Author: LDS is 'dangerous religion' [Romney article]

Deseret News ^ | May 31, 2011 | Hal Boyd

[Colofornian]

Bill Keller infamously announced in 2007, "If you vote for Mitt Romney, you are voting for Satan!"

While expressing less vitriol in his delivery, evangelical author Warren Cole Smith said something similar in his recent article, "A Vote for Romney Is a Vote for the LDS Church."

Smith wrote, "I believe a candidate who either by intent or effect promotes a false and dangerous religion is unfit to serve. … A Romney presidency would have the effect of actively promoting a false religion in the world. If you have any regard for the Gospel of Christ, you should care. A false religion should not prosper with the support of Christians. The salvation of souls is at stake."

Mormon scholar and author Joanna Brooks spoke with Smith about his views regarding Mormonism. In the interview posted on religiondispatches.org, Brooks said: "I can understand from an evangelical perspective why you view our religion as 'false.' But why do you think we are 'dangerous?'"

Smith replied, "Let me ask you: is anything that is false not dangerous? Anything false is dangerous. Falsehood leads to danger."

Brooks countered by asking if other faiths he considered theologically "false" like Judaism and Catholicism are also dangerous. Smith said that those faiths are both different from Mormonism.

[Colofornian]

Hey, if you can vote for a waffling Scientologist claiming to be a "conservative," then, hey, you'd be consistent as voting for Romney.

From the article: A Romney presidency would have the effect of actively promoting a false religion in the world.

Well, let's address this Q from a parallel angle: Would a Scientologist president have the effect of actively promoting a false religion in the world?...And would Scientologists use that to their advantage?

Pretty easy conclusion on that one: Yup.

Oh, and you think Scientology is a "ways" away from Mormonism? Then you probably haven't seen this thread: Similarities between Mormonism and Scientology [see also posts 1 & 10]

[mnehring]

I don’t like Romney, but good grief this is a ridiculous article. I would rather have 1 good Mormon on my side than 100 bad Christians.

[NoGrayZone]

I see my comment was deleted.

[Colofornian]

I would rather have 1 good Mormon on my side than 100 bad Christians.

Jesus asked somebody who called him "good teacher," "why do you call me good."

Jesus wasn't questioning his own goodness; he was questioning this assumption about men coming from the person he interacted with.

Same question goes to you: "Why do you call ANY man 'good'?" What is your standard or presumption that qualifies someone to be "good?"

[Persevero]

Who’s a Scientologist?

[ansel12]

Romney’s background helps explain his terrible and thorough embracing of liberalism his entire life, and his being a pathological liar, with no true center or self.

He is a thoroughly misguided man assembled from a kit.

[tellw]

I am an Episcopalian but I would probably rather a President take spiritual advice from the head of the LDS church than the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church.

[Bidimus1]

The logical counter to your statment would be: But would you not rather have 1 good Christian than Romney ?

Mind that his POLICIES are more than enough to keep him from the nomination, his belief that he will become a god and father an entire race to worship him as such is not needed for me to vote against him in the primary.

[Colofornian]

Parallel example.

The closest cult POTUS candidate we had to Romney in '08 was Democratic candidate Dennis Kucinich, a New Ager.

The prob is drawing a parallel there is that the New Agers aren't as formally "wound up" and organized as either the Mormons or Scientologists.

So the Scientologists makes for the "best" hypothetical parallel "work thru" for a voter: If a voter says, I could vote for a Scientologist POTUS candidate, then they are being consistent.

[MHGinTN]

Poorly thought out ‘either or’ assertions seem to be the norm for these types of threads.

[svcw]

It is an lds publication that wrote this article. What is a good mormon? If mormonISM is false, then there should be a question electing a mormon just as there should be questions about any group that promotes anti Christian rhetoric.

[afraidfortherepublic]

I’d rather have a Mormon for President than the “so-called” Christian we have now.

[svcw]

Could be an interesting point. Do you know what the advice and teachings of mormonISM is?

[svcw]

I would like to know what you think the differences of what they believe? They are not that far apart.

[Tennessee Nana]

I would probably rather a President take spiritual advice from the head of the LDS church than the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church.
_________________________________________

No you wouldnt

The Episcopal would put the country first

The Mormon MUST put his church and what his mormon “president/prophet” says first

There was a time that the mormons were at war against the United States and celebrated when any POTUS died (ala Islam)

The Episcopal Church has never declared war on the US or mocked a presidents death

[CommerceComet]

I would rather have 1 good Mormon on my side than 100 bad Christians.

None of whom would know the Holy Spirit.

[Colofornian]

I’d rather have a Mormon for President than the “so-called” Christian we have now.

Let's apply that: You'd rather have Romney or Huntsman as POTUS?

[Turtlepower]

What’s the difference between Romney and the current president?

[arderkrag]

Oh, and you think Scientology is a "ways" away from Mormonism? Then you probably haven't seen this thread: Similarities between Mormonism and Scientology [see also posts 1 & 10]

Or this: Mormonism and Islam