Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: reaganaut

“It is not wrong or UN-American to vote my conscience, it is however both for you to try to keep me from doing so.”

Nobody said that, you twit.

“I never said they couldn’t RUN for office, I’m saying I will never VOTE for them and even then the list is small (pseudo-Christian cults and Muslims).”

Really? Well your friends have. Why don’t you help me correct their unAmerican views?

“Again, it is not wrong to vote my conscience. At least I have one. You however, are wrong to try to get me to violate my conscience and my religious beliefs.”

You can keep repeating this, but I never said you should not vote as you wish.

It is your intolerant friends who ignore the Constitution.

We’re making progress here.


415 posted on 03/09/2012 7:52:11 PM PST by RFEngineer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 412 | View Replies ]


To: RFEngineer

How am I ignoring the Constitution?

Where have they said that Mormons or anyone else can’t run. Prove it, liar. Show me the posts.

You keep saying that I am being un-American for refusing to vote for a Mormon. You can’t even keep your story straight.


417 posted on 03/09/2012 7:54:29 PM PST by reaganaut (Ex-Mormon, now Christian "I once was lost, but now am found, was blind but now I see")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 415 | View Replies ]

To: RFEngineer; reaganaut; Godzilla
I have looked over the thread and find that you indeed are defining how individuals can vote or determine FOR THEMSELVES what qualities and qualifications they find desirable in a candidate. I also find no one advocating keeping a person off the ballot based on such criteria.

So school is in session, not so much for you since you are far smarter than the rest of us, but for those most interested in how all this Constitution and law stuff really works.

I will use my friend Reaganaut as an example if she does not mind.

Reaganaut is an American Citizen as well as a citizen of her local state and town. As an INDIVIDUAL she is free to practice any religion she chooses and no other individual, organization or government can infringe on that right in any fashion. She is also, as an INDIVIDUAL, free to support a person (or be against same) based on ANY criteria she chooses, be it religion, hair color, shoe size, favorite movie or any one of thousands such reasons.

HOWEVER, let us say the Reaganaut the individual serves on a board, commission or what have you that determines eligibility to be on a ballot for public office. The ONLY criteria she and her fellow members can use are those SPECIFICALLY listed in the Constitution and other laws of the land. Normally these focus on age and residency. Therefore she nor anyone else can remove or block a person from said ballot based on religion, hair color, shoe size, favorite movie or any one of thousands such reasons.

Now to the reverse. In accusing one of being “un American” for choosing to practice their God given Constitutional right to choose for public office FOR THEMSELVES an individual based on any criteria they desire you essentially are doing unto them what you accuse them of, namely acting un-American. Yes they can even say that they feel the person IS UNQUALIFIED for office based on religion, shoe size what have you. What they CANNOT do is in anyway prevent their fellow citizens from being given such a choice to make for themselves by denying said candidate from being on the ballot. Doing such denies their freedom of religion and moral conscience ether by direct action or implied wrong doing for the purposes of “shaming” them into some perceived line to toe.

A further point. No individual on this board, and more specifically in the so called “Inman” group that works towards exposing the very real issues and perils of Mormonism has EVER seriously advocated preventing any LDS member from practicing their faith, period. None would jail them, tie them up, destroy their places of worship or do anything to impede their religious freedom, an argument falsely used against them with sad regularity when they are are accused of same or worse.

Indeed in attempting to silence such individuals either directly, by coercion or by social embarrassment, individuals whose religion requires them to defend their faith, point our heresies and false teachings and save souls via any one of a number of methods their rights to practice their religion is being infringed. As long as they simply point out facts and engage in debate about the religion they take issue with and in no way impede the practitioners of said religion from going about their business beyond such debate they are behaving well with in the confines of our Constitution.

For those who are interested in knowing how things really work I hope this has proven informative.

For the rest, c’est la vie

445 posted on 03/09/2012 11:01:38 PM PST by ejonesie22 (8/30/10, the day Truth won.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 415 | View Replies ]

To: RFEngineer

It is your intolerant friends who ignore the Constitution.

- - - -
No, it is you who is reading into the Constitution something that isn’t there, you twit.

Again, show me where anyone has said Mormons (or any other religion) cannot run for office?

Give me the links. You keep claiming my friends have, no they have not.

Reading comprehension isn’t your strong suit, is it?


524 posted on 03/10/2012 3:17:00 PM PST by reaganaut (Ex-Mormon, now Christian "I once was lost, but now am found, was blind but now I see")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 415 | 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