Romney on Religion: Hardly a JFK Speech?

I didn't see Mitt Romney's speech today. But from what I've heard, the buildup to this "Kennedyesque" moment was much ado about nothing.

From what I've heard, he raised more questions than he answered.

"No candidate should become the spokesman for his faith," Romney said. "For if he becomes president he will need the prayers of the people of all faiths."

I can't argue with that. But I'd still like to know how Romney stands on a few issues that were key components of Mormonism in the old days.

Romney's family has been part of the Mormon church for many years. I don't know precisely how long the Romneys have been Mormons. Were they practicing Mormons before the church banned polygamy in 1890? The acceptance of polygamy by the Mormons was one of the main reasons Utah was denied statehood six times before 1887. After a politically expedient "revelation," the Mormons banned polygamy, and Utah became a state.

I know the Romneys were part of the Mormon church in the 1970s, which is when the church stopped practicing racial discrimination after being put under pressure again. That policy reversal was the result of another "revelation."

How does Romney feel about those two issues? I gather from what I've read that he didn't really address either one today. The main subject today appears to have been whether Mormonism is a "cult" or not. That's a rather odd position for a presidential candidate to have to take concerning his religion.

For a long time, the racist doctrine of the LDS church was based on the following writing from Brigham Young:

"You see some classes of the human family that are black, uncouth, uncomely, disagreeable and low in their habits, wild, and seemingly deprived of nearly all the blessings of the intelligence that is generally bestowed upon mankind. The first man that committed the odious crime of killing one of his brethren will be cursed the longest of any one of the children of Adam. Cain slew his brother. Cain might have been killed, and that would have put a termination to that line of human beings. This was not to be, and the Lord put a mark upon him, which is the flat nose and black skin."

Romney has pointed out that his father marched with Martin Luther King Jr. at a time when the Mormon church had not reversed its discriminatory racial policy. That's commendable, but it only addressed the issue of equal rights under the law, not whether Romney or his father believed the church's teaching about blacks' standing in the eyes of God.

Worldly law and heavenly law are two different things.

Romney has a lot to say about religious tolerance, but his church hasn't been tolerant of many groups, and it remains intolerant of homosexuals. How would those teachings affect a President Romney, who claims that he wants to serve "no one religion, no one group, no one cause, and no one interest?"

Fred Barnes writes in The Weekly Standard that Romney "made the most of the opportunity the speech gave him. It was a very impressive speech."

Meanwhile, The New Republic's "quickie reaction" brought responses from all corners of the spectrum. And John Podhoretz writes about "Romney's boilerplate mistake" in Commentary.

I think the fact that Romney felt compelled to make such a speech, just as Kennedy did 47 years ago, proves my point.

Mike Huckabee is making gains among Christian conservatives, a group Romney needs to capture the nomination. Today's speech was a warning shot that it is open season on Christian conservatives.

Separation of church and state has never really existed in the United States. It's one of those thing people tell themselves to feel noble. It sounds noble to say that separating church and state is part of the foundation of the United States.

But that's as much a myth today as it's ever been.