Why on earth would the LA Times run a column about a Mormon presidential candidate by an anti-Mormon writer who is trying to drum up sales of her anti-Mormon book and the anti-Mormon movie based upon it? That is my question after reading this piece by Sally Denton -- which does nothing but rehash a 150-year-old atrocity and long-repudiated Mormon doctrines while expressing skepticism (which I share) about Joseph Smith, the founder of the LDS Church.

Particularly disturbing is this paragraph.

Still, is it fair or legitimate to hold Mitt Romney accountable for dark deeds committed many years ago by the church to which he belongs? If we start down that road, where does it lead? Shall we, for instance, burden Bill Richardson with the Inquisition because he is a member of the Catholic Church?

It's not a church's eccentric past that makes a candidate's religion relevant today, but its contemporary doctrines. (And it's worth noting that polygamy and blood atonement, among other practices, are no longer condoned by the official Mormon church hierarchy.)

The problem -- Denton never bothers to mention a single contemporary doctrine that Romney should be held responsible for or required to answer for. Indeed, she never even bothers to explain why Romney should have to answer for those doctrines at all. Rather, she prefers to tar Romney with the "eccentric past" that she claims is not relevant today and hints at something nefarious in the contemporary faith. Indeed, she brings up only one question that Romney needs to answer.

In the end, it seems less a candidate's religion that concerns Americans and more an apprehension of fundamentalist fanaticism and a fear that the separation of church and state is becoming murky. As for Romney and Mormonism, there seems only one legitimate and relevant question: Do you, like the prophet you follow, believe in a theocratic nation state? All the rest is pyrotechnics.

Interestingly enough, Denton's question does not refer to any contemporary teaching, but to that very history that she claims should be irrelevant! So which is it, Sally -- is Romney responsible for the past of the LDS Church and every past statement by Mormon leaders or not?

Of course, as she raises the specter of Mormon theocracy, Denton neatly ignores this statement from the LDS Church itself on the issue of church political neutrality -- because bringing mentioning the statement would destroy the entire premise of her argument. As such, its exclusion instead neatly demonstrates her bigotry, ill-will, and dishonesty.

H/T Captain's Quarters

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT , The Virtuous Republic, Faultline USA, Maggie's Notebook, Big Dog's Weblog, Nuke's news and views, Blue Star Chronicles, Webloggin, The Pink Flamingo, Leaning Straight Up, Cao's Blog, MY Vast Right Wing Conspiracy, Gulf Coast Hurricane Tracker, Colloquium, Jo's Cafe, and Adeline and Hazel, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.