Tant, good luck on that one! It seems that many people here believe that every post against any sect other than the one they belong to is going to get them some additional reward in the afterlife. That's the only explanation I can figure for the amount of religious tussling that goes on here.
Governor Romney makes reference to JFK's struggle to overcome resistance to his (nominal) Catholicity. That would seem to be a good parallel, but like all analogies, it limps. Kennedy could not be said to be seeking societal legitimacy for Catholicism, it was a firmly established religion in the US of 1960. It's my contention that a lot of people of faith traditions that have seen LDS missionaries attract away members of those faiths over the last few decades do not want to give the missionaries another "look who's one of us," beyond the members of the Osmond family.
I would submit that many here are trotting out the "Mormonism believes such-and-such" statements in preparation for the counter-proselytizing that they envision they will have to do if Governor Romney does become President, or even the Republican nominee. I can only guess as to whether or not such things occurred in 1960; back then, we had these old guys called 'editors' that sought to avoid showing the dark underbelly of what they considered to be the nasty side of politics.
For better or for worse, we have the uncensored Internet today, where at least people can get some truth about what their neighbors will not say to their faces.
Gladys Knight is a Mormon but I don’t know about the Pips. Ha!
~”Tant, good luck on that one!”~
I must admit, in addition to genuinely wanting to discuss the political ramifications of the religious element, I’m engaging in a bit of social experimentation: can the anti-Mormons restrain themselves?
So far, by and large, they’re doing pretty well.
~”It’s my contention that a lot of people of faith traditions that have seen LDS missionaries attract away members of those faiths over the last few decades do not want to give the missionaries another “look who’s one of us,” beyond the members of the Osmond family.”~
I agree that’s the motivation of some; still, I find the assertion laughable. Look at how the Masons and Quakers have taken over the country!
Indeed, I suspect that a Romney presidency might well hurt the Church more than it helps. About the only thing it gives Mormonism is name recognition; otherwise, every little policy difference that some people have will automatically be attributed to Romney’s faith, resulting in a lower estimation of the LDS Church.
Frankly, when I first learned of Romney, I was, for this reason, quite nervous about his candidacy. Of course, while I’m waiting to see what Thompson brings to the table, I’m leaning significantly in Romney’s direction these days. My growing understanding of him as a compelling candidate in his own right are overpowering my initial concerns.
I’m too young to have been paying attention during the Reagan years; but I’m beginning to think that Romney may just have that level of potential as a champion of conservatism.
I’m looking for someone to inspire me as a member of the conservative base. Romney seems to fit that bill.