Posted on 06/03/2011 1:04:28 PM PDT by Colofornian
Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney announced Thursday that he will once again seek the Republican presidential nomination, but four years after his first bid, analysts say he will once again face the same unique hurdle: his Mormon religion.
SNIP
Mr. Romney steered clear of his religion when he kicked off his campaign in New Hampshire, but that could change this weekend when he and Mr. Huntsman travel to Washington, where they are scheduled to speak at the Faith and Freedom Coalition (FFC) conference — an event that could provide an early snapshot of where they stand with religious conservatives.
Ben Crosby, an Iowa State University professor who... studied how Mr. Romney handled his faith...told The Washington Times that Mr. Romney’s Mormon roots “absolutely” put him at odds with much of the evangelical Christian community, which plays a key role in the first-in-the-nation Iowa caucuses and can make or break a candidate in the South Carolina Republican primary.
“Mormonism represents for evangelical conservatives a breaking of a particular order, a breaking of tradition, a breaking with convention,” Mr. Crosby said...
SNIP
John G. Geer, chairman of Vanderbilt University’s political science department, told The Times that his studies show that while there has been a steep decline in prejudice against many groups in the United States, that hasn’t been the case with Mormons, Muslims or atheists.
SNIP
He pointed to a recent Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll that shows less than 50 percent of those surveyed said they would be comfortable with a Mormon running for president.
Evangelicals, fundamentalists and other traditional-leaning Christians widely consider the LDS Church not to be a Christian body — claiming it either denies or unrecognizably redefines such Christian doctrines as the Trinity, original sin, the atonement, the continuity of the church and the canon of Scripture...
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
If he were the perfect Christian or the perfect Jew, would anyone be lining up to vote for a this progressive statist? Besides Democrats, I mean.
You know this is a VERY common perception among FREEPERS; yet the polls are even more telling on this:
From the article: He pointed to a recent Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll that shows less than 50 percent of those surveyed said they would be comfortable with a Mormon running for president.
Think about it. 48% say they wouldn't vote for a Mormon. Another 6% are undecided.
Do you really think that you could find a 48% block of voters who thought, "Romney is too RINO...Romney is too liberal...or Romney is too waffly"? Really?
For the liberals, nobody's "too" liberal for them.
[So you'd already eliminate almost 1/3rd of your potential "pool" for a Romney's too (fill-in-the-blank) considerations.]
True GOP conservatives might only be 20-25% of the voter pie. Of them, a decent chunk might be willing to consider a vote for Romney. In fact, Mormons are 2% of the population and are probably 3% of the GOP. You can count on 2.5 - 2.75% of the GOP -- Mormon -- would vote for Romney!
So if you could come up with 15% of the voter pie -- GOP conservatives -- who think Romney's too whatever...you'd then have to comb for 1/3rd of the voter pie amongst moderates & independents & more conservative Democrats to agree with you that Romney's biggest hurdle is himself.
I don't think these 3 groups are well-informed enough 'bout Romney's waffles, liberalness, & pro-abortion stances -- or care enough about them -- to bring this key consideration to a high radar concern level for about half of the voting populace.
I said I will not vote for that liberal and I will not. Voting for McCain was it.
Yep it doesn’t seem to matter anyway I don’t know what’s in or not in their heart for loving America but nothing is different between the partys if we keep getting people like McCain or Romney, or Bush for that matter. The whole thing is rigged and we have no representation anymore and I’m beginning to believe we’re gonna be starting all over very soon
Post #22 addresses this.
If a hurdler falls on his face at the starting line --
-- and if only 15% of the crowd notices
(@ any given track meet, there's LOTS of events going on inside the track)
...and if only another 20-25% of the crowd becomes aware of this after-the-fact because they're "connected" in some way either electronically to the news or commentators or family/friends who alert them...
...That means you may have 35-40% who are readily aware that the hurdler fell at the starting line...
The rest of the spectators either don't care, are preoccupied with other track events, or whatever...
Sorry, but even if you can get 35-40% of the fans aware of that mishap, I'll take the 48% (+6% undecided) who heard about an association that hurdler has and don't like it & therefore wouldn't "root" for such a hurdler to win...
I'll take that 54% block of fans anytime over the conservative close-following fan-set who realize what a weak, flip-flopping, fall-bound, (etc.) hurdler they have on their hands right in their view!
Well at least two people did not fall into the elitist GOP trap. I have already seen two different posts about how Romney's Mormonism is going to hurt him. They are trying to guilt us into liking Romney. Instead of getting into the theological weeds about the difference between historical Christianity and Mormonism, we need to keep to the simple truth: Romney is not a Conservative and will say anything to get elected.
For example, Romney LIED LIED LIED to Sean Hannity yesterday. He said that he would not impose a Massachusetts style health care law on the entire US; but that states can because state constitutions allow for mandates.. ok fair enough. BUT IN 2008, Romney ran on Romney care and stated we could replicate it nationwide... LIAR LIAR LIAR...
So you’ll vote for a candidate because of the letter after his/her name? Pretty lame if you ask me...any liberal, such as Romney, can claim to be a Republican, but would be devestating if actually elected.
Faith is not his hurdle. [Freekitty, post #16]
I guess my hypothetical is:
If a certain Rev. Wright...
...had given a certain sermon...
...when Obama was a member under his spiritual tutelage...
...& the sermon content proclaimed Obama as THE Messiah...
...why would such a sacrilege be suddenly "irrelevant" to so many FREEPERS?
There's just no way we would have had the liberal campus advisement of "tolerance of all things religious" come out from FREEPERS had Wright said such a thing about Obama. FREEPERS would have been all over that!
What way too many FREEPERS wouldn't stand for a Democrat saying..."I am -- or He is -- the Messiah...I am or He is a god"...is suddenly A-OK if a "conservative" proclaims it?
You mean to tell me that it's irrelevant to you if your one-day fave candidate -- as long as he has other "conservative" credentials...thinks he's a baby god on his way to full-grown godhood?
I am confused.. What is your point?
If you really think that, then you are no conservative I will not and can not support anyone who is not a real conservative. I learned my lesson in the last election. If I have to leave that office unmarked, then that is what I will do. Just voting for someone with an R by their name is wrong if that person is not a conservative. Some are worse than some democrats.
“... staying home on election day.” That is precisely what the coommie democrat criminal enterprise wants you to do, so you will ignore the down ticket votes and the criminals can place whomever they want in the House and Senate seats. And of course, what a principled example you set for your boys, that if they don’t like the election at any point on the ballot, they can just ignore voting.
I’m not religious and have known some very nice Mormons, so the religion doesn’t scare me. Romney is the wrong man for the presidency, though. So is Obama. The Republicans need to wise up and rally behind an actual conservative or expect another loss a la McLame, Dole, etc.
Middle of the road is a great place to be if one wants to be run over.
Adhering to this country’s founding principles of individual liberty and freedom and limited federal intervention needs to be the starting point of any campaign on the right. Where it goes from there is the candidate’s choice. But an intrusive government-down approach is a recipe for failure. Romneycare is garbage.
My district is solid conservative by a sizable margin and my one vote won’t change anything in down-ballot voting. My ‘boys’ are actually girls, but your point remains the same. The principled example I’d set for them is that there comes a time when a man has to stand up and say “no more.” No more RINOs, no more waffly losers that’ll sell out to be liked by the media, no more sleazy douchebags that only strive to be slightly better than the opposing douchebag in hopes of getting into power.
I want a legit conservative as the candidate opposing the Marxist. Cain, Palin, Bachmann or anyone of that nature. Even if I don’t agree with everything they stand for, I’ll agree with enough of their positions to vote for them with pride. The Republican party needs to hear us all saying that. No more “lesser-of-two-evils” votes!
You said, Romney's faith isn't a hurdle to him. About half of America disagrees with you. Why?
Well, there's a NUMBER of troublesome aspects about Mormonism. For hundreds of thousands -- especially liberals, it's the caricature (some true; some stereotyped) that you might see on a Broadway Book of Mormon play.
For Evangelicals, they tend to find it's relevant that they would be voting for somebody who thinks they are -- or will be a God.
Temple Mormons comprise approximately 20% of all Mormons. They believe worthy temple Mormons who have been married -- and have a similarly worthy spouse -- will get to live with Heavenly Father-God forever...and ONLY them. (Nobody else) The "other" shoe to drop for those who reach this "degree" of heaven, per Mormon theology, is that they get to be gods of their own planets.
Romney is a temple Mormon. If he is a true-believing temple Mormon, then, he, too, believes classic Mormon theology.
My point is simple: If Obama's former pastor had preached that Obama was a Messiah on the order of Jesus Christ, that would be not only banner headline news but would be commented upon as "relevant" by Freeper posters who would see that as yet another hurdle for Obama.
"Religion" would be relevant, after all.
Yet what do I see FREEPERS do -- re: cartwheels rushing to say about Romney's religion? They ask, 'What does that matter?'
You mean to tell me that if Hillary Clinton ran in 2016 and she announced that she was a "would-be god" that's irrelevant?
(I don't think so)
What it comes down to is downright inconsistency by too many FREEPERS. Why? It varies. I'm sure for a lot of them they know Mormons and think of them as true conservatives.
What they likely haven't investigated or thought through is the common Mormon belief that faithful Mormons will become gods who are worshiped and prayed to. (Have any FREEPERS thought of your friends and co-workers who actually believe that "tidbit?")
This is relevant for ALL kinds of reasons, especially of a POTUS candidate: It shows...
...a person's character (ultra level of pride).
...they've got key "identity" issues...thinking they are a "god-in-embryo" -- a favorite term for some Mormon leaders to call their "sheep"...
...their gullibility level -- that they would take a 14 yo pimply-faced boy at face value and form their life around that.
...their discernment is lacking.
...they don't know how to define over 80% of the GOP which self-identifies as "Christian" other than Mormon!
I mean what? Do you think the almost 75% of the nation
-- and over 80% of the GOP
--all which attends a Protestant, Catholic or Orthodox church at least sporadically...
...is going to be happy to uncover that Romney's religion references them as "apostates?"
Will that "inspire" them to vote for Romney if he wins the GOP?
What? Do we think the MSM is going to "skip" over these "little" Mormon details like Mormon mass godhood and "Christians-are-apostates-who-believe-abominable-creeds" come 2012 Spring, Summer & early Fall? (not on your life...it'll be PLENTY relevant to the MSM then!)
The other-worldly worldviews of a candidate ARE relevant. If a Scientologist conservative was running, all of these above issues likewise kicks in!
Wrong.
Allow me to use my Gilligan's Island parable.
You and your adult son join the seven as marooned on the island.
Between the three single men on the island, Mary Ann and Ginger get married to two of them. Your son is straight, and the remaining single character claims to be straight, but seems to waffle back and forth 'tween the two.
Your son announces to you that he's going to "marry" the only remaining single candidate on the island. That this would be less "devastating" than remaining single all of his life.
You try convincing him that there's hope beyond that. That maybe Mary Ann or Ginger would divorce their hubbies. Or better yet, you'll all get off the island.
"Besides," you tell him. "Once you get back to the states, this choice will permanently divide the immediate and extended family -- them knowing that he 'married' as a gay. The family will never be the same -- unified wise."
Likewise, political parties can fracture to such a degree that they PERMANENTLY disintegrate. For example, the Whigs no longer exist, oh8eleven. (For a reason)
A party can so "extinct" itself by way of for what it stands -- or fails to stand -- that it may never recover. A Romney nomination would do this!
What could be worse than Obama? Democratic presidents until Christ returns!
I said Romney’s faith is not a hurdle for me. It’s the type of person he is.
I would caution only this last thing: by voting down ballot but withholding a top slot vote, you’re sending a better message, more pointed, especially if enough of us (yes, I will do likewise if another republicn’t rino is nominated) do it, is that the count of votes dawn ballot coming up measureably higher than the votes cast for the top slot sends a message, too. I cannot imagine living in SC and casting no vote if Pansey Graham is on the ballot, rather than voting for his opponent.
Catholic should be at the front of that list, but instead, it is always, always, left off entirely, which gives a false impression of the unity of Christianity on Mormonism.
That’s always a good option. Thanks. Hopefully the Republicans will rally around the right candidate and this discussion will become moot.
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.