Mitt Romney is a Mormon and I am a Baptist: Get Over It!

North Star Writers Group ^ | October 29, 2007 | Herman Cain

[Invisigoth]

The Baptists, Methodists, Catholics, Lutherans, Pentecostals, Mormons and a few other faiths have three things in common – they believe in Jesus Christ, that He is the Son of God and that He died and was resurrected for our sins.

So what’s the problem?

The political pundits continue to try and make Mitt Romney’s religious beliefs a big issue as he runs for the Republican presidential nomination. Different denominations of Christianity are just that – different denominations – which means different worship practices of the same fundamental Christian beliefs.

Some people have commented that they cannot support Mitt Romney because he is a Mormon. When they are pressed to explain why that is objectionable, they stutter. Still others are skeptical of Mitt Romney based solely on hearsay or lack of knowledge about Mormons.

[Kevmo]

Hmmm, only one reply when you point out that “Mormons practice heresy” while the other things mentioned really are just denominations.

What’s wrong with this picture? If it were a baptist running for pres, and someone called baptists heretics, there would be a lot more responses to that.

I pointed out that it was heresy on another thread and I was accused of “being stuck in the dark ages”.

Well, I suppose I should bookmark this part of the thread to see if there’s any followup.

[Spiff]

No, a "shill" is someone who supports a candidate either dishonestly or out of ignorance and largely for political reasons having nothing to do with ideological conformity, and who attacks other candidates on the basis of same (i.e., regardless of what a candidate believes or does).

So, on that basis alone, you can be called a "shill" for whatever candidate that YOU support. Thank you. I won't call you that, for the reasons that I posted previously, but at least you'll have met your own definition given your ignorance of Mitt Romney's actual record.

Mitt's actual record (which you've been silent about, other than to refer to it nebulously as a "reason" why other shills also support Romney), is not very good on abortion issues (which, btw, are not completely contiguous with the more ill-defined "life issues" spoken of by people with poor records on abortion).

I have not been silent about Romney's record. I guess, by the definition you're using for being "silent" about it, you've also been silent as you've failed to back up your assertions that Romney's record is pro-abortion. You simply give nebulous statements saying that he's not trustworthy on the abortion issue while saying that his actual record is the most important determining factor.

No, you are a shill because you falsely portray (whether intentionally or because you have on blinders, I will not render an opinion) Mitt's position(s) on abortion. Likewise, you falsely attack FDT on the issue, using verifably false claims.

I've falsely portrayed nothing. Are you implying that Dr. Jack Willke is also falsely portraying Romney's record? Is Dr. Willke a "shill" now because he disagrees with your assessment of Romney's record? This man has dedicated his life to the pro-life cause and is now staking his invaluable reputation on Romney yet you're going to disregard it and call Dr. Willke a "shill!!?"

Case in point would be your claim that FDT voted for some anti-life amendment to a bill back in 1995 (which you tried to use to "prove" that FDT doesn't have a "100% pro-life record). I disproved your assertion quite handily, something to which you never bothered to respond.

For one, your link here in this thread does not point to what you think it points to. Second, some of the links in the post where you think that you disproved something are expired and don't point to anything. But, most importantly, you were wrong in that post (which I did find through a little searching) because Roll Call #369, to which I was referring, WAS another vote on keeping FEHB funds from paying for abortions. It was a Committee vote to strip lines 10-17 from page 76 of the legislation, which would have removed that language allowing payment for abortion services. If you would actually read the Congressional Record on the matter you would see that. Your claims that you disproved anything are what is verifiably false.

And I was NEVER asserting that Fred Thompson was anything other than a pro-life candidate. What I've been asserting and will continue to assert is that he doesn't have a 100%, perfect pro-life in the Senate. People here want to demand that he does, but they're wrong. I back up my assertions with the solid facts that the premiere pro-life organization in America - the National Right to Life Committee - did NOT give him a 100% rating AND I did find one amendment on which he did not vote the pro-life position. Instead he voted with all but 5 of the Democrats and a bunch of RINOs like Jeffords, Spector, etc. There may be others, but I'm sure that it is an extremely rare occurrence. Continuing to demand that Thompson has a perfect, 100% pro-life record - despite seeing the facts that he doesn't - meets your own definition of being a "shill".

Does Mitt Romney have a 100% pro-life record? No. Does Fred Thompson? No. Did Mitt Romney answer some pro-choice groups' questionnaires in a manner which did not assert a pro-life position? Yes. Did Fred Thompson do the same? Yes. Neither candidate is perfect on the issue. That's all I've been trying to claim, your false claims, aspersions and namecalling notwithstanding.

[GOP_Lady]

The only thing I have to say about this is ... Mike Huckabee (a Baptist) telling us how we should live, and Mitt Romney (a Mormon) not telling us how we should live. I find this very telling.

[Old Mountain man]

How do you regard Peter? How do you regard Paul? Did they not found Churches all over the Mediterranean?

[xjcsa]

I really wish other Romney-backers wouldn't try to make the argument that Mormonism is just another denomination of Christianity. It is not; the differences are far more profound than this author lets on. I support Romney in spite of his Mormonism, because I think he'd make the best general election candidate and President of those running.

[restornu]

A prophet is not a founder he is a restorator of the Lord Word!

[johnthebaptistmoore]

I’m a Baptist man with the last name of Moore. This makes me a Baptist and a “Moore man” at the same time!

[Colofornian]

I can think of no other way in which his Mormonism would be relevant in the Presidential primaries.

I'm going to address your comments in two responses, starting with your last comment first:

For a proper backdrop on this response, see post #79. So, let's say Mitt is in the Benson-Kimball camp, which is standard LDS theology...Actually, let's go in a complete reverse direction: Let's take away every presidential candidate's faith structure for a moment. Let's say we didn't know any of their beliefs or to what church or spiritual affinity they belonged, adhered to.

Let's say at an open forum a new candidate named Joe Jones was in the midst. And I asked him the question, "What is your belief about God?" and he answered, "I believe I will be a god someday."

Wouldn't that cause you or anyone else to pause just for a moment? I mean, first of all, how often do you get to meet an alleged "future god?"; Secondly, you begin to wonder about the mental make-up of this candidate if he takes this thought quite seriously...I mean that's a horse of a different color than thoughts about the Virgin Mary.

Additionally, I would think if this guy thinks he's actually about to graduate into godhood, what kind of power pulsating through his veins will reign during his presidency? Man, that's October Scary. (And that is also a big diff between, say, a Senator or Gov. and POTUS of the most powerful country in the world)

[SnakeDoctor]

I didn’t judge anyone. In fact, I specifically stated that it wasn’t my place to judge whether the differences between Mormonism and Protestant Christianity were dealbreakers with regard to Salvation.

Simply noting that there are fundamental doctrinal differences between Protestantism/ Catholicism and Mormonism isn’t a judgment ... it is a fact. There are differences. God can sort out whether those differences are important.

H

[Old Mountain man]

Congratulations on getting the quotes correct. You may also note that Heavenly Father is never addressed as a god but as God. Do not try to deny there is a difference. Do not try to obfuscate the issue.

The Godhead consists of three Personages: God the Father, Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost.

I would invite anyone with a curiosity as to true beliefs of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints not to go to the anti Mormon sites first, but feel free to go to LDS.org where you will find published in full all of our sacred standard works. Find out for yourself if we are the demons Colofornian and others of that ilk claim we are. By the way, Colofornian, was it your church that produced the movies back in the early part of the 20th century that portrayed our missionaries as vampires?

Bless you.

[SHEENA26]

Exactly! This too shall pass. Mitt’s the man!

[SnakeDoctor]

>>> Mormonism have differences in fundamental doctrine which separate them from traditional Christianity (for instance, Christ was not the Son of God.

>> Whoa wait. I don’t believe that Christ was the Son of God? I must not have gotten that memo.

That was a cute, yet obnoxious and entirely disengenuous, use of selective quotation. Argue with what I actually said, not what you can twist a quote to make it appear that I said. The following is the actual quote as written in my post ...

[...]
“Unitarianism, Judaism, and Mormonism have differences in fundamental doctrine which separate them from traditional Christianity (for instance, Christ was not the Son of God (Judaism) or Christ is not the only path to Salvation (Unitarianism)).”
[...]

As you can plainly see, I specifically stated that I was talking about Judaism when I noted that there was a religion that didn’t believe that Christ was the son of God. Don’t get your panties all bunched up when I clearly wasn’t even talking about Mormons.

H

[Old Mountain man]

Prophets have been the mouthpiece of the Lord since the very early years of the Old Testament. There are prophets mentioned in the New Testament, as I am certain you are aware.

Joseph Smith was a Prophet of God, who was given the task of restoring the Gospel to the Earth. Since by example of the current Prophet, Gordon B. Hinckley, I shall not speak ill of other Churches, I will not explain the necessity of restoring the gospel to the Earth.

Bless you all and have a great day!

[broncobilly]

Satan was created by God as all other angels were created by God.

---

Satan is an angel?
And God created something that evil?

As I said: Weird! So you see, it is easy to criticize others and not look closely at oneself.

[MHGinTN]

Hilarity placemarker

[TigersEye]

Who cares what church he goes to? He’s a liberal.

[Greg F]

What you wrote is the most sophomoric thing I’ve run into in a long time, broncobilly. Mormons seem to rush to sophism as their main method of interfaith discussion, which makes me suspect that they are either brainwashed or brainwashing (deciever or decieved). I’m assuming you are a Mormon from what you’ve said in this thread.

Basic response to your point: God gave man and angel free will.

[Colofornian]

Can you point us to any elements of Mormon theology which Romney attempted to impose in Massachusetts while he was governor?

Yes. But this is also a "set-up" question.

Take a look at all of the Christian presidents in U.S. history and then ask your question. "Can you point us to any elements of Christian theology in which these presidents attempted to impose on U.S. citizens while in office?"

Clever. You asked a question already set up/designed to get a "no" response. Now, change one little word in your question as applied to U.S. Presidents (at least some of them) & you might get a different response: "Can you point us to any elements of Christian theology in which these presents attempted to expose on U.S. citizens while in office?"

The answer to this question is "yes." Yes, Teddy Roosevelt "exposed" his Christian faith and beliefs while in office (as has others).

So let me deal with your question by first asking it slightly reworded, and then I'll deal with the original question as is:

Can you point us to any elements of Mormon theology which Romney attempted to EXpose in Massachusetts while he was governor? [And the extended question by virtue of the multiplied visibility and power, How pronounced would this be when it comes to THE POTUS?]

All we have to do is to look at one real recent prez and one hypothetical prez: Bill Clinton was a presidential role-model disaster for our young generation re: the scandal. Any president the voting block elevates to the highest role model position in our land accords the highest vote of respectability to the public aspects of what that person stands for. If that person, for example, is a neatly tucked-away communist who's adopted a mask of "family values," & we elect him president, we are telling our kids that communism is OK to emulate. Furthermore, we are handing proselytizing fuel to communists everywhere. It would fuel their door-to-door boldness and other aggressive campaigns to be able to say, "See. Our respectable Communist leader holds the highest office in the land. Come study what helped make the man he is today!"

Now for your direction question "as is": Can you point us to any elements of Mormon theology which Romney attempted to impose in Massachusetts while he was governor?

Yes. I believe that a person can make a case for Romney's gumby positions just on the fact that by doing so, he's exhibiting himself to be a "traditional Mormon leader."

First of all, what do I mean by his "gumby" positions?

Romney was against legal fake marriage ("gay marriage") while being for legal fake marriage (civil unions and dometic partnerships).

Romney underwent a pro-life "conversion" in Nov 04 only to be forcefully "pro-choice" at a press conference in May 05.

In '94 in 2 back-to-back sentences, Romney spoke about the rights of the Boy Scouts of America to determine its own policy, and in the very next breath say that the Boy Scouts should be open to people of any "sexual orientation."

Romney was twice endorsed by the Log Cabin Club of MA only now to have ads run against him by the Log Cabin Club. Romney was in favor of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act before he was 'agin' it.

Romney came alongside Catholic social services to help them keep homosexuals from adopting thru their agency before telling them that "No...can't help you."

Romney was in favor of embryonic stem cell research and then underwent a "conversion." He was in favor of Roe until he was against it.

Hey, you take enough stances...then if you really do twist the apostle Paul's words as "being all things to all men" in this manner, you, too, can be a political gumby!

Now, how may have the evolution of Mormon theology influenced the evolution of Romney's theologically laced social stances?

Well, one only needs to review LDS history:

Example 1: The Book of Mormon was anti-polygamy; but then its original prophet WAS a polygamist (along with many to follow); but then the LDS church cracked down on polygamy; but then polygamy is still supposedly being practiced forever in the celestial kingdom (IOW, "right now"--as much as "eternity" can be "now").

Example 2: LDS said black skin was a "curse" and prevented blacks from the priesthood. Then they changed their mind in 1978.

Example 3: LDS were largely anti-slavery in history. But then you get curious pro-slave owner "Scriptural" passages like Doctrine & Covenants 134:12.

Example 4: Except for the doctrine of grace and some others, just about all of the major distinctions between LDS & the historic Christian faith doesn't even come from the Book of Mormon. What that means is that LDS theology itself "evolved" (one God in BoM; multiple gods later...no priesthood in BoM; priesthood later; no created God in BoM; LDS god a created God later; no 3 degrees of heaven in BoM; 3 degrees later; no baptism for dead or geneology works or temple works in BoM; all of that later...I could on and on)

Example 5: LDS position on abortion. If you read the LDS position on abortion (particularly the one I've seen written for LDS bishops), it initially comes across as "pro-life." But as you read it carefully, you realize that the holes in this cheese makes you ask, "Where's the cheese?"

I mean there's an exception for rape. An exception for generic "health." (And guess who gets to define "health"?--that's right, the abortionist). An exception for if you pray to God about it and then you make God an accessory to murder by saying, "He answered 'Yes'." An exception for life of the mother...

Conclusion: When folks point to Gumby Romney waffling on this or that, I guess I have to ask, "What's the big deal?" (That's what LDS leaders have done from the get-go)

[broncobilly]

I think you should read the church fathers broncobilly before you characterize what they say to others. Which of the church fathers have you read?

---

Quite a few. And you?
Also, what specifically are you referring to?
Are you referring to my statement that the early fathers believed in divinization of man?
Try reading the first volume of Pelikan’s history of Christianity.
And where else to begin?
1) G. Bonner, “Augustine’s Conception of Deification.”
2) A. Louth, “Manhood into God.”
3) Gregorios Mantzaridis, “The Deification of Man: St. Gregory Palamas and the Orthodox Tradition.”
4) Robert Rakestraw, “Becoming Like God: An Evangelical Doctrine of Theosis.”
5) Christofors Stavropaulos, “Partakers of Divine Nature.”
6) P.T. Wild, “The Divinazation of Man according to St. Hilary of Pointiers.”
etc.
etc.
Salvation as the Deification of Man was a common belief in early Christianity. It was the belief of St. Athanasius, the great defender of the Nicene Creed.

[Ace's Dad]

"What is your belief about God?" and he answered, "I believe I will be a god someday."

I think I'm hearing too much "god" here, and not enough Jesus Christ, who simply taught love and eternal life.