There are some on Free Republic that oppose Romney specifically because they are afraid his election would legitimize Mormonism and lead to a surge in the growth of the LDS Church. That this is a political consideration for them is something I have condemned in the strongest terms. Nevertheless, I think it's an assumption based on a false premise.
I’m not Mormon...and not planning on becoming Mormon, or making valuations about Mormonism based on Romney. If I vote for Romney, I would be hiring Romney to balance the books, streamline government, reduce taxes, keep our economy healthy, appoint conservative judges, keep us on offense in the war, and above all, beat the DEMS!
Ping
AMPU, you’re the only non-Mormon I’ve pinged. Please ping some (polite) acquaintances who you think might have an interest in the topic.
Let’s be civil, everybody.
There are many, but few who will admit it.
Mike
I don’t think that is the problem most people here have with Romney.
I think it is:
1. His support of gun control
2. RomneyCare with its $50 abortions, deputizing insurance companies to collect a de facto tax, and general socialism;
3. Massive increase in taxes in the form of “fees”
4. Being passionately pro-abortion (including story about family friend who died in back-alley abortion) until a few years ago
5. Being for gays in the military -— saying “don’t ask don’t tell” didn’t go far enough
6. Being for gay Boy Scout leaders
Etc. -— huge changes for a 50+ year old man to make in world outlook -— with NO explaintion
And we have a memory -— recalling George Romney (Mitt’s father) who ran as a surrender in Vietnam Republican -— and lost to Nixon (also a liberal) who ran to the right.
Basically, it’s readily apparent that Romney is a liberal who decided not to repeat his father’s mistakes, and so has decided to pretend to be a conservative.
One well known evangelical who supports Romney is Jay Sekelow.
One well known evangelical who supports Romney is Jay Sekelow.
One well known evangelical who supports Romney is Jay Sekelow.
I dunno. Did Adams, Adams, Fillmore and Taft grow Unitarianism (they're 0.02% of the population.)
Did Nixon grow the Quakers?
Did Eisenhower grow the Jehovah's Witnesses?
Sounds more like the folks who vigilently demand that politicians enact their religious faith into law suddenly don't think it's such a hot idea.
Yes it will hurt the church. Not because the LDS church is bad but because the LDS church wants to keep some secrets. That will not be allowed. People are naturally nosy.
There are some on Free Republic that oppose Romney specifically because they are afraid his election would legitimize Mormonism and lead to a surge in the growth of the LDS Church. That this is a political consideration for them is something I have condemned in the strongest terms. Nevertheless, I think it's an assumption based on a false premise.
You see, Baptists and Catholics make up most of America. Mormons make up a few TV commercials and a few percentage points of American history. My point is that nobody really cares about Mormonism enough to discriminate against it. I'm tired of Mormon's trying to become the next victim.
Oh, they’ll just love an Obama presidency.
Tant,
Thanks for the ping.
I disagree with the article. I think it sets up a straw
man and then tries to refute it.
Since you stated your position and identity, let me do the
same, though you know it yourself.
I’m a Christian. An evangelical. Former missionary. Seminary
graduate. Committed to my faith. A conservative. Beyond that,
a capablist.
I’m not a Mitt fan for many reasons. I could list them as
I have on other threads. Suffice it to say I find him
both liberal and fake. He could also use a personality
transfusion.
I have no fear that mormonism would grow more rapidly
in conjunction with a Mitt Presidency. It may or may not.
That isn’t my personal concern.
Assuming he wasn’t a fake and a liberal though, I
still cannot vote for him.
My concern has only to do with my personal conscience.
I cannot cast my personal vote to elect a follower of
a cult to the Presidency. I’ve really searched my
conscience and cannot.
I do know other Christians who have no problem with
voting for Mitt. Others can. I cannot.
It won’t matter. If Obama goes on to win - and the odds
are increasing, it won’t matter who is nominated on
our side. We don’t have a legitimate candidate who can
credibly argue they are for change. And change is what
people are looking for.
In other words, if Mitt threads the needle and succeeds
in fulfilling his strategic plan, Operation Kindle,
he will lose. First mormon to capture the Republican
nomination for President. Landslide for Obama. I’m
wondering how that would feel to you?
Best,
ampu
PS - so here is the test again tant: Float trip down the
Arkansas River for the day. Cooler of beer. Lazy day off.
Who would the average American rather spend the day with,
Mitt or Obama??
Clearly, Obama.
This is one evangelical who’d support Romney before I’d vote for Schmuckabee.
I posted this on another thread. I post it again modified:
Does anybody here know, or care, about the history of western civilization? Looking at it through spiritual eyes, the real underlying history of Europe and Britain has been the history of the bloody struggle for, first, the Bible, secondly, for the truth contained therein.
It is my understanding that this country of ours owes its great system of liberty and freedom traceable to none other than the Bible. Traceable to the religious foment in Britain (and before that, continental Europe) that brought our forefathers to this country seeking religious liberty. Liberty they could practice their Bible based belief…without being persecuted for it.
Sure, the desire for religious truth was a nasty affair, frought with many fits and starts, and errors by imperfect men along the way, a trail marked with the blood of many martyrs. It was, and still is, a noble venture, this search for truth.
Thanks be to God, with our Bibles in the land of freedom, we have now the opportunity most of those in the preceding 2000 years never had.
Truth contained within the Bible has been the goal…and the only authority recognized by Christians. Until yesterday, that is, now other forms of authority have arisen to challenge it: like the Koran, and the book of Mormon.
Americans have benefited from this long 2000 year process of blood and martyrdom, we have can search out truth…and we need look no further than the Bible alone. We Biblicists view Mormonism with its extrabiblical revelation, Joe Smith and his golden plates, God coming from the planet Kolob, Masonic-like temple ceremonies, becoming gods, etc., with abhorrence.
It has taken 2000 years to come full circle back to true Biblical faith. For a Biblicist to reverse his long standing search for truth, and capitulate to such an extrabiblical fraud as Mormonism after all this would be to flippantly dismiss the entire process!
I, for one, am appalled at the ignorance of the history of western civilization displayed by so many today. And by the attitude displayed by Christians, apparently, to them, all the blood spilled for Biblical truth is meaningless. Anybody ever searched out what brought the pilgrims here?
CTR
I'm not Mormon, though the company I work for was founded by Mormons (they hired me), I still have Mormon co-workers today, and for a while one of my state reps (whom I very highly respect) is Mormon. That Romney is Mormon doesn't matter in the least to me, any more than his father's being Mormon mattered when I lived under the latter's governorship.
But Mitt is not his father, and Mitt's conduct of elements of his governorship is why I would be very hard-pressed to vote for him come November.
But I wouldn't worry about the LDS church. Whether Mitt wins or loses, if nobody LDS goes off the deep end and plays the religion card, you all will be seen henceforth as being mainstream Americans. JFK brought previously-suspect Roman Catholics "into the fold": the same will happen here.
What a dumb article.