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.
“If Willard Romney can make a case why a POTUS who believes in a cult based on the following document:”
Why don’t you go back to whatever hole you came out of. I’m sure there are some hate-sites out there who would love to have you.
That's a pretty broad statement to cover all Christians. I'd accept that the Christians you know have not reacted that way, but your experience and knowledge certainly don't cover all of them.
In the same circumstances, with outsiders mocking and deriding basic Christian beliefs, I suspect many Christians would react the same way.
That would be difficult, since the whole post is a twisted mess of half-truths and sensationalist nonsense.
How old was he? How fast did he work? Why would he make that stuff up? Who else saw the plates? Who worked with hims? How many witnesses were there? how venomous was the opposition to him? Why didn’t he quit and recant? He wasn’t burying his head in a hat out of regret.
Typical lazy journalism; they get the quote wrong. If you're going to use quotation marks, MAKE IT AN ACTUAL QUOTE. What the man actually said was, "Christ, 'cause he changed my heart." I remember it well; I was in the room.
[rant directed at author, not poster]
No he’s either faithful (and not being honest when he says it is irrelavant or he has no core basis to his principles. He is trying to have it both ways and getting called on it.
I don't trust any liberal of either party when it comes to war. Cowardice and retreat in the face of opposition, which is characteristic of liberals, is far more apt to bring about a nuclear war than is standing rock solid strong for our nation's security and being equipped and prepared to fight to the death to preserve it. Knowing that they face such a determined, powerful, unyielding opponent would cause any potential enemy to realize that they would pay an unthinkable price for attacking us.
As much as I oppose Giuliani, I think he would be much better in that respect (national security) than Mitt even though I strongly disagree with him on many other issues and I doubt that my conscience would let me vote for him. But either Hunter or Thompson would be better, far, far better in fact, than Giuliani, and I would vote for either of those men without a moment's hesitation.
You mean, like “Ether”? (Wasn’t that a typo?)
Mark Twain described the Book of Mormon as “chloroform in print” because it lifted so much from the old testament, then just kept repeating it.
I think that most of America would be weirded out to find out that Mitt thinks that he will become a God of his own planet along with our God, who is one of millions of God of their own planets.
And no, I am not making that up.
Guess what I discovered? John F. Kerry managed 26% of the vote here in 2004. The counties he won are shown in red. The counties he won big are shown in darker shades of red.
Utah Freepers, please correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the OTM (other then Mormon) share of Utah voters close to 26%?
What gives you the right to declare a religion false, denigrate its founder and leaders, and offend members of that faith in a NEWS/ACTIVISM thread or even on a conservative political forum? Should your religion also be fair game? Would it be right for FReepers to trash your faith, the founders of your faith, and the things that you hold sacred? While you don't believe in some people's religions, and many people don't believe in your particular religion, don't you think that the polite and appropriate thing to do is allow everyone to worship how they so desire even if you don't agree with it? How would you feel if every day you logged into Free Republic, someone was harassing you about your religion and saying the most untrue, vile and ugly things about every aspect of it? Mitt Romney's or any other person's candidacy does not give you or anyone else here license to bash anyone else's religion.
You don't believe my religion is true. I don't believe that your religion is true. So what? Should I jump into every thread that mentions your religion or any candidate who is a member of your religion and start posting a bunch of attacks on your religion? No. Then why is it that you and others like you think that they have license to do that same to members of the LDS Church just because one of the frontrunner candidates is a member also?
Should Free Republic become a circular firing squad where we blast fellow conservatives because we think that their religion is false or odd or whatever? How does such behavior support the conservative mission of this website? It doesn't. It detracts from it. There's dozens of websites and forums where such behavior is considered to be appropriate. Might I suggest that you do this there and leave it off of this forum?
You lost me. What are you even talking about?
Mark Twain described the Book of Mormon as “chloroform in print” because it lifted so much from the old testament, then just kept repeating it.
Yes, great theologian that Mark Twain was. Is Mark Twain your standard for accurate doctrine?
The Book of Mormon isn't a novel.
I wonder if the media folk said that about Ellison (sp?) in Minnesota.
Here you go FRiend.
http://scriptures.lds.org/en/ether/contents
(But I won’t lift you on-and-off the old girl.)
Good point!
Yes. Ignore the string of shining success after shining success in Mitt's leadership history.
Ignore Bain Capital and Staples.
Ignore the 2002 Winter Olympics.
Ignore Mitt's election to Governor in very liberal Massachusetts and his ability to govern conservatively there.
Pretend all of that never happened, so Mitt can be a Bad Candidate.
{But Romney has a more difficult task. Whereas Kennedy mollified skeptics by declaring that ‘’I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute,’’ Romney can ill afford to say that. Conservative Christian voters, who wield great influence in Republican primaries, do not believe in ‘’absolute’’ separation. Romney would commit political suicide if he echoed JFK; nor would he want to, for personal reasons. He has repeatedly signaled that religion belongs in the public square, and that the tenets of his faith have infused his conservative politics. }
Since many of us are offended with the addition of “separation of church and state” to the original meaning of the Constitution, all he needs to do is say he believes in the Constitution as originally written and properly amended
I'm still waiting to hear YOUR POINT.
I'm quite aware of the book of Ether. I've read it. More than once.
Please refer to Post #53 for a real picture of Romney...he makes Bill Clinton’s cowardice and loathing of the military pale in comparison.
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.