I am no Mormon. I have a different faith. And that is what it is: FAITH. Religion, by its very nature, is a faith-based thing. Unless a religion calls for denial or destruction of our Constitution and laws or a candidate says that he will govern based solely upon his religious beleifs, I come down on the side of religious freedom.
Of course I would prefer to have a candidate who believes exactly as I do in all matters: religion, politics, my favorite teams, etc. Who doesn’t? But my vote will go to the candidate who most closely conforms to my positions, especially as to domestic and foreign policy.
Between your post & the one by mom4melody (see my response post #13), who's calling for any curtailment of religious freedom?
The same Qs I asked of mom4melody in post #13, apply to you...Are you consistent? Or hypocritical?
So; who don't?
But my vote will go to the candidate who most closely conforms to my positions, especially as to domestic and foreign policy.
And mine (or lack of it) will 'go' to the one who does NOT believe in some damnable heresy that NO CHRISTIAN religion accepts as authentic.
You might want to learn about the foundation of mormonism then.
Yes...and no. By "NO" I mean faith is never running solo...there's always an object of that trust. With Christianity, no personal revealing of Jesus, no faith, no religion. No resurrection of Jesus= a faith that is in vain...empty...says the apostle Paul in 1 cor 15...That means unlike "religion" christianity is rooted in time-space history...it's not ethereal esoterism like a lot of faddish new age stuff...that means that the resurrection of Jesus wasn't done in some dark corner...He appeared to 500 witnesses...eyewitnesses are legal testimony...testimony worthy of the "news" section .. not just the "religion" section ... it isn't simply "faith" regardless of whether it corresponds to reality...if the jerusalem times had been around during Jesus' dayn reports of His resurrection would have bee front page news...the eyewitnesses could have been interviewed