| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 08/03/2007 6:34:01 AM PDT by Religion Moderator, reason:
Poor behavior |
Posted on 07/26/2007 5:03:33 PM PDT by tantiboh
Democratic political consultant Mark Mellman has a very good piece up today at The Hill on the baffling and illegitimate opposition among voters to Mitt Romney due to his religion. I liked his closing paragraphs:
In July of 1958, 24 percent of respondents told Gallup they would not vote for a Catholic for president, almost identical to Gallup’s reading on Mormons today. Two years later, John F. Kennedy became the first Catholic to assume the oath of office. Within eight months, the number refusing to vote for a Catholic was cut almost in half.
[snip]
Mellman also discusses an interesting poll he helped construct, in which the pollsters asked half of their respondents whether they would support a candidate with certain characteristics, and asked the other half about another candidate with the exact same characteristics, with one difference. The first candidate was Baptist, the second candidate was Mormon. The Baptist had a huge advantage over the Mormon candidate, by about 20 points.
[snip]
However, more recent polls have attempted to fix the anonymity problem. A recent Time Magazine poll (read the original report here), for example, got to the heart of the question by asking respondents if they are less likely to vote for Mitt Romney specifically because he is a Mormon. The result is not as bad as some reporting on the poll has suggested. For example, while 30% of Republicans say they are less likely to vote for Romney because of his religion, fully 15% of other Republicans say that characteristic makes them more likely to vote for him. And while many have reported the finding that 23% of Republicans are “worried” by Romney’s Mormonism, the more important (but less-reported) number is that 73% say they hold no such reservations...
(Excerpt) Read more at romneyexperience.com ...
“Mormon leaders claimed it came from God to have polygamy forever, that God was once a man, that Jesus and Satan and ME and YOU are literally related, and that men lived on the monn and dressed like quakers”
Intellectually dishonest. This is a prime example on breaking the 9th commandment.
“So, you are in the group referenced in the article. You’re in a position to provide good insight. Short of renouncing his faith, is there anything that Romney could do to convince you that he’d be an acceptable vote to cast as President?”
I can think of nothing he could do to get my vote (short of renouncing Mormonism). Please understand that I have always voted a straight Republican ticket since I was able to vote for Reagan. This is not a decision I make lightly.
They are something else.
At one time the Camisards (in France) thought they could destabilize Catholicism in France to the extent that they would no longer be persecuted. In the end they were murdered right along with the Huguenots.
Their English and German counterparts were of the same opinion, and continued to hold to it as they emigrated to Penn's settlements in the 1700s.
BTW, Penn attended the Protestant Academy in Saumur France where he had direct contact with gun-toting Huguenots as well as peace and brotherhood Camisards.
“Mormons do NOT claim Jesus for their Salvation, they still believe works are necessary for salvation”
Jesus said not all who say Lord, Lord in that day will be saved, but he has done the will of the Father.
Also, Catholics believe in works. And if you go the absurd extreme all Christians believe atleast declaring your faith in Christ. That my friend is a work.
Again, can we drop the distortions? Be more truthful and substantive. Afterall, God says that we need to bear truth witness about our brothers. Is not a Mormon your brother too?
~”I can think of nothing he could do to get my vote (short of renouncing Mormonism).”~
Fascinating. I appreciate the honest answer. I would be lying if I said I weren’t disappointed; I hope to think that my fellow Americans can see beyond such distinctions.
Still, I admire your convictions.
It’s easy to find the reference on the net. You might do so. At the same time it was a common belief in the 19th century that there must be life on the Moon, and Mars, and Uranus, etc.
~”...there must be life on the Moon, and Mars, and Uranus...”~
...
No. I will resist.
Yes, I have a thorough understanding of the topic. It was common belief over 90% of all Christians during that time period. Yet we have only an anology from one leader, Brigham Young. And we have someone 30 years after the fact claimed to have heard it from someone else.
And yet it is claimed that Mormons believe such a thing? That is intellectual dishonesty. It would be the equivalent of me stating that Southern Baptists believe in snake handling as a testament of their faith, because I have some obscure references to such a thing. In fact, I could make a vastly stronger case, but in my heart I would know it was dishonest. Don’t you realize in your heart the blatant dishonesty that these nutcase critics are making?
Where is the claim that the Mormons found Salt Lake City first? The Catholics were in Utah before the Mormons, they established a couple of missions here. The trappers were here before the Mormons. And Brigham Young pored over maps after the martyrdom of Joseph Smith to find a place where the members of the Church of Jesus of Latter-Day Saints could emigrate to and not be persecuted and driven out of their homes for their religious beliefs.
“I really don’t know what to say to you. Mormonism and Fascist-Socialist-Communist are comparable? I agree the book of Mormon is fake, but they still acknowledge Jesus as the Messiah. For that reason, I think you are over-reacting. Show me a perfect Church in America? Is there one? After-all, Jesus hasn’t come back yet, and when he does we will have to be all open to hear about where we have all failed, I don’t think it will be too smart to be so judgemental. And also, I really do disagree that Hillary is no different then Mitt, I mean really? Do you really understand who Hillary is and what she stands for, it doesn’t sound like it.”
First of all, I hardly know where to begin in my response. You seem to be so emotional about the subject that I don’t wish to upset you further, but I am honestly answering the questions posted to me. To give a PC answer would be disingenuous.
Your assertion that Mormons acknowledge Jesus as the Messiah is incorrect. In order to claim a belief in Jesus as the Messiah, one must believe that Jesus saves fully and completely - plus and minus nothing. Mormonism does not proclaim that truth. Indeed, they reject it. Salvation for them is through their own works. I do not make these ‘judgments” by my own reasoning. I make them according to the Scriptures. In them we find all truth. It is our standard. Anything that falls short of the absolute truth in something as important as the Gospel must be rejected outright.
We’re not talking about an “imperfect” church. We’re talking about a false religion that damns people to Hell for eternity. That concern is far more damaging than anything Hillary can do to our country. Hell is for eternity. Hillary is for 4 - 8 years.
What about a Moslem like Barack Obama?
O.K. so the Presidency is the moral equivalent of a vote for someone’s religion?
I thought it was an office to represent all of the people of the United States. Even the 6 million Mormons, 8 million Jews, and many other faiths which have a proven moral framework.
Has it occurred to anyone that Jesus could possibly hold those responsible for not voting for the best qualified moral candidate? For God is not so limited, that I believe he works through all of his Children. Some not believe that but I do. Even as it says as the central message in the Book of Ezra—God can work through a righteous infidel to bless his people. What do you think God included that message in his Book? That is proof in God’s word contrary to your reasoning.
I am a lapsed Catholic (WAY lapsed). Hey, most religions have some weird aspect to them. I can still recall the alter boy outfits. But Mormanism is weird even by most standards. Beyond that, any ultra religious person would not get my vote. No Muslim, Catholic, Jewish (certainly not ultra-orthodox) Scientologist, Wiccan, snake handling Baptist, stern Protestant. Basically anyone who wears their religion WAY out front. It makes me nervous. But I certainly do not claim to know what would be “acceptable to God”, doing that would also strike me as weird.
It is said that JFK lost about a million votes simply because he was a Catholic. I was hoping the voters today would not be so close-minded. On the other hand, a lot of people still can’t tolerate Catholics, either. Some things never change.
I have talked to a few Catholics and they seem open to Romney. For one thing, they can relate to the anti-Mormon rhetoric. They’ve been having to put up with it, too.
The values that Mitt Romney holds near and dear to his heart - strong families, clean living, good work ethic, etc. - are the same values shared by other people of faith. One can only hope and pray that voters will look for the good.
The LDS Church has done so much good in the world. Lots of good fruit.
Homeshoolmom,
I think we need to understand our terminology.
Mormons believe that Salvation is a complete free gift. All those who lived on Earth have been ransomed by Jesus Christ. In fact this view is even less work based than a typical Christian’s. One could say our view is vastly more Jesus dependent than vastly many others, because it is FREE FREE FREE totally independent of being in the right faith or not!
We believe also, however, that Rewards in addition to our salvation as stated by Jesus in the New Testament, is a function of our works and our faith in Jesus Christ.
Part of the problem here is that Mormonism started as a church with a following and a leader with a leadership elite. Conditions were such that they ended up out in the Wilderness in the American West and had to govern themselves.
That colors everything. On the other hand, the institution of the Prophet, although it allows LDS to "adjust to modern conditions", runs across the grain of more orthodox Christians who believe the Age of Prophecy is long past.
They come out of the woodwork to denounce views to the contrary ~ there are a lot of 'em too.
I still say, voting Republican is always better than staying home or voting Democrat. It just is. Deviations from this belief will be punished through loss of their children, confiscation of their assets, and imprisonment for smoking cigarettes and drinking beer.
So the end result is that you would vote for Hillary. Enjoy your socialism and laws banning Christianity (it claims that homosexuality is a sin -0 can't be allowed by a democrat president and congress).
I am a born again Christian as well. I believe that Hillary is a Satan worshiper (in her deeds and actions), not a Christian. You would prefer a true Satan worshiper over a Mormon? I know many people who claim to be Christians but state, outright, that the Bible is false. My guess is that Hillary and Bill are some of these people.
What about Jews - can't vote for them because they deny Christ? What about non-Christians? They're out as well? What about all of the people who claim to be Christian but are not (probably the majority of the democrat party anyway)?
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.