On September 11, 1857, 155 years to the day before Ambassador Chris Stevens was killed by angry religious zealots in Libya, a Mormon militia in southern Utah slaughtered 120 members of a wagon train en route from Arkansas to California. The perpetrators of the Mountain Meadows Massacre had a lot to be angry about themselves. They had been harried out of Missouri, their prophet had been lynched in Illinois, a U.S. Army was marching on their capital, and they were the object of some of the ugliest verbal attacks ever leveled by Americans against the religion of other Americans.
Five years ago, Mitt Romney gave a speech in which he took Americans to task for past religious intolerance.
Today's generations of Americans have always known religious liberty. Perhaps we forget the long and arduous path our nation's forbearers took to achieve it. They came here from England to seek freedom of religion. But upon finding it for themselves, they at first denied it to others. Because of their diverse beliefs, Ann Hutchinson was exiled from Massachusetts Bay, a banished Roger Williams founded Rhode Island, and two centuries later, Brigham Young set out for the West. Americans were unable to accommodate their commitment to their own faith with an appreciation for the convictions of others to different faiths. In this, they were very much like those of the European nations they had left.
Would it be fair to accuse Romney of therefore justifying the Mountain Meadows Massacre? Not at all. To condemn intolerance is not to exonerate those who react violently against it. But of course, that's exactly what the GOP presidential candidate did yesterday in using the condemnation of intolerance issued by the American embassy in Cairo prior to the assaults to accuse the Obama administration of apologizing for the assaults.
There are many reasons to question Romney's judgment and character in making this accusation, and then doubling down on it. What's striking to me is that the perpetrator was someone who knows only too well from his own tradition how assaults on their religion can lead communities to commit unspeakable acts.
d | Sep 14, 2012 | 1:28am
What does this have to do with Lybia & Egypt in 2012? Romney wasn’t alive in the 1850’s-nor any of us today…...
Brian Scarborough | Sep 14, 2012 | 8:18am
When someone murders someone else, you condemn (and prosecute) those who committed the murder. It is not the time to point out that the murderers and protesters had reason to be aggrieved. These Mormons in 1857 were murderers. Those they killed had nothing to do with the persecutions that Mormons endured. It was inexcusable.
Copts in Egypt are treated much like the Mormons were treated. Yet we do not see them murdering people or acting uncivilized. There is something terribly wrong about those (Muslims) who act as if they have every right to lash at Americans or Europeans who criticize their religion.
Additionally, there may be some indication that 9/11 protests were planned before anyone even knew about the now infamous video.
Carl Diederichs | Sep 14, 2012 | 8:20am
Might it be called learning from history? Or not learning from history.
Mark Silk | Sep 14, 2012 | 8:26am
As you may have noticed, Brian, the man responsible for the scurrilous video that has provoked the riots is a Copt.
Brian Scarborough | Sep 14, 2012 | 10:30am
Mark, you have not responded to my main point. If a man murders his wife, is it the appropriate time to mention that she was a nag or of poor character?
Mark Silk | Sep 14, 2012 | 10:50am
I’m not sure that was your main point, Brian, but I get your drift. The fact is, however, that the embassy statement was issued prior to the assaults on the embassy and consulate.