Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Here Comes the Ocean and the Waves Down by the Sea
Jim Geraghty
points us to Mitt Romney's "Nissan Infiniti ad."
Here's the close: "I'd like to keep pornography from coming up on
their computers. I'd like to keep drugs off the streets. I'd like
to see less violence and sex on TV and in video games and in
movies. And if we get serious about this we can actually do a great
deal to clean up the water in which our kids and our grandkids are
swimming."
This raises a couple of important questions. When did Romney hire The Onion's editorial cartoonist as a full-time policy maven? And what's "get serious?" mean? We can answer all that, but first, look at the water. Doesn't it make you want to sleep... sleep... ... ... sleep.
|7.16.07 @ 10:23AM|#
Now all I can think about is Mike Gravel dropping a giant rock on Mitt...that'd be pretty sweet.
|7.16.07 @ 10:28AM|#
Incredibly shallow, full of platitudes, but looks great?
That seems appropriate.
Randolph Carter|7.16.07 @ 10:30AM|#
BLOOOOOOOD! OCEAN!!111!
Get serious means spend a lot of money and erode civil liberties.
Don't you have the newest edition of the Newspeak dictionary
yet?
Dave Weigel|7.16.07 @ 10:34AM|#
BLOOOOOOOD! OCEAN!!111!
I'M! TICKING! TO! THE! DETHCLOCK DETHCLOCK DETHCLOCK!
Randolph Carter|7.16.07 @ 10:43AM|#
"I want an end to pointy objects and rough edges that can cut and injure our kids. I'd like to see a universal nap time to make sure none of our little citizens get too tired. I'd like to see the world as a brightly lit padded room where everyone is wearing restraints."
Paul|7.16.07 @ 10:46AM|#
How far we've come that an ad for someone running for President
references only things not mentioned in the Constitution as the
role of the Federal Government.
We might as well ignore it. The politicians are.
|7.16.07 @ 10:47AM|#
and don't forget the floaties...or fill in the shorelines
deep waters = more drownings
Anonymo the Anonymous|7.16.07 @ 11:02AM|#
Weigel et al.,
Where's a decent recording of the title-quoted song (that was VU,
right)? Only versions I ever found have pretty severe problems.
Dave Weigel|7.16.07 @ 11:04AM|#
Where's a decent recording of the title-quoted song (that
was VU, right)?
The versions I have are on the VU box set and on Reed's first solo
album. The Reed solo version is pretty solid, but I understand most
people have problems with that record.
Jesse Walker|7.16.07 @ 11:04AM|#
Where's a decent recording of the title-quoted song (that
was VU, right)?
It's on the VU album. Lou Reed does a decent version on
one of his early solo albums as well.
Anonymo the Anonymous|7.16.07 @ 11:07AM|#
Cool thanks guys. Think I'd come across at least two different versions with some major audio issues, probably some kind of bootlegs or something.
|7.16.07 @ 11:21AM|#
Calm down, folks, politicans have been saying this sort of thing
for decades yet the sheer amount of smut and media violence
currently available in our society is unprecedented in human
history.
There really is no stopping human progress.
|7.16.07 @ 11:37AM|#
hopefully, he's just trying to please them and won't do anything about. i think it's been proven he's not exactly a man of his word.
|7.16.07 @ 12:17PM|#
this reminds me of some really interesting mormon lore about the water belonging to the devil or something. other christian religions may have similar beliefs - i think it comes from some passage in the bible - but the mormons take it very seriously. Missionaries are not aloud to go swimming at all because that's where satan has the most power over man. In the water.
|7.16.07 @ 12:33PM|#
I'd like to keep pornography from coming up on their
computers. I'd like to keep drugs off the streets. I'd like to see
less violence and sex on TV and in video games and in
movies.
And I'd like to be able to go into a 7-11 without an
interpreter!
|7.16.07 @ 12:40PM|#
Pinette,
I don't know about the mornon thing, but there's not much of a
chance that Christianity has any similar beliefs. If anything,
water is seen as the most holy substance. Hence superstitions that
witches/demons/etc. can't cross running water, or can only do it
with great pain.
|7.16.07 @ 1:00PM|#
Pinette says: "this reminds me of some really interesting mormon
lore about the water belonging to the devil or something. other
christian religions may have similar beliefs - i think it comes
from some passage in the bible - but the mormons take it very
seriously. Missionaries are not aloud to go swimming at all because
that's where satan has the most power over man. In the
water."
Gee, Mormons believe water belongs to the devil? Care to quote the
relevant scriptural passage from the Doctrine and Covenants or the
Book of Mormon or the Bible that I somehow missed? Because if that
were so, someone better tell the Mormon First Presidency to quit
using water instead of wine in the sacrament service each Sunday,
or quit insisting on complete immersion in water for baptism.
Oh, and missionaries aren't allowed to go swimming because a)
they're supposed to be spending all their time on their mission
trying to convert people, not playing and b) the Church takes great
pains to ensure the safety of the young kids in their care, and
with 50,000 or so missionaries in the field, if they allowed
swimming, every year a few dozen of them would drown. And nobody in
the First Presidency wants to have to write letters to grieving
parents explaining that their kids died because a few basic safety
precautions weren't taken.
Oh, wait, sorry, this is H&R -- we don't do facts here. My
bad.
edna|7.16.07 @ 1:01PM|#
"Calm down, folks, politicans have been saying this sort of
thing for decades yet the sheer amount of smut and media violence
currently available in our society is unprecedented in human
history."
i hate agreeing with you.
|7.16.07 @ 1:14PM|#
Edna,
Actually, it's a pleasure seeing Dan T. saying something
intelligent and witty for a change. Now, if we can just get the
other trolls to follow his lead ...
highnumber|7.16.07 @ 1:28PM|#
Anonymo the Anonymous,
I really like the version on the live album 1969, which
has apparently been split into two volumes. "Ocean" opens vol
2.
|7.16.07 @ 1:34PM|#
JH,
It's not doctrine of course. I called it lore for a reason. sort of
like religious urban legend. Mormon culture is full of it.
I'm sure you're right about the real reason for missionaries not be
allowed to go swimming, and I'm sorry for claiming another reason.
But as far as what people believe in utah, as it differs from the
actual reasons given formally by the church, it's often said that
missionaries don't swim because Satan holds power over the water.(i
always sort of thought it was so they wouldn't be tempted to look
at women in bikinis)
This is where it gets tricky, like most church doctrine. I can't
find any direct quotes from church leaders, but I have heard that
one of their prophets once claimed that satan held power over
bodies of water. I'm pretty sure it was specifically the missourie
river and only on sundays, then later generalized to mean all
bodies of water.
DOCTRINE & COVENANTS: 61
"Revelation given through JS the Prophet, on the bank of the
Missouri River, McIlwaine's Bend, August 12, 1831. On their return
trip to Kirtland the Prophet and ten elders had traveled down the
Missouri River in canoes. On the third day of the journey many
dangers were experienced. Elder W.W. Phelps, in daylight vision,
saw the destroyer riding in power upon the face of the
waters."
the words "in power" being key here.
Then later in verses 14-16:
"Behold, I, the Lord, in the beginning blessed the waters; but in
the last days, by the mouth of my servant John, I cursed the
waters.
"Wherefore, the days will come that no flesh shall be safe upon the
waters.
"And it shall be said in days to come that none is able to go up to
the land of Zion upon the waters, but he that is upright in
heart.
Anyway, JH, of course they still babtize and drink water. Since
it's all mythology anyway i have trouble seeing the difference
between legends that exist within the church culture, and doctrine
sanctioned formally by the church. especially since they have a
track record of changing and erasing their doctrine as they see
fit.
|7.16.07 @ 2:13PM|#
Randolph Carter,
a religious studies prof i had once explained some of the mythology
surrounding water in Christianity. for sure the meme about satan
having power over water is not a strong one, maybe even dead now,
but here's where it comes from. When the Roman government was
trying to assimilate christian doctrine into the highly pagan
culture, they took to demonizing icons of the former belief
stucture. They were trying to do away with greek gods and
goddesses. Posiedon was the god of sea/water and was often shown
with a trident. through art and other methods they began depicting
satan/lucifer with a trident.
|7.16.07 @ 2:16PM|#
Pinette, if you read the footnotes to "Behold, I, the Lord, in
the beginning blessed the waters; but in the last days, by the
mouth of my servant John, I cursed the waters.", D&C 61:14
refers to the biblical passages of Genesis 1:20 and Revelations
8:10, so this isn't just a Mormon thing. Anyhow, if you read all of
D&C 61, it appears to be about the dangers of this one
particular trip along the Missouri in 1831, not a general statement
of principles.
First I've heard of this supposed Mormon aversion to water --
unless it's brewed with coffee or tea ;)
As for the "track record of changing and erasing their doctrine as
they see fit", other than 1) the prohibition of polygamy in 1890,
2) the allowing of black priesthood holders in the 1970's, 3)
switching from wine to water for the sacrament, and 4) extending
the Word of Wisdom to virtually all addictive drugs rather than
just coffee, tea, alcohol, and tobacco, I'm not sure which alleged
major doctrinal changes you're referring to. Perhaps you could give
some specific examples?
|7.16.07 @ 2:32PM|#
About the water thing, Again, I was only talking about mormon
legend. I was offering up the scriptural reference as the origin of
the legend, not to prove that it is in fact church doctrine. The
truth is, regardless of the official position of the church, that
many mormons believe satan holds power over bodies of water.
You already named the most relevant changes that were made to
church doctrine.
but there are many, many more.
go here. http://www.saintsalive.com/mormonism/bomchanges.htm
|7.16.07 @ 3:11PM|#
jh
The belief that missionaries cannot go swimming is based on Satan's
power over bodies of water (not water per se) is widespread among
Mormons of my acquaintance (and they are numerous). It is of course
nonsense but then many Mormons believe nonsense that is not in
accordance with church doctrine. eg that Darwin's theory of
Evolution is incorrect.
Of course, when one mentions "the allowing of black priesthood
holders in the 1970's" without mentioning that the prohibition on
blacks holding the priesthood only goes back to the early 1850s and
was totally in conflict with Joseph Smith's views on racial
equality that had lead him to not only be an ardent abolitionist
(the source of many of his conflicts with the general populace) but
also to ordain a number of black converts into the priesthood. So
you get a twofer on the "changing and erasing their doctrine as
they see fit" right there. A flipflopflip, as it were.
It was the racist Brigham Young who introduced the priesthood ban.
But then if it had not been for the resistance of some of the
remaining Josephites he would have made Deseret a slave
state.
And the church would be a lot more convincing on the subject of
plural marriage if they had not been teaching that "by golly if it
was legal we'd be doing it" well into the 1970s.
|7.16.07 @ 4:01PM|#
""" especially since they have a track record of changing and
erasing their doctrine as they see fit."""
What religion hasn't?
|7.16.07 @ 4:09PM|#
Isaac said: "And the church would be a lot more convincing on
the subject of plural marriage if they had not been teaching that
"by golly if it was legal we'd be doing it" well into the
1970s."
Actually, if you read "Official Declaration 1" (at the end of
Doctrine and Covenants), it says in part "Inasmuch as laws have
been enacted by Congress forbidding plural marriages, which laws
have been pronounced constitutional by the court of last resort, I
hereby declare my intention to submit to those laws"
This is not the same as saying D&C 132 (the doctrine about
plural marriage) is rescinded in whole or part, but rather, that
since Church doctrine is to fully comply the laws of each country,
the Church will comply with those laws so long as they are on the
books. If you continue reading Official Declaration 1, it makes it
clear that the declaration was enacted only under extreme duress
and persecution from the federal government: "If we had not stopped
it ... This trouble would have come upon the whole Church, and we
would have been compelled to stop the practice. Now, the question
is, whether it should be stopped in this manner, or in the way the
Lord has manifested to us, and leave our ... fathers free men, and
the temples in the hands of the people"
And, in fact, the Church is still allowing plural marriage after
death, though complying with the temporal ban on it. If a man
sealed in the Temple divorces, and remarries in the Temple, both
his ex and his current wife remain on Church records as sealed to
him when he enters the afterlife (unless, of course, the ex is so
mad at him that she requests a nullification of the sealing and the
nullification is approved).
So, basically, the Church is emphatically downplaying the plural
marriage thing, but if you look at the careful phrasing of the
General Authorities when they are reluctantly forced to address
this issue, they very carefully refrain from saying that D&C
132 has been repealed.
Just thought I'd clarify for you ...
|7.16.07 @ 4:19PM|#
But note that noone in the church has suggested mounting a legal
challenge to the ban when it is fairly clear that in the last
twenty years or so it has been clear that such a challenge could
very likely succeed.
So I guess what I was really getting at is that Mormons don't
really want to live the fullness of the gospel, they want to be
respectable.
Witness the way that Romney retreated from the question. His father
(the son of true pioneers) never would have been such a wimp.
|7.16.07 @ 4:48PM|#
I think it would be awesome if Romney "white horse" became
president, appointed some Mormon justices to the SCOTUS, then got
the laws banning plural marriage repealed for being
unconstitutional.
Since the D&C 132 wasn't repealed, mormons would again be
encouraged by god to enter into polygamy.
just sayin it would be entertaining. that's all.
|7.16.07 @ 4:59PM|#
"So I guess what I was really getting at is that Mormons don't
really want to live the fullness of the gospel, they want to be
respectable."
The leaders of the Church (not always the same as the rank and file
membership of the Church) want numbers -- they want massive
membership growth -- and that means projecting a squeaky-clean,
white bread and jello Middle American wholesomeness to the world.
And reinstituting plural marriage would be a membership disaster,
because most Mormon women *hate* polygamy -- just the thought of it
p****s them off royally. The few that are OK with it tend to leave
the Church voluntarily, or get promptly excommunicated if they're
outed as practicing The Principle. Watch Big Love if you want to
see the fascinating tension between the polys and the mainstream
Mormons. First season out on DVD.
Of course, the problem is that if pumping up the numbers becomes
your consuming goal, a few other parts of the Doctrines and
Covenants could be trimmed back, too. Ease off on the prohibition
of alcohol -- stress careful moderation rather than total
abstinance -- and the membership would rocket upwards. It's a
balancing act between two conflicting goals that a few dozen old
men in Salt Lake City are trying to conduct.
Bill|7.16.07 @ 9:39PM|#
"Incredibly shallow, full of platitudes, but looks great?
That seems appropriate"
I have no idea how you look, so I can't really include that portion
of the quote, but the rest of it is so applicable to you joe it is
unbelievable. I have been scouring these message boards lately and
I can say unequivocally you are the most arrogant individual on the
boards. Even a cursory examination of your posts reveals you are
lacking in knowledge in most of the topics for which you seemingly
put yourself forth as an expert. The amount of intellectual puffery
in which you engage is laughable.
Bill|7.16.07 @ 9:45PM|#
Pinette says: "this reminds me of some really interesting mormon
lore about the water belonging to the devil or something. other
christian religions may have similar beliefs - i think it comes
from some passage in the bible - but the mormons take it very
seriously. Missionaries are not aloud to go swimming at all because
that's where satan has the most power over man. In the
water."
Gee, Mormons believe water belongs to the devil? Care to quote the
relevant scriptural passage from the Doctrine and Covenants or the
Book of Mormon or the Bible that I somehow missed? Because if that
were so, someone better tell the Mormon First Presidency to quit
using water instead of wine in the sacrament service each Sunday,
or quit insisting on complete immersion in water for baptism.
Oh, and missionaries aren't allowed to go swimming because a)
they're supposed to be spending all their time on their mission
trying to convert people, not playing and b) the Church takes great
pains to ensure the safety of the young kids in their care, and
with 50,000 or so missionaries in the field, if they allowed
swimming, every year a few dozen of them would drown. And nobody in
the First Presidency wants to have to write letters to grieving
parents explaining that their kids died because a few basic safety
precautions weren't taken.
Oh, wait, sorry, this is H&R -- we don't do facts here. My
bad
I couldn't have said it better myself, but I bet joe thinks he
could. I am no mormon, so I have no idea about their beliefs, but
an alarming amount of people seem to believe mormon bigotry and the
spreading of half-truths about Mormonism is acceptable simply
because they don't like Mitt Romney. I guess I should consider the
source. This site is dripping with an anti-religious animosity that
is impossible to miss.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245