Posted on 09/10/2006 4:20:44 PM PDT by restornu
Evangelical leader says voting for a Mormon not a problem Politics over religion: He says Romney's faith not a barrier to his presidential bid By Peggy Fletcher Stack The Salt Lake Tribune Salt Lake Tribune
The Rev. Ted Haggard, president of the National Association of Evangelicals, said Friday he would have no problem voting for a Mormon for U.S. president. "We rejected an Evangelical [Harriet Meiers] for the Supreme Court and accepted a Catholic [Samuel Alito]," said Haggard, who was in Salt Lake City to address the annual convention of Religion Newswriters Association. "It's a question of competence."
Evangelical Christians are more interested "in good government," than in religious affiliation, said the founder and senior pastor of New Life Church in Colorado Springs, Colo.
As the leader of the influential National Association of Evangelicals, which has 45,000 churches across the United States, Haggard's statement is significant because of the ongoing tensions over theology between The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and evangelical Christians. To many, Mormons are viewed as non-Christians because of their extra-biblical scriptures, rejection of historic creeds, claims to divine authority and unique rituals.
Some political observers have already suggested that a candidate such as Mitt Romney, governor of Massachusetts and a Mormon, would have trouble wooing Evangelicals.
John Green, who studies religion and politics at the University of Akron, told The Salt Lake Tribune last year, "If [Romney] wanted to be president, he would have to get support of Evangelicals in the primaries, especially Evangelical foot soldiers," Green said. "Some of them might have some real reluctance to support a Mormon."
In July, a Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll reported that 37 percent of Americans surveyed would not vote for a Mormon for president - and that clearly included some conservative Christians.
But a group calling itself "Evangelicals for Mitt" takes a position similar to Haggard's.
"The 2008 election is for president, not pastor," says the lead essay on the group's Web site. "We would never advocate that the governor become our pastor or lead our churches - we disagree with him profoundly on theological issues."
Haggard is clear on LDS theology.
"We believe Mormonism is a Christian cult," he said after his speech. "But we have the same positions on many social issues, pro-life and so on. " He said that Evangelicals and Catholics have long joined forces on these social issues and a similar dialogue about them between Evangelicals and Mormons is "in the early stages."
"We are in search for areas where we can stand together," Haggard said.
When it comes to voting for Romney, it will depend on the other choice or choices. If it came down to Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif., House Minority Leader) vs. Rudy Giuliani or Mitt Romney, the majority of Evangelicals would choose the Republican Catholic or Mormon, he said. "And don't think Evangelicals will vote as a block in the Primaries, either."
"Catholicism is Christian; Mormonism only claims to be."
The whole protestant thingie was because some folks thought Catholicism was not doing it right, either. Remember?
Mussolini was "competent". He made the trains run on time. But he was a fascist leftwing statist socialist.
Are you trying to say Romney is a fascist?
Yikes!
You need to work on those reading comprehension skills, and on your ability to make distinctions.
The former is a sign of your education level, and the latter is an indication of your grasp on reality.
The way he made the trains run on time is, he had them print new schedules that showed what time they actually ran.
He didn't change anything to do with running the trains.
I believe that Romney is more socially conservative, but has made some compromises to get elected in Massachusetts.
The way he made the trains run on time is, he had them print new schedules that showed what time they actually ran.
He didn't change anything to do with running the trains.
I thought it was Hitler who made the trains ran on time if I recall my history!:)
Be thankful for your education and your ability to exercise them!:)
Down here in the Bible belt Catholics certainly are equated with Mormons by the Evangelicals. Neither are considered "Christian" and neither are considered to be "going to Heaven".
That's unfair. While I think Mormonism is a little weird too, most of the nuttiest interpretations of it aren't any more fair then Dan Brown's views on Catholocism. It's certainly not scientology nutty.
For one thing, the Mormon church actually does quite a bit of philanthropy and such things, while Scientology is nothing more then a money making enterprise.
Mormons in public life have a long track record of competence and hard work, and most that I know that have served in elected office have done an above average job. In public office, they have exhibited no weird behavior on account of their religion that I have ever seen. Quite the contrary.
I'd have no more problem voting for one anymore then I would voting for a Jew or some other religion with a respectable record in the public arena.
Oh please! I'm perfectly willing to accept that Romney isn't conservative enough for you, that's reasonable, but calling him a 'proven liberal' just proves you aren't a serious person.
When since did God appoint these bible belt evangelicals to decide who's going to heaven?
I don't live in the Bible belt, but I've never met a Christian that said all Catholics are going to hell. If I did, I'd doubt he really understood his faith.
Catholics have some beliefs I disagree with, but no fair minded student of the scripture can say that they are for certain going to hell. That's just judgemental, legalistic nonsense.
It was Mussolini, but it may also have been said about Hitler.
bump for later
I recall when I was young the uproar that occured when Pat Boone joined the "Charismatic movement" that includes speaking in tongues, faith healing, etc. There were books published by the Church of Christ saying he was no better than a Catholic in his godlessness. They didn't mention Mormons, but then I don't think Mormons were on anybody's radar back then.
None of these are disqualifying elements, IMHO. I am in full support of the re-election of my Mormon state legislator.
Do I agree with him on everything? No -- he's rather more libertarian than I am. But I have yet to see another state representative as thoughtful as he is about ALL the issues brought forward.
What do you call people who support abortion, the gay agenda and socialized medicine? Conservatives? If we were to follow your lead and do that, our political language would have lost all meaning.
For which you have only your blind faith.
One could as easily believe that Romney is a liberal extremist -- he ran to the LEFT of Ted Kennedy on social issues, after all -- who has tried to avoid taking any strong stands so he could redefine himself based on whatever political office he decided to run for in the future. US Senate? He's a liberal! Republican primary for governor? He's a conservative! General election for governor? He's just to the right of his psycho liberal opponent! Republican presidential primary? He's a conservative! General election? He's a moderate again!
I suppose you would be right under those circumstances. But seeming as how he doesn't support abortion, doesn't support the gay agenda, and seeming as how his healthcare plan was created in large part by the Heritage Foundation, I'll just go on assuming you aren't a serious person.
Hmm, well, I don't know anything about that, but I go to a Church of Christ in California, and I think you'd find it impossible to get any of the elders in the church to automatically damn all Catholics to hell.
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.