In reading Michael Medved's typical thoughtful, reasonable, and compelling article today at Townhall.com about the ongoing dialogue regarding a Mormon in the White House, I was surprised to see him write that I had announced that I could never, in good conscience, vote for a Mormon.
Actually, I believe Michael heard me pose a hypothetical scenario during my radio show. Heck, it might have even been my fault in the way I presented it on-air. I remember that I was defending people who are raising the issue of Mormonism by suggesting that one should able to say, "I could never vote for a Mormon in good conscience based on the core religious beliefs that conflict with my own" and not have to be accused of being some kind of foaming-at-the-mouth bigot by Mitt Romney supporters.
But for the record, I've never said I have failed to consider ANY of the Republican candidates for president. It's way too early and besides, I continue to struggle with the issue of the strangeness of a number of various Mormon beliefs. But that doesn't mean I'd ever suggest that I'd never vote for Gov. Romney.
While Michael makes some convincing arguments that should make Romney supporters happy, I noticed that the pre-1978 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints opinion of Blacks was missing from his column. Evidently, prior to 1978 the Mormons had a pretty dim view of people of color. But in 1978, presto! there was some kind of revelation or inspiration or some auspicious occasion where Blacks were suddenly allowed to be on an even playing field with Whites.
Again, as I understand it, this was 1978. Not 1878.
Is it fair and reasonable to wonder if a man who is part of a religion that held such a horrible view only 29 years ago would be a good choice for the president of a country that seems to constantly be struggling with race relations? Can we at least consider the question openly and without condemnation?
I sure hope so.
Meantime, not that it matters much, but when I decide who to vote for in 2008, I"ll let you know.