To quote Nicole Kidman in Far and Away, O'Donnell is a "spineless little fraction of a man."
Posted on 12/09/2007 7:49:23 AM PST by PJ-Comix
Apparently (we don't get cable) there was a TV series on HBO recently called "Big Love," about a Mormon polygamist. Out of all the possible names they could have chosen for this character, guess what name they used? Bill HENRICKSON! Now why would they pick a good Swedish Lutheran name and use it for a Mormon polygamist?! And to even spell "Henrickson" that way. . . .
I tell ya, I was so upset, I told my wives, Mrs. and Mrs. Henrickson, "Honeys, that's it! No HBO for us!"
Well, I wouldn't go quite that far. I reject Mormonism as a false religion, but not every false religion is a "cult." The term "cult" implies a certain set of characteristics: a powerful, charismatic leader; sleep deprivation and cutting off new recruits from their families; etc.
Now while I reject the LDS religion theologically--it is not a Christian church body, since it does not hold to the historic, biblical, creedal, Trinitarian, Christological faith--that in itself would not be enough for me to disqualify Mitt Romney from being President. I am voting for President, not Pastor. And Mormons can make for good citizens; often they are fine, upstanding citizens.
If Romney ends up being the Republican nominee, and I think he would govern in a conservative, constitutional way, I would not hesitate to pull the lever for him.
Right now, though, I am supporting Fred Thompson, since I like his stand on the political issues best of all. And Thompson isn't much of a church-goer, by his own admission. Again, I'm voting for President, not Pastor.
I would never vote for Giuliani, the nominal Roman Catholic, not because of his Catholicism (which he doesn't even practice), but because he is a liberal. I would vote third party or write-in before voting for Rudy the RINO.
I'm not crazy about Huckabee, who apparently is an ordained Baptist minister, again because of his political views--the Bush Lite variety of "compassionate" conservatism.
Then I'll be expecting Harry Reid's announcement that he's either denouncing his religion or resigning from the Senate because he,too,is a Mormon.
LOL!
Yeah, I corrected the Byrd first name on my blog. I was just writing about Harry Reid and the Harry name stuck...
Yeah that is strange. BTW, until recently most Mormons were of almost exclusively English background. Not even Scotch-Irish. Strictly English. If you look at an ethnic map of the United States even the South has few areas of mostly English background people (since most white Southerners are Scotch-Irish). However, Utah is almost entirely English. Specifically Yankee English.
While I agree that Mormonism isn’t a cult, it’s virtually impossible to leave. Our church in Salt Lake (ELCA) was about 25% former Mormon, almost all of whom were still carried on the LDS rolls. Keep that in mind when you hear/see figures on the growth of that particular faith.
Oh, and the Salt Lake valley (as is much of Utah) is a closed community religion-wise. By that I mean it’s very unlikely a ‘Gentile’ (non-Mormon) will be accepted. Business interests are the exception, but once business is concluded forget the relationship.
I could go on and on, but suffice it to say, My wife will never cast a vote for Romney because of his religion. I would, but would do so with much concern. Like you, I’m for Fred. But, time will tell.
We had a polygamist community about 5 miles from out house in Sandy, UT. A walled and gated community with about 4 homes inside. Each was for one wife. We’d also see families in family restaurants. Wives together with their children. They were recognizable because of their granny type clothing. Remarkable.
One of my employees had a relative who’s husband died. Since he’d handled all family matters, the wife wasn’t prepared to handle worldly financial and family matters. She thus became a multiple wife of an existing polygamist. My employee was not very happy with the relationship and told us a few things; not very flattering and rather repugnant, actually.
But, the point made by the DU’r is wrong. These people, while considering themselves ‘real’ Mormons, aren’t really part of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (LDS). They are a separate sect yet, frankly, closer to the original orthodoxy. Mormonism has changed; much of it because of their desire for statehood. But these people haven’t.
I would GLADLY debate O’Donnell about my faith, one-on-one, mano a mano, preferably in a closed room or steel cage.
What a pathetic, lying miserable excuse for a human being.
To quote Nicole Kidman in Far and Away, O'Donnell is a "spineless little fraction of a man."
To correct two things I’ve seen here:
1. A simple letter to the church requesting one’s name be removed from the church’s records is sufficient, by church policy, to make it happen. If a local leader doesn’t follow policy, send it to church HQ in Salt Lake.
2. Any church member entering into a polygamous marriage after 1890 has been, and will be, excommunicated from the church. Local leaders have no authority to do otherwise.
Another question:
Was the LDS church necessarily ‘racist’ previously when Blacks were not granted the priesthood?
First answer this: Was God necessarily ‘racist’ in Old Testament days when only those of the Tribe of Levi were permitted by God to hold the Priesthood, and when he (only) characterized the House of Israel (12 tribes) as His ‘chosen’ people?
My answer to the second question: No.
My answer to the first question: If the temporary practice in the LDS church was directed by God, then ‘No,’ in my view. If it was not of God, then it originated by man in a 19th century American culture and was consistent with that dominant culture for decades, but was then somewhat belatedly discontinued in law about 15 years after the Civil Rights Act was finally enacted, despite Democrat opposition.
Many Dems are more annoying than lifetime over-eaters who recently changed, and lost a few pounds, and became nutritionally ‘righteous.’
Larry O’Donnell telling the truth is in itself a stop-the-presses announcement.
O’Donnell probably still remembers the day when you imitated his absurd outburst against Swift Boat Vet John O’Neill, repeatedly shouting “Creepy liar” at him as he was helplessly caught in traffic. One of your best FReeps.
I got to hear his diatribe replayed last night on Mark Levin. If I ever get the chance to face him down again, what shall I say with respect to this latest rant? I’ll entertain any ideas.
He’s both a bully and a coward, usually they go hand in hand.
I don’t know how to handle, but maybe you can an idea here:
Hugh Hewitt - Theology 101 with Lawrence O’Donnell
http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/talkradio/transcripts/Transcript.aspx?ContentGuid=cb634a31-a45d-47fd-b285-d181b269d10c
O’D trashes the Catholic Church’s teachings, in addition to slamming the Mormon Church and holding Romney responsible for every aspect of Mormonism.
Incredibly, after O’D describes Joseph Smith as “a madman who was a criminal and a rapist,” he says that he won’t say similar things about Mohammad because “I’m afraid for my life if I do.”
How upside down is that? O’D admits that he can totally slime Mormons because they are nice people, but he won’t dare do anything similar to Islam because some of them are not so nice. (If logical, he might conclude that trashing nice people and their religion is not nice, nor is it deserved or appropriate.)
TO ALL WHO WANT TO HELP US TO BELIEVE WHAT YOU BELIEVE ABOUT CHRIST AND HOW HE GUIDES HIS PEOPLE ON EARTH.
If this thread is like most others that have anything to do with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, or as we are more often called, the Mormons, it will soon be taken over by those who, for reasons of their own, choose to put down my Church, and those of us who worship with it.
We find no problem with people who really want to talk to us about converting to their religion, we spend a lot of time doing it ourselves.
What we find offensive is when people leave out part of the truth to make a half-true lie , or when some one renames something, that we find important or sacred, so it sounds like gutter talk.
I do not know how to tell the difference all the time. There are some Handles that keep showing up, and they are easy to spot. Sometimes, though, I have given a hard and not so kind response to some who honestly care for us and our salvation.
Please forgive us if we get you mixed up.
Thanks for your time,
fred
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.