Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Colofornian

Even if Mormonism is not within the mainstream of Christianity, there is no religious test for public office and the nation has done just fine in the past with non-Christian presidents.


18 posted on 02/20/2012 4:30:27 AM PST by fso301
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: fso301
Even if Mormonism is not within the mainstream of Christianity, there is no religious test for public office

Well, Gee Whiz! I've never seen that little gem before.

I guess I'll just have to reconsider all the candidates, leaving their religious beliefs out of my considerations. I wouldn't want to do any thing that's unconstitutional.

27 posted on 02/20/2012 9:39:08 AM PST by Graybeard58 (Eccl 10 v. 19 A feast is made for laughter, and wine maketh merry: but money answereth all things.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

To: fso301

There is no religious test for the government to apply to candidates, but voters are allowed to use whatever crieria they want to decide for whom they will vote. Many on this forum, even on this thread, use Obama’s religion as a factor in determining their vote against him.


28 posted on 02/20/2012 10:02:16 AM PST by Turtlepower
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

To: fso301
You don't understand.

This is simply part of today's THREE MINUTES HATE !.

Don't you know Jesus hates those dastardly Mormons ! And so does the pastor and all the good brethren and sisteryn !

Yup, yup, they're real Christians alright !

31 posted on 02/20/2012 2:20:21 PM PST by jimt (Fear is the darkroom where negatives are developed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

To: fso301; jimt
Even if Mormonism is not within the mainstream of Christianity, there is no religious test for public office and the nation has done just fine in the past with non-Christian presidents.

Ya know, fso...I once read an Lds news release that said: The framers of our constitution included a provision that “no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States” (Article VI). That constitutional principle forbids a religious test as a legal requirement...

This release was part of a discussion by Lds "apostle" Dallin Oaks.

I'm afraid you -- FSO -- like Mr. Oaks...misconstrues candidacy eligibility issues.

All the constitution says is that an eligible candidate cannot be kept from running on religious test grounds.

Ya know, even Mr. Oaks recognized how ludicrous some of his rhetoric was sounding and needed to offset it a bit with a qualifier: "...but it of course leaves citizens free to cast their votes on the basis of any preference they choose."

So...here's a Constitutional "primer" for you so that you don't keep exporting confusion to others:

Point 1- RELIGION: Religion IS NOT a qualification or disqualification for public office; but it's certainly one quality of voter discernment among many others...namely, voting record, present position statements & rampant inconsistency of past position statements, social issues' stances, character, viability, scandal-free past, etc. Article VI, section 3 of the Constitution is aimed at the candidate (must be of a certain age and must have resided in our country for a certain number of years) and the government so that religion does not become a disqualification to keep somebody otherwise eligible for running for public office. Article VI, section 3, is not aimed at the voter. Otherwise, voters would have to 100% disregard character, beliefs, other-dimensionly commitments, and spiritual discernment in weighing candidates.

POINT 2 - ELIGIBILITY: Newsflash!! Every person on the ballot, & even most write-in candidates, have proper "qualifications" to not be excluded from office consideration (based upon religious grounds). Of course, millions of us have the "qualifications" to be considered a potential POTUS & shouldn't be excluded outright from a ballot because of the religion we hold! Nobody has a "Religious Ineligibility" tattoo on their forehead!

POINT 3- BOTTOM LINE: You don't, FSO, really want to join Lds "apostles" in their confusion by emphasizing words similar to "qualifications" (language within the Constitution) with words like "qualities." (language that’s NOT in the Constitution)...do you?

I focus on what voters base their votes on in the "real world": Qualities

Otherwise, Article VI says absolutely...
...nothing...
....nada...
...zero...
...about how voters must weigh--or not weigh--the "qualities" of a candidate...

Nowhere does Article VI say that voters MUST 100% disregard character, beliefs, other-dimensionly commitments, and spiritual discernment in weighing candidates!

"Qualifications" have to do with what gets a man on a ballot. "Qualities" has to do with who gets elected.

(Even 94-95% of Mormons -- most voting upon the fellow personal "qualities" of a candidate like Romney -- can tell you that!)

Btw, fso, why aren't you lecturing Lds voters if anywhere from 88% to 95% of Mormons will only vote for a Mormon?

(For some reason, the "Article 6 Religious Test" lecture tour never seems to hit Utah, Southwest Wyoming or Southern Idaho)

38 posted on 02/20/2012 5:09:15 PM PST by Colofornian (Conservative DOESN'T = voting 4 a reincarnated Hitler 'cause he's "better" than THE anti-Christ)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson