Posted on 08/11/2011 4:29:28 AM PDT by Colofornian
...we pretty much know what kind of re-election campaign Barack Obama is going to wage: A relentlessly negative one, which...will focus almost exclusively on making the challenger seem unacceptable rather than defending the sitting president’s accomplishments. Thanks to Ben Smith at Politico, we also know roughly how the White House plans to “destroy Mitt Romney,”...By “attacking him as inauthentic, unprincipled and, in a word used repeatedly by Obama’s advisers in about a dozen interviews, ‘weird.’”
Weird how, you ask? Here’s Smith:
The character attacks on Romney will focus on what critics view as a makeover, both personal (skinny jeans) and political (abortion) … Democrats also plan to amplify what Obama strategists described as the “weirdness” quotient, the sum of awkward public encounters and famous off-kilter anecdotes, first among them the tale of Romney having strapped his dog to the roof of his car.
SNIP
...The crucial thing to understand here is that Romney’s Latter Day Saint affiliation isn’t just a potential liability among evangelical voters in Republican primaries. It’s a potential general election liability as well. In a recent Gallup poll, 18 percent of Republicans described themselves as unwilling to vote for a Mormon candidate — but that number actually climbed to 19 percent among Independents, and 27 percent among Democrats.
Who are these non-conservative Mormon skeptics?... theologically conservative/politically liberal Christians (mainly African American and Hispanic) who regard Mormonism as a dangerous heresy...secular liberals...who dislike L.D.S...positions...people who don’t have a particular theological or political ax to grind, who know Mormonism primarily through pop culture (from “Big Love” and “Sister Wives” to “South Park” and “The Book of Mormon”) and the occasional encounter with bicycling missionaries, and who have a vague sense of the L.D.S. church as little bit cultish, a little bit outside-the-mainstream, and a little bit, well, weird...
(Excerpt) Read more at douthat.blogs.nytimes.com ...
I just glanced long enough at my last two replies from him/her long enough to see who it was from, didn't bother to read them.
He/she is mormon or mormon wannabe, or perhaps atheist, who knows? But why would an atheist be on the religion forum? Disruptor?
I have a knack for ignoring those I want to, by simply not reading their replies to me.
Yes, I absolutely disagree with that interpretation.
There are some desirable aspects of Christianity that can make people better themselves, but one of the most odious tenets that some people subscribe to is the disgusting belief that we are born sick and commanded to be well.
You can keep on believing all Mormons are evil. I do not share that belief and will challenge it when I see it.
You've psychoanalyzed billions of people by defending someone who called them evil! Who's reaching here bub?
Tell you what. Should you ever take a course or workshop of any type (like offered by your employer)...or perhaps a college course...just raise your hand @ some point & label some of the specific beliefs of the trainer/prof/class leader as "wacky." [Then say: "You know, I'm not 'judging' your beliefs as being 'wacky.' After all, good people believe wacky things. But don't think that's a judgmental evaluation of your beliefs."]
Then move on from continuing to judge beliefs as to how people put those paradigmns into action. Next time you get in a taxi cab, just ask the driver...
"What driving test did you pass to become this wacky driver you've become?"
"What? Is your GPS system haywire or something? Or do you always flip instantaneous moving-Us?"
"Who certified you as qualified to be behind your 'wacky' wheel?"
"But, hey, I'm not 'passing judgment' on your actual driving or anything. I mean, all drivers exhibit some 'wacky' things they learned from whoever taught them how to handle a vehicle."
I took issue with someone calling all Muslims and all Mormons evil and bad for their country. If you don't like it, too bad.
There ya go yet again. Passing JUDGMENTS on BELIEFS when you've claimed on this thread (#136) that you don't do that! (Do you ever stop contradicting yourself?)
Let's review the three statements you've made on this thread -- including this one -- where either you've objected to comments made on this thread that were similar to Jesus' worldviews...or in this, case you castigate a worldview more directly mentioned by Jesus.
#1
Your above comment: ...the Pharisees and the teachers of the law who belonged to their sect complained to his disciples, “Why do you eat and drink with tax collectors and sinners?” 31 Jesus answered them, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. 32 I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.” (Luke 5:30-32)
Outright statement: Anyone engaging in issuing commandments -- who compares original sin to a form of being unhealthy -- is "odious" and holds "a disgusting belief."
The irony here is that it's the Mormons who think we can "obey" our way into God's heart via commandment-keeping. The true Christian worldview is that we need to be healed/transformed from the inside-out. But here you slime Jesus' worldview of the reality that we are born sick.
#2
Post #118: I don't know how to characterize the statement that all devout Muslims and all devout Mormons are evil and bad for the country other than to call it deranged.
Implication: Anyone who labels sub-groups of people as "evil" is supposedly "deranged."
Jesus speaking to "the crowds": If you, then, though YOU ARE EVIL, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him! 12 So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets. (Jesus, Matthew 7:11-12)
Jesus assumed ALL of His hearers of that sermon were "evil." I suppose if you had been there listening to that sermon, you would have jumped upon Jesus' case, too eh?
#3
Post #57: Caww, you're taking this anti-Mormon hatred a little far aren't you?
Implication: Anyone who demonizes devout legalists who traverse the earth to proselytize/spread their deceptions is engaging in extreme hatred.
Jesus speaking to legalists: “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when you have succeeded, you make them twice as much a child of hell as you are." (Jesus, Matthew 23:15)
I'd say since you've now implied on this thread that Jesus of Nazareth is "hateful" & "deranged" and is "odious" -- holding to "disgusting beliefs." I'd say that when you start this kind of repetitive character-assassination behavior & belief-whacking of our Lord, it's time to do as Greyfoxx39 suggested long ago & move on.
You may not care that you insult our Lord Jesus Christ in this way. (We do)
Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.
For one disinterested you sure have posted a lot...
O...
K...
Caught that too huh?
Too easy...
So; a person has to HAVE a certain veiw before they can be considered to be able to contradict another?
HMMMmmm...
WHAT!!??
How do YOU know that they need 'help' withOUT 'passing judgement'?
Huh?
Better themselves??
Get 'better' that the way they wuz born?
How wuz they born?<{>If 'sick' then you've contractdicted yourself.
If 'well' where is the need for 'bettering'?
Passing judgement is determining whether or not a person is a good person or a bad person. Plenty of good people have mental problems.
You're just confused again. I said that I judge people primarily by their actions, not by their beliefs.
There's nothing wrong with judging beliefs, but there is something wrong with the way you and your ilk judge billions of people as being "evil" because they have a different belief system than you.
You do realize there's a difference between judging someone's character and judging ideas, right?
GunRunner, your own words condemn you. You've just conceded by your own personal standards that you shouldn't be openly judging "character" on this thread. Yet what did we see you tell Reaganaut in post #118:
I don't know how to CHARACTERize the statement that all devout Muslims and all devout Mormons are evil and bad for the country other than to CALL IT DERANGED.
You engage in character assassination by characterizing other posters' character under the banner of complete-stranger psychoanalysis of "derangement." And here you finally "confess" (in sorts) that there's something wrong with what you've done in post #118.
If this is what your own conscience is telling you, may I suggest you apologize to CAWW at least for that post?
A lot of the rest of what we've said has simply been a sharing of worldview clashes, which people should be able to do in an adult manner -- and in which I think we've been largely successful. Sometimes what we say crosses even our own line -- and all I'm suggesting is that it's apparent you moved even beyond your own comfortable boundaries in that post.
Have a good weekend, GR.
Read it again.
I said:
I don't know how to characterize the statement.
Now read it again. "The Statement" was what was being described.
The problem is that you have absolutely horrible reading comprehension, and an almost non-existent understand of basic grammar.
Caww might be a very fine person, I don't have any idea. But the statement was, AND IS, a deranged statement.
But let me be very, very clear, just so there's no more reading comprehension problems. I will absolutely under no circumstances apologize for the statement, which was 100% accurate!
Hatred for billions of people whom you've never met, who's only personality trait that you know of is that they practice a different religion, is deranged. I would describe it as bordering on mental illness.
So let's recap one more time:
Judging an individual based on their actions = good.
Judging billions of people collectively based on their religious differences = bad.
Is that clear enough for you Paco?
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.