Are you on record as being an Anti-Romney force? Or would you number yourself among the generally Anti-Mormon forces?
My point is not what YOU believe, but what opponents will make of the fact.
I would never in a million years have interpreted that oath as you did. I see no contradiction between that oath and the oath to uphold and defend the constitution, and anybody who does is just acting on blind prejudice.
They should begin to prepare themselves for this, and be aware that there are sites on the web that provide all kinds of info, including the temple ceremonies, the masonic comparisons, baptism for the dead (against the will of survivors), and Joseph Smith's declaration that no one will be allowed into the Mormon version of heaven unless allowed by Smith.
There are a lot of anti-Catholic sites and Anti-Evangelical sites and there are several web sites dedicated to the destruction of my own church (Calvary Chapel). Mormon doctrine clearly is not mainstream Orthodox Christian doctrine, but then neither is the Presbyterian Church USA or the Episcopalian Church. Quite frankly if given the choice between a Mormon in good standing and an American Episcopalian in "good standing," I think I would prefer to be ruled over by a Mormon any day.
What you are seeing in this discussion here is only the beginning. Evangelicals will be provided with this information, and have a decision to made at the polls.
Let's just play into the prejudices of ignorant Evangelicals. Let's not try to inform them that we are electing a secular leader and not the pastor of our church.
You seem to be attempting to engender some kind of fear into the evangelicals that somehow having our country being lead by a Mormon is the functional equivalent of being led Satan himself. I think as evangelicals we need to put our religious differences aside when weighing certain candidates and instead we need to look to see who shares our political and moral values. As conservatives I dare say that we have much more in common politically with Mormons than we do with Episcopalians or members of the Presbyterian Church USA. Yet if an Episcopalian were running for President, we would not be engaged in all this unseemly fear mongering.
Jimmy Carter got a lot of the Evangelical vote because he portrayed himself as an evangelical Sunday School teacher. He was absolutely without a doubt the worst president who ever took the oath of office. I would have preferred to have been ruled over by an atheist or a Buddhist or a Hindu with some leadership qualities than an evangelical nincompoop with a spaghetti spine like Carter.
The constitution specifically states that there should be no religious test for office. While we are free to interject our prejudices into any choice we make, I really don't think it does the evangelical movement any good to have its leaders going around saying that under no circumstances would they ever vote for a Mormon. Mormons vote for evangelicals all the time because Mormons have shared values with evangelicals. But evangelicals don't seem to be willing to return the favor. That is a shame. We are commended to treat others as we would have them treat us. But when it comes down to brass tacks are we willing to do so? It doesn't seem so.
I can't see any reason to continue trying to have a dialogue on this under your terms. If you can provide proof that my statements will NOT be a factor in the decision-making of voters, please do so but your ad hominem attacks such as ( I would never in a million years have interpreted that oath as you did. I see no contradiction between that oath and the oath to uphold and defend the constitution, and anybody who does is just acting on blind prejudice.) do not convince me that voters will have the same interpretation that you have.
I repeat, opponents of Romney WILL make his religion a factor in the primary and general campaigns, and my previous posts detail some of the possible lines of attack that will be used. If 43% are already considering his religion a detriment, there is a pretty high mountain to be crossed.