A significant majority of U.S. Mormons vote Republican and tend politically conservative. In fact, we are the most Republican-voting religion in the country, beating even evangelical protestants. It's surprising, given that ours is a faith with no official political affiliation.
To be forthright, I am neither a Republican nor a Democrat. Neither really represent my political views. So, in a way, I wish for a third party (not Libertarian) and look on in wonder at those who find either one a good political platform. But more on that later.
Now I want to address the question that keeps spinning through my mind: Why are most Mormons Republican?
It's not like on their surface one is evil and the other righteous. Certainly politicians and candidates from both sides can demonstrate unchristian behavior. The high road is universally the road less taken. Furthermore, one could argue that both parties have their good moral stances. Democrats want to reduce poverty, fund research, promote equality and champion civil rights. They struggle to give power to marginalized minorities and the forgotten.
On the other side, Republicans exalt in personal liberties and are often unflagging patriots. Most are people of family and faith. They want to eliminate corruption and waste in government.
Democrats are forward-looking visionaries; Republicans revere the bold beginnings of this country. And both sides (barring any conspiracy theories) want more jobs, better schools, domestic security, safe streets, clean air and water, and personal rights.
After thinking about it for some time I came up with a theory that sheds some light on the decision most Mormons have come to. It revolves around this question: Shall we force morality onto the people (Democrats) or are they moral deep down and it'll come out if we let them govern themselves (Republicans)?
This theory requires a little Mormonism 101 to make it clear. Mormons believe that our spirits did not wink into existence at birth, but that we lived a premortal life with God, an existence that now we cannot remember. We chose mortality to prove we would obey God on nothing more than faith. But along came Satan--yeah, he lived there too--and said he would force everyone to be good. Conversely, God and Jesus' plan would allow us to freely choose good or evil.
How does this translate into politics? Democrats want to pass laws that make us good: Hate crime laws. "Wealth transfer" laws. Gun control laws. Gay marriage laws. Civil rights laws. Equal opportunity. Tuition grants. US AID. Republicans want to keep government out of our lives and schools. They champion personal liberties to the point that government looks very bad. Given that, I guess it's easier to equate forced goodwill with the devil and freedom to choose with Jesus.
This simple view isn't always accurate though. Republicans want fiscal freedom but often come down hard on controversial moral issues like abortion and sex ed. Both try to legislate morality. It's just that Republicans rhetorically emphasize personal freedom more than Democrats. Freedom to do whatever the heck I want.
Am I right? half-right? Anyone have any other ideas? Stay tuned: A few more blog posts on politics coming your way.
Showing posts with label religion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label religion. Show all posts
Saturday, September 17, 2011
Friday, April 29, 2011
Younger All the Time
This article on the reason why Mormons delay marriage was interesting and certainly hits a nerve with a whole lot of people. The vitriol it generated is prolific. But I think it misses the mark yet again. The whole American population is changing, not just Mormons. And it's more about economy than it is about society.
Once American companies learned that Filipinos, Cambodians, and others will do the work for a pittance versus what they have to pay Americans at least minimum wage to do, jobs were exported. So, the 65% of the population working in factories had to find work in services or management. As soon as factories closed, people needed to reinvent themselves and went to college. College enrollment is higher than ever before. Then things became competitive because all the erstwhile manufacturers went into services and management, or at least their kids did. Today even lawyers compete for work, when they used to be guaranteed a good job after law school. It's because now we have 15% of the population in factories and the rest in all those jobs that require higher education. So, young adults have to strive for even higher education before we can bring in any real income at all. Even those who intensly dislike school consider a master's degree to get an edge on the competition.
So, combine that national trend with Mormonism. In a religion that teaches self-reliance, it's no wonder men and women are trying to gain a financial foothold before committing to an eternal relationship where they need to provide more than money, but also time, talents, and everything. While women are taught to get a degree in a world where divorce is a real possibility, men are still taught that they are to win the bread even when the rest of the world has a two-year head start on them.
But, when it comes down to it, that isn't really the issue either. It's that the American economy has real effects on American culture. It is delaying maturity. Thirty is the new twenty. Because they don't have economic resources, young adults are living with their parents well into their twenties. For some, it's mostly summers and vacations, anytime colleges close. Or, more commonly, Mormon young adults use their parents as an economic crutch when times are bad. Many move home or accept money from parents just until they can find real work. (I have.) This postpones maturity. Twenty-one-year-olds don't feel like adults. Society and economic reality have taught them they aren't. It used to be people were adults and on their own as soon as they graduated high school. Now people don't even decide what they want to do with their lives until the third or fourth year of college, if then. And then it'll take at least a few more years before they're earning enough income to pay rent and food for two mouths. I don't think a person is totally psychologically matured until he or she has direction, focus, and reinforcement, despite any urging to grow up. Sometimes, that's only from a real job where a person feels he or she contributes.
Once American companies learned that Filipinos, Cambodians, and others will do the work for a pittance versus what they have to pay Americans at least minimum wage to do, jobs were exported. So, the 65% of the population working in factories had to find work in services or management. As soon as factories closed, people needed to reinvent themselves and went to college. College enrollment is higher than ever before. Then things became competitive because all the erstwhile manufacturers went into services and management, or at least their kids did. Today even lawyers compete for work, when they used to be guaranteed a good job after law school. It's because now we have 15% of the population in factories and the rest in all those jobs that require higher education. So, young adults have to strive for even higher education before we can bring in any real income at all. Even those who intensly dislike school consider a master's degree to get an edge on the competition.
So, combine that national trend with Mormonism. In a religion that teaches self-reliance, it's no wonder men and women are trying to gain a financial foothold before committing to an eternal relationship where they need to provide more than money, but also time, talents, and everything. While women are taught to get a degree in a world where divorce is a real possibility, men are still taught that they are to win the bread even when the rest of the world has a two-year head start on them.
But, when it comes down to it, that isn't really the issue either. It's that the American economy has real effects on American culture. It is delaying maturity. Thirty is the new twenty. Because they don't have economic resources, young adults are living with their parents well into their twenties. For some, it's mostly summers and vacations, anytime colleges close. Or, more commonly, Mormon young adults use their parents as an economic crutch when times are bad. Many move home or accept money from parents just until they can find real work. (I have.) This postpones maturity. Twenty-one-year-olds don't feel like adults. Society and economic reality have taught them they aren't. It used to be people were adults and on their own as soon as they graduated high school. Now people don't even decide what they want to do with their lives until the third or fourth year of college, if then. And then it'll take at least a few more years before they're earning enough income to pay rent and food for two mouths. I don't think a person is totally psychologically matured until he or she has direction, focus, and reinforcement, despite any urging to grow up. Sometimes, that's only from a real job where a person feels he or she contributes.
Friday, February 11, 2011
"Muslim Culture"
This is in response to my friend Carl's post of two weeks ago. I couldn't fit it in the comment field on his site (go figure), so I've posted it here on my blog:
When a quarter of a million Egyptians demand their Allah-given right to freedom and democracy, I can't help but feel love for them. Surely, with democracies rising out of the Middle East, one can feel hopeful for the future of Muslim nations.
So, I’d like to address a few of your minor points and then I’ll tackle the major one.
First of all, you suggest that we need to “get over colonialism.” It’s important to make a few distinctions here because a statement like that can inflame instead of inspire. One way that statement could be misinterpreted is that it suggests we forget colonialism ever happened. Disastrous. If there’s one good reason to study the horrible atrocities of our collective histories, it’s so we don’t repeat the same mistakes.
Another misinterpretation might give license to today’s superpowers to feel superior to the nations and minorities upon whose backs they made their fortunes. It would be dishonest to not give credit where credit is due. Black Americans contributed more labor to the building of this country than anyone can estimate, not to mention their contributions to our collective culture, language, music, dance, literature, etc. etc. etc. ‘Getting over colonialism’ cannot mean feeling proud that we (white Westerners) did it all or are solely responsible for the prominent position our society has in today’s world.
But if you mean we need to start the process of forgiving each other for past atrocities, I agree, mostly because we will never progress as a human race if half of us harbor rancor toward the other half of our own species. Isn’t that a little like racism?
And, you’re right, white Christian men don’t hold the monopoly on oppression; it should be decried wherever found and whoever is committing it. But even a cursory look at the last few thousand years of history will show that white Westerners had the power to oppress other peoples more often than other cultures, and we often wielded that power to disastrous effects. I think it’s a human tendency we have to want to lord over another. But for whatever reason, white Westerners had more opportunity to be world-class jerks and we need to own up to the fact that that’s not very enlightened behavior.
Another point I wanted to address is the conflation of the terms “Islam” and “Arab.” The former is a religion with 1.57 billion adherents. The latter is an ethnic group of about 300 million worldwide. There are radical cultural differences between a Muslim from Saudi Arabia and one from Indonesia or Canada. There is no pope or a uniform agenda. One cannot simply condense an entire religion into one culture. The differences between, say, Russian Orthodox Christians and Latter-day Saints demonstrate that culture and religion should not be confused. So, when Hirsi Ali talks about “Muslim culture” (213), frankly it’s ridiculous.
Furthermore, your claim that we need to “integrate Muslim immigrants into western societies” implies that all American Muslims are Arab immigrants. In fact, fully one-third of American Muslims were born here. And more American Muslims are of South Asian and African descent than Arab, which constitute only one quarter of their numbers. Another quarter consists of African Americans. And is education the untried answer? Your post fails to mention that American Muslims are more educated and affluent than the national average.
Now, if you mean to say that we need to help Arab immigrants assimilate to American culture, well, that’s another thing. If you are saying that Western culture is superior to Arab culture, that changes things quite a bit. I still don’t really agree, but I think that’s the real claim you’re making.
As a side note, you mention female genital mutilation. As you say, FGM is not part of Islam. The Qur’an never mentions it. This is not a religious practice, but a cultural one. It isn’t endemic only to Muslim nations either. Furthermore, changes are already in the works (most notably in Iraq right now) that will illegalize it in some of these nations that traditionally have practiced it. Female oppression seemed tightly wedded to Western culture for at least two millennia, but we’re a little better now. I’d much rather let Islam survive unmolested (but encouraged) to realize for themselves there is a better way. That leads to the question of best how to do that. How can we influence the culture of a people that live thousands of miles away? Well, social media seems to have some effect.
Finally, I don’t know if anyone can make a judgment call about an entire culture and its superiority to another. We just don’t have that kind of objectivity. There may be aspects of another culture that are clearly disadvantageous. But there are aspects of mine that are pure evil too: the pervasiveness of pornography, for example. Our own culture, even traditional culture, is not all that perfect. Elder Scott affirms this when he wrote on rooting out unhealthy cultural norms, “I have found how difficult it is as I work to overcome some of my own incorrect traditions.”
When I think about Western culture, I don’t see us as the bastion of enlightenment. I wonder what you would think of Western culture in the Middle Ages. Or even more recently. One hundred and fifty years ago we condoned slavery. One hundred years ago women could not vote in this country. Fifty years ago minority groups still fought for equality. If we are enlightened, we only caught on recently. If certain cultures that happen to be mostly Muslim need a few years to make the difficult, bewildering step into a new cultural awakening, I’m willing to let them work it out, encouraging all along the way.
My fiancée works in the field of social change in the Middle East. Her company’s tactic is to use the culture and religion already in place to effect change. For instance, they might point out that FGM is never condoned in the Qur’an, that birth control is actually acceptable. I like this kind of work, for its effectiveness and its respect for the good in every culture. You say you don’t think we should throw the baby out with the bathwater for Western culture. Let’s give all people that same opportunity.
With recent events, it seems change in the Middle East, some that should sound very familiar to enlightened Westerners, gives me great hope for the future of Islam. This from an op ed piece in today’s New York Times: “The narrative about how Arab countries are inhospitable for democracy, how the Arab world is incompatible with modernity — that has been shattered by the courage and vision of so many Tunisians and Egyptians.”
When a quarter of a million Egyptians demand their Allah-given right to freedom and democracy, I can't help but feel love for them. Surely, with democracies rising out of the Middle East, one can feel hopeful for the future of Muslim nations.
So, I’d like to address a few of your minor points and then I’ll tackle the major one.
First of all, you suggest that we need to “get over colonialism.” It’s important to make a few distinctions here because a statement like that can inflame instead of inspire. One way that statement could be misinterpreted is that it suggests we forget colonialism ever happened. Disastrous. If there’s one good reason to study the horrible atrocities of our collective histories, it’s so we don’t repeat the same mistakes.
Another misinterpretation might give license to today’s superpowers to feel superior to the nations and minorities upon whose backs they made their fortunes. It would be dishonest to not give credit where credit is due. Black Americans contributed more labor to the building of this country than anyone can estimate, not to mention their contributions to our collective culture, language, music, dance, literature, etc. etc. etc. ‘Getting over colonialism’ cannot mean feeling proud that we (white Westerners) did it all or are solely responsible for the prominent position our society has in today’s world.
But if you mean we need to start the process of forgiving each other for past atrocities, I agree, mostly because we will never progress as a human race if half of us harbor rancor toward the other half of our own species. Isn’t that a little like racism?
And, you’re right, white Christian men don’t hold the monopoly on oppression; it should be decried wherever found and whoever is committing it. But even a cursory look at the last few thousand years of history will show that white Westerners had the power to oppress other peoples more often than other cultures, and we often wielded that power to disastrous effects. I think it’s a human tendency we have to want to lord over another. But for whatever reason, white Westerners had more opportunity to be world-class jerks and we need to own up to the fact that that’s not very enlightened behavior.
Another point I wanted to address is the conflation of the terms “Islam” and “Arab.” The former is a religion with 1.57 billion adherents. The latter is an ethnic group of about 300 million worldwide. There are radical cultural differences between a Muslim from Saudi Arabia and one from Indonesia or Canada. There is no pope or a uniform agenda. One cannot simply condense an entire religion into one culture. The differences between, say, Russian Orthodox Christians and Latter-day Saints demonstrate that culture and religion should not be confused. So, when Hirsi Ali talks about “Muslim culture” (213), frankly it’s ridiculous.
Furthermore, your claim that we need to “integrate Muslim immigrants into western societies” implies that all American Muslims are Arab immigrants. In fact, fully one-third of American Muslims were born here. And more American Muslims are of South Asian and African descent than Arab, which constitute only one quarter of their numbers. Another quarter consists of African Americans. And is education the untried answer? Your post fails to mention that American Muslims are more educated and affluent than the national average.
Now, if you mean to say that we need to help Arab immigrants assimilate to American culture, well, that’s another thing. If you are saying that Western culture is superior to Arab culture, that changes things quite a bit. I still don’t really agree, but I think that’s the real claim you’re making.
As a side note, you mention female genital mutilation. As you say, FGM is not part of Islam. The Qur’an never mentions it. This is not a religious practice, but a cultural one. It isn’t endemic only to Muslim nations either. Furthermore, changes are already in the works (most notably in Iraq right now) that will illegalize it in some of these nations that traditionally have practiced it. Female oppression seemed tightly wedded to Western culture for at least two millennia, but we’re a little better now. I’d much rather let Islam survive unmolested (but encouraged) to realize for themselves there is a better way. That leads to the question of best how to do that. How can we influence the culture of a people that live thousands of miles away? Well, social media seems to have some effect.
Finally, I don’t know if anyone can make a judgment call about an entire culture and its superiority to another. We just don’t have that kind of objectivity. There may be aspects of another culture that are clearly disadvantageous. But there are aspects of mine that are pure evil too: the pervasiveness of pornography, for example. Our own culture, even traditional culture, is not all that perfect. Elder Scott affirms this when he wrote on rooting out unhealthy cultural norms, “I have found how difficult it is as I work to overcome some of my own incorrect traditions.”
When I think about Western culture, I don’t see us as the bastion of enlightenment. I wonder what you would think of Western culture in the Middle Ages. Or even more recently. One hundred and fifty years ago we condoned slavery. One hundred years ago women could not vote in this country. Fifty years ago minority groups still fought for equality. If we are enlightened, we only caught on recently. If certain cultures that happen to be mostly Muslim need a few years to make the difficult, bewildering step into a new cultural awakening, I’m willing to let them work it out, encouraging all along the way.
My fiancée works in the field of social change in the Middle East. Her company’s tactic is to use the culture and religion already in place to effect change. For instance, they might point out that FGM is never condoned in the Qur’an, that birth control is actually acceptable. I like this kind of work, for its effectiveness and its respect for the good in every culture. You say you don’t think we should throw the baby out with the bathwater for Western culture. Let’s give all people that same opportunity.
With recent events, it seems change in the Middle East, some that should sound very familiar to enlightened Westerners, gives me great hope for the future of Islam. This from an op ed piece in today’s New York Times: “The narrative about how Arab countries are inhospitable for democracy, how the Arab world is incompatible with modernity — that has been shattered by the courage and vision of so many Tunisians and Egyptians.”
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
A Greater Follower
A couple of posts ago, I wrote about my wrestle with selflessness. Specifically, I went through a phase of asking for blessings for others and not asking for anything for myself. I learned quickly (well, quickly for me) that God doesn't want it that way.
And then my roommate lent me a collection of addresses by an old Cambridge professor named C.S. Lewis who had already written down the lesson I was trying to learn, in "The Weight of Glory," words both eloquent and insightful:
Lewis goes on to claim that instead of trying to be unselfish, we should endeavor to love better, others and ourselves. And it makes sense: Love thy neighbor as thyself.
God has promised us blessings in heaven we can't now imagine. This is no mere bribe, says Lewis. This contributes to two things--first, if we love ourselves then we will desire the best for ourselves, which is exactly what God wants to give us. Wanting good things for ourselves is a way of actually attuning our own will with God's. Second, if we love others, then we will want to help each and every one of them to achieve the blessings of exaltation too:
So, the problem is not wanting too much, it's wanting too feebly. Lewis says,
And then my roommate lent me a collection of addresses by an old Cambridge professor named C.S. Lewis who had already written down the lesson I was trying to learn, in "The Weight of Glory," words both eloquent and insightful:
If you asked twenty good men today what they thought the highest of virtues, nineteen of them would reply, Unselfishness. But if you had asked almost any of the great Christians of old, he would have replied, Love.
Lewis goes on to claim that instead of trying to be unselfish, we should endeavor to love better, others and ourselves. And it makes sense: Love thy neighbor as thyself.
God has promised us blessings in heaven we can't now imagine. This is no mere bribe, says Lewis. This contributes to two things--first, if we love ourselves then we will desire the best for ourselves, which is exactly what God wants to give us. Wanting good things for ourselves is a way of actually attuning our own will with God's. Second, if we love others, then we will want to help each and every one of them to achieve the blessings of exaltation too:
It is a serious thing to live in a society of possible gods and goddesses, to remember that the dullest and most uninteresting person you can talk to may one day be a creature which, if you saw it now, you would be strongly tempted to worship, or else a horror and a corruption such as you now meet, if at all, only in a nightmare. All day long we are, in some degree, helping each other to one or other of these destinations. [...] There are no ordinary people. You have never talked to a mere mortal.
So, the problem is not wanting too much, it's wanting too feebly. Lewis says,
we are half-hearted creatures, fooling about with drink and sex and ambition when infinite joy is offered us [...]. We are far too easily pleased.
Thursday, April 9, 2009
My New Era Moment
I have had precious few "Mormon moments" in literature classes. While my professors sometimes assign risque literature, I always seem to get through the book by skimming and skipping scenes or pages. After all, it's my mind, right? I should be able to decide what becomes a part of my long-term memory.
As an undergrad, I even used said method to get through Lady Chatterley's Lover. What a quick read! All I know is that there was this game warden who was friends with this woman married to a paralyzed man and some interesting contasts between pastoral countryside and industrialized coal mines.
Anyway, one of my professors assigned The Black Album by Hanif Kureishi last week and after skipping the third sex scene I decided that it just wasn't worth it. To all within the sound of my digital voice, if you want to protect your innocence you shouldn't read this book. But because of my sense of duty (no doubt garnered in middle school), I decided to go to class anyway even though I'd only read about a third of the assigned reading.
Here's what happened immediately after class began:
Prof: Alright, so how many of you loved this book?
(90% of the class raise their hands)
Prof: Okay, how many hated this book?
(I alone raise my hand)
First of all, I was surprised. I didn't think the book (what little I'd read of it) was written very well. The protagonist was as weak-willed and static as Harry Potter (and you all know it!). Nevertheless, all eyes suddenly turned on me and my mind flashbacked to New Era articles I'd read about setting a good example and speaking out about your beliefs. Sure enough, here's what happened:
Prof: Adam, why didn't you like the book?
Me: Well, as the cover says (pointing to the cover because I couldn't really reference anything in the book), it's about "drugs, sex, and rock-n-roll." I like rock-n-roll, but the other two.... (I trailed off before I started explaining that I'd only had experienced rock-n-roll anyway.)
Prof: So, it offended your sensibilities?
Me: Um, yeah.
That was it. My sensibilities had been offended. Not exactly a New Era story but I felt like in the battlefield of life a moral victory had somehow been won...maybe.
But then guess what happened! A classmate sitting across from me also began expressing how it had offended her sensibilities too. Later on the bus ride home I sat next to her and she asked if I were religious. I told her I belong to the Church of Jesus-Christ of Latter-day Saints. We then started talking about skiing in the Rocky Mountains. I don't know what will come of this--probably nothing--but it was nice, I must say, to have this little moment.
As an undergrad, I even used said method to get through Lady Chatterley's Lover. What a quick read! All I know is that there was this game warden who was friends with this woman married to a paralyzed man and some interesting contasts between pastoral countryside and industrialized coal mines.
Anyway, one of my professors assigned The Black Album by Hanif Kureishi last week and after skipping the third sex scene I decided that it just wasn't worth it. To all within the sound of my digital voice, if you want to protect your innocence you shouldn't read this book. But because of my sense of duty (no doubt garnered in middle school), I decided to go to class anyway even though I'd only read about a third of the assigned reading.
Here's what happened immediately after class began:
Prof: Alright, so how many of you loved this book?
(90% of the class raise their hands)
Prof: Okay, how many hated this book?
(I alone raise my hand)
First of all, I was surprised. I didn't think the book (what little I'd read of it) was written very well. The protagonist was as weak-willed and static as Harry Potter (and you all know it!). Nevertheless, all eyes suddenly turned on me and my mind flashbacked to New Era articles I'd read about setting a good example and speaking out about your beliefs. Sure enough, here's what happened:
Prof: Adam, why didn't you like the book?
Me: Well, as the cover says (pointing to the cover because I couldn't really reference anything in the book), it's about "drugs, sex, and rock-n-roll." I like rock-n-roll, but the other two.... (I trailed off before I started explaining that I'd only had experienced rock-n-roll anyway.)
Prof: So, it offended your sensibilities?
Me: Um, yeah.
That was it. My sensibilities had been offended. Not exactly a New Era story but I felt like in the battlefield of life a moral victory had somehow been won...maybe.
But then guess what happened! A classmate sitting across from me also began expressing how it had offended her sensibilities too. Later on the bus ride home I sat next to her and she asked if I were religious. I told her I belong to the Church of Jesus-Christ of Latter-day Saints. We then started talking about skiing in the Rocky Mountains. I don't know what will come of this--probably nothing--but it was nice, I must say, to have this little moment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)