The Latter-day Saint practice of vicarious baptism on behalf of the dead is once again a focus of controversy. In the past few weeks, it's been portrayed in the news media and on the web as unbiblical, ghoulish, bizarre, shameful, vicious, anti-Semitic, immoral, hateful, an exercise in "black magic" and (by some extremists) possibly even illegal. A national television commentator recently named President Thomas S. Monson among "the worst people in the world" for presiding over the practice. It's high time for the view of a very respected non-Mormon scholar to be heard above the noise.

Let me make it clear at the start that I am not (and never have been) a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. So I am writing as an outsider. That being said, I have had several encounters with Saints over the past two decades, and I would venture to say that every one of them has been positive. So, yes, I write as an outsider, but as a friend.

Latter-day Saints around the world participate in the political process, whether as voters or as legislators. “We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulesr, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law” (12th Article of Faith).

The Thomas family from Belmont, Mass., was recently featured because of their LDS faith in a newscast done by WCVB.

When you meet modest-fashion maven Jen Loch, who has tens of thousands following her online magazine and store, you might expect another cute, wide-eyed Mormon blogger who has taken her faith, values, innocence and, of course, fashion sense onto the Internet.

One of the most difficult but important things we can do as Mormons who are alerted to the complexities of cultural differences and sacred writings is to learn how to share in church settings insights we’ve gleaned from our studies. We have a dual challenge: (1) to try to be as faithful as possible to the scriptural text and the context in which it was written and the people who lived in those places and times, while (2) still honoring in some way the Christian and LDS overlays that have become deeply ingrained in ours and others’ faith journeys and worldviews—framings and understandings that can only generally handle grafting in a few new pieces at a time.

No sooner had Mitt Romney lost the presidential election than various pundits and journalists began to declare that the "Mormon moment" was over. Certainly, Romney's candidacies in 2008 and 2012 brought about increased visibility and often scrutiny for Mormonism. Since its founding less than two hundred years ago, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has been often ridiculed, attacked and misunderstood by a skeptical and American public. But as Americans learned more about Romney through the campaigns, many wanted to better understand his faith and what impact it might have on his presidency. Owing to that interest, the American media landscape cultivated a robust and largely informative conversation about all things Mormon, including its baptismal practices, the church's missionary efforts, the status of Mormon women and African-Americans, and the faith's history regarding polygamy. "What Do Mormons Believe?" has read the headline of numerous articles of late.

"My biggest passions in life are my faith and my family, followed by my work," Latter-day Saint Parker Walbeck wrote on YouTube. "So this video was an attempt to combine all three of those passions." In a stunning video showing scenery of Thailand, Walbeck is able to weave his understanding of diversity and how we are all children of God together into a beautiful video.

How Many Kinds of Prayer are There?

There's an interesting dilemma facing the filmmakers who are presumably hard at work, in some well-hidden editing room, on the biographical movie that will play just before Mitt Romney accepts his party’s nomination: What should the movie say about Romney’s Mormonism?So far, Romney has said very little about his faith in this campaign, which is clearly how he likes it. Indeed, his campaign has pushed back vigorously against even innocuous press coverage of Mormon folkways and beliefs, on the theory that trying to explain a much-distrusted, much-misunderstood religion could only distract from the economic message.