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

To: TAdams8591
Did you write this?

That was because Mitt was taking a political moral position that disagreed with the LDS position. His presidential platform is morally in line with his church. There would be no need to consult them.

I think you did..but I'm a male lesbian, and prone to mistakes. Ha!

IF you did indeed write that...then I would ask you to go back and re-read my post. Here's the post number 234.

It's an accurate reply to your post.

Thanks..appreciate it....

274 posted on 08/05/2007 6:28:30 PM PDT by Osage Orange (Steal from one person, and you're a criminal. Steal from EVERYONE, and you're a Government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 263 | View Replies ]


To: Osage Orange
No it's not. My post was an explanation and a response to the charge that Mitt would be approaching his church elders for guidance as president. Mitt approached his church in the past to get permission to hold a political position at odds with this church. It was a statement of fact and not something I agreed or disagreed with. Mitt is running on a conservative presidential platform and none of his political moral positions are in disagreement with his church and thus, there is no need for Mitt to approach his church about any of them.

Sometimes to correctly understand a post, one most go back and review an exchange and more than one post.

276 posted on 08/05/2007 6:40:55 PM PDT by TAdams8591 ( Guiliani is a Democrat in Republican drag. Mitt Romney for president in 2008! : ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 274 | View Replies ]

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