I believe this “anti-mormon” label is thrown around haphazardly and without merit. This post by chanson (and the ensuing comments) show a little of what I’m talking about. From baptism… I’m not sure when this trend began.
After all my analysis, many may choose to consider me (and others) anti-mormon. That is their right. I don’t consider myself anti-mormon (please see my post here).
I don’t think it’s fair to consider someone “anti” (against) something simply because:
-They ask questions about it (particularly difficult questions)
-They bring up difficult parts of its history
-They protest for change or equal treatment for all members of an organization
-They ask for an accurate accounting of membership and funds of that organization
I would like to compare these types of issues with the opinion of the United States.
As many know, U.S. history is full of difficult episodes. At its founding, the U.S. supported the slave trade and many Americans owned slaves (other human beings). The author of the Declaration of Independence (Thomas Jefferson) along with the first president of the U.S. (George Washington) owned slaves on their respective plantation(s) in Virgina. Accounts of human slavery/trafficking are difficult to read and to digest. Suffice to say, it was a dark moment in U.S. history and a specter that hangs over current U.S. policy. Many descendents of former slaves still live in the U.S., and still fight to be treated with equality.
With that said, I have never heard anyone who discusses slavery and its history called “anti-American”. It is common knowledge that slavery existed and that the founding fathers profited from it. Scholars are not deported for questioning U.S. policy about slavery or towards the descendents of former slaves.
In the 60s, many people protested for a repeal of “Jim Crow” laws in the south, which promoted disenfrancisement and segregation of people of different races. While some of those protestors were considered “anti-American” at the time, today they are regarded as pioneers and true innovators. Their sacrifice led to the many gains in race relations here in the United States. The struggle is not over, but I think everyone can agree we are at a better place than we were prior to Brown vs. the Board of Education (and other landmark events).
While some of the protestors may have been anti-American at the time, I don’t think they could all be labeled as Anti-American.
I’ve participated in e-lists and read websites about mormonism (now called the LDS faith) since 1999. Most of these lists/groups are made up of former or inactive LDS.
I have encountered very few people over those years who could be considered “anti-mormon”, and even fewer that encourage any sort of harm against the current LDS faithful.
The vast majority of people that I read are asking difficult questions about the mormon faith. They are questioning why the main governing body (the LDS General Authorities) choose to make the decisions they do. They are protesting for equal treatment for all LDS members. They may bring up unsightly parts of LDS history (and protest against current policy that might harm some members).
I submit that many organizations, even religious organizations, have episodes or other incidents that they are not proud of. Humans make mistakes. The question is, do we encourage a diologue about these policies or issues? Or do we group everyone who is different from us, who brings up difficult issues as “anti-mormon” and as intending harm to that person’s faith?