| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 08/03/2007 6:34:01 AM PDT by Religion Moderator, reason:
Poor behavior |
Posted on 07/26/2007 5:03:33 PM PDT by tantiboh
Democratic political consultant Mark Mellman has a very good piece up today at The Hill on the baffling and illegitimate opposition among voters to Mitt Romney due to his religion. I liked his closing paragraphs:
In July of 1958, 24 percent of respondents told Gallup they would not vote for a Catholic for president, almost identical to Gallup’s reading on Mormons today. Two years later, John F. Kennedy became the first Catholic to assume the oath of office. Within eight months, the number refusing to vote for a Catholic was cut almost in half.
[snip]
Mellman also discusses an interesting poll he helped construct, in which the pollsters asked half of their respondents whether they would support a candidate with certain characteristics, and asked the other half about another candidate with the exact same characteristics, with one difference. The first candidate was Baptist, the second candidate was Mormon. The Baptist had a huge advantage over the Mormon candidate, by about 20 points.
[snip]
However, more recent polls have attempted to fix the anonymity problem. A recent Time Magazine poll (read the original report here), for example, got to the heart of the question by asking respondents if they are less likely to vote for Mitt Romney specifically because he is a Mormon. The result is not as bad as some reporting on the poll has suggested. For example, while 30% of Republicans say they are less likely to vote for Romney because of his religion, fully 15% of other Republicans say that characteristic makes them more likely to vote for him. And while many have reported the finding that 23% of Republicans are “worried” by Romney’s Mormonism, the more important (but less-reported) number is that 73% say they hold no such reservations...
(Excerpt) Read more at romneyexperience.com ...
HSM...never once said she hated your faith. That is a huge leap.
She posted an opinion..of Mormonism. An opinion that is widespread, like it or not.
fwiw-
Just more liberalspeak.
She posted an opinion..of Mormonism. An opinion that is widespread, like it or not.
fwiw-
You mean wide spread by the children of the world but not so in Heaven!
FWIW!:)
You are a liar all my post have been conservative since I started here on FR!
You were the one who mentioned Reid, who is not even running in your silly response and tried to change the subject (Romney’s Mormon support).
Thanks for the ping. I am supporting Thompson in the primary, and I may or may not vote for Romney should he be the GOP candidate. However, his religion has no bearing on my support or lack thereof — I don’t see any reason why a Mormon couldn’t make a great president.
Your arguments are liberalspeak. Calling those who disagree bigots and anyone who is against Romney for spiritual reasons are called un-American.
How lame you are Iowegian, you are the one who said the LDSers wanted a Mormon in the WH, and if you can read corrected if you have both eyes, I have only one, you will see I said I would NOT vote for REID so you talk with fort tongue!
I speak directly to the point Iowegian!
How many popes thought the sun went around the earth, how many apostles thought the world was flat? Brigham’s views were not so far out of whack for his day and age, and he clearly indicates it is his own personal guess on the matter, not an certain fact, not a revelation, and not doctrine of the church.
Your source isn’t even from a church publication, it is a commercial publication that was compiled in a way rather prone to error, so you can’t even be sure the quote is accurate.
Who said they found Salt Lake first? Certainly wasn’t anyone who is Mormon. How about keeping it real, ok? You don’t like Mormons, say so, and maybe even say why. Don’t blow smoke...
Why in my book when someone bashes someone for their race or creed they are a bigot!
BTW I have some Irish in me you want to return to Irish need not apply too!
Wrong, FRiend. We believe that Jesus’ sacrifice was all we need for salvation. We have been known to cite the Bible for evidence that works are still useful, however.
James 2: 18, 20, 26
18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith• by my works•.
• • •
20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith• without works• is dead?
• • •
26 For as the body without the spirit• is dead•, so faith without works• is dead also.
Works help to strengthen the believer’s faith in Jesus. They also help others to see Him in work done in his name. It’s as simple as that.
“However, I think you overlook a very important problem with Romney. He has changed his positions according to the political climate in which he finds himself. That tells me that he has no real core conservative values.”
Good and valid points here. I am Mormon, and I’m still not too sure I want to vote for Romney. I accept that a man (or woman) can change their viewpoint on things, having done so myself a time or two myself, including becoming a Mormon. I do find Romney’s timing suspicious. I would rather vote for him than Clinton, if those are the only choices, but I really want some better choices before we get to the actual election.
Of course I don't think you realize it...and bless your little heart for it. But your response spawns just what you say is bashing.
By calling those that believe they have very good reasons to question Mormonism..."little children"...you then get what you get.
Then when you get those statements/questions/query's you then cry bashing/bigot's.
You bring much of this on yourself, IMO.
Also IMO, HSM.....had a very legit opinion..and it was stated respectfully.
Now that post was refreshing...........
Well-said. God will know his own, when we get to him.
“Now that post was refreshing...........”
Which one?
You are all over the place and make no sense to me, but I’ll it at this:
My main opposition with Romney is his lack of consistency and double talk. Even if I am not crazy about his religious choices, I would overlook all that if he was someone that I was sure was the right person for the job.
I’m not sure we’re getting double-talk from him, myself. I, too, am bothered by the changes in his stated beliefs. Not so much because they changed, but because of the timing of the appearance of the changes. I once was pro-choice, or pro-abortion to give it it’s proper name. Nearly 20 years later, when my first child was born, I changed my mind. Part of what changed my mind was talking to my mom about the reason I was not aborted. By that time, I understood why abortion was never an option for her. I don’t know what changed Romney’s mind. Was it thinking about his own kids, or thinking about what it would take to get elected President, or something else?
In other words, I’ve been a liberal, but a fair amount of time changed that. Why did he change so (as it appears to me) suddenly?
“They would rather see a Democrat win than give legitimacy to a false religion. For us, the higher and more important issue is an eternal one.”
Elect the democrats and you will have them cutting into your freedom to worship, restricting you from living your faith, erasing America’s Christian culture, and indoctrinating every man, woman, and child they can in secularism and homosexuality. You don’t think that will have eternal consequences on anyone? It will, and they won’t have a whole lot of choice about it.
A faithful LDS POTUS on the other hand would defend your religious liberty, including your right to go out and attach the church he belongs to.
It really is insulting of Americans to suggest that just because the POTUS is a Mormon that they will jump to the conclusion that Mormonism is true, give up smoking, refuse alcohol, go to church for 3 hours every Sunday, pay tithes to the church, dress modestly, reject abortion, and refuse to engage in sexual relations outside of a traditional marriage.
How does an LDS POTUS give any more legitimacy to the church than other successfully Mormons like Orson Scott Card, Steve Young, Gladys Knight? What about people who live beside or work with faithful Mormons, they get to see up close and personal how legitimate our faith is.
If you really want to keep people from finding out what we are like, you are going to have to round us all up in camps and put guards around us so you can demonize us without people having a real life Mormon around to compare to the image you want to sell.
When you’ve done that with us, will you be going after Jews next? Don’t they keep people from finding Christ too?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.