Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: NoLibZone

Harry Reid and Glenn Beck are both Mormons so why is Mormonism a factor in a political contest?


7 posted on 06/13/2012 12:28:37 PM PDT by polkajello
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: polkajello

Religion is a factor for several reasons.

Bishop Romney is the highest, most powerful religious leader to ever run for the presidency, he is from a family of royalty who helped create the anti-Christian cult called Mormonism.

Romney’s entire life seems to revolve around Mormonism and he has transferred 10s of millions of dollars into his cult, his father was a Bishop and also a GOP presidential candidate, an uncle, (or great uncle) was in line to become a Prophet.

Romney sought the approval of his Holy Prophet for this presidential run and it was granted, the Mormon church is coordinating a public relations effort costing millions of dollars to capitalize on this run, and to assist their golden boy (which Romney is in Mormon circles).

Many Mormons believe that Mitt could be the fulfillment of the “White horse” prophecy.

Romney himself has excommunicated Mormons, and baptized dead non-Mormons into his religion, Romney would have been teaching the inferiority of blacks until his 30s, his Mormon church issued his draft deferment themselves, there are many many relevant Mormon questions in regards to Romney.


11 posted on 06/13/2012 12:41:31 PM PDT by ansel12 (Massachusetts Governors, where the GOP now goes for it's Presidential candidates.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: polkajello; greyfoxx39; colorcountry; Colofornian; ejonesie22; Elsie; Godzilla; MHGinTN; narses; ...
Re. Harry Reid and Glenn Beck are both Mormons so why is Mormonism a factor in a political contest?

I maintain Mitt's Mormon beliefs are a critical election issue and I raise following arguments in support of this position:

It is not right to say doctrine doesn't matter at all. Take Islam, for instance. It would be dangerously naive to assume, as American civil religion does, that all religions are pretty much the same. It's true that most religions share core ethical teachings, but orthodox Islam also teaches unambiguously that there is to be no separation of religion and state, that non-Muslims are to live subservient under law to Muslims, and in some sects that Allah commands a jihad or "holy war" be waged against non-Muslim "infidels". To the extent that a Muslim wishes to preside over our pluralist liberal democracy, he will have had to break radically from his faith's fundamentals.

Liberals who insist that religion has no place at all in American politics have to account for the Christian roots of many social reforms. Consider for example the abolitionism and the civil rights movement. When faced with the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., and other black clergymen explicitly appealing to Christian scripture against Jim Crow, Southern segregationists groused that religion had no business in politics. You can't praise religion's role in political discourse only when it advances causes of which you approve or is practiced by constituencies blacks, say, that vote Democratic.

If God doesn't exist, then by what standard do we decide right from wrong? If a society recognizes no independent, transcendent guardian of the moral order, will it not, over time, lose its self-discipline and decline into barbarism? The eminent sociologist Philip Rieff, who was not a believer, said that man would either live in fear of God or would be condemned to live in fear of the evil in himself.

Mitt, himself, has placed his Mormon faith under scrutiny. In his famous speech on Mormonism, Mitt said that a person should not be rejected . . . because of his faith. His supporters say it is akin to rejecting a Barack Obama because he is black. But Obama was born black; Romney is a Mormon because he accepts the beliefs of the Mormon faith. This permits us, therefore, to make inferences about his judgment and character, good or bad.

Mitt has promised to fully obey Mormon teachings without hesitation and without question.

In his February 26, 1980 speech at BYU titled Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet, LDS President Ezra Taft Benson maintained the Mormon Church President spoke with inerrant authority on "any matter, temporal or spiritual " and was "not required to have any particular earthly training or credentials to speak on any subject or act on any matter at any time."

As a Temple Mormon, Mormon Bishop and Stake President, Mitt has sworn among other things, he recognizes the President of the LDS Church as a "prophet, seer and revelator," and will "obey the rules, laws, and commandments of the gospel" as proclaimed by Mormon Prophets.

Mitt made these solemn vows with the understanding they effect "time and all eternity."

Mitt either intended to honor his promises to follow another man's instructions, or he lied. In the case of the former, we are entitled to know where these directives lead, and in the alternative, we should be concerned about Mitt's honesty.

For these reasons, among others, I assert Mitt’s beliefs are indeed a legitimate issue for determining his qualifications for elected public office.

14 posted on 06/13/2012 12:53:52 PM PDT by Zakeet (Obama loves to wok dogs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson