Posted on 08/08/2007 8:00:00 AM PDT by greyfoxx39
Mitt Romney's own Republican Party has made religion fair game, and Romney will be asked how his faith would affect his policies.
-SNIP-
But Mitt Romney is a serious contender in 2008, rich and disciplined, and he's running in an era when presidential candidates are virtually expected to parade their religiosity. This is particularly true in the Republican camp, where religion and politics are now routinely intertwined; indeed, candidate George W. Bush upped the ante in 2000, when he said that his favorite philosopher was Jesus, ''because he changed my life.''
So it's no surprise Romney is facing questions about his lifelong devotion to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the breakaway theology that considers itself humankind's ''one true church.'' He had hoped to stonewall this issue, insisting in a TV interview 18 months ago that ''I'm never going to get into a discussion about my personal beliefs.''
But today word is circulating that Romney will discuss his faith in an autumn speech - and seek to disarm the skeptics much the way John F. Kennedy in 1960 dampened fears that a Catholic president would take orders from Rome.
Romney is dealing with potential hostility, fair or not, on several fronts. Many Christian fundamentalists, particularly southern Baptists, dismiss Mormonism as a cult (thereby imperiling Romney in the GOP primaries, particularly in pivotal South Carolina). Many secular voters are uncomfortable with the church's passion for proselytizing and its superior attitude, particularly its scriptural insistence that all nonbelievers are worshiping ''the church of the devil.'' Pollsters say that at least 30 percent of voters won't back a Mormon.
Romney's biggest problem is that skeptics are simply weirded out. They cannot quite envision having a president who believes that a man named Joseph Smith dug up a book of golden plates, long buried in a hillside, with the help of an angel named Moroni in 1827; that these plates, written in Egyptian hieroglyphics, spelled out the precepts of the true Christian faith; that Smith translated these hieroglyphics by wearing decoder glasses and burying his head in a hat; that Jesus visited North America after the resurrection; that the Garden of Eden was really in Missouri.
-SNIP-
Some questions do seem appropriate. First, the Mormon faith puts a high premium on ''faith-promoting'' information, sometimes at the expense of unpleasant facts. As a high-ranking Mormon leader said in a famous 1981 speech, ''Some things that are true are not very useful.'' Would Romney be able to assure swing voters that he would not merely perpetuate the faith-based thinking, and the rejection of empirical reality, that has trapped us in a ruinous war?
Second, since the Mormons consider themselves stewards of ''a quintessentially American faith'' (Romney's words), and since Mormons believe Jesus will return and rule the world from U.S. territory, does this suggest that a President Romney might wave the flag a bit too fervently, at a time when we need to repair our relations around the world? The Mormon faith is heavily rooted in what is commonly called ''American exceptionalism,'' the belief that we are special and we know best. Would Romney govern accordingly, and, if so, would that be a help or a hindrance in the war on terror?
-SNIP-
What matters, in other words, is not whether he really thinks Joseph Smith met an angel in 1827. The crucial issue is whether, or how, a devout Mormon would apply his faith on the job in 2009. His supporters have suggested that any such questions are symptoms of religious bigotry, but it is the Republican Party, over the past several decades, that has put religion front and center. They have made Mitt Romney fair game.
I submit you that a typical Mormon knows their history quite well. It is nice to quote anecdotal evidence, but when you explain what is going without any facts then it hurts your argument.
Have you considered this possibility? Mormons know their history well, controversies included, and simply have a different opinion. It is my opinion that your point of view is being filtered by your opinion of Mormonism.
Let me give you an example from my perspective. If I find nearly endless amount of positives in my personal experience and yet I am told that there is ongoing evil and harm in my church, how should I view the critics of my faith? If the critics are so wrong now, is there not a possibility that the critics are equally wrong then? I have alot of goodwill towards my church, so with that goodwill I can easily handle any controversy and look at failings that historically these men or women were human too. I also compare them to their contemporaries and again I find them even with warts to be outstanding men or women.
Let’s say your criticism was toward Catholics instead of Mormons. Using your logic, one can argue that the problems with Catholics is that they do not have a good understanding of their faith. And if they did, then they hide it. Doesn’t that reasoning sound demeaning? I submit to you that reasoning is equally demeaning to Mormons. Mormons are very well versed in their history. In fact, we are encouraged to know our history, to strengthen our understanding which will ultimately strengthen our faith.
I found it very ironic that this theme is reminiscent of early 2nd century Christian critics. They argued that the early Christians were ignorant and did not understand the history surrounding the life of Jesus Christ. These learned historians argued many vile things, like Jesus was a vagabound, a thief, a bastard child fathered by a Roman. During that time, these critics were revered for the intellectual soundness while the Christians were denounced for their stupidity and ignorance.
Did you know that Ronald Reagan had great respect for Masood?
One reason I like the Mormoms is because they believe the United States is special. I think the Bible does refer to the United States. It wouldn’t surprise me if Jesus did visit here after the resurrection. I think the United States is pretty special, right up there with Isreal.
“I think Mormon-bashers have provided the rope with which the Left will hang many religious conservative candidates.”
Part of the reason I consider the left such a threat is because I do believe this country was blessed and it is part of God’s plan. I agree with the Mormons on that view. I see that the liberals are Godless and that’s the motivation behind their need to destroy the United States. I think Romney, with his beliefs about the United States would make a very worth candidate against Hillary. I’m not saying he should be the one, but I’m saying it would make sense. I say shame on those Christians who condemn him. I don’t consider them real Christians primarily because they are too damn stupid. They’re not interested in being real, they just want to feel rightous. I think they need to be more worried then Mormons for being fake.
correction - I meant pro gun.
“What “mormon-bashing” are you referring to? They can’t ask Mitt any tough questions without being accused of Mormon-bashing. When all else fails, being the victim is the go-to best solution by him and his supporters.”
Have you been to Church in the last 10+ years? If you have you would know that it is quite common. I don’t want to single a group out, but it horrible for one Christian group to attack another. I look at it they are just in a numbers competition and so have ulterio motives. To me, THAT is disengenuous. And it’s a damn shame that most people are too fake to see the truth. To me, those people are the ones who need to be concerned. I think Christ is more concerned about people being fake then those with a few ideas that are the result of human error. I agree with the Mormons, the United States is special. Is that such a terrible belief? I know plenty of liberals who think that is a horrid concept.
“I frankly remember quite a few hornets’ nest of angry Christians when Judge Roberts and Alito were questioned about whether their Christian faith would interfere with Roe v. Wade and their ability to fairly judge cases before the court. The media played right along, of course.”
Sorry, I was referring to “Christians.”
“I don’t want to single a group out, but it horrible for one Christian group to attack another.”
First one must accept that Mormons and Christians are the same.
If you're not a Mormon and you are a Christian, please read the Joseph Smith rewrite of the Bible and note the thousands of words he added, some to cxreate prophecies of himself to be located in the Old Testament. [Here's a link and if you're busy, just read the additions to chapter 50 of Genesis in the Joseph Smith 'translation'(forgery/fabrication).]
Mormonism is not a sect of Christianity. It's a nextdoor neighbor but not of the same household. Are there Saved Mormons? Of course, and God knows them. Did they get saved through Mormonism? Not likely but all things are possible with God. The beliefs and procalmations at the heart of Mormonism are antithetical to Christian beliefs and contrary to what Christ said He came to do in us who faith in Him not in temple rituals or proxy baptisms.
......................
Nothing I have read shows me that.
Once again, we're now talking about me & not the issues. Definitely a conversation-killer. I guess you've learned that flattery gets you everywhere, as evidenced by the long list of names & labels you've hurled my way.
This is Jim Robinson's forum. It's like his house and we're all guests allowed in to discuss political issues (along with a little small talk) as long as we're supporting his overriding conservative goals. Your behavior is like interjecting yourself into every political discussion of Mitt Romney...
There ya go again...exaggerating (otherwise known as an untruth...or bearing false testimony). "Every political discussion..?" For the past 6 mos. re: Romney, for me it's been 3 threads thus far in August, 6 in July, numerous in June & May, 0 in April, 0 in March, numerous first half of Feb. (I guess FREEPERLAND was silent or near silent on Romney most of those mos., eh?). Compared to some commentators 'round here, all that's a drop in the bucket.
...that "grifter" "Joe" Smith
Not my words. But I guess putting words in somebody else's mouth doesn't matter, eh?
"magic underwear"
Only very briefly :) referenced (no pun intended) once or twice as part of a longer list...no further or extended discussion & no emphasis on my part...but again, distortion doesn't seem to matter to some folks.
...but we remain civil and focus on our similarities and common ground in order to work towards our common goals. You, on the other hand, and those on the forum like you can't seem to handle themselves civilly...
That's almost a new one. I've had many dialogues w/LDS over the yrs, both face to face & online, and few have ever accused me of being uncivil. I don't recall having any convos w/you til today (I supposed it's possible we've had an exchange before). And a review of this post reveals that I've repeatedly attempted to civilly engage you, while it's you who's called me a "basher," "attacker," "harasser," "religious bigot," "troll," "poster boy for religiously intolerant," "polluter," "hard-core, anti-Mormon basher?" (and that was just one post).
You and others like you are doing all you can to make Mormons feel very unwelcome on this forum.
Well, your labels tossed my way today didn't exactly feel like the Welcome Wagon! But that's OK, my skin is well tanned. (Actually, you're one of the few LDS who have told me this. Thank you for your feedback. I guess some folks have thinner skin to pure truth than others).
Your posting history, especially the last 6 months which is made up of constant anti-Mormon posts (except for 2 one sentence posts on other topics) is testament to this. (I urge those reading this to review Colofornian's posting history to see for themselves.)
Thank you for the free commercial. :) (I mean, I sometimes see folks dancin' on the street in costumes advertising for folks to come to the restaurant they represent, but I didn't expect an "ad" from you. So thanks again! Lurkers and Jim, please note Spiff's advice!)
Let's ask the big guy if that is a permissable activity, especially in News/Activism threads, or if there is some guidance that he can offer concerning civility, especially as it relates to religious matters, in support of our common conservative goals.
A review of the record shows that my comments are relevant with political considerations; original (vs. spammed); personal & engaging one on one--meaning customized to the person; at times, heavy on the Bible & even customized to LDS sometimes in citing their Scriptures; not demeaning to the person even when critical of a system; & finally, most are high level w/occasional dry sarcasm (we all know FREEPERS aren't known for that, right).
In my many yrs here I've had 1 post pulled by a moderator & have been warned once or twice about the guidelines. Are you implying that Jim's excellent moderators are not doing their job in upholding guidelines? (Maybe you owe them an apology along w/myself?)
Now, may I suggest that you consider another vein of discussion other than continued ad-hominen attacks?
I am a Catholic and I dont feel Mr Romney needs to answer anything. The lovefest of the dems talking about the faith they have makes me ill and no one said anything about them but Mr Romney is always asked question. I agree when is Hillary or Obama gonna answer question if they dont why should Mr Romney. I personally dont care if he is a Morman what is he gonna to do to make America safe what is his plan for America.
You have one “take” on Mormonism, we have another. We no longer are mormon. Perhaps that’s why you don’t recognize us.
Your strawmen are moronic.[Spiff]
Once again, we're now talking about me & not the issues. Definitely a conversation-killer. I guess you've learned that flattery gets you everywhere, as evidenced by the long list of names & labels you've hurled my way.
This is Jim Robinson's forum. It's like his house and we're all guests allowed in to discuss political issues (along with a little small talk) as long as we're supporting his overriding conservative goals. Your behavior is like interjecting yourself into every political discussion of Mitt Romney...
There ya go again...exaggerating (otherwise known as an untruth...or bearing false testimony). "Every political discussion..?" For the past 6 mos. re: Romney, for me it's been 3 threads thus far in August, 6 in July, numerous in June & May, 0 in April, 0 in March, numerous first half of Feb. (I guess FREEPERLAND was silent or near silent on Romney most of those mos., eh?). Compared to some commentators 'round here, all that's a drop in the bucket.
...that "grifter" "Joe" Smith
Not my words. But I guess putting words in somebody else's mouth doesn't matter, eh?
"magic underwear"
Only very briefly :) referenced (no pun intended) once or twice as part of a longer list...no further or extended discussion & no emphasis on my part...but again, distortion doesn't seem to matter to some folks.
...but we remain civil and focus on our similarities and common ground in order to work towards our common goals. You, on the other hand, and those on the forum like you can't seem to handle themselves civilly...
That's almost a new one. I've had many dialogues w/LDS over the yrs, both face to face & online, and few have ever accused me of being uncivil. I don't recall having any convos w/you til today (I supposed it's possible we've had an exchange before). And a review of this post reveals that I've repeatedly attempted to civilly engage you, while it's you who's called me a "basher," "attacker," "harasser," "religious bigot," "troll," "poster boy for religiously intolerant," "polluter," "hard-core, anti-Mormon basher?" (and that was just one post).
You and others like you are doing all you can to make Mormons feel very unwelcome on this forum.
Well, your labels tossed my way today didn't exactly feel like the Welcome Wagon! But that's OK, my skin is well tanned. (Actually, you're one of the few LDS who have told me this. Thank you for your feedback. I guess some folks have thinner skin to pure truth than others).
Your posting history, especially the last 6 months which is made up of constant anti-Mormon posts (except for 2 one sentence posts on other topics) is testament to this. (I urge those reading this to review Colofornian's posting history to see for themselves.)
Thank you for the free commercial. :) (I mean, I sometimes see folks dancin' on the street in costumes advertising for folks to come to the restaurant they represent, but I didn't expect an "ad" from you. So thanks again! Lurkers and Jim, please note Spiff's advice!)
Let's ask the big guy if that is a permissable activity, especially in News/Activism threads, or if there is some guidance that he can offer concerning civility, especially as it relates to religious matters, in support of our common conservative goals.
A review of the record shows that my comments are relevant with political considerations; original (vs. spammed); personal & engaging one on one--meaning customized to the person; at times, heavy on the Bible & even customized to LDS sometimes in citing their Scriptures; not demeaning to the person even when critical of a system; & finally, most are high level w/occasional dry sarcasm (we all know FREEPERS aren't known for that, right).
In my many yrs here I've had 1 post pulled by a moderator & have been warned once or twice about the guidelines. Are you implying that Jim's excellent moderators are not doing their job in upholding guidelines? (Maybe you owe them an apology along w/myself?)
Now, may I suggest that you consider another vein of discussion other than continued ad-hominen attacks?
“Mormonism is not a sect of Christianity”
Yes it is, you need to get off your high horse. Why don’t you get up in arms over those who are Godless? Leave the believers alone.
“Are there Saved Mormons? Of course, and God knows them”
Please forgive my curt reply, at least you are willing to admit that. I really get annoyed with those who won’t even acknowledge that because I start to question their motives and wonder about THEM.
“Mormonism is not a sect of Christianity” [MHGinTN]
Yes it is [RM]
I think we should let the Mormons themselves speak for themselves on this matter w/out having to add our conjecture:
“It is true that many of the Christian churches worship a different Jesus Christ than is worshipped by the Mormons.” – (May 1977, official LDS church publication Ensign magazine p. 26)
"I asked the personages...which of all the sects was right...and which I should join. 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...He again forbade me to join with any of them..." --14 year old Joseph Smith's assessment of the historic Christian church (recorded much later, mind you), which the LDS church made into scripture (Pearl of Great Price, History of Joseph Smith, verse 19)
>>>Sorry, I was referring to “Christians.”<<<
So you’re saying that Catholics aren’t Christians now? My, you drive a pretty tough bargain.
>>>I don’t need St. Peter. I don’t need reformation. I don’t need Billy Graham. All I need is the Bible itself. That this simple concept eludes you is very interesting.<<<
What’s interesting here is that you’ve pretty much made an idol out of the Bible. You’ve closed yourself off to the idea of continuing revelation from God to those outside of yourself. As God communicates through his saints and disciples on earth today, are you even listening?
That’s one thing I think that Protestants (I am one) and particularly non-denominational Christians miss today. They have completely divorced history from the Christian message. I don’t think this is healthful at all. Nor do I think it was the way Christ conducted himself on earth. Feel free to disagree with me, but at least consider the idea.
And it’s one area where I think the Catholic Church has a doctrine better grounded than that of my own church.
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.