you. I'm too lazy and too connected by family to bother getting off of the roll, so if I was running for office, the first thing I would want to do, out of respect for the LDS community, is to announce my stance openly so that I would not be held up as a pinnacle of LDS behavior. I realize that y'all don't want people to think that your average Mormon is like me, and Huntsman is at least as smart as I (and more devout). He is certainly smart enough to know that he is being scrutinized right now. I think he's considerate to qualify himself as an individual instead of lying and saying he is the very essence of what LDS perfection should look like. I think it is the respectful thing to do, and given how obsessed the community is with uniformity, and the media is with hypocrisy, what other option does he realistically have? He could try to be two-faced, but he would displease everyone, and fool noone. If you want to be angry with him, do it for political views, but he has been very honest with his religious presentation, and I think that's pretty brave to do it! It has earned him plenty of snubs and judgement!

smoser said...

02:55 PM
on Aug 25, 2011

Report Abuse

I am interested in the beliefs of those, who are running for office to represent me (us). If a candidate is a believing, active member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints; then I can have a better understanding of what they believe in and how they might vote. So, that very much helps to determine my votes.

bruce said...

03:37 PM
on Aug 25, 2011

Report Abuse

Mosiah2: On evolution, the precise statements you mentioned (Adam as the first man--meaning the first spirit son of God living on earth--and man made in the image of God), you're right. But nowhere has the exact method of preparing a body for Adam been officially defined. As for the creation of other life, that's been left more or less open (of course, with God ultimately as the creator--or as a video on LDS.org puts it, with the Father as the architect and Christ as the builder). As for what counts as official, that has required some careful delimitation over the years. But having once again reviewed the official statements, I feel confident I can say the Church does not have an official position on the theory of evolution itself, including as it relates to humans. For full documentation, I'd recommend going to http://welcomingtheother.blogspot.com/2011/08/latter-day-saint-view-of-evolution.html

mattwend said...

07:02 PM
on Aug 29, 2011

Report Abuse

I was listening to a devotional at BYU-I, I'm not sure who the speaker was, but he essentially said true science and true religion do not contradict each other. If there is a conflict between the two, it's because the science isn't complete. I'm concerned with the individual above who stressed a fear of socialism and the need to select candidates based on that. Unfortunately, it appears that some political talk shows have painted things as socialism that are not. It's politics based on fear, not on reality. I'm becoming more and more convinced that the Gadianton Robbers are heavily entrenched in state and federal governments and they aren't restricted to just Democrats or Republicans. If you recall, the purpose of the Robbers was to get gain. And the people would work out secret combinations to gain money and power. That's what we would be wise to watch for as we make decisions of who would be best to lead our country. Who's making money off of it? We all need to be very careful of those who would try to sidetrack us from actually evaluating issues by using alarmist terminology like "socialism". And make sure you get information from multiple sources. Fox News admits to being from the conservative viewpoint. And they try to make sure their viewers consider all other news has liberal bias. So, using only the one source that admits to bias is probably not wise. Check with multiple sources.

dian1997 said...

08:54 AM
on Aug 30, 2011

Report Abuse

Since my conversion to the church and the great fulfillment it gave to my life,it does bother me a lot when public figures don't set the example. We as a faith still get misrepresentation and bigotry directed our way. It doesn't help when the behavior of high profile Members doesn't reflect the true teachings and values of the church. ie; Huntsman and most profoundly Harry Reed.

mibble said...

10:11 AM
on Sep 01, 2011

Report Abuse

It's a little insulting to even ask the question "Why does it matter?" It matters because we are looking to elect a president for the United States. We are the only ones who can question our own motives because we make judgements every single day. It's difficult for me to listen to that scripture in Matthew 7:1 because reality and spirituality is based on something much deeper: 3 Nephi 14:2. We are under obligation to make good judgements because this is OUR probation. I completely agree with "Informed" who said many of us vote based on our concern about whether a candidate can win or not. We should be voting on INTEGRITY and record and get down on our knees and present that candidate before the Lord as our choice. Elder Ashton said, "Ours is to explain our position through reason, friendly persuasion, and accurate facts. Ours is to stand firm and unyielding on the moral issues of the day and the eternal principles of the gospel, but to contend with no man or organization." Finally, this is all about honesty. We cannot keep one foot in Zion and the other in Babylon and still aspire to eternal life. It is better to vote for a candidate that is true to principles, lives those principle in his/her personal life, and who acknowledges God and LOVES this country and the values that built it.

blacksheep said...

08:31 AM
on Dec 24, 2011

Report Abuse

Too many of these commenters seem to believe that the only worthy candidate for any political office would be one who fully believes and practices all the beliefs and covenants of our faith, and who publicly states his/her intention to perform all duties of office in accordance with those beliefs. It is the duty of any politician to be a representative of the people, with suitable caveats concerning the dangers of majority (in the sense of "mob") rule. There are many very important principles that must be taught, to bring people into willing compliance, rather than legislated, to force people into complying with standards they don't fully understand and believe in. When Jesus said "render unto Caesar", he was not condemning Caesar, he was explaining this principle. That's why we don't have our missionaries leading protest demonstrations. Jesus taught us to use meekness and humility to create an atmosphere where the Holy Spirit can do its' proper work unto the convincing of mankind. Those of us who would stand as representatives of the True Church must indeed stand firm for all our beliefs, but a politician has a somewhat different calling, which is to maintain the distinction between his/her personal beliefs, without compromise, while executing the duties of office in compliance with established Law, as explained in our Articles of Faith.

bgtaylor4 said...

02:41 PM
on Dec 27, 2011

Report Abuse

Don't completely understand why the concept of evolution is being debated here, but as to mankind (the descendants of Adam and Eve) is the question is as to whether or not "Adam has a belly button?" Was he gestated or does God have another way of creating human beings. Think the apostle Mark E Petersen covered that one best. And the apostle Orson Pratt, although confusing on use of mathematical constant, answered it the same way. Yes, he does; as did Eve. Both were born rather than created like a play doh project and then magically converted to life. Is this question, in very much the same line of seeking technical details on other things like virgin pregnancy, relevant to salvation? No. The message of scripture and modern revelation is that God The Father, an intelligent, Eternal being is responsible for this earth and all that lives on being here, not a spontaneous set of events of unintelligent design. How may be interesting to ponder; but, not essential. How may be the basis for disbelief at the cost of faith; which is essential.

bgtaylor4 said...

02:55 PM
on Dec 27, 2011

Report Abuse

As to Huntsman... not living in Utah my first exposure to him was in a riveting, intelligent conversation with (on) Charlie Rose. He was impressive. When he announced his candidacy for POTUS I was encouraged that two LDS men were running and happy for the EXCUSE to not make my choice in the ballot booth based on religion. That is, religion really isn't a litmus test even if the candidate is LDS. But then Huntsman back pedaled away from his designated faith. Does it it make him a hypocrite? No. He has, as some commenters here have noted, established his position as less than fully committed to (and accountable) to ALL our beliefs. What he hasn't done is to say, I subscribe and support to ALL LDS beliefs, but struggle living some of it. This latter position would be reasonable, refreshing and acceptable to me, as none are perfect. However his position (on his chosen religion, given he hasn't removed his name from the records of The Church) denotes a serious character flaw and many questions -- meaning (for me, IMO) I cannot trust him. Shame, because he seems intelligent, articulate and a decent fellow. But he seems unable and unwilling to stand up for his beliefs -- to fulfill his covenant with God to represent Jesus Christ and His Church. I cannot respect that. It makes me leery.

wonder_woman said...

12:11 PM
on Jan 12, 2012

Report Abuse

lol, when will be able to stop pointing finger at others in our church? will be able to stop classify each other? Reminds me of the Bishops daughter who thinks she's the only one who will get into heaven because she does "everything" right…. Jack Mormons, i doubt you saw or met many european Mormons, i guess they would mostly fall into that category. @but-i-digress… very well said! @bruce yes, there is no official position of the church… and maybe that's the reason why we are "divided" in 2 camps on this matter. Now a question for all, so let's say, he was a super awesome true conservative Mormon… you would give all your trust and hope… and then as time goes you notice his actions are not really "mormon"… what then? One other point he's married with someone who isn't mormon (i'm not sure if his wife converted…). I don't know about you guy but in my ward we got a handful of people who married someone who isn't from our church. Sometimes it's hard for them since not each of their spouses agree with our faith to a high degree. It's very complicated. And i think unless you are in such a family it's gonna be hard to understand how it exactly works. Now, Mitt Romney is maybe an devote Mormon, but his involvement in the Bain & Company isn't flattering for us, nor the church. They asked someone from his ward in an interview if everything he does, is "in sync" with his religious believes. He said "Yes everything." - "Also in that Bain & Company matter?" - "Yes.". not so great....

wonder_woman said...

12:11 PM
on Jan 12, 2012

Report Abuse

lol, when will be able to stop pointing finger at others in our church? will be able to stop classify each other? Reminds me of the Bishops daughter who thinks she's the only one who will get into heaven because she does "everything" right…. Jack Mormons, i doubt you saw or met many european Mormons, i guess they would mostly fall into that category. @but-i-digress… very well said! @bruce yes, there is no official position of the church… and maybe that's the reason why we are "divided" in 2 camps on this matter. Now a question for all, so let's say, he was a super awesome true conservative Mormon… you would give all your trust and hope… and then as time goes you notice his actions are not really "mormon"… what then? One other point he's married with someone who isn't mormon (i'm not sure if his wife converted…). I don't know about you guy but in my ward we got a handful of people who married someone who isn't from our church. Sometimes it's hard for them since not each of their spouses agree with our faith to a high degree. It's very complicated. And i think unless you are in such a family it's gonna be hard to understand how it exactly works. Now, Mitt Romney is maybe an devote Mormon, but his involvement in the Bain & Company isn't flattering for us, nor the church. They asked someone from his ward in an interview if everything he does, is "in sync" with his religious believes. He said "Yes everything." - "Also in that Bain & Company matter?" - "Yes.". not so great....

ricklds said...

04:35 PM
on Jan 26, 2012

Report Abuse

Unbelievable...when will Mormon folks separate their politics from their religion...this is an international church...the church supersedes all politics, and all political boundaries...no political party anywhere represents the church...no political anywhere represents all of the church's ideals...whether an individual is a 'devout' Mormon is known only to God, since it is measured in the heart/soul, fortunately not obvious to men...no man can judge whether huntsman or romney or reed is more 'devout' than the other...what a self-righteous position to even attempt to do so...whether one is liberal or conservative or libertarian or whatever politically says ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about his/her 'devoutness' as a Mormon...use the Sermon on the Mount as your measuring stick, if you must have one...measure what every person says and does against the words of Christ himself...and don't think you can 'pick-and-choose' what you prefer out of that Sermon...ALL OF IT!

ricklds said...

04:41 PM
on Jan 26, 2012

Report Abuse

Note to all of you who chimed in emphatically on the 'evolution' question: President Hinckley said in the 60 minutes interview: 'I believe in evolution' -- He also made similar statements in other situations -- He partially defined what he meant, BUT don't think you speak for the Church when you say the Church believes in 'no evolution' -- you are simply incorrect. So if a Church member says no more than he/she 'believes in evolution', that is no more or less than a quote of President Hinckley -- so be careful in your judgments of that member.

carli said...

03:58 PM
on Jun 12, 2012

Report Abuse

Readers who are interested in Jack Mormonism might also like this article from The Cultural Hall, "How to be a Jack Mormon." Might make 'em laugh. http://www.theculturalhallpodcast.com/2012/06/how-to-be-a-jack-mormon/
Leave a Comment
Login to leave a comment.