The Religious Test & Cleanflix

By: Mormon Heretic
June 18, 2012

I attended the Ogden Film Festival last week (officially known as the Foursite Film Festival) and saw 2 films: The Religious Test and Cleanflix: the Documentary.  I thought I would give my impressions.

The producer and director for The Religious Test noted that in 1967, 17% of Americans refused to vote for a Mormon (at that time George Romney was running for president.)  In 2011, that number was 21% (though I think it could easily be within the margin of error.)  They examine issues why that might be.  They also noted similar numbers were raised when John F. Kennedy, a Catholic, ran for president.  Since that time, fewer people have a problem voting for a Catholic: John Kerry, Rick Santorum, and Newt Gingrich don’t seem to run into the Catholic problem.  Evangelicals don’t seem to have an anti-Catholic bias anymore, but the anti-Mormon bias still seems to exist.

For me, it was fun to see some prominent bloggers interviewed, such as Joanna Brooks, Kristine Haglund, and Daymon Smith interviewed, to go along with historians Richard Bushman, Newell Bringhurst, and other academics like Laurel Thatcher Ulrich and Kathleen Flake.  The film interviewed non-Mormons as well, though their names aren’t as familiar to me so I have a harder time remembering them.  I know that someone from Beltway Atheists was interviewed, as well as the French’s from Evangelicals for Mitt, Richard Muow from the Fuller Theological Institute, and some other organizations.  I thought the film was interesting, though I don’t know that it broke new ground:  Anyone that is Mormon is already familiar with these issues. I will mention that some blogs were mentioned too, such as Feminist Mormon Housewives, and our own commenter Paul’s blog A Latter-day Voice made a cameo appearance.  They plan to release the film soon, though the version I saw was still being edited–they included something in the film as recent as a few days ago.  They hope to take the film to colleges and universities, as well as Netflix.

For me it was interesting to notice that the hard-left and hard-right political groups both oppose a Mormon, though for different reasons.  The hard-right seems to be evangelicals with theological problems with Mormons.  The hard left are for human rights, and see problems with Mormons on gay rights, sexism, and past racial problems. Seeing the hard-right and hard-left unite against a Mormon candidate seems to be strange bedfellows indeed.  One thing I thought the producers left out were prominent Mormon Democrats, such as Harry Reid and Morris Udall.

Cleanflix: the Documentary tells about several Utah companies (most prominently Cleanflix) attempts to edit out sex, profanity, and violence from Hollywood movies.  Living here in Utah, much of the information was quite familiar to me, though I am sure that those outside would probably be less familiar with it.  I was surprised to learn that several small video stores tried to keep editing movies even after Cleanflix lost the lawsuit against Hollywood directors.  It did seem to me that the directors were more in favor of Hollywood than Cleanflix, but they did try to present both sides of the story.  I did find the Hollywood director’s position that “there wasn’t a market” for edited films to be hollow.  Clearly the boom in Utah should have made it clear to Hollywood that a thriving market exists for removing objectionable material from movies.  Clearly Hollywood views this as censorship.

They showed several instances of Cleanflix editing. In some cases, such as Saving Private Ryan, Cleanflix editors merely edited out profanity, and they even pointed out that the Today program from NBC News couldn’t even tell that any editing had been done.  The Cleanflix editors did a really good job with that.  However, in a few other movies, such as editing out sex scenes or language in The Weatherman, it was much harder to edit some of those scenes without noticing.  They also mentioned that some movies, such as Pretty Woman were about a prostitute, and while nudity could be edited, the subject material was still about prostitution.  I was amazed to see that Cleanflix editors added a realistic looking bra to the topless Kate Winslett in Titanic.  They also did a podcast on Mormon Matters recently that I found interesting. You can rent this movie on iTunes, Amazon, or purchase it on DVD.


  1. I wanted to see more movies, but was unable to. Do you have any review you would like to share?
  2. Does Mitt Romney have to win the election for the 20% of Americans who won’t vote for a Mormon to drop, or has Mitt made the Mormon issue in politics go away already?
  3. Do you think that people should have a right to edit Hollywood movies?  Why do you think Hollywood is ignoring this moneymaking opportunity?

One final caveat.  Since Mitt Romney is a politician, I know that some may be tempted to discuss the economy, Barack Obama, or any number of political issues.  Please don’t.  If you choose to talk about Mitt or The Religious Test, I would like to keep the focus what a Romney presidency would mean for the Church, whether you think religious bigotry might drop, or something along those lines.  I don’t want this to turn into a rant on political ideology, the federal budget or any other pet topics some of you have.  The filmmakers tried to keep this non-partisan, and I would like to do that as well.

Choose which of the four best describes your view:

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Which of these describes your view best?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

32 Responses to The Religious Test & Cleanflix

  1. Stephen Marsh on June 18, 2012 at 5:57 AM

    There is an old saying “haters gonna hate” and I think that is true in many ways. The question is whether or not there will be an easier group to hate.

    At present, you can’t get a free pass to hate all sorts of people you used to be able to hate or mock in polite society, so that leaves you with a diminishing universe.

    Like this comment? Thumb up 0

  2. Julia on June 18, 2012 at 5:59 AM

    I am not sure that a Mitt presidency will do a lot to change views of Mormons, or who is and is not willing to vote for him. The biggest reason is that Mitt as a Mormon, has obviously held a number of prominent callings, but doesn’t talk specifically about his religious beliefs. Since he doesn’t talk about them, or have one of his spokesman talk about them, it leaves it wide open to a lot of interpretation by people who might or might not understand the LDS faith at all.

    Honestly, I think Mitt running for president may do a lot for the profile of the church, and getting people talking, but I am not sure he will become president. From several studies I have seen the number of conservatives who will not vote for a Mormon is something like a 4:1 ratio as compared the far left.

    While both candidates may have trouble relating to the general populace, those who were most opposed to Obama – Birthers, far right evangelicals, those who think Obama is a Muslim and thus a potential terrorist, etc. – were never part of the group Obama needs to target. Mitt on the other hand needs those people to win. He doesn’t have to lose those votes to Obama, they just have to sit out the election.

    So, back to how that effects the church and willingness to vote for LDS candidates. I think there are lots of communities where LDS populations are high enough that most people have LDS friends or neighbors. Those personal connections make it less scary to consider LDS candidates, on both sides of the aisle, since they are a fairly known quantity.

    There are large swaths of the country where there are few LDS families, where geographically branches or wards are huge. Those areas make up a fairly large part of the country, especially in the “Red” states.

    After living in northern Wisconsin in my early twenties, my husband I went on splits with the missionaries, since they were more likely to have people answer the door if the had a woman with them, when they went tracting. When the missionaries first explained that they always start by asking if the person had heard of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, referred to as Mormons, I thought that was kind of silly. We were not in a metropolitan area, but surely people had heard of the church, right? Wrong, about 70-80% of the people who were willing to open their doors enough to talk had no idea who we were. Often we were confused with the Church of Christ which did regular canned food drives in the town. Halfway through the first question, many people left the door and came back with cans for us. The missionaries were always gracious and dropped the cans they collected at the Church of Christ food pantry.

    In those areas, there is, or at least was, almost no contact with church members. The only youth in our branch who had other LDS kids in their schools were the ones with siblings. There were 18 different high schools in our branch boundaries. Seminary was once a month on branch activity Saturdays where they had mutual, seminary, a primary and RS activity. At the end of the day there was a potluck and family dance. More than half the branch were transplants from somewhere west of the Rockies, and it literally took three and a half hours to drive from one end of the branch to each other. (HT and VT never went above 10% in the winter.)

    In areas of the country that have very few members, people will listen to the people they trust. If those people have an anti-Mormon agenda, they have no way of comparing that to a different reality that would come from knowing LDS people.

    So, while I think there has certainly been a lot of media attention around the Romney campaign, and his membership in the church, I doubt it will change the minds of those who don’t have a way to directly connect to an average church member(s).

    Like this comment? Thumb up 0

  3. Stephen Marsh on June 18, 2012 at 6:08 AM is well worth reading for perspective.

    If there were more LDS, or if there were another group of similar size that made a good target, or if LDS individuals were less noticeable, then it would be different.

    Like this comment? Thumb up 1

  4. NewlyHousewife on June 18, 2012 at 8:00 AM

    I imagine the profit margins in creating clean films isn’t high enough universally to make the process worth it. Hollywood is designed to shock people and make them think, sometimes rethink. The very core of it is to show audiences a world they don’t experience everyday. Editing out every nude scene would go against that and come out as propaganda at best.

    Just because Utah bought it like crazy doesn’t mean Europe, New York and Japan will.

    Like this comment? Thumb up 0

  5. Julia on June 18, 2012 at 8:19 AM

    Stephen #3
    Thank you do much for the link, it was very helpful, and the other links down in the comments were very interesting.

    I oftentimes feel that there is a disconnect between how LDS members talk about religion and how other faiths do. Because I had so much exposure, as a child, to other religions through the classes that were teaching then the tenets of their faith, I am a little better in “passing” in non-LDS conversations. Still, I get a lot of things wrong, or misunderstand a concept. I have learned to admit when I don’t understand and asked questions. I think that makes my friends feel safer asking me questions when they know I don’t pretend to know everything.

    I have been blessed by many great Jewish friends. Since my grandfather was Jewish, but his mother died in childbirth and his father died when I was a baby, I have always felt like there is a part of me that I want to understand. I was really blessed that I was able to take Bat Mitzvah lessons with my friend Wendy. I try to attend High Holy Days every year, and my kids and I celebrate Chanukah and Passover.

    Even with that, I don’t think I could have written an article as thoughtful as the one in the link.

    Like this comment? Thumb up 0

  6. annegb on June 18, 2012 at 8:48 AM

    I just realized I would be very nervous voting for a Pentacostal. Because they’re kind of crazy. So I’m still bigoted. The second I get a glimpse of Mitt Romney acting like an overbearing priesthood holder, he’s dead to me. But maybe he won’t.

    Like this comment? Thumb up 2

  7. Mike S on June 18, 2012 at 9:47 AM

    I do find the issue with Romney vs Obama and Mormonism somewhat amusing. Politics aside, if we were to draw up a platform based on Church teachings, consider the following:

    Immigration: Church attitude – All people are God’s children, regardless of political boundaries. We baptize illegal immigrants, give them leadership positions, and fine-tune missionary policies so they don’t have to travel through airports. Stance that likely best represents actual church policy: Obama

    Ideal society: We hold up as historical ideals Enoch’s Zion, the Nephites’ post-Christ visit society, early Christianity. A common theme – no rich, no poor, all things in common. This was held up by Joseph Smith in the early days as well, but the people just couldn’t live the principle. Policies that are most in line with this: Obama

    Marriage: In the early days of the Church, the majority of the country thought polygamy strange and foreign. They felt it was a threat to marriage. Our argument as a church was that adults should be able to marry how they choose, even if the majority of the country thought it wrong. Policies most reflecting this: Obama

    If we look at the church that Joseph Smith established and look at pure principles, Obama’s stated policies seem to mirror those ideals – yet Romney is the Mormon candidate. It shows how we have changed as a church, from where mainstream Christianity was almost the “enemy” of the LDS Church, to where many Christians can now support a Mormon candidate as our positions are more in line with theirs.

    Fan Favorite! Do you like this comment as well? Thumb up 8

  8. Mormon Heretic on June 18, 2012 at 10:10 AM

    I am the opinion that Romney will have to win for the 20% who won’t vote for a Mormon to drop. He won’t be seen as a game-changer unless that happens. His father helped, but it doesn’t seem to have made a difference among a certain segment of the population.

    Newly Housewife, Cleanflix made a strategic decision to quit making brick and mortar stores in favor of internet sales, meaning that their distribution was much wider than Utah. I think that certain evangelicals would be attracted to a company like Netflix. Cleanflix was wildly profitable until the court case put them out of business.

    Like this comment? Thumb up 1

  9. Paul on June 18, 2012 at 10:51 AM

    #5 Julia: “I oftentimes feel that there is a disconnect between how LDS members talk about religion and how other faiths do.”

    I agree! We LDS seem far more self-conscious about all this than others.

    MH, I think you’re right about Romney’s needing to win — just as Kennedy did. FWIW, I think Romney’s playing the church card pretty well (by not playing it, and letting the church speak for itself).

    Now I’m going to have to buy The Religious Test just to see how my blog appears… Those clever marketeers — they’ll do anything for one more sale. ;-)

    Like this comment? Thumb up 2

  10. Cowboy on June 18, 2012 at 2:33 PM

    Amen Annegb!!

    I wouldn’t vote for a pentacostal either…and yes, they are crazy!

    Like this comment? Thumb up 0

  11. Douglas on June 18, 2012 at 4:39 PM

    In “defense” of Pentecostals (not their faith), I’ve met just as many lucid and rational ones as much as the “crazies”. We tend to stereotype by bad experience.
    Mitt’s LDS faith was the “elephant in the room” for the GOP this go-around. None of the challengers (Cain, Gringich, Perry, Santorum) would have any chance w/o the LDS factor; they were just smart enough to let some big-mouthed Evangelical do the dirty work. The current situation,IMO, belies any notion that there’s as much disdain to electing a Mormon President.
    A better polling question for those that consider Mitt’s religion in a negative light. Choose which of the four best describes your view:
    1) I’ll vote for Obama rather than that Mormon.
    2) I won’t vote for Obama but can’t vote for a Mormon, so I’m sitting this one out.
    3) I favor the Republican so I’ll hold my nose and vote for Romney and hope the White House isn’t being run from Salt Lake.
    4) I favor Romney so I’ll vote for him in spite of my misgivings about the LDS faith. I separate my religious and political views and I trust Mitt will conduct his office likewise.

    Like this comment? Thumb up 2

  12. Reel Mormon Housewife on June 18, 2012 at 4:40 PM

    I reviewed Cleanflix and discussed some of your questions here:

    Like this comment? Thumb up 0

  13. Mike S on June 18, 2012 at 4:48 PM

    Two words best describe my response to people wondering how much Romney in the White House would be run from SLC: Harry Reid

    Fan Favorite! Do you like this comment as well? Thumb up 4

  14. Julia on June 18, 2012 at 4:49 PM

    Douglas #11

    I love your poll! Maybe we can get someone with some money to do a 200,000 person randomized poll?

    I gotta see if Colbert Super Pack has some extra dough!

    Like this comment? Thumb up 0

  15. Bonnie on June 18, 2012 at 7:07 PM

    #8 Agree wholeheartedly MH. It’s not a game-changer unless someone wins and spends significant time in the spotlight so the masses can get mad at him for something else. As long as his religion is the last taste in their mouths about him, it will be the first taste in their mouths about someone else. And frankly, for a lot of America, religion is just plain weird anyway. If a candidate wore socks on his/her head it wouldn’t be as weird to people as professing testimony. That paired with the cultural guilt conscience that we are not living up to the faith of the previous generation smears any religious candidate. I heard as much about Santorum as I did Romney. I don’t think that knee-jerk prejudice is going away anytime soon. The religious right may find itself coalescing because it’s shrinking, and Mormons (and Pentacostals ;) may have to eat at the same table for solidarity.

    Like this comment? Thumb up 0

  16. Bonnie on June 18, 2012 at 7:08 PM

    Oh, for crying out loud. You’d think the spellcheck would have caught “Pentecostal” even if I didn’t.

    Like this comment? Thumb up 0

  17. Badger on June 18, 2012 at 8:15 PM

    I take a dim view of bowlderization as an approach to art and literature. But I think the greater censorship issue with Cleanflix is the application of copyright law to shut down their business. Suppose, for the sake of argument, that the Cleanflix editions of movies were offensive and insulting to the creators, and that their ham-fisted editing destroyed artistic merit. These are, as I understand it, insufficient legal grounds for restricting Cleanflix’s free expression; they would be perfectly free under the first amendment to publish original works that were offensive, insulting, and artistry-destroying.

    The copyright issue is whether Cleanflix infringed on the monopoly privileges granted by copyright, and ultimately on whether permitting businesses like Cleanflix would decrease the incentives for future original movie-making. As I understand it, Cleanflix’s business model (at least in theory) was to purchase one copy of the original movie as “backing” for every Cleanfix version sold, so that there would be no economic loss to the copyright owner; in fact, there is potential economic gain from customers who would not have bought dirtyflix. The arrangement is similar to one in which individuals buy DVDs and send them to a service provider to have backup copies made or, with Cleanflix, slightly incomplete backup copies. Is this so destructive of incentives that the business must be banned? It seems a long way from large-scale copying and selling bootleg DVDs out of the back of a van.

    I don’t personally feel the loss of Cleanflix, but I regard it as an important example of the largely hidden cost of copyright overzeal, paid mostly in the form of the absence of things most of us have not thought of. Importantly, many Cleanflix customers were political conservatives, who perhaps find it hard to sympathize when artists or visionaries complain that copyright is stifling creativity or business innovation. Cleanflix was neither a conscienceless large-scale infringer, nor a casual freeloader, nor avant-garde, nor a Silicon Valley technical vision (or pipe dream). It was a real business, providing an easily understood service for which there was and is a demand, according to a plan which recognized the economic interests of copyright holders. Although it was a service I did not want and do not think highly of, I regret the company’s passing.

    Like this comment? Thumb up 2

  18. Mormon Heretic on June 19, 2012 at 12:12 AM

    Douglas, I liked your idea for a poll, so I decided to add it to the OP. I doubt that our audience is the right audience, but still it will be interesting to see perspectives here.

    Anniegb, I’m not sure if your comment was tongue in cheek or not, but funny! Let’s not forget that speaking in tongues was quite prevalent in the early church. Perhaps we’ve been stained with Pentecostalism too.

    Mike, I find this whole scenario with Mitt working with Harry Reid incredibly interesting. It will be fun to see if that actually happens.

    Badger, regarding Cleanflix, I agree wholeheartedly with your comment. I guess Dan Thompson (the guy at the start of the trailer) is right. Hollywood can never stop people from editing movies. However, they can stop them from selling these movies for a profit, and they have stopped them. I just don’t understand why they refuse to take advantage of a market that wants to buy edited movies. Isn’t capitalism supposed to give the people what they want?

    I can see their argument that this is a form of censorship, but if both versions are for sale, it isn’t really censorship. As for your comment about Cleanflix buying one copy for everyone they made, yes that was the goal. However, some retailers weren’t abiding that goal very well. Cleanflix did it’s best to police it, but Dan was one of the less scrupulous retailers apparently.

    Like this comment? Thumb up 1

  19. Julia on June 19, 2012 at 6:32 AM

    Mormon Heretic #18

    I am not sure this is really the right poll for this audience, even though I think it is a great one for likely Republican voters. Here I think this might be a better poll:

    I am a Republican/Conservative who will vote for my party’s candidate, no matter who his religion is.

    I am a Democrat who will vote for whoever my party’s candidate is.

    Religion has no bearing on who I vote for as long as I agree with their public policies.

    MY religion has a great deal to do with who I vote for, and any Mormon candidate will get my vote.

    MY religion has a great deal to do with who I vote for, and I vote for the candidate whose policies and actions most reflect my religious values, regardless of religious affiliation.

    I don’t pay a lot of attention to politics and ask my spouse who to vote for before we go to the polls/fill out my ballot.

    I usually vote for candidates from a party other than Republicans or Democrat, on principle.

    I don’t vote/I vote for fiction characters, like Mickey Mouse because I think all the candidates and political parties are crazy.

    Btw, I added the last one for my husband, who has been a life long Republican and since GWB’s first term didn’t fit his ideals, he has since then voted in every Primary and General Election for a cartoon character, since he thinks they would be more likely to actually get something done. I truly hadn’t thought about that being an option, so I asked a friend who works for the State Secretary how common that was. She told me that if you added all the fictional characters/people voted for each election that it is usually half a percentage point of the total vote. Her personal favorite is a group of ten voters who consistantly vote for George Washington. She of course couldn’t give me any specific info on them, but she says the George Washington voting block has been consistent for at least fifteen years who counties started reporting what the write in votes were, not just the percentage of right in votes. (I guess before they only had to give the individual write in votes if there were more than 25 for the same person, in that county.)

    Like this comment? Thumb up 0

  20. Jon on June 19, 2012 at 10:56 PM

    Does Mitt Romney have to win the election for the 20% of Americans who won’t vote for a Mormon to drop, or has Mitt made the Mormon issue in politics go away already?

    I think it’s been said on this blog by others that it seems political persuasion run deeper than religious ones.

    Do you think that people should have a right to edit Hollywood movies? Why do you think Hollywood is ignoring this moneymaking opportunity?

    I believe that copyrights/patents are contrary to natural law and, so, if someone owns the electrons of a movie they can do whatever they want with it.

    Why is Hollywood holding out on this? I have no idea.

    Like this comment? Thumb up 0

  21. Jon on June 19, 2012 at 11:06 PM

    FWIW there are still places that edit films for you like . I don’t know all the details on the movie stuff, as a family we don’t watch much TV/movies so we really don’t have a need for it, we can’t seem to keep up with the ones that are already clean. The only reason I know about Clear Play is because my brother & sis-in-law told us about it.

    Like this comment? Thumb up 0

  22. Jon on June 19, 2012 at 11:10 PM

    Mike S, #7,

    I don’t think those are true statements about what the Mormon religion teaches and alignment with Obama (there’s many false assumptions). But I keep it at that for MH’s sake since he didn’t want us to discuss those points. Besides, this has been hammered out in other posts.

    Like this comment? Thumb up 1

  23. Bob on June 20, 2012 at 3:45 AM

    @20: Jon,
    ” Why is Hollywood holding out on this? I have no idea”.
    Because there is no Hollywood! Hollywood is a Myth. There is not a group somewhere thinking the same things, or has the same values. There are no Zombies or Hollywood types.

    Like this comment? Thumb up 0

  24. hawkgrrrl on June 20, 2012 at 4:01 AM

    Personally, I think airline versions would suffice, and honestly, that’s why they were created, right? It would be cool for some movies to have different versions for different ages. For example, everyone should see the Godfather. But it’s a little dark. You don’t have to see the horse’s head to get the point.

    Like this comment? Thumb up 0

  25. Jon on June 20, 2012 at 8:53 AM


    I agree, there is no “Hollywood” but there are groups that control some of the film industry, like Lionsgate owns their own stuff. And isn’t there a conglomeration of them too? Like the music world has this group that goes around suing people for “pirating” music over the internet (I don’t remember what that group is called at the moment). Isn’t there a similar group in the film world? Yes, they don’t have control over everything but they do have influence don’t they? Or is “Hollywood” just Washington D.C. and its unjustified use of force contrary to natural law? Enlighten me.

    Like this comment? Thumb up 0

  26. Mormon Heretic on June 20, 2012 at 11:37 AM

    Ok Julia, I added your poll. I agree that it is a better fit for our audience. I wonder how many people are reading this, but there was a nice burst of activity.

    Jon, the documentary does discuss ClearPlay quite a bit–it was the only company deemed compliant to the law because it uses technology to edit, rather than editing. It does seem that ClearPlay is succeeding in the market, which flies in the face of the director’s guild that there isn’t a market. The producers of the film did say that ClearPlay was harder to use than say Cleanflix, but it certainly is successful.

    Like this comment? Thumb up 0

  27. Julia on June 20, 2012 at 2:24 PM

    I am planning on writing a little about this on my blog, so it will be interesting to see how many responses we get here. I will link to this post and the comments as part of explaining the questions and a few email conversations I have had with LDS friends who are very political or socially involved.

    I am trying to convince a friend who lives in the South, is a Southern Baptist, and has a large following in that community, to post the first poll. So far she isn’t sure she wants to be “outed” as someone with a Mormon friend. Personally I find that the most ironic thing. She is the one person I know who would be able to get some raw and she is afraid to talk about Mitt and religion for fear of backlash in her community. Although, maybe that really is the answer.

    Like this comment? Thumb up 0

  28. MH on June 20, 2012 at 5:46 PM

    doesn’t want to be “outed” as someone with a Mormon friend. My, bigotry is really an ugly thing.

    I’d hate for people to think I had Baptist, Jewish, Gay, Black, or Catholic friends….. I’m sure they would think ill of me to admit such a thing.

    Can you ask her why it is ok to admit such a thing?

    Like this comment? Thumb up 0

  29. Julia on June 20, 2012 at 10:22 PM

    As strange as it sounds to me in Oregon, there aren’t many LDS members in her area. I looked it up on the church website when she insisted I am the only Mormon she has even met. I am sure she must have met some, but none that she spends time with. If she hadn’t married one of my best friends, I don’t think she would have questioned the “Mormons are Devil Worshipers” that she was taught at church. In fact after she got to know me a little bit she asked me whether me really have small horns hidden underneath our hair.

    The church website says the ward for her area includes several parishes, I am guessing that it with members fairly spread out, they aren’t a huge presence. The closest ward building was about an hour away. So, I am willing to believe that most of her local blog readers wouldn’t have a lot of interactions with Mormons.

    Her blog is a “you need a password” kind, and the vast majority of the group are ultra conservative Southern Baptists. She has asked me to not mention being LDS when I comment. Ironically, that contact has helped me to understand their perspective, kind of like being invited to be a fly on the wall in the temple. There are lots of “comments” about what they believe Mormons are, and apparently I am an albino or something, since what they “see” and who I am is like looking in a fun house mirror.

    I am still trying to talk her in to putting the first survey up at some point, but I believe her when she says that she is worried about how others in her church would react to a poll that is couched in such “measured language.” (Her words)

    So, I am going to do a post on both polls and why different audiences might be appropriate for one poll or another. I figure that way she can just borrow what Doug and I suggested here.

    (Doug, I would like to give you credit in my post beyond just your name here, if you want it. You can click on my name, or go to and leave me any info you would like to have shared about your. I try to always give credit where I can, and I already have a link to this page an have it attributed to you.)

    Like this comment? Thumb up 0

  30. MH on June 20, 2012 at 11:08 PM

    Well, she is definitely part of the 20% that won’t vote for a Mormon.

    Hawk, I think the airline versions are BETTER. For one thing, they re-record the foul language, so rather than a bleep, or empty space, they actually put something there. Of course you can lip-read and see they said something else, but it’s much less noticeable than “what the ____ are you doing?”

    I do remember watching “Grumpy Old Men” and being amused when they had Walter Mathau call someone else a “yutz” rather than a “putz”. I didn’t know putz was considered foul language for the FCC.

    Like this comment? Thumb up 0

  31. Julia on June 20, 2012 at 11:13 PM

    I would put all of the 900+ people who are part of her blogging community, most of them are part of her church. They are all very political conservative, so I would really love to know the answer to the first poll, for a group with such strong political leanings and such Mormon-phobia.

    If she does do it eventually, I will let you know.

    Like this comment? Thumb up 0

  32. Wyoming on June 23, 2012 at 12:29 AM

    I loved cleanflix and movies in general. Most videos are downloaded now – there needs to be an online tool (similar to clearplay) that edits movies according to the viewers preference. Netflix/iTunes would be much more useful.

    Like this comment? Thumb up 0


%d bloggers like this: