Replies

All the best, I know you will flame me big time after this post, but I've said my peace, and don't feel the need to debate my religion with you any further.

I would encourage the Mormons here to reconsider debating theology with the rest of us in detail on any political thread.

We simply will not agree on the matter. It's time to recognize that. And Mitt Romney is not running for pope so please don't allow the discussion to turn into something along those lines.

Focus instead on Romney's secularism and his governing as a civic Christian, a "Christian with a small 'c'". His record there is quite similar to that of any elected president from any of the orthodox Christian churches. I don't know of anything in his record to suggest he is some kind of super-Mormon. Far from it.

Romney is not making his campaign about Mormonism. I'd suggest you consider his example. I don't think letting Mormonism threads turn into theology threads contributes anything. Don't let yourselves be baited into such exchanges.

Giuliani, for example, is such a bad Catholic that he can no longer receive communion from his church and he and his Co-Presidentrix were so maritally immoral by the standards of the R.C. church that they had only a civil marriage without any blessing of their church.

But that isn't a very good basis on which to bash him and oppose him. We oppose him because he is a candidate of the Left, a domestic enemy of conservatives and those who love of liberty and the Constitution. And bashing Giuliani just for being a bad Catholic could offend many reliably conservative Catholics here on the forum.

The FR Mormons should discuss it among themselves. But I think it's good advice. I suggest you dialog with the moderators and JimRob and advocate restricting fights over Mormon theology to the Smoky Backroom where they have always belonged and with certain limits even there. This polluting of political threads with anti-Mormon material is also not healthy for the forum. Conservatives who are Mormons and Catholics and Jews and evangelicals and Baptists and Protestants or atheists or agnostic should all be able to gather on FR for discussions of politics and candidates. While religion and theology are not entirely irrelevant and should not be forbidden, I don't see any reason why Mormonism has any greater degree of difference from Judaism and Christianity and atheists in political dialog. FReepers who adhere to those other belief systems are not particularly singled out for discrimination against as a group politically. Why is Mormonism singled out in this way for a political discussion?

I think you should discuss with FR's management about whether posts bashing Mormonismm should be removed by hitting Abuse on them. Moving them to the Backroom would make it easy for anti-Romney FReepers to neutralize political threads with any favorable reporting on Romney. A discussion of Mormonism would only be appropriate on a political thread in the context of Romney being an extreme Mormon of some sort (polygamist, apostate, harboring a desire to favor Mormonism in public policy, etc.).

I am personally quite anti-Mormon theologically, to put it mildly. But this is the political side of FR, not the Smoky Backroom where the Robinsons have generously (and wisely) hosted a religion forum for us.

[Religion Moderator, does this kind of theological discussion belong in the Back Room? Should political threads be allowed to be the only place on FR where anti-mormonism is tolerated? Is this the face FR wants to present to the public? And are you the moderator to flag to deal with this issue, to arbitrate whether these antimormon posts have crossed the line? It's going to be a long and bitter year here if management won't impose a little discipline on this matter. Shouldn't we agree to be reasonable and save such discussion for the Backroom?]

[restornu, whatever happened to White Mountain anyway?]

“We simply will not agree on the matter. It’s time to recognize that. And Mitt Romney is not running for pope so please don’t allow the discussion to turn into something along those lines.

Focus instead on Romney’s secularism and his governing as a civic Christian, a “Christian with a small ‘c’”. “

And you’ve just demonstrated the problem with a Romney presidency. The entire time in office he would have to deny his Mormonism, OR he could slip and become super-mormon (I’ve seen that happen).

In other words, what you are saying is that he would have to bottle up the most important essence of his moral being in order to be viable - for the next ten years. And then you are going to be surprised when the problems happen.

What problems you ask? How about in the middle of a news conference when he is asked about the Book of Mormon’s view that blacks are the children of Caine (now whitewashed but part of the original Book of Mormon). Or asked to discuss Kolob. Or celestial marriage to many women (because spirit beings are 45 to 1 female).

Oh yeah, this is going to get nasty. And you all will have to suck up your Christian faith, or Jewish faith (American Indians are long lost Jews you know) and defend Romney’s beliefs. Or you will force Romney to become a hypocrite.

Sure sounds like a foundation of sand for a presidency.

I would encourage the Mormons here to reconsider debating theology with the rest of us in detail on any political thread.

I would hardly call my exchange with FastCoyote a debate. What I would call it is a exposure of his rhetoric to be what it is, namely lies, falsehoods and deception.

Thanks for you concern, but for you to recommend we stay silent when such rubbage is thrown in the face of ever one on a political thread just doesn't cut it, sorry. I'd prefer to stay silent on the matter as well, but I will in moderation continue to defend when defamed. One cannot defend such filth without refuting scripturally

Cheers