First of all...in some of the principles I have highlighted on FR over the past five years, I have distinguished between generic political office and POTUS -- THE leader of the free world.
Beyond that, let's focus on that word "disqualify" -- 'cause I've already addressed this question: I already said: 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.
I've also said numerous times: "Qualifications" have to do with what gets a man on a ballot. "Qualities" has to do with who gets elected.
Therefore, the focus needs to be kept on candidate qualities -- and qualities include...character, beliefs, other-dimensionly commitments, and spiritual discernment.
Now, if you asked me: Do you think most Mormon political leaders have the qualities, the character, the beliefs, the other-dimensionly commitments, and the spiritual discernment to be THE leader of the Free world...my answer is, "I don't think so. I could be proven wrong re: a very specific individual, but somebody who perhaps can't even discern the difference between 'Christian' and an 'apostate' hasn't 'inspired' me that he can handle foreign policy decisions that occasionally involve Christians around the world."
Another key issue is that a temple Mormon (15-20% of all Mormons) -- vs. a less "institutional" Mormon -- is more likely to be beholden as a "puppet" to the "prophet" in Salt Lake City. So some Mormon candidates have a greater potential for puppet fodder than other Mormon candidates. (And it's not enough to merely say that Mormons have refrained from allowing SLC to overly influence them at the guv or Congressional level...there simply is NO comparison to those levels vs. what can be done from the White House)
You see, the issue here then isn't even primarily the Mormon candidate; it's the potential Mormon "prophet" who can overreach...And I've already included many quotes on other threads -- and a link on a post earlier on this thread -- showing the Mormon leader capacity for political overreach.
Does that disqualify the Mormon? (No) Is that a "quality" -- Mormon puppetry -- I want embraced within the White House? (No)
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 the Doctrine and Covenants, 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.
http://www.ldsendowment.org/terrestrial.html
Mormon’s covenant to put the church before ALL things
>>Beyond that, let’s focus on that word “disqualify” ..”
I purposely defined the meaning I was using in this context as “rule out voting for”. This was the focus, not whether someone qualified for the ballot.
In hindsight, I should have just written “rule out voting for” without “disqualify” for clarity sake. My apologies.
This confusion aside, it seems that your post is affirming that you would rule out voting for a member of the LDS on this basis alone (with some rare exceptions.) This is different than what I concluded in previous posts.
>>You see, the issue here then isn’t even primarily the Mormon candidate; it’s the potential Mormon “prophet” who can overreach..
“Potentially” pretty much any candidate can overreach in this regard and use whatever historical or scriptural justification they require. . E.g., Calvin’s Geneva, Christendom in the middle ages.
In my view, I’m looking for your objective criteria that fits LDS, and, in my view again, the criteria is subjective.
That’s, of course, your and everyone (including myself) else’s prerogative. But a position based on subjective truth cannot be used validly in an objective debate looking toward the truth above the individual level.
thanks for your courteous discussion.