Connect with us

Growing Mormon-Catholic Alliance: Partners Behind Christian Right’s Religious Discrimination Agenda

Published

on

While Tony Perkins, Brian Brown, Bryan Fischer, and other Christian Right pundits of the more shrill variety may be easy to ignore as they demand a right to discriminate on Fox News, there is a more dangerous coalition emerging. One of the primary drivers of the movement to corrupt and redefine religious freedom isn’t someone in a shouting match on cable news, but a decades-long alliance of top Mormons and Catholics.

While Mormons and Catholics may seem like unlikely allies, from a political perspective they bring complementary strengths to their partnership. The Mormon Church has an amazing amount of wealth on hand (it is estimated to be worth over $40 billion – gathered from real estate and commercial holdings, mandatory tithing collections from members, and even a theme park in Hawaii) and a world-class grassroots mobilization and recruitment force. The Catholic Church and related groups, on the other hand, enjoy a much higher approval rating with the American public (62 percent) and thus can put a more popular face on public political campaigns. 

The political allegiance between Mormons and Catholics dates back at least to the 1990s in Hawaii, during the first U.S. battle over same-sex marriage. As I previously reported, while the Mormons could—and did—provide funding and volunteers to that campaign, the more popular Catholic Church acted as the coalition’s public face. The Catholic Church and other visible allies would thereby absorb any public backlash directed towards the coalition, while the Mormons could push their agenda without any serious consequences to their public image. The strategy was effective, and one they repeated during California’s Proposition 8 fight.

The alliance grows stronger with each passing year. Epitomizing the relationship is Princeton professor Robert P. George (image, left), one of the most influential Catholic conservative activists in the country, who partnered with the Mormon Church to create the National Organization for Marriage (NOM). He also joined the editorial advisory board of the Mormon Church-owned newspaper, the Deseret News. George is also the founder of the Witherspoon Institute (responsible for the debunked Mark Regnerus study – which was reported first by the Deseret News), was the primary author of the anti-LGBTQ Manhattan Declaration, and is one of the top national strategists leading the charge to redefine religious freedom into a sword religious institutions can use to force their doctrinal positions on individuals. This week, Mormon Church-owned Brigham Young University awarded George an “honorary Doctor of Law and Moral Values” degree, calling him “one of the most able and articulate advocates of the proposition that faith and reason are not incompatible.”

Dallin H. Oaks (image, center), one of the Mormon Church’s 12 Apostles, has been deeply involved in the effort to redefine religious freedom. He sits on the board of the World Congress of Families, an international culture-warring collection of Religious Right organizations that works all over the world to use (redefined) religious freedom arguments to enact anti-LGBTQ and anti-reproductive health laws (such as the Russian law that criminalizes any positive speech about homosexuality). In recognition of his work with WCF and frequent speeches before conservative groups extoling the benefits of using one’s faith as an excuse to dodge pesky civil rights laws, Oaks received the 2013 “Canterbury Medal” for his “defense of religious liberty” from The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, a conservative Catholic legal organization responsible for the Hobby Lobby ruling at the Supreme Court and one of the top groups in the Right’s religious freedom campaign.

Speaking earlier this month at the Mormon Church’s semi-annual General Conference to all 15 million members worldwide, Oaks quoted a speech given by Philadelphia Catholic Archbishop Charles Chaput at Brigham Young University. “Speaking of ‘concerns that the LDS and Catholic communities share,’ such as ‘about marriage and family, the nature of our sexuality, the sanctity of human life, and the urgency of religious liberty,’ he [Chaput] said this: ‘I want to stress again the importance of really living what we claim to believe. That needs to be a priority—not just in our personal and family lives but in our churches, our political choices, our business dealings, our treatment of the poor; in other words, in everything we do.’” Chaput continued, in his speech to BYU, “Religion is to democracy as a bridle is to a horse.”

Another of the Mormon Church’s top leaders, Henry B. Eyring, met with Chaput and Pope Francis in November 2014 at the Vatican. Eyring described their strengthening alliance and mutual dedication to opposing civil liberties for LGBTQ people and women, saying “I think the thing was, even with other faiths, they have exactly the same feeling that the root of good society is good families.” Another of the Mormon 12 Apostles, D. Todd Christofferson, will be one of the featured speakers later this year at the Catholic’s anti-LGBTQ World Meeting of Families, where the Pope will also be speaking.

The crowning, and perhaps most insidious, achievement thus far of the Mormon-Catholic alliance is the much-hailed Utah nondiscrimination/religious freedom law. While the Christian Right’s state-level Hobby-Lobbyized RFRAs (with their overt anti-LGBTQ intentions) have generated a significant national backlash (particularly in the cases of Indiana and Arizona) and are susceptible to court challenges, the Utah RFRA “lite” law actually won endorsements from LGBTQ groups. The Mormon Church enlisted the help of Christian Right operative Robin Fretwell Wilson, who works closely with right-wing Catholic groups like The Becket Fund and Alliance Defending Freedom, to co-write the law. The end product was a bill written in such a way that LGBTQ groups hungry for a “win” in a Red state could claim victory in the form of a watered-down nondiscrimination law. The price—knowingly or otherwise—was the endorsement by high-profile LGBTQ groups of the Right’s false contention that religious freedom is somehow at odds with LGBTQ rights, requiring a compromise – or, as some LGBTQ groups described the creation of Utah’s law, “a collaboration.” Such endorsements have set a dangerous precedent for the advancement of RFRAs and other efforts to corrupt actual religious freedom in various state legislatures. Right-wing groups can (and do) point to LGBTQ support in Utah as a means of mainstreaming their agenda and deflating their opposition.

Catholic news agencies have hailed the “Mormon law” as a model to be repeated across the country. If that happens, we may well see more such pyrrhic victories, in which gains in non-discrimination legislation are overwhelmed by the emerging “right to discriminate” on the basis of religious convictions.. This is where compromising on the true meaning of religious freedom could lead. We may also see the Mormon Church emerge as a more prominent—albeit less public—partner of the evangelical and Catholic elements of the Christian Right as they continue their quest to corrupt the meaning of religious freedom. 

 

Image via The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Newsroom

 

Eric Ethington is a journalist, activist, and researcher. Originally from Utah, he now works in Boston for a social justice think tank. His writing, advocacy work, and research have been featured on MSNBC, CNN, Fox News, CNBC, the New York Times, The Guardian, and The Public Eye magazine. Follow him on Twitter @EricEthington. 

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

‘Sounds Like Putin’: Trump Blasted for Declaring Top News Organizations ‘Illegal’

Published

20 hours ago

on

March 14, 2025

By

President Donald Trump, just 54 days into his second term, declared himself “the chief law enforcement officer in our country” and labeled two major news organizations, CNN and MSNBC, as “illegal,” while further denouncing their coverage as “illegal.” His remarks Thursday afternoon were delivered to officials at the U.S. Department of Justice, in an appearance that shattered a decades-old norm designed to insulate the department from political interference—a safeguard established in response to President Richard Nixon’s abuses of power. Trump’s statements have drawn sharp criticism for their authoritarian tone and direct attack on press freedom, sparking alarm.

“I believe that CNN and MSNDC,” said Trump (video below), using his own derogatory twist on MSNBC’s name, “who literally write 97.6% bad about me, are political arms of the Democrat Party. And in my opinion, they’re really corrupt and they’re illegal. What they do is illegal.”

Trump also “rallied against the press,” in general, “claiming they are influencing judges and, without any evidence, claiming the media works in coordination with political campaigns, which is not allowed in the news industry,” The Hill reported.

READ MORE: White House Caught Admitting Real Reason for Mass Firings: Experts

It has been widely reported that during his first term in office, Fox News host Sean Hannity spoke with Trump “nearly every weeknight.”

“These networks and these newspapers are really no different than a highly paid political operative. And it has to stop, it has to be illegal, it’s influencing judges and it’s really, eh, changing law and it just cannot be legal. I don’t believe it’s legal and they do it in total coordination with each other,” the President alleged.

Trump’s remarks were just a part of a speech that lasted more than one hour, during which he “delivered an insult-laden speech that shattered the traditional notion of DOJ independence,” as Politico reported. During those remarks, Trump also “labeled his courtroom opponents ‘scum,’ judges ‘corrupt’ and the prosecutors who investigated him ‘deranged.'”

“With the DOJ logo directly behind him, Trump called for his legal tormentors to be sent to prison.”

It is not the first time the President, who is a convicted felon, has declared MSNBC “illegal.”

Last month, when MSNBC host Joy Reid left the news network, Trump unleashed a torrent of hatred.

“Lowlife Chairman of ‘Concast,’ Brian Roberts, the owner of Ratings Challenged NBC and MSDNC, has finally gotten the nerve up to fire one of the least talented people in television, the mentally obnoxious racist, Joy Reid,” Trump wrote in a post on his social media platform. “Based on her ratings, which were virtually non-existent, she should have been ‘canned’ long ago, along with everyone else who works there. Also thrown out was Alex Wagner, the sub on the seriously failing Rachel Maddow show. Rachel rarely shows up because she knows there’s nobody watching, and she also knows that she’s got less television persona than virtually anyone on television except, perhaps, Joy Reid.”

READ MORE: ‘Team Fight’: Democrats Call for Schumer to Resign

Trump’s Friday afternoon assault on the media was swiftly criticized.

“This is what a dictator sounds like,” wrote U.S. Rep. Seth Magaziner (D-RI).

“Journalism is legal,” declared award-winning investigative journalist Lindsay Beyerstein. “Criticizing the president is legal. Being a Democrat is legal. Nothing Donald Trump is ranting about here is a crime and he’s disgracing himself and the Department of Justice by talking this way.”

Journalist Matt O’Brien observed, “Trump wants to get rid of freedom of speech because he wants to be a dictator. And unlike his first term, he now has a government full of fascists who are eager to make that a reality.”

Marlow Stern, Adjunct Assistant Professor of Journalism at Columbia University’s Columbia Journalism School wrote: “sounds like putin.”

Pulitzer Prize-winning political columnist Kyle Whitmire wrote simply: “Enemy of the Constitution.”

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Basically Underwater on Everything’: Trump in Big Trouble With Majority of Voters Poll Finds

 

Image via Reuters 

 

 

 

Continue Reading

News

White House Caught Admitting Real Reason for Mass Firings: Experts

Published

22 hours ago

on

March 14, 2025

By

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt is “basically admitting” the White House “lied” about the mass firings of tens of thousands of federal government employees, a legal expert is alleging, based on her remarks on Friday. Many of not most of the terminated government workers were ordered to be reinstated by two separate federal courts on Thursday. Judges ruled the terminations were likely unlawful.

According to The New York Times, one judge “said in his lengthy ruling that the government’s contention that the firings of the probationary employees had been for cause, and not a mass layoff, ‘borders on the frivolous.'” Another judge “concluded much the same and made it clear that he thought the manner in which the Trump administration had fired the probationary workers was a ‘sham.'”

Leavitt previously has been criticized for having exhibited “a fundamental misunderstanding of the separation of powers enumerated in the U.S. Constitution since 1789,” and for making false claims in general.

READ MORE: ‘Team Fight’: Democrats Call for Schumer to Resign

On Friday, having been asked to clarify a previous statement, Leavitt told reporters that the Trump administration will be “fighting back” against those two rulings “by appealing, fighting back by using the full weight of the White House Counsel’s office and our lawyers at the federal government who believed that this injunction is entirely unconstitutional.”

Leavitt insisted that the injunction — presumably both injunctions blocking the administration from additional mass firings and requiring that the fired probational employees be reinstated — are unconstitutional.

She claimed that, “for anybody who has a basic understanding of the law, you cannot have a low level district court judge filing an injunction to usurp the executive authority of the president of the United States.”

That is false, and violates the separation of powers, as legal experts and Supreme Court cases have made clear, although it is a claim the Trump administration has repeatedly asserted.

“That is completely absurd, and as the executive of the executive branch, the president has the ability to fire or hire. And you have these lower level judges who are trying to, uh, block this president’s agenda,” she stated (video below).

That appears to be the remark that drew the attention of attorney Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, an immigration policy expert and senior fellow at the American Immigration Council.

READ MORE: ‘Basically Underwater on Everything’: Trump in Big Trouble With Majority of Voters Poll Finds

“Pay attention here to how the White House is basically admitting to have lied about why these people were fired,” Reichlin-Melnick wrote. “Now they claim this was the President’s command and must not be overruled. But when the firings were happening, they claimed on paper it was for ‘performance’ reasons.”

Andrew Heineman, legislative director for U.S. Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) wrote: “It sounds very much like Leavitt just admitted that the firings were part of Trump’s ‘agenda.'”

Leavitt went on to suggest that there is a conspiracy of activist judges working to “block” President Trump.

“It’s very clear, and as I just cited, I was appalled by the statistic when I saw it this morning in three or, uh, in one month in February, there have been 15 injunctions of this administration in our agenda,” she said.

“In three years under the Biden administration, there were 14 injunctions. So, uh, it’s very clear that there are judicial activists throughout our judicial branch who are trying to block this president’s executive authority.”

She went on to praise President Trump and his legal team, saying that despite being “indicted nearly 200 times,” he was able to become President.

Trump has not been indicted nearly 200 times. He was indicted four times, and faced a total of 91 felony charges.

“We are going to fight back,” she insisted, “and as anyone who saw President Trump up in his legal team fighting back, they know how to do it. He was indicted nearly 200 times, and he’s in the Oval Office now because all of the indictments, all of these injunctions have always been unconstitutional and unfair.”

“They are led by partisan activists, who are trying to usurp the will of this president and we’re not going to stand for it.”

Critics blasted Leavitt’s grasp of the law.

Semafor’s David Weigel posted headlines of federal judges, or, “low level district court” judges, as she said, blocking other President’s actions.

“You sure about that? You sure about that?” he asked, mockingly.

Attorney and Democratic activist Aaron Parnas, responding to Leavitt’s claim that you cannot have a  judge block a president’s wishes, responded: “You actually can. That’s why we have three branches of government.”

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Entire World Ripping Us Off’: Trump Quotes FDR in Angry Tariff War Meltdown

Image via Reuters

 

Continue Reading

OPINION

‘Team Fight’: Democrats Call for Schumer to Resign

Published

1 day ago

on

March 14, 2025

By

Democrats across the political spectrum—liberal, moderate, and progressive—appear united in their outrage over Senate Democratic Minority Leader Chuck Schumer’s decision to back the Republican-led bill to fund the government and prevent a shutdown. They argue that the legislation enables President Donald Trump and Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to continue dismantling the federal government while jeopardizing health care and veterans’ benefits. Without a signed bill, the federal government will shut down at 12:01 AM on Saturday.

Calls are mounting for Leader Schumer to resign. There appears to be a movement on social media demanding his resignation, across platforms including X, Bluesky, and TikTok.

Protestors in New York City are chanting, “Vote no, it’s time to go,” while some hold up signs that read, “Schumer — Be a fighter not a collaborator,” and, “Don’t be a Schumer chicken s—.”

SENATOR AOC?

Some are calling for U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the popular progressive Democrat from New York, to primary the 74-year old Schumer, who was first elected to Congress in 1981.

“I think there is a deep sense of outrage and betrayal,” Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez told reporters on Thursday. “And this is not just about progressive Democrats. This is across the board. The entire party. There are members of Congress who have won Trump-held districts in some of the most difficult territory in the United States, who walked the plank and took innumerable risks in order to defend the American people, in order to defend Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare. Just to see some Senate Democrats even consider acquiescing to Elon Musk, I think it is a huge slap in the face, and I think that there is a wide sense of betrayal if things proceed as as currently planned.”

READ MORE: ‘Basically Underwater on Everything’: Trump in Big Trouble With Majority of Voters Poll Finds

Some House Democrats “are so infuriated with Schumer’s decision” that they have begun encouraging Ocasio-Cortez “to run against Schumer in a primary,” CNN reported Thursday night. “Multiple Democrats in the Congressional Progressive Caucus and others directly encouraged Ocasio-Cortez to run on Thursday night after Schumer’s announcement.”

One member said that Democrats were “so mad,” CNN added, “that even centrist Democrats were ‘ready to write checks for AOC for Senate,’ adding that they have ‘never seen people so mad.'”

SCHUMER’S ‘STRATEGY’

When in the minority, Democrats for years have handed Republicans enough votes to help pass numerous “continuing resolutions,” bills that keep the federal government’s lights on, but this time it’s different. Right now, Democrats are aching for a leader who will fight the Trump/Musk/MAGA machine.

Their anger erupted Thursday night.

Leader Schumer on Wednesday had announced that it did not appear there would be enough Democratic votes to help Senate Republicans pass the House bill, and instead that they would filibuster it. But on Thursday afternoon he declared he would support the legislation, suggesting there would be enough votes to pass it.

Schumer’s reasoning is not wrong, many are willing to admit. Elon Musk reportedly wants the shutdown because if the government stays closed for 30 days, he can then mass fire even more government employees.

But Democrats are saying Schumer’s rationale does not meet the moment. They want someone to fight, not cave.

Adam Jentleson is a writer, political commentator, and the former deputy chief of staff to the late U.S. Senator Harry Reid. Reid, a Democrat from Nevada, was an extraordinarily successful Senate Majority Leader from 2007 to 2015.

READ MORE: ‘Entire World Ripping Us Off’: Trump Quotes FDR in Angry Tariff War Meltdown

“There is a lot of ‘what would Harry Reid have done?’ and sadly we will never know,” Jentleson wrote late Friday morning. “But I can say that we won the 2013 shutdown because we spent months laying track on a clear message about health care. The terms of the shutdown were well-defined before it happened.”

Critics say that’s what’s missing — that Leader Schumer hasn’t bothered to do that.

Pointing to a late Friday morning report indicating that Senate Republican Majority Leader John Thune said that he and Leader Schumer have not even spoken, Democratic strategist Matt McDermott writes, “The problem here is that all evidence suggests @SenSchumer has no strategy whatsoever. Absolutely stunning that he hasn’t talked to the Senate Majority leader, even to attempt to negotiate concessions.”

McDermott also offered this insight:

MSNBC’s Chris Hayes on Thursday night sat down with Schumer, and summed up the situation for him.

“I’ve seen a lot of House members, and across an ideological range, interestingly enough, urging the Senate to filibuster this, saying, look, this is existential about whether we control the power of the purse or not. We cannot essentially sign off on this DOGE unilateral arrogation of this power,” Hayes explained.

The Democratic Leader’s response was that “it’s different in the Senate,” because voting against the bill in the House would not have led to a shutdown. But that’s incorrect. If the House bill failed, and no other passed, that would have absolutely led to a shutdown.

“I felt so strongly that the shutdown would be the greatest disaster we face with these arrogant, arrogant autocrats that we had to avoid the shutdown and fight and many of the other things, every other issue that we have,” Schumer added.

‘TEAM FIGHT’ — ‘MISREAD THIS AT YOUR OWN PERIL’

Illinois Democratic Governor JB Pritzker issued a statement explaining his opposition to passing the continuing resolution, but his chief of staff late Thursday night served up an analysis of what Democrats are feeling.

“The fight going on in the Democratic Party right now is not between hard left, left and moderate,” explained Anne Caprara. “It’s between those who want to fight and those who want to cave. And Team Fight stretches across all ideological aspects of the Party. Misread this at your own peril.”

Right now, it appears there might be enough Senate Democrats willing to vote in favor of the continuing resolution, or at least, vote for “cloture,” meaning to allow debate on the bill.

One who is not voting yes is U.S. Senator Tim Kaine (D-VA), largely considered a moderate Democrat.

“When I saw the House bill on Sunday, I said, ‘Hell no,’ because I just was not interested in voting for something that was going to enable these guys to fire more veterans and cut education and health programs, screw up air safety, tank the economy,” Senator Kaine said Thursday morning on MSNBC. “Why would I do it?”

Kaine noted that during an Armed Services Committee,”the Pentagon looked us in the face and said, this House CR will hurt national security, will weaken our ability to maintain ships and subs. It’s going to do damage to us. And then my Republican colleagues on the committee said, we agree with you, this is going to hurt national security, but it’s better than a shutdown.”

He criticized Speaker Johnson f0r sending House members home after passing the continuing resolution this week, because there’s now little means to alter the bill.

“And I decided then, when the Republicans are trashing this, but acting like they have to go along, I’m not going along.”

“I went back to my days in living in Honduras,” Kaine shared, “when it was a military dictatorship, and I learned something very important. That a bully can take something from you but you shouldn’t hand it over to him, so I’m voting no.”

Kaine also said, “we’re winning cases in court right now against things that Trump is doing. But if we vote for this bill and sort of say, ‘Okay, we’re going to put our imprimatur on some of this,’ I even worry it might make it harder for us to prevail in court on some of these battles.”

PRAISE FROM TRUMP

Critics from across the Democratic spectrum continue to blast Senator Schumer.

“Schumer’s decision is an unconscionable surrender that shows he does not have what it takes to meet this moment,” explained MeidasTouch co-founder Brett Meiselas on Thursday night. “Time for new leadership in the Democratic Party.”

“It is clear that some of us understand the present danger & some don’t! I stand by the NO vote on the blank check for Trump & Elon,” wrote U.S. Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-TX). “I’ve got no explanation nor agreement with Senate Dems being complicit in Trump’s Tyranny.”

SiriusXM host Qasim Rashid, Esq. wrote: “Schumer thinks he’s smart to vote with GOP now because ‘in 6 months Trump will be unpopular.'”

“What’s Schumer smoking to think THIS time is different? Schumer—resign & retire.”

“How badly do you have to f— up being the Democratic leader that Trump is praising and congratulating you????” an astonished Elie Mystal, the justice correspondent for The Nation, asked on Friday.

Indeed, President Trump is praising Leader Schumer.

“Congratulations to Chuck Schumer for doing the right thing — Took ‘guts’ and courage!” Trump wrote on Friday morning. “The big Tax Cuts, L.A. fire fix, Debt Ceiling Bill, and so much more, is coming. We should all work together on that very dangerous situation. A non pass would be a Country destroyer, approval will lead us to new heights. Again, really good and smart move by Senator Schumer. This could lead to something big for the USA, a whole new direction and beginning! DJT.”

Watch the video above or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Not Above the Law’: Fist-Pounding Democrat Explodes Asking ‘Where’s Elon Musk?’

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.