Alexander: The LDS Church Needs to Step Back from Influencing State Policy
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints office building in Salt Lake City photographed on August 28th, 2020. (Photo by Gwen Christopherson | The Daily Utah Chronicle)
September 19, 2020
The state of Utah, while an extraordinary place to live, lacks a certain separation between church — that is, the LDS Church — and state.
Utah has been home to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints since 1847, and 62% of the state’s current population are members. Because of those deep roots and constant representation in office, the Mormon Church’s power remains ever-present in Utah’s Capitol Building. Impacting more than politics, the predominant faith dominates education, legislation and the daily lives of non-members, who are becoming increasingly outraged. Time and time again, Utah legislators take the LDS gospel and turn it into policy that greatly affects non-Latter-day Saints. This forcing of beliefs onto others is a direct violation of the United States Constitution. Utah blatantly fails to respect a division between church and state, and it is time that the Church recognizes their influence as damaging to Utah policy and inconsistent with the Constitution.
One of the reasons that Utah policy deeply reflects Mormon ideals is that nine out of every ten legislators are LDS members. And while many policymakers try to downplay the severity with which the Church involves itself in governmental affairs, some of them recognize the faith’s influence. As then-House Representative Rob Bishop said in 1993, “Perception is reality, whether it’s true or not. The perception out there is that the Mormon Church does control the state of Utah.”
With one word, the Mormon Church has the ability to exercise control over the legislative body. Once they issue a stance on a controversial policy, legislators follow suit, citing scripture and Church leaders’ remarks as aiding their decisions. Utah lawmakers continuously demonstrate that their covenants to the Church are considerably stronger than their oaths of office. The Church’s extensive reach into politics and legislation is ever prevalent in Utah’s laws. Abortion, alcohol-concentration levels and even medical marijuana policies exhibit the Church’s stance. This transgression is unconstitutional, and because of this, some citizens are fighting back against the Church’s influence.
To illustrate, a policy debated between the Church and non-LDS citizens is 2018’s Proposition 2. Prop 2 legalizes the use of medical marijuana and expunges minimal criminal offenses regarding it. The majority of Utahns voted in favor of this proposition, but it was met with blatant opposition from the Church. In response, people who need life-saving treatment are creating petitions to prevent Church interference. Such action should not be needed or expected, because the Church should not be allowed to override Utah constituents’ clear support for a piece of legislation.
Another policy with pushback from the LDS Church is SB-132, which raises the alcohol percent level allowed in Utah’s liquor stores. It is no secret that the LDS Church prohibits alcohol consumption among members, yet their beliefs have led to the watering-down of alcohol in stores. The bill, which Utahns voted for, received pushback from the Church based on covenants to which only its members adhere.
Once again, Church interference in Utah legislation not only pushes religious beliefs onto non-Mormon Utahns, but it also undermines the basic idea on which our Constitution was founded: that the citizens of a state can vote for and uphold policies in their best interest. It is time the LDS recognize that the power is with the people — not the Church.
For LDS members, the Church’s influence on legislation makes little to no difference in how they live. The policies advocated and created by Mormon leaders reflect and encourage the practice of current LDS lifestyle and values. However, what many members fail to recognize — or recognize as a problem — is their Church’s impact on the daily lives of non-LDS people.
Due in large part to the Church’s stance on homosexuality, same-sex marriage was banned in Utah until 2013 when a federal judge ruled the ban unconstitutional. In addition, even alcohol was watered down for the sake of enforcing Mormon ideologies. These policies are based entirely on religious beliefs, yet all of these decisions and laws affect non-LDS members who wouldn’t normally adhere to the religion’s rules and expectations.
The LDS Church is infringing on our religious freedoms by pushing their beliefs onto us non-LDS through policy. The LDS Church is also not adhering to the Constitution’s rule of separating church and state. Elected officials need to serve us, the American people — not the prophets of the Church. If our legislators believe serving the Lord means manipulating others into keeping their commandments, maybe they shouldn’t be on Capitol Hill.
Arturo Ordonez-Hernandez • Jul 5, 2023 at 5:38 pm
Gambling is also illegal because of Mormon power, which is dumb because Utahns drive off to Nevada or Idaho for a bit and gamble anyway (including LDS members), so what is this really accomplishing? Not to mention, the cost of living has been increasing rather quickly over the last two decades, yet gambling, which could help our state’s economy, hasn’t even been considered. Not all of us are wealthy Mormons!
Robert Shear • Sep 2, 2021 at 8:42 pm
“There shall be no union of Church and State, nor shall any church dominate the State or interfere with its functions.” – Article I of the Utah State Constitution.
Emma Owusu-Ansah • Dec 5, 2020 at 12:37 pm
In response to the issue at stake, I tried to compare Utah States to all other states in America. I can boldly say that Utah is one of the finest state in the Country. Let me add that, it has its challanges but interms of looking out for it residence, Utah State is doing more to help her residence. We have the best school system with lots of other organization policies in place whether government or private always ready to help. I think all these can be attributed to the Church. We as members have been thought the correct principles, how best can we use it if we don’t have influence in decision making by vying for position of which is within our right. We have a History of establishment, humble men and women toiled to make the best out of Utah. We are also law biding Citizens who respect and honor the policies of Utah which we are part of. We are lucky to be in a state that has some religious influence where our children can go to school and come back home safely, According to you 62% of population in the Utah state are members of the Church, also means we have best community tolerance, we have kindness and peace people around us. In this time and age, thats all a person could ask for
Arturo Ordonez-Hernandez • Jul 5, 2023 at 6:11 pm
I don’t know, the whole sending kids to school safely thing doesn’t really resonate very well with me considering we’ve had way too many mass shootings in the past two decades alone, at least two of which have been in elementary schools (Sandy Hook in Newtown, CT and Robb Elementary in Uvalde, TX). Even elementary school kids who have barely lived at all arr at risk of getting murdered by some psycho; and based on what we’ve seen in Uvalde, we can’t always rely on quick action by the police because they could get stalled by leaders who aren’t entirely sure what to do. I’m not sure how upset I can be with Arodondo, as regardless of our level of experience, we are all human and make mistakes and cannot think clearly under pressure, but then again, there should be guidelines for what to do in these kinds of situations, yet he was confused for 2+ hours about whether or not he was in charge while Ramos hunted down more than 20 adults and children who had no way of protecting themselves. Border patrol had to step in to finish the job after so many people were killed. I hope it doesn’t happen anytime soon (or better yet, ever), especially since I have two amazing nephews and a niece who are between 7 and 9 years old, but just because it hasn’t happened in Utah (as far as I’m aware) doesn’t mean it can’t or won’t ever happen.
James Sucese • Sep 22, 2020 at 10:38 pm
It’s funny how the comments from LDS members don’t see the infringement upon the rights of it’s no -LDS neighbors. You are ok with Shariah law then right? Instead of ruling as a legislative body for all Utahans they are only legislating for their religion. Thus there is very little space between what is legislated and what is given to you at the pulpit. It takes national precedent for you to accept that you shouldn’t legislate using your religion. What needs to happen is more people running for office that are not of the dominate religion/
Andrew Lanier • Sep 22, 2020 at 7:47 pm
This article articulates exactly what I experienced upon moving here from another state. The religious affiliation of the elected officials is not the issue. The issue arises when edicts handed down by the Mormon Church supersede the will of the electorate. In the case of the marijuana proposition, the people collectively voted against the desires of the mormon church. Instead of enacting the will of the people, the government allowed the Mormon church to enter into the process and supersede the people. While Mormons may serve as public officials, the Mormon Church as an institution has no recognized governmental authority inside the United States. So if elected officials and parishioners of the Mormon faith are not allowed to deviate from the Mormon Church as an institution, then the Mormon Church has claimed an authoritarian power that is not granted by the constitution and in essence should invalidate the State of Utah as a recognized state within the republic.This same question was raised about JFK when he was running for president. If he was not able to make decisions independent of the Catholic Church as an institution, then by all definition the U.S. would be handing over 1/3 of it’s governmental powers to an outside body with no recognized power, thus making him ineligible to serve in public office, much less seek the office of the President. California (where I am from) has a similar issue in the form of union controlled government officials. Unions pay for politicians to represent their interests. When those politicians overide their constituents in favor of the unions who put them in office (which happens often and is the basis for California’s ongoing problems and corruptions), you now have a failed state where the voice of the people has been overturned by an outside institution with no recognized base for power according to the constitution. There is nothing wrong with politicians who hold Mormon religious beliefs. When those politicians are forced to follow the will of the Mormon Church instead of the electorate, you have an unconstitutional base for power that is not reflective of a recognized free state of the union.
Shawn • Feb 9, 2022 at 11:35 am
Well put
BC • Sep 21, 2020 at 2:46 pm
As many others have stated, the legislators are voted into office by the population of the area. If they are elected and accept the office while presenting a certain platform to the public, wouldn’t it then be their duty to maintain that same platform while in office? If they are predominantly members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, then yes, it is safe to say that the policies and issues they believe in and fight for will probably reflect the views held by many members of that same Church of Jesus Christ. One’s religion often times affects their core beliefs, which then translates into their friends, lives, political views, etc. But if the stance of these legislators on certain issues is known prior to a public and fair election, then I see no issue in them maintaining their values and principles while in office. There are two ways around this if a person does not agree with the policy and law makers in their state: a) they can remove themselves from the situation and find a residence wherein their beliefs and values more closely mirror those of their elected officials, or b) they can take their civic duty seriously and vote when given the opportunity.
Alex • Sep 21, 2020 at 2:11 pm
While I see where you are coming from we can see this perspective in any other state as well. I grew up in SC and most people were Baptists and so you could say Baptists dominated the interests of the people. There are a ton of liberals in CA that are dominating the interest of the majority there. If you want something to change encourage someone else to run for state legislature so you can have a different opinion in politics. The LDS Church as you pointed out is the majority in Utah so wouldn’t it make sense if their ideologies dominate the political climate. You can either bring more people to UT with a non-LDS background to help with the numbers or you can live somewhere else, but right now wouldn’t it make sense that their ideologies are a majority?
DJ • Sep 21, 2020 at 1:46 pm
“Another policy with pushback from the LDS Church is SB-132, which raises the alcohol percent level allowed in Utah’s liquor stores.”
This should read “grocery stores” not “liquor stores”. Liquor stores can already sell full strength alcohol.
Boyce Fitzgerald • Sep 20, 2020 at 10:59 am
Thank you for this article. While I find myself agreeing which some of what you write, I can’t help but ask how you propose that this happen? The lawmakers are elected by the people, who, as you noted, are predominantly Mormon. I don’t believe the Mormon Church can or should change its teachings. Yes, these basic principles do filter into politics. I’ve lived in the south and religion effects local politics there too. I don’t think this is intentional but it is a naturally occurring reality. I don’t see how we can change this fact without undermining democracy in general. I do hope that non-Mormons in Utah do not feel marginalized and that there can be some way to temper such situations.
Robert Wojnar • Sep 20, 2020 at 7:43 am
Yes, separation of church and state is in the Constitution. When the First Amendment was adopted in 1791, the establishment clause applied only to the federal government, prohibiting the federal government from any involvement in religion. By 1833, all states had disestablished religion from government, providing protections for religious liberty in state constitutions. Not keeping it separated is plainly Un-American. Very good article and nice to see non-mormons with a voice in a State that tends to minimize those voices.
LDSAnon • Sep 20, 2020 at 7:20 am
If 9 out of 10 Utah legislators are latter-days saints, that is the democratic image of the people’s will. The state’s laws reflect the values of the majority. Liberals don’t really believe in democracy. If you wish to have booze, marijuana dispensaries, gambling, prostitution, and abortion all unfettered, exercise your liberty and agency to go elsewhere.
Shawn • Feb 9, 2022 at 11:37 am
You do realize that was a vote goes through and something passes the church is supposed to have zero say in any changes made to said law and that is the problem us non Mormons have in Utah is that it doesn’t matter if something passes or not if the church can come in and make any changes they like
LDSAnonthrowyourselfinafire • Apr 24, 2023 at 10:32 pm
Jesus of course (famously) had no tolerance for prostitutes.
John Doe • Sep 20, 2020 at 7:01 am
I fail to see what exactly is unconstitutional here.
If it is the fact that a majority of parliamentaries are active latter-day saints and when voting follow their beliefs (which happens to be religiously based), it wouldn’t be much different in principle than a parliament majoritarely influenced by secular ideals and organizations. In a democracy, the majority rules, sometimes to the detriment of the minority.
If the problem is the church taking position on certain subjects or lobbys to politics, isn’t it playing by the same rulebook as any other organisation? And knowing that Prop 2 still passed, despite the church’s opposition to it might indicate it’s political influence isn’t that omnipresent.
I might be wrong in my understanding and would appreciate some legal clarification, but to me it seems that regardless of the morality of an entity being that powerful, we cannot call the situation unconstitutional. I sure hope that they are possibilities in Utah to make diverse viewpoints heard.
Shawn • Feb 9, 2022 at 11:39 am
Yes prop 2 passed and then the LDS church was allowed to butcher what was voted on that is a problem when a law is passed the church should not be allowed to make alterations nor should our elected officials be allowed to make alterations that favor the church especially if it was already voted on and passed
Scott Thomson • Sep 19, 2020 at 11:53 pm
‘The separation of church and state’ is nowhere mentioned in the Constitution.
Knielson • Sep 19, 2020 at 10:58 pm
I’m not going to lie, I’m a little uncomfortable but understand where you are coming from. There needs to be more separation, but it’s hard when this is how legislators live and this is the state where they decide to live. Many people do pray in big decisions because that’s what we’re taught to do. All love, all respect, but the Church normally has reasons behind things. It doesn’t mean they’re never wrong, but majority of the time it’s not out of spite or vengeance.
Shawn • Feb 9, 2022 at 11:41 am
Fair enough however once prop 2 passed the church should not have been allowed to make alterations to what was voted on however our cowardly representative was unwilling to stand with the majority hence why it passed