Posted on 10/24/2007 5:45:16 AM PDT by Reaganesque
You are a bigot because or your demonstrated hateful attitude and disrespect against a particular religion.
Your behavior here is that of a troll.
What causes you to think that Mormons are heretical?
My behavior here is that of a Mormon who no longer believes the lies espoused by a religion that claims to be a restoration of Christ’s Church based upon the lies and deception of a sex-driven, con man who sought power, women and devotion to the detriment of millions of people foolish enough to buy into a deluded system that mimics true Christianity.
Pound sand spiffy, you are as bigoted against ex-mormons as anyone you accuse of being bigoted against Mormons. Let me ask you this spiff, would you vote for Warren Jeffs? How about Owen Allred? Are you bigoted much?
The actual editorial link below.
http://news.bostonherald.com/news/opinion/editorials/view.bg?articleid=1039807
1. God was once a man
2. Jesus is your Spirit brother
3. Satan is Jesus’ Spirit Brother
4. There will be polygamy in heaven (70 virgins anyone?)
5. Pre-existence
6. Those who were unfaithful in the spirit world (pre-existence) were cursed to be born on earth with black skin. ...
7. Native Americans (and Hawaiians) are descendants of Hebrews
8. Christ dies so that you can “earn” your way to heaven.
.....and on and on.
Now, I suppose you will publicly denounce that Mormonism teaches these things, but I know better and I have tokens to sell!
OK, you can't discuss South Carolina in a vacuum. That's pretty obvious. In fact, it was pretty obvious to Tulane when this person first raised the issue of faith-based voters in post #7: If Mitt can get the support of evangelicals, he will beat Clinton
So, I guess if you're going to get on my case for mentioning the background of a politician, then be consistent and jump on Tulane's case for the mere mention of the background of most SC voters.
Secondly, yes or no, have you or have you not commented in any of these threads on the South Carolina Bob Jones University rep's endorsement of Romney?
Your bigoted rants notwithstanding, the thread has nothing to do with religion.
Why are you always ranting about "bigots" and religion-mentions? (as if "religion" contained cooties or something and was taboo to vocalize).
With Romney, what is going on is not “belief”.
Romney’s aura is Uber Competence. That is what the credentials say. Ideology. Passion. Religion. All secondary. The reality of his resume is Uber Competence.
It starts from there. Democrats are all about feelings and Republicans are about results. Uber Competence is a good place to start from for a GOP nomination.
Folks need to remember also that the nomination is not the election. Electoral Votes are not Delegates. Delegates can be split. With him being strong in many or all states, consistently, and Thompson winning southern states but perhaps not being at all strong in the west or north, and Guilliani not being strong in non Florida deep south . . . and you have a formula for Romney going to the convention leading in delegate count by virtue of consistent 2nd or 3rd place showings plus at-large endorsements. The many has a crisp organization. They are focused on victory.
I rarely post articles at all, and frankly until very recently, I've yet to see many FREEPERS post articles on Huckabee. Anyone is free to post articles and comment on the content. There's no way you could say, "You mean like how Pat Robertson being an ordained minister and religious broadcaster was discussed thoroughly by the MSM and by voters in 1988? Not" because, in fact, Robertson's faith and actions & content of his broadcasts was plenty discussed.
Your lame excuses for your constant display of relgious hatred towards Mormons are laughable. All anyone has to do is review your posting history to see that it's almost all anti-Mormon rants 24/7/365. The excuses you just gave aren't just lame, they're dishonest. You know why you feel compelled to rant about Mormons in every Romney thread and it has nothing to do with the politics of any particular state.
Some of the items on your list are accurate and others are distortions or not factual. I would be glad to discuss these with you in the religion forum. This thread was meant to be for politics. You've stated that there is no Mormon who could ever get your vote and that is your choice. So ping me to a thread in the religion area if you're interested in continuing the conversation.
Exacto-mundo!
Fred Thompson (love the name Fred for US President) is a lovable and fascinating guy, especially cause he was (is) a movie actor.
But he would NOT get the bulk of the younger and mushy-middle voters, I don't believe. He is too curmudgeon-ee, and long of tooth. Fred has aged quite a bit in the past few years, and I suspect it's due to that disease he recently announced he has.
Romney will, on the other hand, attract the lions share of young voters, especially males, plus the moderate Repubs, plus many conservative Dems.
Add the priceless plus of Romney's squeeky clean (FIVE) sons and daughters, and other handsome family members -- and I believe the media will eventually grow tired of trying to paint him as a hate-filled bigot conservative, like the media ALWAYS does with other Republicans.
sandude,
I have no interest whatsoever in discussing Mormonism with you. I know what it is, and what it teaches. But you have done an adequate job of making yourself look reasonable and level-headed by requesting we speak on the religion forum.
I’ve discussed Mormonism many times on the religion forum. Perhaps you should do a search, I’m sure you will find it interesting. Use the keyword “Mormon”
Didn't your momma ever teach you that vague crits get you nowhere? (Isn't any wonder that the so-called "brother" of your Savior is known as the one who accuses?) Stop with the vague accusations. It's rather easy to stamp a label of "liar" on someone while rarely being specific about your accusations.
Your lame excuses for your constant display of relgious hatred towards Mormons are laughable.
By your own standards shall ye be judged. So since you consider opposition = hate, then that would mean: And your constant display of religious hatred toward anyone who opposes Mormon doctrine is laughable (and since I'm smiling as I write this, I guess the only animosity present is whatever chunk of that you have toward me).
[Oh, and BTW, Paul opposed Peter to his face on doctrinal issues in the book of Galatians...so I guess by your standards Paul "hated" Peter, eh?]
...anti-Mormon rants 24/7/365.
Well, look who the liar is. (I hope your not in charge of your family budget if that you're that loose with exaggerated numbers) And of course, you haven't posted any weekly and thrice-weekly pro-Romney articles, have you?
Oh, and since you didn't answer the question about whether or not you've commented on the Bob Jones University rep, I'll assume you have. So, if that's the case, it's OK for you (and/or other FREEPERS) to highlight Evangelical support for MR; but if you spot any Evangelical dissent in said support, you and others are quick to hurl the "bigot" bombs...ad hominen attacks...and seek to stifle and quell any "negative" discussion of your pet candidate.
(Perhaps you can give us a testimonial as to why why, you being LDS, are supporting an LDS candidate and how the faith of that candidate does or doesn't weigh in to your support decision)
I wholeheartedly believe the GOP (Bush) gained nearly 5 million popular votes between year 2000 and 2004 precisely because they started paying attention to the immense voter fraud (phony absentee ballots, inner city Democrat ballot box stuffing, union coercion in strongholds like Philly and Chicago).
I truly believe the polls were about correct in 2000, and that GWB really should have had a 4-5 percent lead over Gore on election day.
But the Democrat surge in cities in Fla., Pennsylvania, Illinois, and other states pushed Gore's totals up.
With all the Bush hatred syndrome among Democrats, I find it hard to believe that 5 million of them would have switched from Dem to GOP between 2000 and 2004.
Do you think that this is an act on my part or do you think that it is impossible for a believing Mormon to be reasonable and level-headed?
Are you feigning surprise also? ,-)
I wouldn't worry about the evangelical endorsements preventing voters from voting for Mr. Romney. People who are so uptight about evangelical Christianity that they would vote against the candidate who received these endorsements are likely people who are already in the Rudy Giuliani, John McCain, or Ron Paul camps. In addition, there are people who are so anti-Romney or anti-Mormon that no matter what question is asked, they will say that they are less likely to vote for Mr. Romney. The 27% who are more likely to vote for Mr. Romney are likely people who are undecided and still deciding on a candidate.
The real news in these polls is that Mitt Romney is gaining ground in Florida. If the party doesn't strip Florida of its bonus delegates because of the early primary, Mr. Romney will need to win about 35 to 45 of Florida's 114 delegates. I don't remember how many delegates Florida stands to lose if the party invokes the penalty or how those delegates will be allotted. The final result may be that Florida gets only 2 delegates per Congressional district and no bonus delegates. In that case, Mr. Romney will need to concentrate on winning districts and not on the popular vote total.
Bill
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.