Posted on 11/20/2006 8:24:45 AM PST by areafiftyone
Mitt Romney (R) begins the 2008 campaign season in fourth place among those seeking the GOP Presidential nomination, trailing Rudy Giuliani, John McCain, and Condoleezza Rice. While many Republican insiders believe the Massachusetts Governor could become an attractive candidate to the party's social conservatives, a Rasmussen Reports survey finds that Romney's faith may initially be more of a hindrance than a help.
Forty-three percent (43%) of American voters say they would never even consider voting for a Mormon Presidential candidate. Only 38% say they would consider casting such a vote while 19% are not sure. Half (53%) of all Evangelical Christians say that they would not consider voting for a Mormon candidate.
Overall, 29% of Likely Voters have a favorable opinion of Romney while 30% hold an unfavorable view. Most of those opinions are less than firmly held. Ten percent (10%) hold a very favorable opinion while 11% have a very unfavorable assessment. Among the 41% with no opinion of Romney, just 27% say they would consider voting for a Mormon.
It is possible, of course, that these perceptions might change as Romney becomes better known and his faith is considered in the context of his campaign. Currently, just 19% of Likely Voters are able to identify Romney as the Mormon candidate from a list of six potential Presidential candidates.
The response to a theoretical Mormon candidate is far less negative than the response to a Muslim candidate or an atheist. Sixty-one percent (61%) of Likely Voters say they would never consider voting for a Muslim Presidential candidate. Sixty percent (60%) say the same about an atheist.
The Rasmussen Reports survey found that 35% say that a candidate's faith and religious beliefs are very important in their voting decision. Another 27% say faith and religious beliefs are somewhat important. Ninety-two percent (92%) of Evangelical Christian voters consider a candidate's faith and beliefs important.
On the partisan front, 78% of Republicans say that a candidate's faith is an important consideration, a view shared by 55% of Democrats. However, there is also a significant divide on this topic within the Democratic Party. Among minority Democrats, 71% consider faith and religious beliefs an important consideration for voting. Just 44% of white Democrats agree.
The national telephone survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted by Rasmussen Reports November 16-17, 2006. The margin of sampling error for the survey is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.
You've joined others here in roundly condemning Mormons as narrow-minded and hopelessly blind cultists led by the spirit of Satan who judge others according to a false doctrine.
If that were so, one would expect them not to support evangelical candidates under any circumstances.
In other words, they would behave exactly the same way that evangelicals are behaving toward them.
But Mormons don't behave that way. They will support a presidential candidate who represents their socially conservative values on marriage, families, self-reliance, and fiscal discipline.
Surely the irony isn't lost on you, is it?
If you study church history, you will note that it was the "heathen"--not the godly folks--who were polytheists (gods everywhere, divine spirits everywhere). So, it's not I whose identified Mormons with the heathens. It's Mormons' own belief in polytheism (and worse, that we can increase that polytheism by joining the ranks of the circle of gods) that places Mormons in the same encampment as heathens past.
BTW, haven't you noticed the RLDS have become more Biblical in their doctrine through the years?
>>And you since you asked me this question twice, allow me to add an analogy.
JFTR I never asked you this.
>>The bad-news people, the Mainstream Press, often sees (at best) through a glass/mirror
>>darkly. They just don't have the entire story.
>>But that doesn't stop us from (a) posting their articles here; or (b) believing at least
>>portions of what they write as true.
>>Just because the MSM doesn't have the entire scoop doesn't make everything they
>>report to be untrustworthy [well, let me qualify that by saying just because a number
>>of journalists who are part of the MSM don't have the entire scoop doesn't make
>>everything they report to be untrustworthy :() ]
IMHO: If the MSM tells me the sky is blue, I go outside to check (it’ raining when I get there)
>>Anyway, if that's true of even the MSM, then ya gotta concede that Evangelicals have
>>it better than them, right?
Well, your not setting your standards very high here, I’d go so far as to say a LOT better.
>>And yet, what does LDS Scripture say: That all of our creeds are an "abomination"
>>before God (Joseph Smith 2:18).
I am not familiar with the book of Joseph smith, and Joseph smith history only has one chapter in it.
JS History 1:18-20 (http://scriptures.lds.org/en/js_h/1)
18 My object in going to inquire of the Lord was to know which of all the sects was right, that I might know which to join. No sooner, therefore, did I get possession of myself, so as to be able to speak, than I asked the Personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right (for at this time it had never entered into my heart that all were wrong)—and which I should join.
19 I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: “they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.”
20 He again forbade me to join with any of them; and many other things did he say unto me, which I cannot write at this time. When I came to myself again, I found myself lying on my back, looking up into heaven. When the light had departed, I had no strength; but soon recovering in some degree, I went home. And as I leaned up to the fireplace, mother inquired what the matter was. I replied, “Never mind, all is well—I am well enough off.” I then said to my mother, “I have learned for myself that Presbyterianism is not true.” It seems as though the adversary was aware, at a very early period of my life, that I was destined to prove a disturber and an annoyer of his kingdom; else why should the powers of darkness combine against me? Why the opposition and persecution that arose against me, almost in my infancy?
Is this what you mean?
>>Something's gotta give. Either Joseph Smith was wrong there, which means his first
>>vision wasn't as he described (he put out 7 different versions of the First Vision); or,
>>all of our creeds are sewage in God's eyes.
No one used the word “sewage” Abomination, not Sewage. As for the multiple versions, do these versions contradict? Have you ever told a true story in more than one way? How exactly did Judas die? Why don’t the gospels agree on how? (He’s still dead though)
>>Which is it? Why do LDS daintily try to tip-toe around calling us corrupt practioners
>>of used toilet-water creeds?
We don’t, and accepted Christian creeds have called each other much worse so why get your nose bent out of shape for this one?
Joseph Smith hasn't afforded you that option.
What option? I went to church with many friends when I was in High School. Some times they went to mine (I was in Iowa at the time) Most of the preachers were impressed with how well I knew my bible, I was able to find things in class faster than most of the members of their flocks!
We just think that you have a partial truth, and you need the further knowledge we can supply in order to fully comprehend the Gospel as taught by Jesus. Do not be offended by this, don’t you offer us the same?
That certainly says it. Interesting how no similar stories about Harry Reid, the new Senate Majority Leader and also a Mormon, huh?
Just go back and check the news reports of the time, the licenses didnt start happening until after the lege followed the courts order and implemented a law.
Now the same lege is trying to stifle the constitutional amendment and Mitt Romney is pushing them to let the people have their say.
In other news, 68% don't know what Mormons are.
The difference is that many Mormons see Christians as worshipping the same God as they do (just that they are incomplete in that worship/adherence, etc.). Therefore, LDS don't usually have a problem, say, praying with Evangelicals, despite the fact that Ensign mag itself says LDS worship a different god than Christians.
When I talk with LDS missionaries, I'll pray with them. But I won't let them pray outloud on my behalf. Why? Because I believe they are praying to a different god, exactly like what Ensign mag taught in that one issue.
Maybe you don't see (I don't know, maybe you do) that there's a battle going on right now for the soul of Mormonism. There are those who want to lower the divide between Christians and LDS and want to "get along" and stop the so-called bashing and allow the LDS p.r. campaigns to fully flourish. (Again, see how the RLDS have become more Biblical thru the years).
Then there are others who within the LDS faith who have said for years that the Bible is not "common ground" but a battle ground. That they should emphasize the BoM, not the Bible. That if it was a simple matter of "going along to get along" that Joseph Smith 2:18-19 could be excised simple enough--as the message of the apostasy/restoration is offensive to many Christians.
Do you see what I'm saying? Socio-politically, we have a great deal in common. A great deal! But spiritually, even many LDS see (and in fact, emphasize) how great the divide is. Is not a candidate's faith a substantive part of who he is? If I believe a candidate has been vastly deceived on spiritual matters, how can I invest trust in him on other matters?
To me, it's like abortion. I'm not a one-issue voter, but if a candidate has it all wrong on abortion, then it shows a character flaw that touches most other issues as well.
Exactly. Me too and I am Mormon.
Just because he happens to be Mormon doesn't mean beans to me. In fact if he goes about touting the fact that he IS Mormon that will probably cause me to dislike him.
Even more, I take my religion seriously enough to know that it shouldn't be denegrated down to the level of politics. Nor should one pretend that a 'religion' supports your candidacy.
We call that Priestcraft, which basically means you use religion in order to get gain for yourself.
(by the way Mormons don't believe in taking money for their religion. no paid bishops, stake presidents,etc. The only people who get any money at all are those who devote 100% of their time to service and even they don't get a 'salary'...all those missionaries in general are self paid)
If he was Jewish or whatever, and qualified, so be it. I would vote for candidates regardless of denomination if they are good upstanding people who are doing whats right.
Christian denominations & writers & preachers, etc. have been bombastic at times of other denominational beliefs. It's been extremely rare for such folks to use the "nuclear option" and blast away at everything they believe (Joseph's "all creeds" statement).
Same applies to your "don't you offer us the same?" The answer is, "No, I don't take issue with all creeds of Mormonism." Certainly, you've read post to AppyPappy about what is in common between BoM and Bible...and I barely touched the surface.
A little late to the party with these, aren’t you?
>>Mormons believe that God had actual sexual relations with Mary to physically
>>conceive Jesus (like Brigham Young taught),
THIS was never taught. God the Father is the literal father of Jesus Christ, nothing was said about sex (you have a perverted mind) We have many ways of doing this now, God has so many ways to do this we can’t count them.
>>believe that after becoming a good Mormon a person has the potential to become a god
Well, we are his children, and have linked the scripture (from the Bible) on other posts on this thread…
>>(as Joseph Smith taught), and believe that God - a flesh and bone man from another planet - is married to his goddess wife.
This is really twisted phraseology, How about just going to the source ( http://scriptures.lds.org/en/a_of_f/1 )
They believe that there are 3 different Gods: the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost.
One in heart might mind and strength. Try John 17:21&22 ( http://scriptures.lds.org/en/john/17 )
21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be cone in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:
Jesus makes the analogy to the apostles with his and the Father’s one ness. The Doctrine of the trinity was not created until 325 AD by a pagan emperor (Constantine) who did not join until he lay dieing many years later, several bishops were killed when they did not agree with this change of doctrine and Hypolytus (Great or Great, Great Grand son of John) was exiled for his disagreement. I posted a link earlier; it’s a new advent.org a catholic encyclopedia.
They deny the essence of Christianity that there is ONLY ONE God - three different persons but only one God.
Who exactly was Jesus Standing on the right hand of in Stephen’s vision? ( http://scriptures.lds.org/en/acts/7/55-56#55 )
>>Mormons believe that there are 3 gods holding the office of Trinity, which is denying
>>the biblical truth, disqualifiying them as Christians.
Where in the Bible does it use the word Trinity? (Nowhere) Show me one use of the word trinity, and I will fold my tent and leave.
Go and read my earlier posts on this thread for a link to the Catholic encyclopedia where this is discussed.
"And yet Mormons have no problem voting for evangelical candidates."
Point well made, thank you!
Those who oppose Romney because of his religion will surely hand the Whitehouse to Hillary, not to mention our remaining freedoms. He is a good man and a faithful husband/father and I think he would be a great president. All we have to do is get him to start voting against gun control.
Nixon was a Quaker and we all didn't end up wearing those funny looking big-buckled shoes and goofy hats. Let's give Romney a chance.
Oh, yeah. It was real important that we had Nixon in the White House. What was that reason again? Oh, yeah to show how Republican leaders are such men of integrity.
Reagan also judged by "the fruit," not by appearances. Mormons absolutely loved him. What a great and wise man!
>>You said I used the term "mere" a bit too loosely in conjunction with creation.
>>Well you use the term "creation" a bit too loosely above. Joseph Smith taught that
>>matter was eternal--opposing Hebrews 11:3. Joseph also clearly taught that this eternal
>>matter was "organized."
Eternal is one of god’s names. Eternal damnation (God has damned X) Eternal Punishment (God’s punishment), Eternal Life (God’s way of Living in heaven) Yep, Jesus organized God’s matter when commanded to by his father who is also our father.
What? Too Convenient for you? That’s what Mormon’s believe and it all works out, no contradictions. The Trinity stuff works, the creation works Stephen’s vision does not have Christ bending over to stand upon his right hand, etc.
>>In case you haven't noticed, there's a big difference if I tell you to "organize" your
>>house versus "building it from nothing."
If I make the boards, then organize those boards into a house, haven’t I done both? (We believe both, create and organize)
That sounds like a "Republican do or die" statement. I suppose that the Anti-Christ, were he on the Republican ticket, would be a worthy vote-getter ("if only to keep Hillary Whitehouse-free").
If there's a problem in a national election at choosing between candidates, then the problem doesn't arise with who to vote for...The problem is rooted well before...either at the primary, or even with whose is chosen/or who takes or fails to take the initiative...
Let's deal with root problems up front.
Yeah, how convenient for Joseph Smith to have come up with this angle after the fact (after the fact of referring to hell as eternal in the BoM). Note the date when Joseph first wrote about this in the D&C, and then compare it to the BoM publishing date.
So the original BoM golddust writers couldn't redefine "eternal" properly and so every BoM reader along with every Bible reader got it wrong for years all until Joe's D&C commentary came along?
Note...this redefinition is still not in the BoM, meaning that when LDS missionaries ask folks to read & pray about the BoM, they don't know that even basic phrases like "eternal hell" have been totally redefined.
So, you're telling me that when the BoM describes heaven as being "eternal" it's not really eternal...[that we're all gonna get a heavenly pink slip some day]...that heaven is only called "eternal" because God is "eternal." [Gotta be consistent, ya know]
Wow! What a comforting doctrine! Especially knowing your god is evolving (he may want to take a transfer to a Kolobite satellite moon some day).
LOL! Mormons ask you to pray about it!
>>No, Mormon missionaries don't ask you to pray about which Jesus is true. They
>>present a book that doesn't differ in too many places from the Bible and ask you to
>>pray if this historical book is true.
This historical book would not exist if Joseph Smith were not a prophet.
When you read the BoM, it says absolutely nothing about Jesus being a man-who-became God; about exaltation; about 3 degrees of glory; about becoming a god; about God having a body of flesh & bones...etc.
It’s all covered in the discussions, I know, I have taught those discussions.
No, initiates only get that after advancing beyond the initial "primer."
Poppycock! (Can you say that on a conservative forum?)
There ya go again w/that "looseness." Even if you could claim that you grew the tree from a seedling from which you got the wood and then "made" the boards, I got news for you: The seed, the tree, the wood, was not original from you. You cannot get a patent on that wood and that tree and that seed.
The biblical doctrine of creation is that Christ has a patent on creation, and that it's ex nihilo (Latin from out of nothing)...all based upon Hebrews 11:3 and other passages.
There.... I fixed it for you.
What? Every library-placed BoM, bookstore-placed BoM, every Salt Lake City mailed copy of the BoM comes with a "Missionary-kit-packet-just-add-water" and "poof" an instant missionary appears who discusses it with you (now that would give a different "flavor" to the term "familiar spirit.")
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.