Contact

MormonAmerican welcomes communications from our audience and from other interested people. We’re happy to speak with reporters and commentators to provide a faithful, informed Mormon perspective.

Send comments to dt at mormonamerican (dot) com and ryan at mormonamerican (dot) com.

Send press inquiries to press at mormonamerican (dot) com.

Submit media reports and other writings worthy of commentary to submit at mormonamerican (dot) com.

11 comments

  1. I just wanted to thank you two for the refreshing pithiness, clarity, and insight you are providing in your writing. As I read your blogs I tend to end them with an enthusiastic “That’s Right!”

    I am a 55 year old 5th generation Kentucky Mormon and have been inundated most of my life by blowhards presenting bias and inaccurate information about the church. I have found that much of the blogging information coming out of the West has tended to either confirm to the readers that yes, we are weird: or have an element of here is what we believe as coming from a non-believing believer perspective. (Whatever than means?)

    Just to illuminate my background a little, my brother-in-law is John Dehlin of the Mormon Stories fame so I am not kidding about what I am saying on any of this.

    Thanks, and keep up the good work.

    Tom Hatton

  2. Most pathetic website I’ve seen, came across, browsed, and reported by media. You baby-crying, belly-aching, close-minded brats, “why don’t people like us mormons?” Because your organization singles out the ‘elites’ and looks down upon us ‘sinners.’ You gravitate and only interact with your kind and make assumptions of others’ who aren’t part of your cult. I’ve lived it, seen it, and been around it all my life and I still, to this day, will advocate that this religion is a crock. And quite getting all pissy and moany that people still don’t want to listen or accept your belief. Its life and it is what it is.

  3. Shane Stewart · · Reply

    It amazes me how this “curious people” now want to be so normal. As someone who was a Mormon, I find your characterization of Mormons to be a flat out lie! We both know what is really taught to us each Sunday and what we are expected to believe and do. Also just an FYI, sexy underwear are great! Best thing I ever did was throw out those awful garments, and no I didn’t even cut out the sacred “marks”!! Why don’t you write an article explaining how normal it is to wear sacred undies and the idea you can’t just throw them away, but you have to remove the sacred marks in them first?

  4. Thanks for writing this blog. I don’t know how much traffic it does or doesn’t get, but it’s important that LDS perspectives are included in coverage of Mormons and Mormonism. At least it will be out there, for people who want to understand.

    The media tend to be very secular and have ephemeral interest in or understanding of Mormonism, and it seems like the sources they consult are ex-Mormon or lapsed Mormon at least as often as real Mormon, and caricatures seem more common than sincere attempts to view Mormons as everyday people who believe in something. I don’t expect that to change, and frankly in 6 months coverage will become alot more rare, but while it lasts it’s good that this and many other sources cite articles and the specific errors they perpetuate. I often wonder myself whether it’s worth my time posting on comment threads dispelling inaccuracies or false assumptions about Mormonism, as it seems like heavy media-users tend to be pretty set in their opinions already, but it’s good to see others engaged in the same effort, whether any results are visible or not. Keep the coverage as positive and sincere as possible (you do pretty well), and keep up the good work!

  5. Caroline · · Reply

    Thanks so much for this blog. I have had strong times and weak times in my belief and faith, and your blog definitely helps me for the better. Keep up the great work!

  6. Congratulations on getting an article published at the Washington Post. Your insightful responses to the weird way people insist on writing about Mormons with almost zero actual ubderstanding are remarkably calm and therefore more credible. I petsonally have far less patience with those who refuse to do even minimal homework before condemning millions of Mormons to their neighbors.

    On the specific story in Bloomsberg Businessweek, a glance at the other recent stories they have run shows a real bias against Mormons in general and Mitt Romney in particular. They have lost all pretense of being an objective news source.

    Let me pass along one point in rebuttal of that story. An alleged Mormon named Cragun criticized the Church because its $52 million annual average expenditures.for humanitarian aid was only 0.7% of HIS estimate of all Church expenditures, versus what he claimed was 29% of United Methodist Church national revenues for similar charitable work. I looked up information on the web and found that UMCOR, the Methodist international aid committee, spends an average around $60 million a year, and compated against the 7.8 million Methodists in the US versus $52 million divided by the 6 million Mormons in the US, BOTH Mormons and Methodists donate abput $8.00 per capita per year to specifically humanitarian aid worldwide. The 29% figure is based on the fact that the central, national Methodist expenditures.do not include the cost of buildings and utilities and paying pastors, which are paid locally. So this is an utterly misleading comparison, and I have to conclude that either the author or Cragun concealed the details in order to make a gross difference appear when in fact there is almost no difference at all. This is not a difference of interpretation, it is plain old lying.

    It is also deception when the author calls humanitarian aid the only “charity” the Church gives to, when she darn well should know about Fast Offerings (there is a pasding mention of income in that form but not expenditures or an explanation of how they are gathered) and Chutch Welfare, bishops storehouses, Deseret Industries, the Perpetual Education Fund, etc. Personal service by home teachers, visiting teachers, the Relief Society and Elders Quorum is not mentioned, even when there are tangible forms of aid (food, child care during crises, help in home repairs and moving to another home) which could be assigned monetary value. The notion in the story that it only counts as charity if the recipient of your aid is not a member of your church is ridiculous. Does a generic Christian soup kitchen serve only Jews and Muslims? Education costs for BYU, LDS Business College, Institutes and Seminaries are classic charitable expenses, as every university in the nation will assure you. The operation of churches themselves is charitable because they help people to avoid all sorts of personal and social ills, to become better people who care about others and to perform works of charity. At the historical growth rate of the Church, by 2035 the Church will need to double the number of meetinghouses already in existence in 2012. That is an essential cost before the Church can do anything else.

  7. I would like to comment on the transparency issue. I worked for over seven years for a closely held corporation that eas NOT publicly traded. The stock was held primarily by the descendants of the original sole proprietor, who had founded the company a century before. A limited number of shares were held by senior executives, vice presidents and above, but only whike they were employed. The company was generous with its bonus program for general professional employees like myself, with a formula for distributingba share of its worldwide profits that for me, amounted to thpusands if dollars a year. Its worldwide revenues were in the billions of dollars, but its profits on those revenues were NOT published to the world. Because there was no risk to the public of being induced under false pretenses to buy stock in the company, it escaped a myriad of government regulations that require detailed disclosure of the use of funds by publicly traded companies.

    Thete are numerous large organizations whose financial arrangements are not public, because the public at large does not have a financial stake in those organizations. The only motive for forcing such organizations to disclose their finances is to then turn around and use the information to justify taking control of the organization’s assets for your own purpises. That is not a theoretical concern; when Henry VIII made himself the head of the Christian Church in England, he confiscated the assets.of monasteries and distributed them as gifts to his courtiers. Similar anti-clerical actuons have characterized the French Revolution, the Mexican Revolution, and Communist revolutions around the wold, including in Cuba, China and Russia. Forced disclosure is the first step toward confiscation, and confiscation was already carried out by the Federal government against the Mormons via the Edmunds-Tucker anti-polygamy statute of the 1880s.

  8. Charles Marvil · · Reply

    To add to coltakashi…The two primary directives for the dialectic materialists (socialsit ‘reformers’ of all ilks) to acheive their goal of total dominion over man and the reengineering of the nature of man, is dissolving private property ownership and the destruction of religion. If either of these stand, according to their beliefs, the end goal of a communist dominated, atheist world, can not.
    The Founders understood the evil of this ‘leveling’ concept (as they called the socialsit/communism philosophy) and made it clear that private property ownership and freedom of religion were paramount and co equal in establishing a government that would maintain and perpetuate a righteous society that would honour and obey the Laws of Nature, and Nature’s God, the Creator of all.
    In the minds of these ‘levelists’ today, successful attacks and elimination of these primary foundation rights of man, will collapse all the other natural rights of man, clearing the way for total re engineering of the ‘nature of man,’ in their image.

  9. Mormon Fact Check · · Reply

    Enjoyed the site and look forward to reading your work. We liked the leading quote in Washington Post about already fulfilled prophesy his name “should be had for good and evil among all nations, kindreds, and tongues, or that it should be both good and evil spoken of among all people.”

  10. Raymond Takashi Swenson · · Reply

    Folks, I miss you. I hope you are able to take up your blog and make new entries.
    Oh, and I found an article that identified Professor Cragun as an ex-Mormon.

  11. Where did this blog go? I thought it was great and one that I frequently checked. It provides a sorely needed voice in the present discussion

    I suppose I can’t complain too much because I am capable of doing the same – although not nearly as skillfully – but count me in as one who would like to see the posts continued at least to until “the Mormon moment” reaches a saturation point.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: