March
12 HBO vs. LDS: The Mormons strike back - UPDATED

HBO’s aplogy is a farce. If they really wanted to apologize, then they wouldn't show this show and try and link these polygamists with Latter-day Saints. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has the strongest stance against polygamy of any U.S. church, immediate excommunication. No if and or buts. HBO is just picking on the minority religion and slandering their beliefs out of context to boost their ratings.

Being a former long-time multi-generational Mormon from Utah and California (I officially excommunicated the Mormon Church from my life in 1998 :) and as a professional marketing and PR consultant, I can say with full confidence and direct knowledge:

1) The Mormon Church invests millions of dollars ($US) each year in a professional PR agency and engagement process to burnish and enhance its image around the world.

2) The Mormon Church has never subscribed to complete disclosure of its true and unvarnished history, motives or objectives. The Mormon Church has zero tolerance of opinions that deviate from the core and "santized" dogma of the Church
(e.g., Boyd K. Packer, the next leader in line to become the prophet, led the effort to ex-comunicate six scholars who were members of the Mormon church in September of 1993. The six academics ex-communicated for telling the truth about church history would become known as the "September Six".

Critics of the Utah-based Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints point to this and the more recent dis-fellowshipping of Grant Palmer, author of An Insider's View of the Mormon Origins, as proof that the Mormon church is anti-intellectual. Read more: "The September Six: This Event Started Boyd K. Packer's War on Mormon Intellectuals" - http://mormonism.suite101.com/article.cfm/mormon_intellectual_decline#ixzz09bjPRjNJ

3) The Mormon Church has spent its entire existence (since 1830) adopting, changing and burnishing its history and image to become mainstream and to be accepted by the popular and acceptable standards of modern society.

4) The author of this PR release (David Politis) appears to be not only a devout Mormon but an experience PR professional.

5) Transparency and complete honesty trumps all, especially in a new era when intellectual honesty, inter-connected social media and multi-cultural and diversity is a given.

6) Any attempt to control or "spin" in this day and age of instantaneous electronic media will likely result in disastrous consequences.

7) David Politis is attempting to "spin" the facts.

Well stated David. I see exactly where you are coming from.

Since no one here has seen the scene in question, it's disingenuous at best for Politis to reframe the Mormon outcry in terms of the church's stance on polygamy. This whole brouhaha started over the mere fact that the endowment ceremony was being depicted at all - whether it involves a polygamist or not is secondary to this perceived violation of privacy.

Unfortunately for Politis and like-minded LDS-ers, the misunderstandings they seek to prevent are, fundamentally, caused by their own Church's secrecy. If the rites, rituals and practices of Mormonism were more accessible to laypeople, then not only would Mormons likely enjoy more mainstream acceptance in American society, but they would also be better equipped to weather any distortions of their faith - whether presumed, as in this case, or otherwise - that appear in the media.

Long story short: open up! Don't just try to educate us, but let us educate ourselves. Because until the Mormon faith can truly enter into the stories of our culture (and Big Love is one of the best stories going these days), it will never fully arrive into American life.

Sheesh, David. Do you always post the email addresses of commenters at your blog? You no longer have any credibility to speak on the subject of showing respect for others' secrets. Zero.

"The Standard of Truth has been erected; no unhallowed hand can stop the work from progressing; persecutions may rage, mobs may combine, armies may assemble, calumny may defame, but the truth of God will go forth boldly, nobly, and independent, till it has penetrated every continent, visited every clime, swept every country, and sounded in every ear, till the purpose of God shall be accomplished, and the Great Jehovah shall say the work is done."

In response to Sean's call for openness of the temple ceremony, one wonders if he finds anything sacred in the world today; anything that should remain hidden from the prying eyes of a tabloid, internet-surfing, snarking, gossipy, puerile society; an interesting contradiction in a society that touts the right to privacy.

As for the comment about "no persecutions, no mobs," following the passage of Prop 8 in California, someone wrote a letter to the editor at my daughter's college suggesting that the extermination order of Gov. Boggs in 1838 should have never been rescinded. It was published without hue and cry. I wonder what the response would have been if there was a call for the extermination of Jews or African Americans. After a history of persecution, it is not surprising that such comments make Mormons a bit nervous. The thought does, after all, proceed the action.

" failed and illegal practices of a few polygamists." By a few I wonder if he means the founder of Mormonism Joseph Smith or its next great leader Brigham Young. The only reason polygamy was given up by the Mormons was so that Utah could become a state. I agree that today it is a small minority, but at one point it was one of Joseph Smith's prophetic visions.

"The pressure to discontinue the practice of polygamy, resulted, partially, from the government threat to confiscate the property and assets of the church and any member who practiced polygamy"

"Then, and only then, did God order the discontinuation of this holy practice because it was being abused. AND NOT BECAUSE OF POLITICS."

Did you read your comment before posting it? Or did you just not notice that you condratict yourself within your statement? Or maybe it's just a coincidence that "God order[ed] the discontinuation of this holy practice" at the same time that the government threatened legal action.

Thank you, David Politis, your comments were very factual, and to the point. I also wanted to reply to some of the comments which accuse the church of being "anti-intellectual", and that it tries to conceal "facts" of history. First of all, my experience with the LDS faith is that gaining as much knowledge as possible is encouraged, and is a good thing. What church members object to is when other members begin to twist history or doctrine around to make them into something they are not, and then proceed to make a big issue out of it and persuade others to follow their mistaken interpretations. This is what the problem was with the intellectuals referred to who were excommunicated. That is true with any church or organization: one can't expect to go off on a tangent and go out of their way to turn people against other members and leaders without becoming a nuisance and becoming detrimental to the organization as a whole and to the best interests of its members collectively. People who disagree with the leaders and other members are then free to leave and then pursue their own differentiating beliefs. The church cannot be expected to change on the whims of a few intellectuals who think that "because they are learned they are wise". There is a big difference also between wisdom and knowledge. I have known very many gifted, talented, bright individuals who were also very proud and thus made stupid mistakes in many of the really important decisions in life. I have also known many who have had a great balance in their lives and didn't let their pride get in the way of their progression in true wisdom.
I see the church as being very open to its history and past doctrines, more so than any other organization I know of, especially in recent years. History is always open to interpretation and so there are always different interpretations of the same historical event. Some will judge a person more compassionately, without being too quick to condemn, while others will judge hastily, being quick to condemn. Joseph Smith knew from an early age that his name would be had for either great good or great evil, and that sure bears out in modern times as well as in the 19th century. People also believe what they want to believe, and we need to be compassionate of other peoples honest beliefs, and can disagree without being disagreeable or disrespectful.

So now that it's aired, where's the beef? Barb's mom and sister basically sneaked her into the Temple for the endowment ceremony. However unfamiliar it may be to non-Mormons, the ceremony and it's aftermath were (in my opinion) handled in a very respectful manner. Had the gatekeepers known she was a polygamist, she would not have gotten in - and so Mr. Politis's main objection has been rendered moot.

As to whether HBO had a right to show the ceremony at all, no matter what the context, the answer can only be "yes." This is America, after all.

I find it interesting that a major theme of Big Love this season, at least as far as mainstream Mormonism goes, is the venality of the LDS (and by extension, of all organized religion) and its penchant for monetary, emotional and spiritual extortion; and yet, the biggest complaint is over one particular scene in one particular episode that violates one particular taboo. I suppose this is issue is a bit too complex to render into a tidy public outcry.

Whatever the case, I have to agree with the other commentators that the LDS only helped Big Love and HBO with their statements. They created a prurient interest, only to find that there was nothing prurient there. If there is a better practical argument against prior restraint, I can't wait to hear it, and to see who makes fool of themselves next.

Well stated. I too am disappointed with HBO's decision to air the segment, especially after defending their reasoning with "[we did] research up to wahzoo."

In order to be so detailed, they would have known these facts (borrowed recommends don't work).

There are many inaccuracies throughout the series, perhaps due to the experts being ex-Latter-day Saints.

The anti-sentiment is obvious though. Even the segment's music seems to resemble anti-Mormon videos (from the 5 seconds I saw).

Makes you rethink the non-apology and philosophy of the network.