While working my way through Thanksgiving leftovers this week (and the related refrigerator storage challenges), I’ve been amused by Andrew Sullivan‘s learning curve about Mormons:
I had no idea about underwear. Is this an urban legend? Or is there something to it?
Suddenly, pictures of the sacred undies are all over the blogosphere, and everybody’s talking about it. Surely I’m not the only non-Mormon who already knew about this?
FWIW, the Mormons that told me about the temple garments were on my bowling team, and I can state with absolute authority that their underwear did not improve their scores in any way… or at least, not well enough to beat the more conventionally-dressed Polimom.
So — If Mitt Romney would please just respond to this burning national curiosity about what he’s wearing under his suit, perhaps we could move on to more substantive issues? Like… how many times can one re-heat gravy before it goes all lumpy? And is there a way to distinguish between potatoes that were mashed with their skins on, and dressing, in an identically sized and shaped storage container?
Are you asking the same questions about Harry Reid? He’s a Moron too, or did you not realize that?
As in… do I care as much (or as little) about Harry Reid’s underwear as I do about Mitt Romney’s?
You’re kidding, right?
I care much more about my mother not being invited to her granddaughter’s *real* wedding, or some of the other strange things I’ve heard about the church. And I can’t tell you how pleased that my nephew has walked away from it.
LIke your bowling team members, the ladies who used to regularly bring me baked goods everytime I ran some notice in the newspaper for the church were among the nicest people I’ve ever met, but in general the CoJCoLTD creeps me out. I still can’t figure out why the damn missionaries won’t come in for something to drink or eat after I tell them I’m not interested. Do they think I’m going to poison them? I’m just trying to be nice, since my nephew went through that entire ordeal.
A
I’m only kidding so much as I understand that the tide is swelling on drawing out Romney’s Mormonism as some sort of negative on him. I’m wondering if those who ask the questions about Romney’s faith are going to be willing to ask the same about Harry Reid’s.
If you don’t care, and I think you probably don’t, I think that’s good. I fear however, that many are merely going to begin to spin Romney as a Mormon boogeyman without applying the same reasoning to others, namely, Reid.
The “underwear” is merely a tongue in cheek way of attacking the man based on his Mormonism, and that’s just not right, even if you, or others do couch it within the context of seeming jokes.
Jason —
I think there are several things going on here, none of which is directly related to Mormonism per se.
1. Evidently, there are a lot of people who know little or nothing about the LDS. I would say there’s a fair amount of curiosity (and maybe even surprise?) about the temple garments. I’d also venture to say that this curiosity would have manifested around any other religion that people are unfamiliar with.
2. There’s zero chance — zero — that Islam wouldn’t be coming under precisely the same level of scrutiny if a Muslim had thrown his hat (so to speak) into the 2008 presidential-wannabe ring. Likewise with Judaism.
3. I’m sure you’re right; some folks are in fact using Romney’s religion against him. However, I don’t think overreacting is helpful… nor do I think one can easily distinguish between outright curiosity (mixed with incredulity) and hostile mockery. It’s a mistake to automatically assume the latter.
4. Finally — yes, you’re right in that I don’t particularly care. What bothers me about Romney (and I’ve already posted about it here) is that he’s snuggling up to the religious right, and that makes him a non-starter in my book. Even if he’s not actually as conservative as he’s sounding (and he probably isn’t, given the state he’s from), I’ve already got a bad taste in my mouth from the recent years of pandering and posturing to religious zealots.
And that has nothing to do with his Mormonism. Or his underwear.
The very absolutely positively last thing I want to know about any politician is what s/he is wearing under the suit. No, no, no, no. Please don’t ever make me think about that again. Eek!
I was vaguely aware of temple undergarments – I think from seeing the play Angels in America several years ago – but had no idea that photos of them were taboo. I’m still not clear why.