Apparently she missed his speech last week or paid it no mind whatsoever. The speech should have ended what is turning-out to be a religious test as prohibited by Article 6 of the US Constitution. Nevertheless, the Times will do it’s best in it’s dying light to promulgate religious animosity. Apparently so will Mike Huckabee.
Governor Mitt Romney is not my candidate, as you all know, but this smacks of religious bigotry, and should NOT be tolerated! What a COMPLETE pantload! No surprise that it’s the NY Times!
The Politbureau must be scared.
Although the columnist has nothing to do with it, the headline is incredibly nasty.
I think you're mixing them up with Jehova's Witnesses, another cult.
Have we ever elected a Unitarian? Just wondering, really.
Can’t wait til the start on Obama’s religious upbringing..
Better a Mormon than a Muslim any day of the week. And I dont even like Mitt.
Thank you many have no clue what some Religious Leaders are doing for Religious understanding!
Ravi Zacharias speaking to the Mormons and Evangelicals in Salt Lake City in the Mormon Tabernacle. Presented by Standing Together.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5799634011915096131&q=ravi+zacharias&total=127&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0
And if he's going to drive the NYT and Larry O'Donnell crazy I guess that puts him in the lead.
That being said, does that disqualify Mitt Romney from the POTUS? Hardly.
It's not like he cuts the heads off chickens or does blood sacrifice by slicing open his child head !
I find it much more troubling that a POS like Bill Clinton who used his religious pandering as a front to fool his sycophants that he is a Christian.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic Ping List:
Please ping me to all note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.
I always try to be very nice with those young men. They’re working so hard, so earnestly.
I wouldn’t expect anything else from the NY Times. It is a nest of despicable atheistic Commies.
The old grey whore jumps on the “only said Mormon once” bandwagon.
Of course this is an attempt to sow hatred. What else is new? This is the NY Times.
Also, the writer clearly is a secularist religion hater, but she is trying to sow hatred between Christians and Mormons.
“But to many American Christians, those friendly Mormon missionaries embody exactly what they fear and resent about Mormonism.”
Speak for yourself, Laurie. If it was a Christian missionary knocking at your door, you’d react in exactly the same way. You wouldn’t understand a Christian missionary any better than a Mormon missionary. You just pretend to.
This reminds me of when the MSM was working with McCain in the 2000 Primaries, and tried to split the Catholics away from Bush, who they pretended to have insulted all Catholics because he visited Bob Jones University. They wouldn’t know what a real Catholic was if they tripped over him, but they pretended very hard to be outraged on behalf of Catholics. Fortunately, Catholics understood exactly what they were up to, and that dirty trick failed miserably.
Did the article mention the Holy Underwear and how a woman can't make it into heaven without her husband's permission? Golden tablets and magic spectacles? Jesus visiting the American Indians?
If one reads the entire article and not just the exerpt and headline above the article, one will see that the article is pretty much right on. There is animosity between evangelicals, Catholics and Mormons. (At the Catholic school I attended in the 60’s the nuns made it clear that the Mormon church was “evil” and wrong. Then I grew up.) There is also animosity between evangelicals and Catholics though not to near the degree as between evangelicals and Mormons. It serves no purpose to close the eyes and act like this doesn’t exist. Many evangelicals and Catholics will not vote for Romney simply because he is a Mormon and that is their right to do so.
Romney did the politically right thing in making that speech although I personally don’t think he said the right things. He should have mentioned “Mormon” much more than just once and he should have talked specifically at length about the Mormon church, it’s beliefs, and then talk in general about all Christian religions.
In making the religion speech, Romney was seeking to “inoculate” his self against many of the things that are being whispered, said and written about Romney being a Mormon. Political inoculation addresses an issue in an attempt to defuse it before it becomes an issue. However, from a political campaign point of view, I think in this case Romney should have made this speech 6 months ago. It serves little good to get a flu inoculation when you already have the flu. Romney’s political problems with his religion are at that stage right now.
And, Romney’s speech was not done for spiritual reasons. It was done for purely political reasons as well it should have been.
I don’t see a thing wrong with the article. There’s nothing wrong with talking about that huge elephant in the room.