Click the Pic Thank you, JoeProBono
Follow the Exciting Adventures of Gary the Snail!
Abolish FReepathons
Go Monthly
Sponsoring FReepers will contribute $10
For each New Monthly Donor Sign-up
Posted on 10/04/2011 6:06:16 AM PDT by Colofornian
LOL!! Doesn't matter you made couple of good points.
Regards
Theology first. Few would claim that.
What they include is character. And for that, you or nobody is able to hermetically seal that as not having affected character.
Additionally, just because it may not be "first" doesn't mean it's not "important."
A late 2006 Rasmussen Report showed once-and-for-all that voters take “faith & beliefs” into consideration. And that it's hardly a rare deal [see http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1741561/posts ]
Excerpt from that thread: The Rasmussen Reports survey found that 35% say that a candidate's faith and religious beliefs are very important in their voting decision. Another 27% say faith and religious beliefs are somewhat important. Ninety-two percent (92%) of Evangelical Christian voters consider a candidate's faith and beliefs important. On the partisan front, 78% of Republicans say that a candidate's faith is an important consideration, a view shared by 55% of Democrats. However, there is also a significant divide on this topic within the Democratic Party. Among minority Democrats, 71% consider faith and religious beliefs an important consideration for voting. Just 44% of white Democrats agree.
So, there ya go.
(1)…62% of Americans do that! (add the 35% and 27% figures mentioned above)
And these Americans say that a candidate’s faith is very or somewhat important as a consideration?
(2)…When you look @ the breakdowns, a full 92% of Evangelical Christians say they consider a candidate’s faith and beliefs an important consideration...and 78% of Republicans.
Excellent points. (I may "borrow" that in the future)
Yes, for Mormon leaders to tell Mormon parents to "pray" about whether the Mormon gods want them to kill the preborn just shows you how far off track Mormonism is. And some pro-life voters either want -- or will settle for -- somebody like Romney...a candidate who according to his faith can pray about things like whether to commit murder-by-dismemberment?
Yeah, but I don’t care what other people think. I think for myself. I may be wrong; I may be right, but at least my opinions are my own.
Now, as to the character question. there can be men of character that are not Christian. Take our Jewish friends, for instance. Although many are unfortunately liberal, there are a fair proportion of conservatives. Which may, or may not, correspond with their personal character.
Or the ancient pagans. There were many honorable men among them.
Still, for me, I would rather have a non-Christian, personally weak morally, person who would govern as a true conservative, than the most sincere, upright and moral Christian who swallowed the social justice Koolaid.
Fortunately, I have not yet had to make such a choice. The characteristics are somewhat entwined together, although there are exceptions.
Give me a conservative. That’s all I ask.
Some men of history, including some pagans, have attempted to integrate honor into their lifestyles.
The bottom line, though, is that men who glorify either mythic Roman & Greek gods, or pagan gods, or glorify themselves via having no gods, have robbed glory from the One True Ultimate God. They are thus glory thieves. And thievery is not an honorable profession, let alone an honorable lifestyle.
Yes.
Joseph Smith, in his "JST" revision of the book of Revelation, added to -- and took away from that book. He altered over 80 verses in that book.
OK, I can agree with that, more or less.
Still, I would much prefer the ancient pagans to the neo-pagans we have nowadays. Including the real thing, the atheists, the secularists, and the Democratic party.
Bump.
If Romney were a truly conservative candidate, I would not care if he was a Mormon [MEGoody, post #2]
Does Romney’s Mormonism Matter? No, but his liberalism does. [Westbrook, post #3]
Mormon? Fine. [Da Coyote, post #11]
I could vote for a Mormon. But that doesn’t mean they aren’t wrong, theologically. I could vote for a Mormon. Just not this Mormon. [Chesley, post #16]
don’t care that Mitt is a Morman. [Joe Boucher, post #20]
Well, this a.m., my other post was this one:
Michele Bachmann's pastor on Mormonism
And here, the Mormon church-owned Deseret News thought it was relevant (after all) to tout what Michele Bachmann's pastor's religious beliefs were about Mormonism.
So tell us, FREEPERS (including many others who have said similar things on other threads to what you five have said on this one):
#1 Why were you prompted to tell other FREEPERS that Romney's religious beliefs were irrelevant to you; but simultaneously, you didn't comment re: Bachmann's pastor's religious beliefs? Wouldn't his beliefs likewise be irrelevant? Would the Rev. Wright's sermon content have been irrelevant in 2008 when voters were weighing Obama?
#2 What do you think of the Mormon church that thinks it's relevant to consider what a candidate's pastor has said about the Mormon church, but they have constantly deflected what the Mormon church (Romney's leaders) have said about the Christian church? Doesn't that appear to be heavily inconsistent?
Principle involved here: - SOME PEOPLE TURN ON ITS HEAD WHO REJECTED WHOM! [DID THE BASE LEAVE THE CANDIDATE BECAUSE OF HIS CULT? OR, DID THE BASE FINALLY REALIZE THAT THE CANDIDATE'S CULT WAS LESS-THAN-INSPIRING DUE TO ITS LABELS OF THE BASE AS 'APOSTATES,' 'CORRUPT' AND CREEDALLY ABOMINABLE?]
Were we to discuss candidates representing a broad range of alternative religions, I would guestimate that 60-80% of them do not necessarily go out of their way to slam Christianity or badly slander the spiritual reputation of Christian adherents for chunks of 170-180 years at a time. That can't be said about true-believing LDS candidates (in distinction from Jack Mormon candidates).
Simply put, the true-believing Mormon candidate who approaches us historic Christians is saying:
"You are an apostate; I am a restorationist built upon the complete ashes of your faith. Your creeds--all of them--are an 'abomination' before God. Your professing believers are 'corrupt.' Can I count on your vote then?" [See below for chapter & verse]
Conclusion: When a candidate mislabels 75-90% of his voting base's primary faith tenets and claims & reduces them to mere "apostate" status--Note that LDS "Scripture" specifically labels the entire Christian church as "apostate" and Note that 75% of people claim to be "Christians" in the more mainline/Protestant/Catholic sense--& frankly, this % is higher in the Republican party)...
...Then...
...he not only shows open disdain for his voting base, but betrays his ability to inspire confidence in his ability to accurately define a major world religion.
If he cannot even accurately define a major world religion, what confidence does he inspire re: his ability to handle national security issues, terrorist issues, & negotiation issues pertaining to another world religion like Islam?
Specific citation to above: Pearl of Great Price, Joseph Smith - History, verses 18-19: I asked the personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right — and which I should join. I was answered that I must join NONE of them, for they were ALL wrong, and the personage who addressed me said that ALL their creeds were an abomination in His sight: that those professors were ALL corrupt... "
LDS cannot just take or leave for this is authoritative "Scripture"; this verse originated as the supposed description of the very foundation of the Lds church--the First Vision of Joseph Smith. They claim that this is their "god's" judgment of Christians and their church bodies; they have since translated this into over 100 languages and circulated this nonsense world-wide with millions of copies.
Some of you might be interested in this online debate about Mitt Romney Damon Linker had in '07 with a BYU scholar, Richard Bushman.
I offered my own critique of Bushman's views on it as well.
ALL: Take a look at these intentions by Mormon leaders in chart below...then read two Mormon "scriptural" revelations from Joseph Smith after that. (No wonder commentators like Damon Linker has warned that the Mormon "prophet" in Salt Lake City "might dictate to an American president!")
| Lds Leader | Chronological 'Prophet' or Fundamental # (or Other Title) | Overlap Areas: Could the President of the U.S. become a 'puppet' to an Lds 'Prophet?' (The Lds Prophets -- in their own words) | |
| John Taylor | Lds 'Prophet' #3 | “The Almighty has established this kingdom with order and laws and every thing pertaining thereto…[so] that when the nations shall be convulsed, we may stand forth as saviours…and finally redeem a ruined world, not only in a religious but in a political point of view.” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 9, p. 342, April 13, 1862) | |
| Orson Hyde | President of the Lds Quorum of the 12 Apostles for 28 years (1847-1875) | “What the world calls ‘Mormonism’ will rule every nation...God has decreed it, and his own right arm will accomplish it. This will make the heathen rage.” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 7, p. 53) | |
| Heber J. Grant | Lds 'Prophet' #7 | "Elder Marion G. Romney recalled the counsel of President Heber J. Grant: 'My boy, you always keep your eye on the President of the Church, and if he ever tells you to do anything, and it is wrong, and you do it, the Lord will bless you for it.' Then with a twinkle in his eye, he said, 'But you don't need to worry. The Lord will never let his mouthpiece lead the people astray'" (in Conference Report, Oct. 1960, p. 78)." Cited in Official Lds publication Search the Commandments: Melchizedek Priesthood Personal Study Guide, p. 209 (1984) | |
| Harold B. Lee | Lds 'Prophet' #11 | ...President Harold B. Lee said: 'We must learn to give heed to the words and commandments that the Lord shall give through his prophet, '...as if from mine own mouth...(D&C 21:4-5)...You may not like what comes from the authority of the Church. It may contradict your political views. It may contradict your social views. It may interfere with some of your social life. But if you listen to these things, as if from the mouth of the Lord himself..." Cited in official Lds publication Remember Me: Relief Society Personal Study Guide I, p. 27 (1989) | |
| Spencer Kimball | Lds 'Prophet' #12 | "President Spencer W. Kimball said: '...We deal with many things which are thought to be not so spiritual; but all things are spiritual with the Lord, and he expects us to listen, and to obey..." (In Conference Report, Apr. 1977, p. 8; or Ensign, May 1977, p. 7) Cited in official Lds publication Come, Follow Me: Melchizedek Priesthood Personal Study Guide 1983, p.12 (1983) | |
| What about Marion G. Romney, cousin to Mitt's father? | Who was he in Lds hierarchy? (Title: 'President' - Top 3 of church as 2nd counselor to both #11 & #12 Lds 'prophets') | "Elder Neal A. Maxwell has said: 'Following the living prophets is something that must be done in all seasons and circumstances. We must be like President Marion G. Romney, who humbly said, '..I have never hesitated to follow the counsel of the Authorities of the Church even though it crossed my social, professional, and political life' (Conference Report, April 1941, p. 123). There are, or will be moments when prophetic declarations collide with our pride or our seeming personal interests...Do I believe in the living prophet even when he speaks on matters affecting me and my specialty directly? Or do I stop sustaining the prophet when his words fall in my territory? if the latter, the prophet is without honor in our country! (Things As They Really Are, p. 73). Cited in official Lds publication, Search the Commandments: Melchizedek Priesthood Personal Study Guide, pp. 275-276 (1984) | |
| Ezra Taft Benson | Lds 'Prophet' #13 | Benson speech given 2/26/80 @BYU. Summary: “…remember, if there is ever a conflict between earthly knowledge and the words of the prophet, you stand with the prophet…” (See excerpts re: 3 of 14 'fundamentals' below) Source: Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet | |
| Benson (cont'd) | Fundamental #5 | 5. The prophet is not required to have any particular earthly training or credentials to speak on any subject or act on any matter at any time. (My Q: Ya hear that Mitt Romney? Ya hear that Jon Huntsman?) | |
| Benson (cont'd) | Fundamental #9 | 9. The prophet can receive revelation on any matter, temporal or spiritual. (My Q: Still listening, Mitt? Still listening, Jon?) | |
| Benson (cont'd) | Fundamental #10 | 10. The prophet may advise on civic matters. (My Q: What say ye Mitt? What say ye Jon?) | |
| Mitt Romney as POTUS??? | Aside from above prophetic impositions, why would Mitt not only honor what these 'prophets' have spoken, but what a future Lds 'prophet' may tell him to do? | The Law of Consecration Oath Mitt Romney has sworn in the Mormon temple (done before marriage/sealing in temple): "You and each of you covenant and promise before God, angels, and these witnesses at this altar, that you do accept the law of consecration as contained in this, the book of Doctrine and Covenants [he displays the book], in that you do consecrate yourselves, your time, talents, and EVERYTHING with which the Lord has blessed you, or WITH which he MAY bless you, to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, for the building up of the kingdom of God on the earth and for the establishment of Zion." Source: What is an LDS Church/Mormon temple marriage/sealing? [Q: Please define 'Zion': The LDS PR Web site (lds.org) defines its primary meaning: "membership in the [LDS] church."] |
What do the Mormon "scriptures" say about Mormon political designs? For those of you who may not realize it, as you read "Zion" below, "Zion" to Mormons = the Mormon church.
* “…if Zion do these things she shall prosper, and spread herself and become very glorious, very great, and very terrible. And the nations of the earth shall honor her… (Lds Doctrine & Covenants 97:18-19)
* For behold, I say unto you that Zion shall flourish…And the day shall come when the nations of the earth shall tremble because of her, and shall fear because of her terrible ones. (Lds Doctrine & Covenants 64:41, 43)
Bears repeating for the FReepers that blindly defend mormonism when they are ignorant of its doctrines.
> #1 Why were you prompted to tell other FREEPERS that
> Romney’s religious beliefs were irrelevant to you; but
> simultaneously, you didn’t comment re: Bachmann’s pastor’s
> religious beliefs?
We are currently being ruled by an anti-American, totalitarian statist, Mahometan Caliph.
While I have no intention of voting for Romney, his cult doesn’t disturb me nearly as much as that of the current occupant of the White House.
> Bears repeating for the FReepers that blindly defend
> mormonism when they are ignorant of its doctrines.
Mormonism is a lunatic fringe cult.
Romney’s multiple positions on abortion is enough for me not to trust him.
As for what the Mormon hierarchy thinks, or believes, about religious relevance, who cares? Is it inconsistent, maybe even hypocritical? Perhaps so, but why should that affect what I think? Is Romney responsible for his church's leaders?
No, he is responsible for himself only, same as anyone. And how he has handled himself is reason enough not to vote for him. I don't need to drag in his Mormonism, just like I didn't need to drag in his blackness to vote against Bambi. Both are irrelevant, and besides, I didn't need them if they had been. (As an aside, though, I wasn’t aware of what the Deseret News had said. I don't read it. But their comments are still irrelevant.)
Look, I would vote for a Muslim, if I thought that he would uphold the Constitution (the old written one, not the “living” one. Frankly, I don't think any Muslim could, not if he bought the imams, or whatever, are selling. But hypothetically, if this, then that.
I don't care what the Mormons think of evangelical Christian theology, anymore than I care what Buddhists, Muslims, Jews, Catholics, Orthodox, or neo-pagans think. Romney's religion is wrong, but it's his religion, and I think he's entitled to practice it. If someone doesn't want to vote for him because of his religion, that's alright, too. Everybody entitled to an opinion. My beef with Romney is his politics and policies.
But what he may say about my religion is one thing. I can say the same about his. It is heretical, at the least. So why get offended? God will sort us all out in the end. I hope that this clarifis my position. If not, ask and, if I can I will answer. Go with Christ.
'Tis fine to rank your personal provocations & act accordingly. But thank God, the "Silent Generation" of WWII vets showed the world that U.S. citizens can "multitask" in addressing more than one enemy nation on multiple frontlines.
Well, there's many points involved here -- including the reality that if a candidate shows gullibility in the most important area of his life, he certainly won't fair very well as a POTUS.
Muslims & Mormons agree on many things. One of which is their labels of Christians. Muslims teach that Christians are "infidels"; Mormons teach that Christians are "apostates."
One of my others points is that we are constantly being preached at to be "tolerant" toward other faiths; yet, among those preaching such a message are the very Muslims who labels us "infidels" and the Mormons who label us "apostates." IOW, some of those who vie for "tolerance" are very good about exporting it.
Look, I would vote for a Muslim, if I thought that he would uphold the Constitution (the old written one, not the “living” one. Frankly, I don't think any Muslim could...
Just as a Muslim seeking my vote could tell me in the same sentence that he would uphold the constitution, 'tis not very "inspirational" if in the same sentence he tells me -- the "support base" he is seeking in the voting booth -- that he deems me an "infidel."
What I saying is that we cannot fully "hermetically seal" other-worldly and this-worldly beliefs/worldviews from politics.
"About 20 percent of Republicans and 23 percent of Protestants tell Gallup they would not support a Mormon for president. A portion of conservative Christianity is unhinged in its condemnation, regarding Mormonism as a dangerous, secretive cult. Even without recourse to calumny, it is clear that evangelicals will not be reconciled to Mormon doctrines without ceasing to be evangelicals.Why start LOSING 20% of the electorate, who pre-decided they won't vote for you????????
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.