Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

They Shoot Mormons, Don't They? Religious Bigotry, alive and well today
Saundra Duffy

Posted on 05/04/2007 5:46:36 AM PDT by Saundra Duffy

They Shoot Mormons, Don't They? Religious bigotry, alive and well today

May 4, 2007 - by Saundra Duffy-Hawkins

“I wouldn’t vote for a Mormon for dogcatcher, much less President of the United States!” There’s a lot of that kind of hateful rhetoric going around since Mitt Romney decided to throw his hat in the ring – as if Mormons are some kind of hideous evil monsters. The loudest anti-Mormon shouts, sad to say, are coming from America’s so-called “Christian right”. How can Mitt Romney hope to get a fair shake in this spiritually polluted atmosphere?

There was another man running for President who faced the same dilemma – John F. Kennedy – only he was the target of anti-CATHOLIC bigotry. In his 1960 speech to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association, JFK said the following: “. . .I believe in an America where religious intolerance will someday end - where all men and all churches are treated as equal - where man has the same right to attend or not attend the church of his choice - where there is no Catholic vote, no anti-Catholic vote, no bloc voting of any kind - and where Catholics, Protestants and Jews, at both the lay and pastoral level, will refrain from those attitudes of disdain and division which have so often marred their words in the past, and promote instead the American ideal of brotherhood.” John F. Kennedy Library & Museum (Speeches, 1960). By the way, if you listen to the audio version of JFK’s speech, you will hear the hurt and frustration in his voice and the unfair treatment surely must have caused many a sleepless night.

Fast forward to 2007 where JFK might as well have been “whistlin’ Dixie”. The hostility toward Mormons today, in my opinion, is even worse than that suffered by JFK. Although it is said that JFK lost about a million votes to religious intolerance, Romney stands to lose even more if the anti-Mormon evangelicals hang together.

According to Media Matters for America - “. . . a Web-based, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media” - FOX News is not reporting accurately on the level of evangelical hostility to the Romney run. Media Matters for America points out that among evangelical leaders rejecting Mormons: Shirley and James Dobson (National Day of Prayer and Focus on the Family, respectively), the Southern Baptist Convention (collectively), Pat Robertson (Christian Broadcasting Network), and Dr. D. James Kennedy (Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church in Florida). “Among many conservative evangelicals – who comprise a significant part of the Republican base – Mormonism is considered an un-Christian cult.” Media Matters for America (2007)

While stumping in Florida, a man in the audience stood up during the Q&A portion and said the following to Romney: “You, sir, you’re a pretender. You do not know the Lord. You’re a Mormon.” Media Matters for America (2007). This is the kind of un-American, disrespectful treatment Mitt Romney will apparently have to endure throughout the entire campaign – as if just being a Mormon is reason enough to open the floodgates for free flow of pent-up hatred and vindictiveness.

For the record, the Mormon bashers know full well that the official name of Romney’s church is “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints” and the members should rightfully be called “members of the LDS Church” but the words “Mormon” and “Mormonism” have an aura of negativity so they prefer to use the “M” word as if it were dirty.

Less than five minutes cruising around the official LDS website (LDS.org) will show anyone who’s interested that the Church is a Christian organization, with Jesus Christ at the Head. There are no paid clergy – all are volunteers. Humanitarian aid is legendary. Members of the LDS Church believe in strong family values; they are patriotic, they are law-abiding upstanding citizens of their community. Many LDS young men right out of high school go on two-year missions – you know, the guys on bikes – and during their mission they don’t date, read newspapers, go to movies or watch TV; but rather they dedicate two years of their lives to serving others. Many women go on missions as well, and couples, only theirs is 18 months in length but the obligations are basically the same. Most members do not shop or go out to eat on Sundays – reminiscent of the good old days when shops and stores were closed in obedience to the Commandment, “Remember the Sabbath and keep it holy”. If they can help it, LDS Church members do not work on Sundays, either, preferring to spend the day at church and with their families. Church members are encouraged to store up a year’s supply of food and water so they will be able to care for their families in the event of an emergency. The LDS Church believes in self-sufficiency and self-reliance but in the event of a financial hardship the Church distributes food and supplies through their welfare (Bishop’s Storehouse) program. Members of the LDS Church do not drink alcohol nor do they use illicit drugs; they do not drink coffee and tea. A Mormon in good standing, therefore, will not be found in a drunken stupor puking her guts out at 3 a.m. anywhere in the world. Furthermore, members of the church are encouraged to dress modestly, be polite and courteous. And members of the LDS Church are faithful tithe payers. Come on, people, what’s not to love?

So what on earth is their beef, the anti-Mormon zealots? Why is there such disdain for the LDS Church and its members? In Hugh Hewitt’s book, “Mormon in the White House?” he states his thesis that the fierce anti-Mormon sentiment among main-stream Christians stems from one or two or all three of the following factors (in order of importance):

1) “It is just too weird.

2) “A Mormon president will supercharge Mormons’ missionary work.

3) “If there is a Mormon in the White House, Salt Lake City will call the shots, at least on the biggest issues.” Hewitt (2007, p. 221-227)

Hugh Hewitt has written an exquisite book about the Romney campaign and overcoming the “Mormon problem.” It’s a good read and I highly recommend it. Of the three problem points listed in the previous paragraph, Hewitt believes – unless some unforeseen blunder destroys his chances – none of the three is insurmountable for Mitt Romney. (Plus, he has the best hair.)

Well, I’m no Hugh Hewitt, not even close; he’s an icon on the conservative radio talk show circuit. Hewitt could talk circles around me (I’ve seen him in action in Sacramento); he’s brilliant; he’s well educated, well read, no doubt a genius, plus he’s kind of cute. I’m basically a “nobody” – an overweight grandma – but after having researched for this paper, I have come to a totally different conclusion as to why there is such in-your-face angst over Romney’s religion of choice: It’s all about money, power and control (in that order). I think they’re (the evangelical religious bigots, that is) scared half to death and are revving up their attacks, not to save souls, but to save their reputations (which if tarnished would lead to financial ruin).

As I said, all one must do is browse around the LDS official web site to see what the LDS Church believes and stands for. Any reasonable person would conclude that Mormons are not evil monsters at all. In fact, they are God fearing, Christ believing, Holy Ghost following people going about doing good. “You will know them by their fruit” and the LDS has plenty of fruit and they are willing to share.

Earlier, I stated that some high-powered ministries have publicly condemned Mormons: Shirley and James Dobson, the Southern Baptist Convention, Pat Robertson, and Dr. D. James Kennedy – just to name a few. There are hoards of others. Sunday after Sunday, preachers, evangelists, reverends and ministers from all Christian denominations pound the pulpit with anti-Mormon rhetoric. I heard the message loud clear when I was a Baptist and when I tiptoed through evangelical/Pentecostal territories. Was I ever miffed when I later learned for myself the Gospel truth about the LDS Church.

Just think about it, please. If Dr. D. James Kennedy, for example, who wrote the book, The Wolves Among Us, were to admit he’d been wrong in labeling the LDS Church a “cult” that leads unwary ignorant people astray (to hell), what would become of his multi-million-dollar ministry? Suffice it to say, there’s big money to be had by sale of books, tapes, CD’s, videos, and other anti-Mormon propaganda, not to mention speaking engagements and world-wide religious crusades. We’re talking trillions, all told. I realize the anti-Mormon aspect of these ministries is but a small portion of the business, but if the truth came out, that they had been using falsehoods about the LDS Church as a cash cow, their entire empires could tumble.

The ABC News program 20/20 aired on March 23, 2007, exposed the lavish lifestyles of some of the top evangelical preachers – million dollar mansions and personal jets. ABC News - 20/20 (2007) (Again, the LDS Church has no paid clergy.)

It’s nothing new. Severe harassment and persecution has been the lot of the LDS Church since it’s inception in 1820 when a 14-year-old boy named Joseph Smith saw visions and communed with heavenly beings. Rather than discuss the spiritual aspects of the LDS Church, however, let’s stick to facts of history. Taken from a college-level early American history textbook, Joseph Smith, upon experiencing the visions and visitations, believed “that God had work for me to do, and that my name should be for good and evil among all nations, kindreds and tongues.” Ayers, Gould, Oshinsky, and Soderlund (2004, p. 292). The textbook continues, “They were met with hostility virtually everywhere they went . . . . As the movement gathered momentum, hundreds of people joined the church; entire congregations of churches of other faiths joined . . .” Ayers, Gould, Oshinsky, and Soderlund (2004, p. 293)

During the dark time of American history when slavery was flourishing and when Native Americans were forced from their lands, the pioneers of the LDS Church also suffered at the hands of unscrupulous politicians, governmental leaders, and angry hate-filled mobs. “In the face of relentless persecution, Joseph Smith, the founder of the church, had led his flock to Illinois. There they had established the town of Nauvoo, which by the mid-1840’s had become the largest city in Illinois with over 15,000 people. . . In June 1844, a mob of non-Mormons broke into the jail where Smith was being held and killed both him and his brother. . .The Mormons abandoned Nauvoo in the spring of 1846 as anti-Mormons pounded the town with cannon, destroying the Great Temple. In a well-coordinated migration, 15,000 Mormons moved in stages to the Great Salt Lake.” Ayers, Gould, Oshinsky, and Soderlund (2004, p. 334-335) Many walked all the way and many died along the way, including innocent babes.

Joseph Smith at one time was tarred and feathered by a mob. No jury, no trial, no judge – and they had planned to castrate him, too. On October 27, 1838, the then governor of Missouri issued an “extermination order”: “The Mormons must be treated as enemies, and must be exterminated or driven from the State if necessary . . .” Far West History (n.d.) Please note that the order called for exterminating “Mormons” making no distinction between men, women and children, and indeed women and children were subject to the extermination order.

In an event known in LDS history as “the Haun’s Mill Massacre”, precipitated by the extermination order, 30 to 40 LDS families were surprised by some 200 to 250 militia. After the smoke cleared, seventeen LDS people lay dead including a ten-year-old boy. Thirteen LDS members were wounded including a woman and a seven-year-old boy. “A few Missourians returned the next day and took plunder.” LDS FAQ (n.d.) No Missouri militiamen were killed but three were wounded. Just a few years earlier, the LDS folk who died that day had been members of other churches - Congregational or Methodist or Baptist or Presbyterian.

In l976, Governor Bond of Missouri officially rescinded the extermination order and presented apologies for the “unfortunate developments” it caused. Quoting from Governor Bond’s Executive Order: “WHEREAS, Governor Boggs’ order clearly contravened the rights to life, liberty, property and religious freedom as guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States, as well as the Constitution of the State of Missouri; and . . . Expressing on behalf of all Missourians our deep regret for the injustice and undue suffering rescind Executive Order Number 44 dated October 27, 1838, issued by Governor W. Boggs. . .” Far West History (n.d.) The individuals who harassed, abused, and even murdered Mormons in cold blood were never tried for their crimes.

I read Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s Letter from Birmingham Jail and it really touched my heart. There he was, suffering for the Lord in jail, and these religious leaders with highfalutin titles on the outside wrote an open letter (“A Call for Unity”) in which they criticize King’s tactics and basically blame King for the racial turmoil of the time. Though you can tell King is upset and hurt by the attack – made worse because he’s stuck in jail and can’t confront the religious leaders face-to-face – his response is gentle genius. “I wish you had commended the Negro sit-inners and demonstrators of Birmingham for their sublime courage, their willingness to suffer, and their amazing discipline in the midst of great provocation. One day the South will recognize its real heroes.” Barnet and Bedau (2005, p. 881)

King has a few choice words for the Church, too: “If today’s church does not recapture the sacrificial spirit of the early church, it will lose its authenticity, forfeit the loyalty of millions, and be dismissed as an irrelevant social club with no meaning for the twentieth century. Every day I meet young people whose disappointment with the church has turned into outright disgust.” Barnet and Bedau (2005, p. 880)

King signs off with “Yours for the cause of Peace and Brotherhood”.

There’s an eerie commonality between what JFK and MLK endured at the hands of the religious bigots of their day and what Mitt Romney is facing today. I hope and pray that Romney will be able to fend off these undeserved attacks from the religious hypocrites with the same grace, dignity and God-inspired resolve displayed by the other two.

A few popular bumper stickers read: “Honk if you love Jesus” and “Christians aren’t perfect, just forgiven” or “Jesus is my co-pilot”. Yet, apparently, these same bumper-sticker Christians are the ones waging war against Mitt Romney’s run for the Presidency solely on the basis of his chosen faith in a Church that bears the name of the Savior of the world.

References

ABC News - 20/20 (2007). Philanthropic donations come from your heart, but where do they end up? Ex-money manager says "enough!" to secretive Christian Ministry spending. Glenn Ruppel & John Stossel. United States: ABC News.

Ayers, E. L., Gould, L. L., Oshinsky, D. M., & Soderlund, J. R. (2004). American Passages - a history of the United States - Volume I: to 1877 (2nd ed.). Belmont, California: Thomson/Wadsworth.

Barnet, S., & Bedau, H. (2005). Letter from Birmingham Jail. Current Issues and Enduring Questions - a guide to critical thinking and argument, with readings (7th ed., pp. 867-882). Boston and New York: Bedford/St. Martin's.

Far West History. (n.d.). The Extermination Order and how it was rescinded. Retrieved April 28, 2007, from http://www.jwha.info/mmff/exorder.htm

Hewitt, H. (2007). A Mormon in the White House? 10 things every American should know about Mitt Romney. Washington, D.C.: Regnery Publishing, Inc.

John F. Kennedy Presidential Library & Museum. (1960, September 12). Address of Senator John F. Kennedy to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association. Retrieved April 22, 2007, from http://www.jfklibrary.org

Lds Faq. (n.d.). What was the Haun's Mill Massacre? Retrieved April 28-2007, 2004, from Brigham Young University Web Site: http://ldsfaq.byu.edu/view.asp?q=57

Media Matters for America. (2007). Fox News whitewashes evangelical hostility to Romney's faith. Retrieved April 22, 2007, from http://mediamatters.org/items/printable/200702280002


TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: boggsforgovernor; cuespookymusic; election; lds; mormon; mormons; romney; whitesalamanderblues
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 441-460461-480481-500 ... 2,981-2,983 next last
To: greyfoxx39; Saundra Duffy; Jim Robinson; OrthodoxPresbyterian; Unmarked Package
Your #400...excellent and concise post.

What a nice thing to say. I'm so rarely accused of being concise. LOL.

Before I proceed to prove why that is so, I'll state that, as a Calvinistic Southern Baptist, I consider my Mormon-bashing and Catholic-bashing credentials second to none. Theologically, not politically.

For all the talk about anti-Catholic and anti-Mormon political prejudice, I think it should be pointed out that the very Protestant/Baptist/evangelical GOP has put five Catholics on the Court. And that is no accident. And it is just a coincidence (or maybe not) that that Court is disproportionately Italian in ethnic makeup. Conceivably, those five Catholic justices are potentially more powerful than any president we can elect to serve, at most, eight years. And li'l ol' Catholic-bashing Baptist me is just fine with that. In fact, I think it's downright brilliant and I was certainly one of those here at FR who demanded that evangelical Aunt Harriet be thrown under the bus so we could get the brilliant Catholic jurist, Alito, instead. Funny, my Catholic-bashing tendencies just seemed to fail me there.

Now, let's look at the Mormon thing more. Not long ago, in conservative circles the most notably conservative state legislature and the real bellwether of GOP state politics was reliably conservative New Hampshire (honorable mention for Montana). However, with the invasion of New Hampshire by liberals fleeing the results of their own voting habits in other neighboring liberal states, New Hampshire is no longer the state legislature we once so admired.

So who is? Utah. They have distinguished themselves repeatedly at resisting federal intrusion in education and other matters. It's a very impressive conservative record. Their reliance on their churches for relief and general rejection of federal welfare programs is pretty unique and is certainly no vice in the GOP. If only we had a half-dozen more legislatures that conservative!

The Mormon standard for clean living and work ethic is admirable. And they are the single largest force in Scouting, an interest Romney certainly shares (and will drone on about endlessly if allowed to as he did one night on CSPAN). Part of what we defend when we defend Scouting from molesters is the safety of Mormon children who are in Scouting. Not that we should ever need to be thanked for it either. This is all part of the Mormon/GOP connection and it is a Good Thing for both.

In addition, Utah and other states with large Mormon populations are among the Reddest. They will vote GOP come hell or high water and they have done so for generations. This is true of Mormons in any state.

Ann Coulter made the point well at CPAC (before her other rather ill-considered remark). When asked who she currently favored, she mentioned she was leaning toward Romney. She explained that she likes Mormons and offered that a state like Utah in which, during the 1992 election, Clinton came in third tells you something about just how reliably Republican the Mormons have been. Mormons are remarkably Republican with a few like Harry Reid being the exception that proves the rule.

Now, for all the real anti-Mormon bigots out there, it's time for all of you to understand that we cannot elect a president without Mormon votes. And I don't know why we'd even want to. We can elect a president without RINO votes in places like New York but we can't without the Mormon vote. They are absolutely vital in any close election.

We need to embrace our Mormon allies. They are our longtime and loyal political partners. They are not second-class citizens in the GOP. If they can field an attractive candidate (and Romney is), then the standard we should apply is whether that candidate is conservative and will adhere to our party goals as spelled out in the party platform. Period.

Given that FR exists in part to expose libmedia's hidden agenda, I'd also point out that the libmedia attacks on Romney's Mormon background and even the marriage records of his ancestors is a blatant attempt to split off a faction of the GOP from the Party Of Reagan. Just as they are trying to use Giuliani to drive wedges into the party, they are also trying to fan the flames of anti-Mormon bigotry in order to split the party base and create a situation where Hitlery can win.

If we fall for it, perhaps allowing Giuliani to become our nominee merely because he might be the only credible alternative to Romney, if we allow anti-Mormon bigotry to rule our choices of nominee, we will lose. And we will deserve to lose. This is the only hope the Dims have to win, the only chance the Wife Of Clinton has to reach the White House. And we have to avoid falling into their trap.

Questions remain about the extent to which Romney represents the values of our party base, particularly the pro-gun and pro-life factions. Personally, I'm willing to wait for the pro-life/pro-family and pro-gun organizations to tell us whether we can trust Romney on those issues. That is their job in our coalition and they've done pretty darned well at it.

We are the Party Of Reagan. We share power with all those who share the goals of our party platform and adhere to them. They are our partners and that includes Mormons. It is somewhat distasteful that it should even need to be discussed.

Threads about Romney should not be Mormon threads, bashing and defending Mormon theology and history. It is a profound mistake to allow this to happen. Theology threads belong in the Backroom with all the other theology debates.

When you start bashing Romney over Mormonism, just remember that it's not you who is winning or losing a debate. It's Keith Obertroll who is winning. It's Dan Rather who is winning. It's the New York Times and the Washington Post who is winning. It is, in short, all our libmedia enemies who will rejoice at having sown such discord and fanned the flames of intra-party warfare here at FreeRepublic, the bastion of online conservative discussion.

Don't fall for it. Don't let libmedia (and a few hotheads) split the party and elect the Wife Of Clinton.

[JimRob, I hope you'll read this and consider it. I think I'm right about libmedia's intent to split the Party Of Reagan with a multi-pronged RINO-Giuliani and anti-Mormon strategy.]
461 posted on 05/05/2007 9:20:11 AM PDT by George W. Bush (Election Math For Dummies: GOP ÷ Rudi = Hillary)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 415 | View Replies]

To: Saundra Duffy
I think Mormons are wonderful, upstanding people. I would not have a problem voting for one for president, any more than a Baptist, Lutheran Catholic etc.

Years ago I read several books about Mormons and Mormonism and it is the history of the sect that is off putting. Joseph Smith found golden tablets from God and then he lost them before he could show them to anyone else? The members of his sect were encouraged to have multiple wives?

I am sorry but that is just plain weird. He must have been very charismatic to get others to follow him or maybe it was just the multiple wives part.

462 posted on 05/05/2007 9:29:26 AM PDT by Ditter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: colorcountry; Saundra Duffy
I love my Church and my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Amen.

What did he save you from? Just death?

And what did he save her to, as well? Being one of millions of celestial wives of an exalted man who is a god, so she can produce spirit babies to inhabit his planet?

463 posted on 05/05/2007 9:38:40 AM PDT by needlenose_neely
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 459 | View Replies]

To: George W. Bush; xzins; Saundra Duffy; greyfoxx39
If I could be assured that Romney was more conservative than any of the other candidates, he would receive my full support. But Romney has New England Liberal Republican credentials. Up until he decided to run for president, he was a staunch abortion proponent. So from a primary point of view, Romney is not acceptable to me.

However if he gets the primary nod, then I will fully support him. However, if Rudy gets the primary nod, I will not be voting for a Republican for president. Rudy is an UNREPENTANT abortion proponent. Romney is a repentant and allegedly former abortion proponent who is running now on his opposition to abortion. It's a hard pill to swallow, but not impossible.

If Fred Thompson were a Mormon, I would still be hoping and praying that he enters the race. It would make no difference to me at all.

464 posted on 05/05/2007 9:39:15 AM PDT by P-Marlowe (LPFOKETT GAHCOEEP-w/o*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 461 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe

I will even accept a recanting of his abortion position by Rudy IF he does so in a way that PROVES it is real and not just a matter of expediency.

1. Must be full and public recantation for all media outlets to run.
2. Must pledge to fully support fully pro-life planks in the party platform.
3. Must pledge to appoint as chief WH counsel and judicial picks advisors pro-life jurists AND name those persons and get their agreement to serve.
4. Must pledge to support pro-life and pro-family amendment to Constitution.

BTW, given Romney’s RECENT past, I expect the same thing from him.


465 posted on 05/05/2007 9:45:17 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain And Proud of It! Those who support the troops will pray for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 464 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian
Why don't you pray directly to Jesus?

Because Jesus told us to pray to Our Father.

466 posted on 05/05/2007 9:48:17 AM PDT by Netizen (If we can't locate/deport illegals, how will we get them to come forward to pay their $3,250 fines?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 368 | View Replies]

To: George W. Bush

Mormonism is not what makes Utah conservative. Utah is conservative because it is a member of the Intermountain States and all those States are governed by individual rights. They are rugged indivualists and abhor Federal Government intrusion precisely because of their status as minority (and therefore overruled) by large urban interests. We see this in every single ‘Red’ State, and not just Utah. Your assumption is incorrect.

Now let us address your assumption that we cannot win without Mormon backing. There are about 5,000,000 Mormons withing the United States (by their own recogning). 1,000,000 of them live in Utah. That leaves 4,000,000 divided between the rest of the 49 States. California has the highest number of LDS (about 2,000,000), but California’s electoral votes almost always go Democrat. Mormonism’s effect in California is negliglble.

Between California and Utah, the balance of Mormons live in the West and so the States where they reside have few electoral votes to consider. Of the 3,000,000 or so Mormons that live in the US (besides Utah and California,) by all estimates only 1/2 of them are active LDS. EX-Mormons and inactive Mormons are predominantly liberals as can be viewed by opinions on this site. http://www.exmormon.org

So, of those 1,500,000 active LDS living in the balance of the 48 States, only 1/2 of those are of voting age (if that many, since Mormons have a high preponderance of their membership in children due to their birth rate). So we are left with 750,000 voting LDS members (some of whom will vote democrat)

Now let us divide those 750,000 members by 48 States, and if every active Mormon who is able to cast votes does so for the Republican candidate, we would have an average of 15,625 Mormon votes per State.

The effects of those votes even if they went 100% in favor of Democrats would be nothing. Mormons, if they turn tail and run to the Democrats would show the preposterousness of their own political position.

Believe me, Mormons need the Republican party FAR more than we need them. They are using us IMO to further their own political agenda. They get away with it by accusing us of bigotry, hate, and prosecution. This is clearly a liberal tactic.

In the realm of politics, if you think you have something better, then prove it. If we don’t accept your proof, that’s just too bad. That’s politics.

If Romney were gay instead of Mormon, we would never even be discussing the issue. A gay politician has beliefs that conflict with ours, we are not required to accept the position that somehow we must accept him or be labled as bigoted, hateful, persecutors.


467 posted on 05/05/2007 9:49:16 AM PDT by colorcountry (An Honest Man will change his thoughts to match the truth and a Dishonest Man will change the truth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 461 | View Replies]

To: George W. Bush
There are aspects of Romney's religious beliefs, such as new revelation given by their god supplanting previous revelation given by their god which is a form of flip flopping, which Romney is prone to do, and makes truth not absolute but relative just like the postmodernist view, which make Romeny highly suspect.

Also, the White Horse Prophecy of Mormonism, and it's effect on Mormons in high office decision making process is also a cause for scrutiny.

Just to name a couple.

Also, Romney, and along with him, the GOP, could not withstand the scrutiny of a Presidential campaign.

Romney has already flip flopped on homosexual marriage, abortion and embryonic stem cell research, as well as other issues of the economic and security variety.

468 posted on 05/05/2007 9:50:46 AM PDT by needlenose_neely
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 461 | View Replies]

To: George W. Bush
Threads about Romney should not be Mormon threads, bashing and defending Mormon theology and history. It is a profound mistake to allow this to happen. Theology threads belong in the Backroom with all the other theology debates.

The original post on this thread certainly does.

When you start bashing Romney over Mormonism, just remember that it's not you who is winning or losing a debate. It's Keith Obertroll who is winning. It's Dan Rather who is winning. It's the New York Times and the Washington Post who is winning. It is, in short, all our libmedia enemies who will rejoice at having sown such discord and fanned the flames of intra-party warfare here at FreeRepublic, the bastion of online conservative discussion.

A little hyperbolic here, IMO. There is a difference between discussion and "bashing" in the first place and secondly, I certainly wouldn't describe this as warfare or even "sewing seeds of discord." If you follow some threads closely, you will see, in some cases, a spirit of competition over "who is the better theologian" rather than "warfare".

Don't fall for it. Don't let libmedia (and a few hotheads) split the party and elect the Wife Of Clinton.

This is a point I have made time and again on FR. The media right now is playing these cards. As an example, the PBS special on mormonism this past week. A Romney nomination will bring on an onslaught from the media on the peculiarities of mormon beliefs with the specific intent of both tarring all Christians with the same brush, and keeping evangelicals from the voting booth.

[JimRob, I hope you'll read this and consider it. I think I'm right about libmedia's intent to split the Party Of Reagan with a multi-pronged RINO-Giuliani and anti-Mormon strategy.]

Agreed.

469 posted on 05/05/2007 9:51:00 AM PDT by greyfoxx39 (Fred sez "I'm not interested in being the tallest midget in the room.." RUN FRED RUN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 461 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe; xzins; Saundra Duffy
If I could be assured that Romney was more conservative than any of the other candidates, he would receive my full support. But Romney has New England Liberal Republican credentials. Up until he decided to run for president, he was a staunch abortion proponent. So from a primary point of view, Romney is not acceptable to me.

Ronald Reagan signed the most liberal abortion bill in the country in 1968. Although his biographer claims that in conversations with Ronnie, he was always opposed to abortion, there is no proof that he was. In 1975, Ronnie came out against abortion with a profound conviction of its immorality. That was only a year before he ran for the nomination against Ford as a pro-lifer.

Most of us are pro-life converts. This is true of the entire pro-life movement.

If he has converted to pro-life, then we should accept him. The same way Ronnie was accepted without further questioning of his motives.

I would point out that Romney and his wife looked into supporting embryonic research because it was a political issue and because she suffers with MS. As you know, multiple sclerosis is not an easy death. So they consulted with a Harvard researcher. What they found repelled them and turned them against embryonic research and Romney took action as governor. They have, since then, consistently opposed abortion and embryonic research and cloning. Given that the lovely Mrs. Romney faces a hard death from suffocation, it would be only too easy for them to champion embryonic research. That they refuse to do so on moral grounds and speak to the issue extensively should go some distance in allaying concerns over the sincerity of their pro-life convictions.

Many of us pro-life converts could tell a not dissimilar story of when we finally realized just what being pro-abortion really means. And how we, like the Romneys, recoiled from it and became pro-life.

I would also point out that converts are often your most energetic and effective advocates. And, although it might sound cynical, Mrs. Romney would easily counter any further attempts by Michael J. Fox to go off his meds deliberately to tape more pro-infanticide/pro-cloning commercials by using pity for his condition to soften up the voters, as happened in Missouri and other states in '06.

If the Romneys are sincere (and I don't have reason to doubt it yet), Mitt could be far and away the best pro-life nominee we could field.

However if he gets the primary nod, then I will fully support him. However, if Rudy gets the primary nod, I will not be voting for a Republican for president. Rudy is an UNREPENTANT abortion proponent. Romney is a repentant and allegedly former abortion proponent who is running now on his opposition to abortion. It's a hard pill to swallow, but not impossible.

I entirely agree. I will never vote for Rudy. NEVER! Romney, well, if he can pass muster with the pro-life and pro-gun arms of the GOP, it will be good enough for me. So far, he's making the right moves.

If Fred Thompson were a Mormon, I would still be hoping and praying that he enters the race. It would make no difference to me at all.

Exactly so. We will face defeat if we start bickering over theology. We will deserve defeat if we let the libmedia bait us into doing it.

BTW, you did notice that Harry Reid is a Mormon, admittedly a very corrupt one (unlike the squeaky-clean businessman and CEO that Romney is)?

It's no accident that the Dims selected a Mormon to lead their Senate. They are trying to split our loyal Mormon allies from the Party Of Reagan. This is a deliberate strategy that will entail our long-term defeat at the polls. Without our Mormon allies, there would never have been a President George W. Bush. And the Dims know it! (I forgot to mention this part in my previous post.)

None of this is an accident. It's part of a plan by libmedia and the Dims. They have grown smarter. We'd better understand that before it's too late. But the GOP is not the Plantation Party. That's what our enemies are. Either the Mormons are our full partners or they really should look elsewhere. If they have a good candidate who supports the entire party platform then he gets a fair shot, not just some cheap shots at the theology of his church.

BTW, you did notice that Utah went after the FLDS very strongly? That is also no accident, IMO. They're cleaning up the last embarrassing remnants of the polygamy era. About time too, especially if they're planning to field a serious presidential candidate and back him financially (which they are certainly doing). I think the FLDS will not exist in America by the end of the year.
470 posted on 05/05/2007 10:16:39 AM PDT by George W. Bush (Election Math For Dummies: GOP ÷ Rudi = Hillary)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 464 | View Replies]

To: Pan_Yans Wife
Why would a faith use Smith and say he was persecuted?

When I think of the strong men of the Bible, they had strength of conviction, powerful reasoning skills, leadership abilities, and a spirit of guidance. They stumbled, but carried on. Some reached their goals, others did not. But all of them were looking to God to guide them. And if they failed, they didn’t blame Him. It is a give-and-take relationship. And we are blessed by their examples.

Painting Smith into a hole where the entire state was out to get him, makes him look impotent.


Really? I thought the effort to paint him a a womanizing wife stealer was just the opposite. (lol)

There is truth and perspective, truth just is. Perspective can be manipulated. Are you saying there was no extermination order? If there was, then the whole state was “Out to get him”

I wouldn’t follow such a weak person. Why others do is beyond me. Were they so lost that they couldn’t see the danger?

So to you, strength is crushing your opposition in the here and now? His opponents thought killing Joseph Smith would destroy Mormonism. They were wrong.

Jesus Christ was murdered on the cross by politicians, lawyers and religious leaders who thought killing him would destroy his religion, the were wrong.

would you follow such a weak person?

It is so easy to twist words, the truth however, does not twist and those who deny it will discover, like Saul that it is hard to kick against the pricks.
471 posted on 05/05/2007 10:16:56 AM PDT by DelphiUser ("You can lead a man to knowledge, but you can't make him think")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: colorcountry
Saundra you haven’t been in the Church long enough to be familiar with the pride Mormons had in being a “peculiar” people, you should look up those referrences. Come on now Saundra, we know you are a recent convert, but you simply must get up to speed with Mormonism before you post embarrassing one-side opinion posts like this one.

The condescending tone in your post is telling more than the words you are speaking.
You might want to fix that.
472 posted on 05/05/2007 10:20:28 AM PDT by DelphiUser ("You can lead a man to knowledge, but you can't make him think")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: Phantom Lord
I’ll be honest. I have trouble seeing myself voting for someone who wears magic underwear.

Magic?

Would you have a problem voting for someone who wears a yamica (sp?)? How about a prayer shawl?
Priests collar?

Religious clothing is not new, and Underwear is hardly a topic for a candidate, I don' want to see it, or see it aired, if you know what I mean.

Bill Clinton thought it was funny to be asked what kind he wears, and answered the questions!

I for one was embarrassed for America that day.
473 posted on 05/05/2007 10:26:37 AM PDT by DelphiUser ("You can lead a man to knowledge, but you can't make him think")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: Pan_Yans Wife
I’ve never had a Methodist say to me, “You’re wrong!” But, I have had Mormons say that to me. A Methodist is not threatened because the mainstream Protestant faiths are very similar.

I have been damned to hell by lots of ministers, then again, I grew up in the bible belt as a Mormon.

Some people even damn me to hell without meeting me, Sigh.
474 posted on 05/05/2007 10:31:15 AM PDT by DelphiUser ("You can lead a man to knowledge, but you can't make him think")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: JRochelle; Saundra Duffy

I agree. That was an UGLY and VICIOUS smear against evangelicals. if there is anything that would change my open mind about Romney, it is that type of stuff.


475 posted on 05/05/2007 10:32:50 AM PDT by Zechariah11
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: colorcountry
We see this in every single ‘Red’ State, and not just Utah. Your assumption is incorrect.

I've lived in two states that were all-Red in 2000. I don't think I'd agree entirely. Certainly, Nebraska doesn't fit your generalization.

Regardless, without Utah, there would be no Bush administration in the White House.

Even discounting Utah, it would be difficult to believe that the Mormon voters of Florida did not provide far more than the margin of 500 votes for our victory in 2000. Of course, it does not hinge around Mormons. But they are a key component of the party.

Given that Mormon voting populations are more concentrated in certain states than you suggest, I'm not going to respond to your other analysis. But I don't accept it.

EX-Mormons and inactive Mormons are predominantly liberals as can be viewed by opinions on this site.

And ex-Catholics and inactive Catholics are also liberals. Look at the northeast. I don't think you actually have a point here.

Believe me, Mormons need the Republican party FAR more than we need them. They are using us IMO to further their own political agenda.

And what, precisely, is this "Mormon political agenda"? Describe it in detail.

They get away with it by accusing us of bigotry, hate, and prosecution. This is clearly a liberal tactic.

Aside from the tendencies in this vanity's original post, I don't see it much. I certainly don't see it coming from Romney, he's running a very positive campaign, notably so. I like his commercials on Fox News during the Hume show. Very effective. I very much like when he talks about vetoes: "I like the veto.". He sounds like a Boy Scout going after his Veto Badge. Makes me smile. Almost as funny as his remarks about being a longtime "rodent hunter". Pretty humorous, though in part unintentional so.

As for your other conclusions, I think I have already provided a far more comprehensive set of answers about libmedia/Dim strategy against us and the attempt to neutralize the Mormon/GOP vote.
476 posted on 05/05/2007 10:35:11 AM PDT by George W. Bush (Election Math For Dummies: GOP ÷ Rudi = Hillary)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 467 | View Replies]

To: colorcountry
I left the LDS Church at great personal peril.

Let the flames begin.


No flames from me CC, I do however find it sad that you take a personal tragedy and make it our fault. If there be faults (and there are and will still be faults) they are the faults of men.

I pray you will find the peasce in Christ that eludes you.
477 posted on 05/05/2007 10:37:13 AM PDT by DelphiUser ("You can lead a man to knowledge, but you can't make him think")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: George W. Bush

Do you seriously think Mormons would abandon the GOP and vote dem, if we don’t nominate Romney?

Even when Senator Smoot was under investigation and not seated in Congress, the Momons support the Republicans.

The Mormon political agenda is very similar to the Republican agenda. Family values, States rights, the protection of the unborn. Like I said they need us more than we need them. Don’t get confused. The GOP supports their lifestyle. We needn’t get confused and think that we are dependant upon them. The GOP is FAR, FAR more in need of the Evangelicals whom (if we can use the OP as any indication) are completely despised by the LDS. I would think twice before alienating Christians over Mormons.

The GOP has a big tent. We have always protected Mormons as well as anyone. We don’t need to “prove” it to the Mormons. We need to stick to our principals. It is our principals that make our ideas valuable. Part of our principals in a belief in One God. I will not pretend to think that electing a Commander in Chief who believes he will become a god is not an important aspect of his character.

When it comes down to each individual who votes his own conscience are we going to worry about alienating gays, or abortionists, or socialists (of which there are far more in number than Mormons)? Must we bend to this special interest group to show our lack of bigotry?

BTW, Utah will continue to be conservative (unless the socialists from other States continue to move in in alarming numbers). As will the rest of the Intermountain West. What we need to fear is the influx of liberal agenda into the lifesyle and politics of traditionally conservative States. This is something to fear!


478 posted on 05/05/2007 10:52:44 AM PDT by colorcountry (An Honest Man will change his thoughts to match the truth and a Dishonest Man will change the truth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 476 | View Replies]

To: JCEccles

“Now, you would think that evangelicals would welcome Mormons as political allies for the very same reasons that the liberals reject them. You’d be wrong. Evangelicals, many of whom believe the cosmos and world did not exist a little over 6000 years ago, reject Mormons because they have some “weird” beliefs. “

The 6000 year thing IS a weird belief and isn’t the doctrine of any major denomination I know of. Seems Christians reject things over time that that have found flat out wrong (like the world is flat), Mormons appear to offer a new Revelation and then pretend nothing happened.

I am a Lutheran - good old Martin was a beer drinking good old boy who besides rocking the world and starting a major protestant war was also a bit of a semite. BUT HE WASN’T GOD AND HE WASN’T A PROPHET!!! So I’m happy to reject his failings. How’s about you rejecting Joseph Smith’s failings. Oh, that’s right, if some of his grifting turns out to be true, the whole foundation of Mormonism collapses. That’s why you have to defend Joseph to the Death, no matter how much evidence of craziness is presented.


479 posted on 05/05/2007 10:52:57 AM PDT by FastCoyote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 446 | View Replies]

To: DelphiUser; George W. Bush; xzins; Saundra Duffy; greyfoxx39
Look for the Mormons to propagate the Religious Bigotry card as the Kennedy's did in the 1960 election. Let's all see how it works for them.

Having an open mind to the point of having your brains spill out is not a good idea.

480 posted on 05/05/2007 10:53:14 AM PDT by Afronaut (Supporting Republican Liberals is the Undeniable End to Freedom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 477 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 441-460461-480481-500 ... 2,981-2,983 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson