May 16
Ambassador Huntsman…The LDS Implications Are Huge
2009 at 9:15 am | posted by Rep. Craig Frank 36 comments
This morning at a press conference in Washington DC, President Barak Obama named Utah Governor Jon M. Huntsman, Jr. to be the new Ambassador to China. Congratulations, Governor. This is a big deal for the Governor, Utah, the United States, and…the The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS).
Although the LDS church’s missionary program has an ecclesiastical presence throughout many parts of the world, the countries with the largest population bases (China and India) are not currently open to the church’s missionary efforts. Huntsman served his LDS mission as a 19 year old young man in the Taiwan Taipei Mission in the early 1980’s. He has since been back to the Far East on a number of occasions. Huntsman not only takes to China his political acumen but also a lifetime of membership in the LDS church. This should bode well for the LDS church’s mission to spread the gospel throughout the world, since all members of the LDS faith are under divine mandate to…”Go ye therefore, and teach all nations…” (Matt 28:19)
Huntsman’s ambassadorship not only puts him in an excellent position to address US-China relations, it puts him in an even better position to teach the gospel…in Mandarin.
May 16th, 2009 at 9:26 am
Craig,
I like your positive thinking on this! Great post.
Lisa
May 16th, 2009 at 9:44 am
Well said. Huntsman is clearly an inspired choice. The USA’s relationship with Chilna is critical for the future from so many angles, and this is just one of them.
May 16th, 2009 at 10:39 am
Thanks for saying publicly what I said privately. I think Gov Huntsman will do a tremendous job as Ambassador. It’s a perfect fit for him.
May 16th, 2009 at 11:05 am
[...] By hollyonthehill I just wanted to give a shout-out to Representative Craig Frank for saying publicly what many of us have thought or said privately – the appointment of Governor Huntsman to be [...]
May 16th, 2009 at 1:07 pm
You gonna roll back your petty complaints about his traveling expenses now?
May 16th, 2009 at 9:43 pm
I hate to burst your bubble, but to say that Obama was inspired to pick a lapsed Mormon for ambassador to China is laughable. This has absolutely nothing to do with Mormonism. Huntsman would not walk across the street to help advance the cause of the LDS Church in China. And all Obama was trying to do was show some bipartisanship on a position that doesn’t require party politics. Huntsman is clearly qualified for the job, undoubtedly, but c’mon, big implications for the LDS Church…. If anything, this will hurt the church, because Huntsman will go out of his way to make sure nobody accuses him of favoring the Church. Just watch.
May 17th, 2009 at 7:57 am
Rep. Frank,
Are you speaking as a state representative in this post? Your hope that the Mormon church might take advantage of Huntsman’s appointment for ecclesiastical gain seems out of step with your office. Or are you simply speaking as a church member now? It’s not clear to me. Either way, do you believe it is part of an ambassador’s duties to support missionary efforts for American religions in foreign countries?
May 17th, 2009 at 8:20 am
[...] state Rep. Craig Frank is excited about the appointment of Huntsman as ambassador to China because of the implications it has for the [...]
May 17th, 2009 at 10:33 am
Are you seriously saying that a government official should use his position to advance the cause of a religious institution? I’m so glad that Huntsman is a better person than you. If he tried to use his Ambassadorship to promote a Mormon cause, he’d get thrown out in a heartbeat.
And you, Rep. Frank, should be thrown out for suggesting that he do it.
May 17th, 2009 at 2:06 pm
Misty, I think you’re reading into it a bit much. I think the implication is that Huntsman’s presence would serve as a good example for the LDS, not that he would be directly advocating for the LDS Church.
May 17th, 2009 at 2:46 pm
Jesse, I agree with you. He is not being called on a mission for the LDS church – he is there to be Ambassador from the United States. Leading by example can not be underestimated. He will not hide that he is LDS and I’m pretty sure that will lead to questions and discussion.
Frankly, if Huntsman could be influential in convincing China to stop killing people they don’t like (including baby girls), I would be DELIGHTED, even if that is the only thing he ever does there…..
May 17th, 2009 at 4:26 pm
You guys, I guess I have to remind you that this blog is my own personal on-line journal. This on-line journal is my “personal space” and has no tie to my official capacity as a state representative. Just a reminder.
May 17th, 2009 at 4:31 pm
Oh, I should also probably state that “no taxpayer dollars have been used in the design, implementation, or maintainence of this website”…except mine. =J
May 17th, 2009 at 7:34 pm
You can understand our confusion, what with the title being “Representative Craig Frank’s…”
Something for you to keep in mind in the future.
May 17th, 2009 at 7:46 pm
I discussed it with my attorney…he said it was OK. You’ll just have to get past it.
May 18th, 2009 at 7:00 am
Jesse- I don’t think you are reading enough into it. The post speaks for itself: “Huntsman’s ambassadorship not only puts him in an excellent position to address US-China relations, it puts him in an even better position to teach the gospel…in Mandarin”
Rep. Frank, speaking of course as an individual only, and not a the representative of District 57 (wink, wink, nod, nod) is clearly advocating that Gov. Huntsman use his ambassadorship as a vehicle for preaching the gospel. Misty is right.
And Rep. Frank, with all due respect, your explanation about speaking as an individual only doesn’t even pass the smell test. Your site and its content has all of the trappings of one of an elected official, from the name, to your bio, to the way you sign your posts, to the content you put up. No taxpayer dollars may be involved, and counsel may have given you the green light, but it is pretty clear that you mean to communicate in your capacity as an elected representative. So go ahead and embrace that. Its more intellectually honest than the alternative.
May 18th, 2009 at 7:13 am
MC: I guess you caught me…RED-handed
May 18th, 2009 at 7:21 am
Wasn’t intended as a “gotcha.” Just pointing out the obvious.
May 18th, 2009 at 6:20 pm
Of course Huntsman will not in any way shape or form “proselyte” for the LDS Church. But just the fact that he is an LDS Member, and will not drink alcohol, and learned his Chinese while serving an LDS mission, will increase awareness. Furthermore, the United States is a strong advocate for freedom of religion in every country in the world — including China. It is inevitable that as China develops more commerce with the world, and more Internet connections, that something approaching Freedom of Religion will follow, which will hopefully lead to missionaries from all the world’s religions being welcomed in China — just like they are in the USA.
But here are the thoughts of the SL Trib on this:
http://www.sltrib.com/ci_12397820
May 18th, 2009 at 11:58 pm
Tom L. seems to be suggesting that Gov. Huntsman, either as Governor or as Ambassador SHOULD be favoring Mormonism? Or at least seen to be doing so?
Religious triumphalism will be the scourge of the 21st Century. Please Gov. Huntsman, please don’t try and spread any more of it, whether in China or anywhere else.
May 19th, 2009 at 3:50 pm
When a doctor insists on being called doctor outside of the hospital, does that mean he represents the hospital in everything he does? A representative like Mr. Frank is an elected official of the people and clearly most of the people on this thread, including myself agree with his stand whether he uses the title of his elected position or not.
May 19th, 2009 at 8:39 pm
[...] 1st Amendment for Rep Frank By hollyonthehill Representative Craig Frank posted a blog voicing his view that Huntsman’s appointment as Ambassador to China could be a positive thing [...]
May 20th, 2009 at 9:02 am
Representative Frank,
Many who do not really understand the LDS faith are very skeptical and even suspicious of the motives of the Church and its members. Your comments have not been very helpful in that regard, and in fact, have further reinforced the stereotype that we Mormons are incapable of maintaining the proper separation between our religious identity and our professional responsibilities. In other words, all we are interested in is converting folks, and we will exploit any position we attain, professional, political or otherwise, to satisfy our zeal to convert the whole world. That perception is more widespread than you may think.
Please be cautious about the comments you post.
May 20th, 2009 at 10:42 am
With all due respect Representative Frank … this is HARDLY a “personal journal”. Your blog is the template that is used in many states for government officials. The name is “UNDER THE DOME” … and your picture is your State Rep. pic with the notations about “District 57 House of Representatives”. So, to try to say that the notes on this blog should not be considered for public debate is truly irresponsible and naive on your part. As were your comments about Gov. Huntsman. The idea that HE would be so irresponsible to use this appointment to spread your gospel is ridiculous. We can only hope that your political career does not have aspirations beyond Cedar Hills.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:23 pm
Will somebody please explain to me why we would want Rep. Frank or any other politician to separate who they are, faith included (even especially) from what they do or say in their capacity as a politician?
I’m not asking for a lecture on separation, he did not try to mandate his faith on anyone.
I’m just suggesting that in this day of the Speaker of the House calling the CIA liars, socialism being shoved down our throats, bailouts etc, don’t we want men of faith, any faith serving in public office? Shouldn’t their faith be not just a PART of who they are? Every decision I make is because of my faith not in spite of it.
Rep. Frank did not suggest that Huntsman go out and “proselyte”, he just said out loud what everyone was thinking. Why filter? Don’t you want to know what your representative thinks on a political or personal blog? He is after all a WHOLE person, not just a part time legislator. The great thing about politics is that we get to vote them in or out based on what we know about them.
I for one like what I hear, here!
And yes I am a constituant, so my vote counts!
May 20th, 2009 at 2:21 pm
Thanks, Earl. The left controls the blog world. If liberal bloggers can discourage right-leaning bloggers (by vitriol, half-thruths, and name-calling), “they” will have free reign of the hearts and minds of americans everywhere…how great that would be for them. No resistance. The agenda: destroy the First Amendment (i.e. through the “fairness” doctrine, etc.).
May 20th, 2009 at 3:48 pm
Earl, nobody is saying politicians are not entitled to live their faith openly. The problem is when we start talking about exploiting a position of authority in government to preach a particular religion. That is one of the primary reasons many within the GOP rejected Romney. They feared that if a Mormon were elected, he would use his position to ram Mormonism down everyone’s throat.
When Rep. Frank says, “Huntsman’s ambassadorship…puts him in an even better position to teach the gospel,” it reinforces the stereotype that everything Mormons do is centered around converting their coworkers and countrymen, a perception which–and this may surprise you–turns a lot of people off and doesn’t make them want to learn more about the LDS faith, much less elect a Mormon to high office.
When he is functioning as Ambassador, Mr. Huntsman will be representing the United States government, not the LDS Church. He’ll likely be wearing a suit and tie, but without the missionary name tag. If the way he lives his life encourages people to learn more about his faith, fantastic. But he should not be using his ambassadorship as a bully pulpit to preach the LDS faith in China.
May 20th, 2009 at 7:20 pm
The “left” controls the blogworld? Are you serious? What, we all got together in a conspiratorial meeting behind Reams and decided to “take over the blogworld”?
NO ONE owns blogs, but the individuals and organizations that create them. There are millions of them – to suggest the left controls them is a study in lunacy.
Blogs are “owned” by savvy people with internet technology skills, some of whom use it to blog about values, religion and politics. As a member of the illustrious “left” I suppose (as if we are this monolitic mass), I am appalled by your bias and stereotypical response to criticism about your blatant use of this “un-official” but very official looking realm to blast your own sheltered opinions that mirror the dictates from on high at Temple Square.
You are going to wake up one day to discover that Utah is full of non-Mormons, all of whom expect and deserve intelligent, level-headed and secular leadership by their elected officials – or those elected officials won’t be so elected next time around. For the people and by the people, actually means people like me too. Remember? That oath of office thing?
I am glad I came across this “personal journal” published on the world wide web – it will certainly inform my future opinions of Mormons and how I choose to lobby and vote.
The tide is changing – you might want to catch a wave into the new century.
May 21st, 2009 at 9:29 am
Rep. Frank,
As a voter in District 57…..please don’t catch the wave!
May 21st, 2009 at 1:10 pm
After hearing all the bruhaha I decided to check out the statement myself. Well, Craig, way to stir up the hornets! Look, nobody, Mormon or non-Mormon wants Jon Huntsman to use his post as a de-facto LDS missionary. But, I certainly do want him to be an advocate to the Chinese of our American values. Of course we want our ambassador to officially defend and promote American values to the Chinese. One of these values is our freedom of religion. I hope Ambassador Huntsman encourages the Chinese to allow greater human rights, including a free press, freedom of religion, freedom to assemble, and a lot more. Wouldn’t it be great if Ambassador Huntsman could persuade the Chinese to allow missionaries of all faiths to enter their country and peaceably teach and proselyte their people. Freedom is a good thing and more freedom is a better thing. I hope Jon Huntsman fearlessly promotes and advocates for religious freedom – this most basic of American values – among the Chinese. Why wouldn’t any of us want him to do that?
May 22nd, 2009 at 10:05 pm
I caught the link to this from article6blog.com, which was started by an evangelical Christian and an LDS guy as a forum and response to the way Mike Huckabee spoke code to evangelical Christians, reminding them that they’re not supposed to like Mormons, and thus removed the momentum Romney had going at the time. Article 6, of course, states that “No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.” The blog isn’t there to debate religion. It’s about people of all faiths working together to elect the best representative without eliminating someone if they belong to the “wrong” religion.
How do I feel if I’m a Catholic or Protestant or Hindu or Buddhist living in District #57 and I come across this? Or have you already decided that everyone in District #57 is LDS? All of your readers who said that you stated what they were thinking should ask themselves the same question.
You could learn some things from Huntsman. He knows that when you hold elected office, you represent all of the people. You still have your faith, but you’re sensitive about the wide range of beliefs held by others, and that’s reflected in what you say, and don’t say.
Please, Rep. Frank, think things through a little more before you write. Your intentions might have been good, but your comments were more appropriate for FHE.
May 23rd, 2009 at 10:28 am
AZ Guy:
Fair question, let me tell you about District 57. District 57 (by my rough estimate) is approximately 85% LDS. I know it’s a unique demographic. The other 15% live in a community dominated by City Councils, Mayors (all three), and business owners who are LDS. People are voted on by the local electorate because of who they are. (Believe it or not, people around here even decide whether to shop at certain stores depending on if they’re closed Sundays.) The non-LDS population of this district know they’re moving into a predominantly LDS community before they move here. Despite the high-concentration of LDS, many non-LDS individuals and families have chosen to live in this community because they feel comfortable here. It is never my intent to alienate, or to be insensitive to, my non-LDS constituents…I represent all of us.
For 30 years I lived outside Utah. A good portion of my out of state non-LDS acquaintances…have had me share the gospel with them…I don’t recall a single person who was offended because I shared the message of the Gospel of Jesus Christ with them. And, I don’t ever recall being offended by anyone who sincerely shared their beliefs with me. We can all learn from eachother!
If we hide what we sincerely believe and teach our children within the walls of our own homes, then the Gospel cannot and will not spread throughout the earth…and at the rate things are happening politically, it needs to go forward now.
May 23rd, 2009 at 4:33 pm
Rep. Frank,
Please don’t think that I don’t understand the responsibility and opportunity we have to share the Gospel. We shouldn’t hide from that. But there is a time and place for everything, and that includes sharing the Gospel.
When Mitt Romney was asked in a nationally televised debate if he accepted the Bible as the the word of God, should he have also added his testimony of The Book of Mormon? Did he hide what he truly believed? Fortunately he had the good sense to know that in that forum it probably wouldn’t have done either the Church or his campaign much good.
It was a forum to discuss government, what I would have expected to see on your blog as well.
Of course anyone moving into most Utah communities is aware of the predominant LDS culture. But running them over with talk of LDS missionary work may not be the best conversation starter.
In my experience the best missionaries I know are the ones who are capable of interacting with everyone without feeling the need to bring up the Church in the first 15 minutes or 6 months or whatever. They’re just good people, good examples, good friends, and if the opportunity seems right they bring up the Church and extend an invitation. And if the person has no interest, they’re still good friends.
Your assumption that “Huntsman’s ambassadorship ….. puts him in an even better position to teach the gospel…” comes across as if that is his primary goal. I doubt that is the case. And I doubt your “personal” comments have been helpful to either the Huntsmans or the Church as the internet carries them to the homes of people of all backgrounds and faiths.
I guess reminding your constituents that you’re LDS is a good way to prepare for the next election when 85% of them are LDS. But in the bigger picture, it reinforces the idea some have that the Church has too much influence on Utah politics, and you might ask if that is helpful to the Church. Nothing wrong with LDS politicians being influenced by their LDS values. That’s a good thing. But your comments certainly didn’t represent the 15%. And no one in the 85% needed to hear it from you anyway, especially the way it was phrased. Tell them instead what you’re doing for District 57.
Again, I know your intentions were good. But please consider your entire audience.
May 28th, 2009 at 11:30 am
I lived in Utah for fifteen years; left in 2002. Looks like nothing has changed much “behind the Zion Curtain.” Leave Mormonism (or any other specific religion) out of political comment! This kind of thing has non-Mormons and those of us who have left, rolling our eyes. Yes, we’d all like to see every country open to religious freedom…but leave it there.
June 7th, 2009 at 12:55 am
Dear Representative Frank:
Do you see anything wrong with US ambassadors, governors, state legislators, and other government officials WHO ARE BAPTISTS using their governmental positions (as well as their semi-official “private” blogs) to promote their particular religions as well as to convince others that “Mormons are not really Christians”?
Do you want US ambassadors who are Catholics to be using their official positions to help promote Catholicism? As a taxpayer, do you see anything wrong with a Catholic ambassador using his or her ambassadorship to promote the Roman Catholic faith? Should they be able to use their official positions to be telling other people that “Roman Catholicsm” is the sole true church?
Do you want US ambassadors who are non-believers to use their positions to undermine religion?
Or is it only Mormons who can use their official government positions to promote their personal religious beliefs?
While I think you can in fact see that government officials should not use their official positions to say that the Mormon Church is not true, you seem to think that the opposite is permissible.
Too bad that you cannot see that you are doing exactly what you would criticize others for doing — if the shoes were reversed.
June 7th, 2009 at 9:15 am
Earnest: I NEVER stated Mormons are the only Christians under divine obligation to spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ throughout the world…in fact, the “charge” I used was from Matthew 28:19. All Christians are under the same obligation to “Go ye therefore…” Personally, I have absolutely no trouble with any sincerely motived Christian from spreading the “good news” at the proper time and in the proper place to any people who would follow the truth “if they knew where to find it.”
And, maybe a point of additional clarification: Sir, no matter where I am, no matter what I’m doing, no matter how or what I’m speaking…I am a Christian first (or should be attempting to be such). No doubt, sometimes, in the political arena it is difficult to remember my primary obligation. Perhaps it won’t be until after I depart from “political” office that I will truely feel comfotable again in my own skin…the skin of a Christian attempting to share the Gospel with my friends and neighbors…wherever I am. Because…I’ll always be a Christian…but I won’t always serve as an elected official.