The LDS is a gruesome cult and I’m glad one of its leaders was rejected from office. Its tenets are shockingly barbaric and its history is so filled with shame that it glosses over the most obvious parts…like the fact that Joseph Smith was a HUGE FUCKING LIAR. Good riddance I say.
Then why does it address “Americans everywhere…” instead of “Mormons everywhere”? The statement is spin.
If it makes practicing Mormons feel all inclusive, that’s fine. But to this non-Mormon it reads like an attempt to appear far more magnanimous and inclusive than the church actually is.
I, for one, am in agreement that it was in fact a statement.
So y’all would get really really mad for no reason. Yup, that was my whole intention. You know. Whatever makes you feel better about hating on me for no reason.
I just posted the statement with positive commentary and the first post under mine was instant hate and negativity. I didn’t do anything to provoke that. So keep being angry and belligerent (this goes to everyone who is acting like this). Whatever makes you feel justified getting mad about a benign statement. It means what it mean, simply at face value and I was sharing. Get over yourself.
I think April R is right about the statement being mostly for devastated Mormons crying into their pillows this morning about why God didn’t give Mitt a helping hand. Also, they want to be seen as gracious in defeat, but they know most people won’t even read this statement.
It’s a signal to the membership to not go all Donald Trump “We Should Start a Revolution.”
As to why April wanted to post it here, I’m not sure. But it’s definitely FMBM (for Mormons by Mormons).
That doesn’t answer my question: Why did you post it, if it wasn’t open to critique? Define what you think the topic is, because what I’m getting now is that we are suppose to take that statement at face value and either praise it or go elsewhere.
The press release is a weak attempt by the LDS church to appear less regressive and out-of-step with the country than it actually is. When the church actually changes their policies and ends their opposition to civil rights, I’ll give it some credence. Until then, statements like this one are best pandering and at worst insulting.
If that’s what you had meant, you would have posted this on an LDS board, but you posted it here. You can invite public discussion of the statement, but you can’t control what the public says about it.
I disagree that a press release from an evangelical church addressed to all Americans regarding the outcome of a national election is “benign”. Pretty obvious motive.
Others disagreeing with you about the intentions behind the statement does not reflect a personal vendetta against you, and the disagreement isn’t sufficient grounds to claim martyrdom. You get over yourself.
The Mormon Church just had a windfall PR campaign via this Presidential race. It is capitalizing on the publicity, and making the most of the spotlight just like any other business would. It’s not a noble gesture; but it is totally unsurprising and really no big deal.
And frankly, I think it’s good that the Mormon church did release this statement. A not insignificant number of Mormons already think Obama is the Anti-Christ, and having a Mormon lose to him is sure to radicalize the small but hardy extreme right-wing survivalist segment of the Utah membership.
This is a much-needed unambiguous signal to the wackos that, no, the Second Coming isn’t here yet and you need to accept the results of the damn election already so our church can become more mainstream.
Who cares why she posted it? It’s true April_R didn’t do much to define the subject (and probably failed to anticipate tone of the replies), but the statement itself is going to be more interesting to more people than a discussion about April_R’s motives.
I hope it helps. Much of my extended family seems to be in shock – they’re all pretty conservative Mormons who get all of their news from conservative sources, and they were really confident that this election would see the first Mormon president. They were expecting a Romney landslide and were completely blindsided. Even though I disagree with them, I feel bad for what they’re going through right now. So I hope this statement comforts them.
I’m sorry, but the person who brought up her motives first was April R herself, when she told us she that she didn’t post that statement for it to be attacked, and that it wasn’t directed to or meant for us non LDSers.
edited to add: didn’t see the Mod tag, so I’ll drop it…assuming that critiquing the statement itself is still an option despite her protests to the contrary.
And April R doesn’t get to tell everybody what do discuss. I’d encourage her to explain what she wants to talk about here, but let’s drop the discussion of her motives and focus on the statement - which can absolutely be critiqued - instead.
That press release was well worded and the fact that it was released right after the results were announced indicates that it was written and vetted well in advance…which leads me to believe that they had a different press release ready in case Romney won. Do you think the tone of that alternate press release was pretty much the same?
I never said it wasn’t for non LDSers. I posted the statement to get reaction about the STATEMENT. Not prop 8, not “Fuck You Mormons.” That was uncalled for and twisted the tone of the thread before it even got started.
The point was to discuss the separation of Romney from the Church. He was not running as a representative of Mormons or Mormonism or the LDS Church. The statements shows the Church isn’t all butt hurt over him losing fair and square and is able to separate his religion from his candidacy, which a lot of people this whole election on BOTH sides weren’t able to do. I got “Fuck Romney for being Mormon/Religious” and “Romney has to win, he’s conservative and has God on his side.” It was stupid on both sides. This statement helps show the Church’s stance on voting and political participation and how you should uphold your leaders no matter what. You can take that as sincerity or nefariousness, but it is what it is. But it wasn’t about Prop 8 or anyone’s personal vendetta against the Mormon Church. That is for another thread, probably in the Pit.
Why were some Mormons devastated? Because they consider Romney one of their “team” and they wanted their team member to win. I don’t think they feel any differently than lots of non-members do this morning because the guy on their team lost. I imagine Karl Rove is having the same type of day.
I believe it was interesting to April R and so she posted it. It was interesting because, as Marley asks, no, I don’t think they normally make a statement after elections. But since a member was running they felt that it was appropriate to make a statement. That some people can’t critique a press release without ridiculous hyperbole was probably a shock to April.
ETA: Ah, you beat me to it, April!
I shouldn’t be shocked anymore. 
Hyperbole, mudslinging, and purposely misrepresentation of people’s words has been the script for this election, so I shouldn’t be surprised when a statement of civility gets attacked for being civil (so they must be up to something) because they didn’t come out acting angry and mean.
What form would that take? He is a Mormon who is very involved in the LDS church and gave the church millions of dollars - and took advantage of the church’s tax exemption to save some money for himself, come to think of it - and he was running for president. It turns out that nobody ever really wanted to have a discussion of what that means. Mitt Romney was apparently one of those people. Like I said, maybe that’s for the best. But the topic certainly didn’t get a lot of attention.
I asked this earlier: what else would you have expected them to say? That America blew it and now we’re all going to hell?
I don’t know why anyone would think a church as image-conscious and media-savvy as the Mormon Church would admit to being “butthurt” over the results of the election. I’m sure the Old White Male leadership of the Mormon Church is both disappointed and relieved this morning. The members are probably just disappointed as they don’t have to worry about marketing an unpopular American brand overseas.
I don’t find anything about this statement to be very noteworthy.
Other than the first sentence it would have been exactly the same. Really, as a member, I can promise you that. In this case it would have been an olive branch to those of us who had our little hearts set on Obama.
As to why it addresses “Americans everywhere” is because they consider themselves prophets, seers, and revelators to everyone, not just members of the church. In fact, everyone of you have your own Bishop and Stake President, too, you just don’t know it. 