Would You Vote for Someone Just Because They're Mormon?

Lds Living ^ | Jan. 10, 2011 | Ashley Evanson

[Colofornian]

Buzz about the 2012 presidential election is already in full swing. But with no real Republican front-runner, really, anyone is game. We’ve been hearing Mitt Romney’s name tossed around as a potential for a while now, but two weeks ago we started hearing another familiar name: Jon Huntsman.

While Huntsman doesn’t have the same national profile as Romney, he has gained status as the ambassador to China and might become more of a threat in the upcoming year. Can you imagine—TWO Mormons (gasp) both running for president?

Now, I understand my next thought doesn’t apply to every Mormon, BUT, I know of a lot of members who vote for politicians based on the fact that they, too, are LDS. And honestly, I know that I’ve been unjustifiably biased toward LDS politicians for the sole reason that we share a religion.

But what if Romney and Huntsman go head to head in 2012? Who will the Mormons vote for?! If their only choice was Romney, I bet a fair number of Mormons wouldn’t really give the other candidates a second thought. But throw Huntsman into the picture and we might actually have to do more research on each candidate’s stances. If they both end up running, it will be interesting to see how members react to the situation over the next two years. Do I sense a hint of BYU vs. Utah-style rivalry in the air?

[Colofornian]

I never stated that all illegal things are moral and all legal things are immoral. Cheating on your wife is immoral, yet it's legal. Smoking a joint in 49 states is moral or amoral, yet it's illegal.

Yes, we've talked about adultery on this thread...Smoking a joint extends beyond our discussion.

I'm not saying you have a 1:1 correlation of that which is legal = moral...but since I don't know the ultimate source of your moral code, not sure how high (how transcendent) it originates.

For many who don't directly try to honor any divine-established standard or code, it often stops @ their given govt.

Examples of your propensity to flow near a "whatever is legal is moral" ethical worldview:

You responded to where I said: (Perhaps Marriott could start an "in-room" hooker service as well & donate 10% of its sanctioned whoredom to the Mormon church as well!...I mean if somebody films it while in process that wouldn't be much different than porn movie status, would it not?):

Your post #117: No it wouldn't be much different, but then they'd be running afoul of state prostitution laws. If they operated in Canada, however, it would potentially be legal...

Then, in the same post, you added: Regarding the difference between "paying to watch a couple have sex on a TV screen vs. someone paying to watch a couple have sex via see-through mirrors from the room next door?", well, is this even a serious question? The very nature of your sentence implies that in the second example, there's some kind of peepshow going on without the knowledge of the involved parties. That type of video voyeurism is illegal in every U.S. state.

My point: To you & seemingly millions of others, outright prostitution is eschewed as "illegal" and is apparently not advocated; but if an act of prostitution happens to have a film crew near it, roughly id'd as the generic "porn industry," then it becomes "the first amendment" and your libertarian "come to the defense" streak kicks in!

So you're telling me that (a) the presence of a camera makes all the difference to you?
Or (b) The reality of what is legal vs. illegal is the real distinction you draw?

Since you made the same exact distinction with the TV screen vs. see-through mirror, it seems it's not the act of paid prostitution by the porn industry that "bothers" you; no, it seems what is deemed "legal" vs. "illegal" that's become your dividing line of what you advocate/defend vs. what you won't advocate/defend.

[Colofornian]

"I sustain the prophet because he is the Lord's chosen" [Earlier post by PD]

You have been given all you need, numerous times, to find out this truth for yourself. The rest is up to you. Don’t be lazy. Don’t be hard headed or hard hearted. You would LOVE to know the truth in all things right?

(So we're to believe the Lord was locked into choosing a man with a Mormon ID & the oldest birthdate among certain elderly men with Mormon IDs because a Web site or two says so????)

[SZonian]

What happened to the “nut”? Did he get the zot or just booted from the thread?

Man, I hate when that happens while I’m away...

[aMorePerfectUnion]

“You have been given all you need, numerous times, to find out this truth for yourself. The rest is up to you. Don’t be lazy. Don’t be hard headed or hard hearted. You would LOVE to know the truth in all things right?”

......................................

I have reviewed all facts, evidence and logical argument
and there is none I am aware of that confirms ANYTHNG
about mormonism. ZERO. Not at your spam links, not in the
wild. ZIP.

You can continue to call names, judge the hearts of others
(which is a form of mindreading), impugn the character of
others (character reading), and pretend you gave an answer.

In the end, you have NEVER provided a SINGLE SHRED of
evidence that supports a SINGLE WILD CLAIM of yours.

Not once. Not ever.

All you do is post spam links and make wild claims.

ampu

[Colofornian]

"I sustain the prophet because he is the Lord's chosen" [Earlier post by PD]

You have been given all you need, numerous times, to find out this truth for yourself. The rest is up to you. Don’t be lazy. Don’t be hard headed or hard hearted. You would LOVE to know the truth in all things right? [PD]

(So we're to believe the Lord was locked into choosing a man with a Mormon ID & the oldest birthdate among certain elderly men with Mormon IDs because a Web site or two says so????) [My last post]

One more thought or two, PD: I guess, at least we're starting to see a glimpse of the Mormon hierarchy moving at a snail's pace toward a paperless trail, eh?

I mean with your e-links & all to Web sites that say: "Accept the man with the whitest hair as 'prophet'"...we'd be in just turrible shape without all that!

So: When can we see the rest of Lds hierarchy go paperless?

I mean, right now the Mormon god is totally locked into the deepest of paper trail avalanches that determine...
...which man he picks as "prophet" (a calendar date declaring the oldest man)...
...who gets to spend eternity with him (a subjective one-man temple recommend consent form from someone way down the Lds hierarchical ladder)...
...who gets to become a god (a subjective one-man temple recommend consent form from someone way down the Lds hierarchical ladder)...
...and genealogical paper trail obstacles which determine which dead men & women get necro-baptized by proxy so they can get out of spirit prison quicker!

And that last paper blizzard is a doosy!

I mean, just consider what those 11 dozen Mormon temples are up against:

Chapter 34 of the published Teachings of the Presidents: Joseph F. Smith:

Not a soul that has ever lived and died from off the face of this earth shall escape a chance to hear the gospel of Jesus Christ. If they receive it and obey it, the ordinances of the gospel will be performed for and in their behalf, by their kindred, or their posterity in some generation of time after them, so that every law and every requirement of the gospel of Jesus Christ shall be carried out, and the promises and requirements fulfilled for the salvation of the living and also for the salvation of the dead. (Original citation: “Latter-day Saints Follow Teachings of the Savior,” Scrap Book of Mormon Literature, 2 vols. (n.d.), 2:561–62.)

That’s why the mainstream Lds curricula book, Gospel Principles, “Jesus has provided for EVERYONE to hear the gospel, whether on earth of after death.” Gospel Principles, 1997, p. 104

Well, imagine that: Despite the fact that the vast majority of Dark Ages & before will never have their paper trail -- their genealogical records found -- how can the Lds church turn around and say this is MANDATED for EVERY spirit before they can be judged?

Joseph Smith taught that "ALL those who have not had an opportunity of hearing the Gospel, and being administered unto by an inspired man in the flesh, MUST have it hereafter, BEFORE they can be finally judged. (Teachings of the Presidents: Joseph Smith, p. 471)

So there ya go...No final judgment, says Joe Smith, til they've had an opportunity to greet Mormon missionaries bringing them glad tidings of necro-baptism in the afterlife! Yet no glad-tidings of greetings minus that handy-dandy birth & death doc...tell us, PD, how "fair" that is for people who lived in a paperless or very-difficult-to-acquire paper portions of history?

(PD, are your absolutely sure ya don't want that gator habitat we were discussing earlier? Prime time real estate, ya know!)

Well, there ya go...better get your 11 dozen Lds temples 'round the world crackin' round the clock, PD...Lds "prophet" Joseph Fielding Smith said a while back:

“The work of saving the dead has practically been reserved for the dispensation of the fullness of times, when the Lord shall restore all things. It is, therefore, the duty of the Latter-day Saints to see that it is accomplished. WE cannot do it all at once, but will have the 1,000 years of the millennium to do it in. In that time the work must be done in behalf of the dead of the previous 6,000 years, for all who need it.” Joseph Fielding Smith (a different Joseph F. Smith than above), Doctrines of Salvation 2:166

OR PD, you could recognize that there is no godhood, no eternal life, no prophet-pickin', or salvation to be had in what your "paper status" is!

To again paraphrase Jesus, he told the Jews of his day that here they searched the Scriptures 'cause they thought in them was eternal life; and yet Jesus said the written Word was there to testify of the Living Word -- Jesus Christ! [see John 5:39]

[Colofornian]

What happened to the “nut”?

(Well, apparently...well, let's just say our porn-promoting friend got "flushed" from the system)

[Colofornian]

(And I say it’s better to vet some new posters early to find out their provocateur status...than to still have hundreds of FREEPERS dealing with him a month or months into their poster life)

[Colofornian]

Colo, I’d watch this noob

Well, good call, Colorcountry...tho apparently less from a "noob" angle than a retread angle, given CommerceCommet's response in #230 to post #164:

CommerceComet, post #230 (to NF): I remember you from summer 2008 — you clearly haven’t changed one bit. [NF]

What was your screen name then? I don't recall any Nut Flush. I'm sure I haven't changed that much -- the attitude you displayed would have annoyed me then too. [CommerceComet]

[Osage Orange]

Nut Flush...was flushed.

[Paragon Defender]

Your obsession blinds you to basic concepts.

“(So we’re to believe the Lord was locked into choosing a man with a Mormon ID & the oldest birthdate among certain elderly men with Mormon IDs because a Web site or two says so????)”

The Lord chooses his Prophets and they are in the right place at the right time for him and us. Exactly how he arranges for this to be done, is beyond us and I am not privy to it. This is really not that hard to grasp. (If one isn’t obsessed with looking for any perceived fault that is.)

Your other new focus about paperwork is beyond silly. Just because you don’t know or understand how we will know of all the people who have ever lived doesn’t mean we won’t. The Lord will provide. Everyone will have a fair chance.

Yet another much ado about nothing by the anti-Mormon propaganda gang. Convince yourselves there is an issue where there is not.

[Paragon Defender]

Fine. Your choice. You have been given all you need.

I remember the day my eyes were finally opened. Keep searching. Your joy will be great on your day too. I will be happy with you.

[CommerceComet]

Nut Flush...was flushed.

Does anyone know what screen name Nut Flush posted under before? I vaguely remember having issues with a couple of obnoxious Mittens in the summer of 2008 but I can't remember their names.

[aMorePerfectUnion]

Pd- you haven’t presented a single fact - EVER.

[NoRedTape]

"Hey, they voted and elected one for President.

Mormon, I thought you said moron?

Never mind!!!"

LOL. Perfect.

[NoRedTape]

Comedy GOLD would be if Romney is fully debated on, or gives a FULL speech all about Joe Smith. Add-in LOTS about Planet/Star Kolob. Please.

[Elsie]

Did he get the zot or just booted from the thread?

It appears: ZOT!

---

While I was going back and forth with him, he vanished like the Cheshire Cat and then the grin went, too!

[Elsie]

 

All you do is post spam links and make wild claims.

---

---

HI!

 

 My screen name is Paragon Defender; but you can call me PD (if you are SINCERE, that is.)

 

I provide TRUTH to ALL who would care to seek it (if they are REALLY sincere) and I do it OVER and OVER and OVER and OVER and OVER  again.

I am pleased to offer my services for the Betterment of Mankind.

Please feel free to ask me ANYTHING and I'll sincerely post my link list again.

Remember...

I am normal too; and I am a MORMON!

 

Sincerely,

PD

 

 

[Utah Binger]

They flushed the nut.

[Elsie]

 

Well, imagine that: Despite the fact that the vast majority of Dark Ages & before will never have their paper trail -- their genealogical records found -- how can the Lds church turn around and say this is MANDATED for EVERY spirit before they can be judged?

You foolish, Hateful BIGOTS!

 

Have you STILL not realized that OUR god is a god of REVELATION?

 

He WILL make these names available to us, somehow, in due time.   After all, we have the Golden Plates; right?

 

 

 Wait; let me re-state that.)

[Elsie]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjVKUap1HgU