Since Newt and Rick are Catholics, should we bring up their religion in every post about them as well?
How far does it go?
I’m not a Mitt backer at all, but I don’t see the purpose of bashing his religion every time his name is mentioned.
Mormons, by and large, are good people with solid character. Yes, they have some wacky beliefs, but so do Baptists.
From my perspective.
I don’t let that poison my mind.
It’s sad what you do and it makes all of FR look kookish and bigoted.
Your claim to represent the vast majority of Americans is silly, too.
I'm going to give you 3 answers in 3 quick successive posts...
#1 I don't bring up Mitt's Mormonism in every post about him...
Some, I'm talking about his pro-abortion record...
...or his socialistic healthcare track record...
...or his appointment of liberal judges...
...or his three distinct stances on treating homosexual employees as "minorities..."
In MANY of the posts where I do discuss Mitt's Mormonism, I'm really addressing the implications of those beliefs & convictions: That he...
...lacks discernment to become THE leader of the Free world...
...is vulnerable to deception because of his life-long major gullibility bents...
...is arrogant & prideful to the max -- that he thinks he is a "god in embryo" on his way to running his own world as a future grown-up "god"...
...is racist for not objecting the first 13 years of his adult life the open racist doctrines & policies of his church, which he gave 10% of his income to...
...disses his very base of his party by embracing the "faith of his fathers" -- a "faith" that labels us Christians as "corrupt" "apostates" who embrace 100% abominable (putrid) creeds [Note: If the Republicans nominated a Muslim, I'd call out the Muslim in this same way for his faith calling us Christians "infidels"]
#2 If Newt & Rick belonged to ANY church which engaged in open racism during these men's adult membership, then they are relevant issues to be discussed...they are on the table...
ESPECIALLY since -- and this is key -- if the candidate won't even discuss the matter!!!
What? Are you in favor of a candidate "tabling" his racist ties??? Is that what you're advocating?
If he won't discuss them, then, yes...we need to raise the issue over & over again until he begins to address them!!!
#3 My question to pollster1 in post #46 applies to you as well...If Newt or Rick's religious membership led them to believe they are "gods-in-embryo" -- with a full "godship" and accompanying own creative world to come -- you think that their announcement about adhering to such a religious belief is somehow "off the political table?" Especially if the candidate NEVER addresses this belief? Really?
If Obama announced tomorrow that he was Messiah II, but said he would discuss it no further, according to the convictions expressed by you and pollster1, you would have to begin going thru EVERY thread to defend Obama from the religious critiques on those thread if you were really motivated to keep FR from being "kookyish and bigoted."
(Yeah, like that would happen)
Therefore...I ask: Why is it:
I NEVER SEE YOU OR POLLSTER1 OR ANY FREEPER EVER call on the carpet ANY OBAMA COMMENTS THAT ...
(a)...HE IS A CLOSET MUSLIM...
...OR (b) DISPLAYS RADICAL RELIGIOUS ASSOCIATIONS DUE TO HIS TIES TO REV. JEREMIAH WRIGHT...
Nor, btw, did I see ANY FREEPER object when the Christian Science Monitor reported in late 2007 whereby Romney said he wouldn't place a Muslim on his Cabinet.
If you & pollster1, and other FREEPERs were so motivated in your expressions to "root out" perceived religious intolerance, you'd go after those posters critiquing Obama. (But you don't)
[Note: There were three such threads on Easter Sunday alone; and one less than a week before & another less than a week after...And a disclaimer is in order here: I think Obama should be called on the carpet re: Rev. J. Wright + his catering to Muslims...tho it'd be nice if FReepers actually documented his "closet Muslim" status instead of just gossipping it]
If you & pollster1, and other FREEPERS were one ounce consistent in your convictions to keep religion "hermetically sealed" from the political arena, you'd go after those posters critiquing Obama. (But you don't)
That leaves me to only one conclusion: Either that's not your real motivation -- to as you claim, keep FR from looking "Kookyish or bigoted" --
...or you posters are among the biggest dual-faced hypocrites we have on FR!
So...you've got two choices...come clean on your motivations here...or confess that you're inconsistent & hypocritical on these religio-political issues.