3 ms·

The Smith video doesn't show anything abnormal. I was concerned by a couple of things about it, like him sharing what might have been classified information wi

by sofal 10y ago

The Smith video doesn't show anything abnormal. I was concerned by a couple of things about it, like him sharing what might have been classified information with the church leaders, and also indicating that his support for the Iraq war was so that the church could eventually send in missionaries. If that is not abnormal, then it is a pretty disturbing example of how religion influences our government.

cookiecaper 10y ago
The "that may be classified" thing was pretty obviously a slip-up on minor information (number of centrifuges; the other information was publicly known), which is why he made that statement after the fact. He wasn't intentionally sharing classified information, and Church leaders weren't shown asking for it. I assume we'd see those kinds of slip-ups reasonably often if we recorded and played back all of the private conversations of reps. Americanizing Iraq was the underlying subtext and principle during the invasion discussion. I know there was the superficial justification of WMD, but Republicans often spoke of things like "bring them democracy" and "bring them freedom", i.e., teach them the American way. For most of the people that supported the invasion whom I talked to around that time, this was the salient point and driver of their interest, not the potential possession of WMD. Smith doesn't say that missionary work is the sole reason he voted for the war, but I'm sure it was an important and desirable side effect for him, and he discusses that. Most religious people would say the opportunity to spread their religion to new people is desirable. That's why missionary programs exist (Mormons are neither the first nor the only religion with a missionary program). Smith was certainly laying it on thick, no one can doubt that. I would guess that politicians are wont to do so. The Quorum of the Twelve, the body to whom Smith is presenting in the video, is the second-highest body in the Church and it's a big deal to talk to them. Thus, while his presentation was annoying, it wasn't improper in a substantial way. Accidentally disclosing a minor possibly-but-not-definitely piece of confidential information is the only infraction here.
- sofal 10y ago
  Smith doesn't say that missionary work is the sole reason he voted for the war, but I'm sure it was an important and desirable side effect for him, and he discusses that. Yes, which is why I find it disturbing. The LDS religion has a strong "kingdom building" ethos where service to their god is equated to furthering the aims of the church corporation itself, which is considered to be the kingdom of their god on Earth. It is codified into the rituals in their temple that every "worthy" adult participates in regularly. Not every member shares the same interpretation of the scope of that commitment, but if a Mormon senator gives a reason for entering into a war as being the expansion of the LDS organization specifically, then that seems problematic to me. I would be concerned about something like this from any other specific religious organization as well.

by sofal 10y ago

cookiecaper 10y ago

The "that may be classified" thing was pretty obviously a slip-up on minor information (number of centrifuges; the other information was publicly known), which is why he made that statement after the fact. He wasn't intentionally sharing classified information, and Church leaders weren't shown asking for it. I assume we'd see those kinds of slip-ups reasonably often if we recorded and played back all of the private conversations of reps. Americanizing Iraq was the underlying subtext and principle during the invasion discussion. I know there was the superficial justification of WMD, but Republicans often spoke of things like "bring them democracy" and "bring them freedom", i.e., teach them the American way. For most of the people that supported the invasion whom I talked to around that time, this was the salient point and driver of their interest, not the potential possession of WMD. Smith doesn't say that missionary work is the sole reason he voted for the war, but I'm sure it was an important and desirable side effect for him, and he discusses that. Most religious people would say the opportunity to spread their religion to new people is desirable. That's why missionary programs exist (Mormons are neither the first nor the only religion with a missionary program). Smith was certainly laying it on thick, no one can doubt that. I would guess that politicians are wont to do so. The Quorum of the Twelve, the body to whom Smith is presenting in the video, is the second-highest body in the Church and it's a big deal to talk to them. Thus, while his presentation was annoying, it wasn't improper in a substantial way. Accidentally disclosing a minor possibly-but-not-definitely piece of confidential information is the only infraction here.

sofal 10y ago
Smith doesn't say that missionary work is the sole reason he voted for the war, but I'm sure it was an important and desirable side effect for him, and he discusses that. Yes, which is why I find it disturbing. The LDS religion has a strong "kingdom building" ethos where service to their god is equated to furthering the aims of the church corporation itself, which is considered to be the kingdom of their god on Earth. It is codified into the rituals in their temple that every "worthy" adult participates in regularly. Not every member shares the same interpretation of the scope of that commitment, but if a Mormon senator gives a reason for entering into a war as being the expansion of the LDS organization specifically, then that seems problematic to me. I would be concerned about something like this from any other specific religious organization as well.