#1 Romney is beholden to whatever his "prophet" might change his mind on.
#2 Joseph Smithdid advocate polygamy (Romney is his disciple). And the year Smith died, he also declared himself a candidate for POTUS.
Are you telling us that Joseph Smith, had he not died in a gun battle exchange where he went down firing, could not have been POTUS because of his polygamy religious beliefs?
So which is it? A POTUS candidate like Smith would not have had to remove his religious belief such as polygamy? Or, could a person committing bigamy have been POTUS?
If a politician advocated Sharia Law, they couldn’t be president, since Sharia Law would overrule the constitution.
Abortion overrides the constitutional inalieble right to life. (That hasn't stopped POTUS candidates before -- now has it?)
On top of that, since when does sheer First Amendment advocacy of something = doing some unconstitutional that pre-empts you from being a POTUS? Can't a POTUS be a theoretical advocate -- exercising First Amendment rights -- without doing something "unconstitutional?"
Godzilla's right. The more you open your mouth, the more stupidity escapes. (You might want to post a guard or two on that keyboard of yours)
Sorry, but you are to stupid to show me how Mitt governed as a Mormon. And you are stupid to see that not all Mormons have the same beliefs.
“So which is it? A POTUS candidate like Smith would not have had to remove his religious belief such as polygamy? Or, could a person committing bigamy have been POTUS?”
A polygamist couldn’t be president, but someone who believes in polygamy could be president, because they are not advocating it for others. Those who favor Sharia Law are advocating it for society. You seem to favor a religious litmus test, but we are not a state run Christian nation.
“Abortion overrides the constitutional inalieble right to life. (That hasn’t stopped POTUS candidates before — now has it?)”
Those presidents had no choice in enforcing that Supreme Ct. ruling. The rest of your response is written horribly.