That is certainly true however what does his religion have to do with anything? We criticize liberals for their condemnation of the CEO of Chic-fil-A. Are you not doing the same thing? America stands for freedom of religion. As a conservative I find it abhorant to criticize ANY man because of his religion.
We criticize liberals for their condemnation of the CEO of Chic-fil-A. Are you not doing the same thing? America stands for freedom of religion. [New Jersey Realist]
We criticize liberals for the basis of their crit; not the means they use to express it (The First Amendment). You, on the other hand, turn this around vs. Ron H.
Somehow, because of your fancied notion of "freedom of religion," Mormonism seemingly is supposed to be teflon proof. And I say that on the basis of your last line as well: "As a conservative I find it abhorant to criticize ANY man because of his religion."
In this "world" you've created, no falsehood is ever to be critiqued -- all because you have a faulty notion of "freedom of religion."
And what's worse, Ron spoked "religiously" when he labeled Mormonism a "cult." Those were his religious views spoken under the very same "freedom of religion" you accord Mormonism. But then you critiqued him for it.
Wanna 'xplain why Mormonism gets your free pass under your faulty "freedom of religion" notion, but Ron H.'s religious expressions don't? Do you see how you're being inconsistent here? (You have essentially refuted yourself)
That is certainly true however what does his religion have to do with anything? [New Jersey Realist]
You also "tip your hat" here by treating "religion" as some separate compartmentalized entity. The article I posted from the Christian Broadcasting Network yesterday -- written by David Brody, an Emmy-award winning journalist (see The First Mormon President? Does Faith Matter? [Yes, indeed!!! Lest we have a false god leading USA]
Brody pointed out in that article that among Mormons, "This gospel is not a Sunday only gospel. It's an everyday gospel day for us," Hinckley said. "If it doesn't infuse one's life, what good is it? We try and we teach that this is an everyday religion," he continued.
This is actually a value that Mormons and Christians agree upon. That it's an around-the-clock faith -- not simply a "religion."
It's usually posters who neatly compartmentalize their life -- or have largely let it go -- that have this secular-sacred dichotomy.
Sorry, but Mormons -- like Mitt Romney, don't; and the Bible, upon which is one of the ways we evaluate Mitt Romney, doesn't, either.
Btw, if you're from New Jersey, Obama will win there, anyway. Why don't you vote for a third party candidate, even if you have to write in a true conservative. You're vote wouldn't help Romney, anyway.
Sorry, but a persons religion is part and parcel of what makes the man. It is an insight to what the person is and how he thinks. Republicans were (and still are in some quarters) crying about not knowing anything about Obama and his religion or background. Many of those were worried that he was (and likely is) an Islamist Muslim. Now some of us believe if that principle was true for Obama then surely we have a duty and a right to explore Romneys religion and background if wants to the President of the United States.
Isn't what's good for the goose supposed to good for the gander?! RINO's are famous for speaking with forked tongues when it suits them. They love the double standards.