Reader comments
Romney won't 'take orders' from church
78 comments | Read story
Jazz Fan Slapper | 2:27 a.m. Oct. 22, 2007
To this headline I say: "Good."
lamonte | 6:02 a.m. Oct. 22, 2007
"...and I wouldn't listen to them on an issue related to our
nation." Isn't Governor Romney being a little harsh here? I would
think he would be willing to listen to the feelings of all citizens on any issue
whether they were private citizens or leaders of any church. Such a statement
seems extremely narrow minded or it is just a political ploy meant to appease
the Mormon haters. The American people deserve better than that.
Comments continue below
diamond ladi | 6:39 a.m. Oct. 22, 2007
I think I would like it if Romney did get input (if elected)- in certain
situations- but not exclucively from our faith. After 9-11 Bush got input from a
group of religious leaders which included Pres. Hinckley- Sort of a temporary
"religious" cabinet.
Certainly these occasions would be rare (like in a 9/11 type catastrophy)
Certainly these occasions would be rare (like in a 9/11 type catastrophy)
Lawrence Welk Slapper | 7:09 a.m. Oct. 22, 2007
I agree...but I wish I could say: To this headline I say:
"Unfortunately"...that would sure make the world a better place in the
long run.
Lake Havasu | 7:16 a.m. Oct. 22, 2007
I think it is funny that people will think that Mitt Romney will take orders
from the church, but I don't hear people saying that of Harry Reid.
my2cents | 7:22 a.m. Oct. 22, 2007
Romney will no more take orders from Salt Lake than Harry Reid does. I think
the fact we have 2 very opposing poltical views from active and honrable members
of the church should be proof that no marching orders come down from the Prophet
to the political characters.
Most of us | 7:44 a.m. Oct. 22, 2007
We knew that already.
Anonymous | 7:56 a.m. Oct. 22, 2007
Kennedy did not take orders from the Pope either!
Anonymous | 8:01 a.m. Oct. 22, 2007
So much for "sustaining the Prophet."
Thomas Jefferson | 8:12 a.m. Oct. 22, 2007
To the Danbury Baptist preacher, I sent a letter which has been mis-construed to
demand "separation of church and state". What I was assuring the
Reverend was that the Federal Government would never dictate to any church what
its theology should be. (Of course, Connecticut and most of the 13 colonies had
State-supported churches at the time, and I was referencing only Federal
policy.)
I would welcome comments by the clergy on issues of concern to them. I assume such issues would be relating to the morality of our citizenry, and how our laws could uphold the Lord's commandments.
I would welcome comments by the clergy on issues of concern to them. I assume such issues would be relating to the morality of our citizenry, and how our laws could uphold the Lord's commandments.
Blake | 8:25 a.m. Oct. 22, 2007
You can still sustain the prophet without taking orders from him. The Church
will not endorse anyone, but does everyone know that? I think he told it how it
is, he didn't say anything close to not following his religious leaders
Minnie | 8:29 a.m. Oct. 22, 2007
Romney is near perfect.
We hope he wins the election.
If he doesn't, America will be missing out on a rare talent that is VERY MUCH needed.
We hope he wins the election.
If he doesn't, America will be missing out on a rare talent that is VERY MUCH needed.
bdc | 8:29 a.m. Oct. 22, 2007
I agree, it seems extreme to suggest that he won't even accept
'input'. I'm sure he did not mean to suggest that he won't
listen to voting citizens because they also happen to have a particular
religious viewpoint.
Of course, the comments are a sop to those worried a Romney Presidency will be controlled out of SLC. Romney is walking a tightrope the way he is juggling the issue of religion. Of course, it's also somewhat offensive that he feels he needs to make such a statement - do the other candidates have to disavow input from their religious leaders!?!
Oh, and it has nothing to do with sustaining the Prophet. I'd listen to his views on my job - but I wouldn't feel obliged to conduct my business anyway the Prophet said. Nor, I am sure, would the Prophet presume to act in such a way.
Of course, the comments are a sop to those worried a Romney Presidency will be controlled out of SLC. Romney is walking a tightrope the way he is juggling the issue of religion. Of course, it's also somewhat offensive that he feels he needs to make such a statement - do the other candidates have to disavow input from their religious leaders!?!
Oh, and it has nothing to do with sustaining the Prophet. I'd listen to his views on my job - but I wouldn't feel obliged to conduct my business anyway the Prophet said. Nor, I am sure, would the Prophet presume to act in such a way.
Anonymous | 8:36 a.m. Oct. 22, 2007
How can you "not take orders from the Church" and do anything BUT
"not follow your religious leaders?" Granted, the probability that an
issue would arise where the Church leaders told Mitt Romney what to do would be
etremely rare, but in principle the subordination of Mitt Romney to his
priesthood superiors is fundamental to Romney being a Mormon. And in times of
exigency, exceptions happen and demarcations of influence are often ignored at
great cost.
BotchedExperiment | 8:36 a.m. Oct. 22, 2007
Yeah, just like Big Oil, Big Tobacco, Big Pharma, and anyone else with money
wouldn't have any influence. Please. I'm so tired of all the lies
from politicians.
300 million people in this country, and Mitt and Hillary are the best we can do?
300 million people in this country, and Mitt and Hillary are the best we can do?
Anonymous | 8:52 a.m. Oct. 22, 2007
I'm sure Romney would accept "input" from the LDS church the same
way that he would accept input from the Sierra Club or the ACLU or the Taxpayors
Union or the NRA if elected president. That is if you have a large base of
constituents you'll get any president's ear. The LDS church came out
against the mobile nuclear missle plan and president Reagan dropped it within
days. That didn't make Reagan a tool of the LDS church.
Romney probably feels compelled to use the strongest possible language about this issue so that his detractors can't misconstrue what he says.
Romney probably feels compelled to use the strongest possible language about this issue so that his detractors can't misconstrue what he says.
lamonte | 8:59 a.m. Oct. 22, 2007
In previous interviews Harry Reid has stated that the First Presidency has
approached him - when the Democrats control Congress - and they have approached
Senator Hatch and the other Republican LDS Senators - when the Republicans are
in control. Mitt Romney said he "would not listen." I hope he meant
something less than that but the fact that he used those words tells me he is
not very careful with his words. Such carelessness has been the cause of wars
in past history. I think Governor Romney should be more careful with his words.
Anonymous | 8:59 a.m. Oct. 22, 2007
No, Mitt and Hillary are NOT the best we can do. That is why there are other
excellent candidates on the tickets. Is it just in Utah that people think this
comes down to Mitt vs Hillary? Wow! That says volumes about the mindset in this
state!
Athena | 9:07 a.m. Oct. 22, 2007
It seems that Romney and the Church are in agreement with one thing. Didn't
the Church already announce that it would not get involved in politics at all,
no matter who was elected?
Perspective | 9:19 a.m. Oct. 22, 2007
I'm a non-religious voter who's had to vote for religious people for
40 years. So I've always had to look past any particular magic hokum that
the candidate espouses. But I can tell you non-Mormons are uneasy about a
Mormon candidate.
When I came to Utah, I met many bright, ethical Mormons--folks I like and see every day. But I was stunned when I few of them told me "I just believe what they tell me to believe". These are people who are totally capable of making good moral decisions for themselves, but who have abdicated to someone above them in the church hierarchy. That in a nutshell is why a lot of people are uncertain about Mitt's independence.
Do I think Mitt believes "what they tell him to believe". No. He's bright enough to do his own pandering without church input. But Mormons still have some work to do in explaining how their church works.
When I came to Utah, I met many bright, ethical Mormons--folks I like and see every day. But I was stunned when I few of them told me "I just believe what they tell me to believe". These are people who are totally capable of making good moral decisions for themselves, but who have abdicated to someone above them in the church hierarchy. That in a nutshell is why a lot of people are uncertain about Mitt's independence.
Do I think Mitt believes "what they tell him to believe". No. He's bright enough to do his own pandering without church input. But Mormons still have some work to do in explaining how their church works.
To Anonymous. | 9:19 a.m. Oct. 22, 2007
Please remember that priesthood authority and subordination goes is a direct
line over what they have authority over. The President of the church is not in
any line relating to the the line of authority of the President of the USA. He
can direct on the CHURCH's position on a matter but cannot direct on the
Nation's position on a matter. It falls outside his line of authority. The
Elder's Quorum president doesn't tell the Relief Society's
President what to cook for dinner or what kind of car to drive. Even if he did
choose to, the Relief Society President would be well within her rights to tell
him to take a hike.
Anonymous | 9:28 a.m. Oct. 22, 2007
Even if you don't believe they are "divinely called", there is no
denying the business, academic, legal, political, and other credentials of the
LDS Church leaders. These are no mere sunday school teachers (except for
Packer)! They have a great, valuable brain trust in those leading quorums, and
with the influence they have on millions of Americans, Mitt would be foolish to
not listen to them! You don't have to believe they are "prophets,
seers, and revelators" to believe that they might have something meaningful
to say.
What's the difference? | 9:41 a.m. Oct. 22, 2007
Candidate Huckabee, who has been rising in the polls as of late, is a Baptist
minister and hasn't had to answer how his church would influence his
policies and decisions. A perspn's religion, regardless of which religion
it is, influences a person's values. Would seem to me ALL the candidates
sould have to answer the same question. But apparently not. Perhaps religious
bigotry still exists today. When I make a loan, I cannot discriminate based on
age, sex, race, national origin, RELIGION, color, or marital status (Equal
Credit Opportunity Act). However, these same standards apparently do NOT apply
in the ballot box or in the public media. Never has and probably never
will.....
No Orders needed | 9:46 a.m. Oct. 22, 2007
An order would not be necessary provided Mitt is only the same political
wavelength of the church. This was more of a question when he ran against
Kennedy and was not nearly as conservative. Now, however, he's on the same
page as the church on many political issues.
No orders needed.
No orders needed.
Reality | 9:51 a.m. Oct. 22, 2007
American politicans are much better at getting elected than they are at doing
their jobs once they are in office. If they have enough money and really want
the privilege, prestige and power of office they will promise or do what ever is
needed to obtain the office. Voters have to look beyond what they say and try to
understand what they are and who they are and what their life is about.
Mitt's life, like all good Mormons, is about being a Mormon. Voters have to
decide if that is a good or bad thing.
Anonymous | 9:54 a.m. Oct. 22, 2007
The question of whether the LDS prophet would have authority over a Mormon
President is not unprecedented, and I don't just mean Kennedy. In the
ancient world, the Bishops of the Catholic Church took confession and advised
the political leaders. In fact, that is the norm. The exception is when
political leaders try to lead without input from religious sages. But that is
also what can lead to curruption and political intrigue. If Mitt gets elected,
it might be interesting to see how it impacts the LDS Church in ways that are
similar to how such connections affected the ancient Christian Church.
arizonamom | 10:21 a.m. Oct. 22, 2007
Why is it that the media has no problem with every recent former President
taking counsel from the Rev. Billy Graham, famous Baptist preacher, but
can't even countenance Mitt Romney counseling with Gordon B. Hinckley,
friend and religious leader??
Scooter | 10:58 a.m. Oct. 22, 2007
People who think that the church would tell Mitt Romney what to do are not to
informed about the churches stance in politics they don't get involved in
politics. Some people may think that is not true but the laws we have protect
us.
Ray Wilsson | 11:10 a.m. Oct. 22, 2007
Mitt Romney has less baggage than any of the rest in both fields.
sb | 11:31 a.m. Oct. 22, 2007
What's wrong with Mr. Romney receiving input put from Pres. Hinckley or any
other religious leader? Pres. Bush and others before him have met with Pres.
Hinckley and many other religious leaders. I'm sure the presidents have
learn much from these people and then formed their own opinion besides.
Anonymous | 12:18 p.m. Oct. 22, 2007
The LDS Church has a long history of meddling in politics directly and using the
Church hierarchy to do so. Smoot, Young, Benson, and Joseph Smith himself. Given
the Church's track record, it is not unreasonable to think that might
happen again. Indeed, Mormons believe that the Prophet has the right and
authority to speak out on any matter, religious, political, social, or
otherwise!
B | 12:22 p.m. Oct. 22, 2007
Mitt will say anything to get elected. Just another sleazy politician.
Aaron | 12:38 p.m. Oct. 22, 2007
Mitt is an impressive person, but he's got to stop trying to coddle the
religious right. People who don't like us are not going to change their
minds, and we shouldn't care much anyway. I am so sick of the political
machine the Evangelicals have become. It's possibly the single worst thing
happening to American politics today.
To the anonymous poster who said there are other excellent candidates on the tickets besides Mitt and Hillary, show me where. Please don't say McCain or Giuliani or Thompson. Honestly, Obama and Huckabee are about the best candidates out there, but they're long shots. It's always those who are unlikely to run who would be the best candidates.
To the anonymous poster who said there are other excellent candidates on the tickets besides Mitt and Hillary, show me where. Please don't say McCain or Giuliani or Thompson. Honestly, Obama and Huckabee are about the best candidates out there, but they're long shots. It's always those who are unlikely to run who would be the best candidates.
ladyblueyes | 12:41 p.m. Oct. 22, 2007
Dear Thomas Jefferson,
Please bring back the first few presidents and all those that signed the Declaration of Independence. I think we could use a shot in the arm here.
Freedom of Religion was granted to ALL and if the voters are going to discriminate against someone's religious beliefs, we have a serious issue. Barac Obama has different beliefs, but he would also be a good President. Mitt would be an excellent one.
And if either one steps out of bounds, I think a recall isn't out of the question. After all, it really IS a government BY the people and if a grassroots movement needs to be made - then, people, get on board!
Hilary scares me ... Fred Thompson might bring some maturity, McCain controversy (not a bad thing sometimes) and Edwards ... well ... give him a couple more years.
Please bring back the first few presidents and all those that signed the Declaration of Independence. I think we could use a shot in the arm here.
Freedom of Religion was granted to ALL and if the voters are going to discriminate against someone's religious beliefs, we have a serious issue. Barac Obama has different beliefs, but he would also be a good President. Mitt would be an excellent one.
And if either one steps out of bounds, I think a recall isn't out of the question. After all, it really IS a government BY the people and if a grassroots movement needs to be made - then, people, get on board!
Hilary scares me ... Fred Thompson might bring some maturity, McCain controversy (not a bad thing sometimes) and Edwards ... well ... give him a couple more years.
Roger | 12:44 p.m. Oct. 22, 2007
As Romney knows, the Church doesn�t hesitate to take
positions on various moral issues, and it shares its views with political
leaders on those occasions. I can�t help but think Romney
is being disingenuous when he says he won�t even listen to
the church�s position. He�s telling
voters what they want to hear, just like when he told the people of
Massachusetts he was pro-Choice.
Fredd | 12:55 p.m. Oct. 22, 2007
I believe folks are missing the point. catholics and mormons ahave a single
leader they believe is selected by God (at least God inspired selection) who
represents God on earth. You find that in most other Christian religions. So
when Catholics and mormons are told to behave a certain way by their
Pope/Prophet it hold a greater weight then when told by your local minister.
Other Christian sects are free to believe their leaders are fallable beings.
The Pope is infallible and the Prophet speaks FOR God when he says he is. So if
I'm a good catholic or a good mormon and my Pope/Prophet makes a
declaration I should follow it if I'm being honest with myself. Kennedy
came out and said he would not obey the Pope if it was contrary to the good of
the country and his own belief. I sincerely doubt any LDS president would
advocate for anything detrimental to the U.S. I think the fact harry Reid and
Orrin Hatch are both members in good standing makes this a silly discussion.
Fredd | 12:57 p.m. Oct. 22, 2007
Sorry a couple errors. You "don't" find single inspired leaders
in other Christain sects, at least not on a world wide level. I'm trying
to say there is a real difference that could cause concern but all you have to
do is look at Reid and Hatch and its obvious the LDS leadership is not trying to
influence politics.
Doug | 12:58 p.m. Oct. 22, 2007
The church may not have a history of telling politicians what to do. That
doesn't mean it won't ever happen. Suppose the leaders of the church
recieve a revelation to inform Romney of something or tell him something to do.
And if it comes down to it Romney will have a choice between listening and
doing what the prophet says or not. Afterall, Romney believes Pres. Hinkley is
the voice of God. It is foolishness to say that you wouldn't listen to
what the LDS church leaders say. Unless you didn't believe that they were
the voice of God.
David Edward Garber | 12:59 p.m. Oct. 22, 2007
I'm not surprised. Romney's record already proved to my satisfaction
that he rejects any counsel from the Brethren. I'm curious to know if he
agrees with Harry Reid that the Brethren (or some of them, at least) have led
the Church astray.
lamonte | 1:17 p.m. Oct. 22, 2007
Isaac, PhD - Spend some time in a committed membership at any local LDS ward and
you'll find that all of the hyperbole you've been spewing is totally
unfounded. My question is not whether Mitt will be bound to do what the LDS
church leadership ask him to do but why he has to go so far as to say he
"won't listen to them."? He should show some courage. I think
Harry Reid did that just last week.
JOHN J | 1:24 p.m. Oct. 22, 2007
Putting all religion aside, wouldn't the American people say that they, the
runners for president would do anything just to get there name in the history
books. To myself none are sincere enough to run this boggled down country. Just
the usual rhetoric that never gets done.
Anonymous | 1:59 p.m. Oct. 22, 2007
I would listen to the Church Leaders if I were President of the USA. They are a
little more inspired than congress.
Doug | 2:15 p.m. Oct. 22, 2007
In response to Fredd:
You said "other Christian sects are free to believe their leaders are fallable beings". Myself being a mormon know that I am free to believe the prophet could fall- thus making him fallable.
and
"you 'don't' find single inspired Christian leaders in other Christian sects" is a leap.
You don't think God can work miracles in the lives of non-Mormons or even inspire them? Being a Mormon I am sure you understand yourself that God could not only inspire the prophet but you yourself as individual. Well lets hope God hasn't stopped personal inspiration.
You said "other Christian sects are free to believe their leaders are fallable beings". Myself being a mormon know that I am free to believe the prophet could fall- thus making him fallable.
and
"you 'don't' find single inspired Christian leaders in other Christian sects" is a leap.
You don't think God can work miracles in the lives of non-Mormons or even inspire them? Being a Mormon I am sure you understand yourself that God could not only inspire the prophet but you yourself as individual. Well lets hope God hasn't stopped personal inspiration.
The Dark Knight | 2:35 p.m. Oct. 22, 2007
If only Romney would distance himself from the Republican party . . . THEN I
would vote for him.
Shame on Mitt | 2:53 p.m. Oct. 22, 2007
And that's why I'm not voting for Mitt. Yes it would be nice to have
an LDS president, but I want an LDS president who still believes that prophets,
seers, and revelators exist. It is a shame that he went so far to appease his
critics. He might win a few more Republican votes but I think he'll lose
more support from LDS Church members.
Anonaymous | 4:05 p.m. Oct. 22, 2007
Romney said, "the church wouldn't tell you what to do, but even if
they did I wouldn't listen to them anyway." You should always take
the council from the church even if it isn't a popular option. The least
you could do, is to keep it an option. It really bugs me that he would say he
wouldn't listen. I agree with a comment from one of the other people,
"so much for sustaining the prophet."
Lyle | 4:45 p.m. Oct. 22, 2007
Romney sounds a lot like Reid. "Face the Nation": "My church
wouldn't endeavor to tell me what to do on an issue, and I wouldn't
listen to them on an issue that related to our nation." I suppose he, like
Reid, believes that when the Prophets speak concerning the US Constitution, as
did Ezra Taft Benson, then they are leading the membership astray.
sb | 4:55 p.m. Oct. 22, 2007
In November 2003 conference Elder Perry stated: �We have
never been encouraged to be blindly obedient; it is an intelligent obedience
that characterizes members of the Church.
Brigham Young is reported to have said that the greatest fear he had was that members of the Church would take what he said as the mind and will of God without first praying and obtaining a witness of the same for themselves. �
There may be some who follow blindly, but we are encouraged to find out for ourselves and follow after the dictates of own conscience.
Mr. Romney does stand for what he believes. He said he is "not going to try and distance myself in any way, shape or form from my faith." I believe when he says, "My church wouldn't endeavor to tell me what to do on an issue, and I wouldn't listen to them on an issue that related to our nation� means that the church isn�t going to tell him what to do and if it did that he isn�t going to follow blindly. Mr. Romney is a smart guy and will do what is best for the country.
Brigham Young is reported to have said that the greatest fear he had was that members of the Church would take what he said as the mind and will of God without first praying and obtaining a witness of the same for themselves. �
There may be some who follow blindly, but we are encouraged to find out for ourselves and follow after the dictates of own conscience.
Mr. Romney does stand for what he believes. He said he is "not going to try and distance myself in any way, shape or form from my faith." I believe when he says, "My church wouldn't endeavor to tell me what to do on an issue, and I wouldn't listen to them on an issue that related to our nation� means that the church isn�t going to tell him what to do and if it did that he isn�t going to follow blindly. Mr. Romney is a smart guy and will do what is best for the country.
Kevin Duchansky | 5:57 p.m. Oct. 22, 2007
I think the television interviewer may have recalled some of the peculiar habits
of the Mormon people when he asked Mr. Romney the question. Similarly, Mr.
Romney was asked recently if he'd "baptized the dead". I'd
anticipate questions like "do you hoard food in your basement", or
"what's up with the underwear". Its natural for people to be
curious, and vital for them to consider the actions of one who would like to be
their President. Lighten up, folks.
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining
E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.
- Blog: Eliapo cleared to play in bowl... 5:45 p.m.
- Outdoor notes 5:35 p.m.
- Miley and I can climb a mountain 5:35 p.m.
- Hedrick is a better competitor 5:35 p.m.
- Izumi gear comfortable, functional 5:35 p.m.
- Kids clip coupons for family 5:34 p.m.
- Let your kids approach Santa 5:34 p.m.
- Recession is taking toll onshelters 5:34 p.m.
- No proven psychic powers 5:34 p.m.
- McCoy successor selected Saturday 5:23 p.m.
- Susan Powell notebook seized
- Will Chambers keep his promise?
- Josh Powell meets with WVC police
- Star on field, in community
- Boozer plays at an All-Star level
- Conan mocks Orrin Hatch, Mormons
- BYU singers compete in 'Sing Off'
- Jazz miss Harpring's toughness
- Thanks 'Tonight Show,' 'Big Love'
- Mendenhall, Riley have crossed
- Jazz stunned by Timberwolves
114 - Stay the course with our president111
- Josh Powell meets with WVC police108
- TV mom gives birth to 19th child106
- Sources: Josh Powell hires attorney100
- Letters: 'Liberal conceit'99
- Letters: Explaining Palin99
- Tethering of pets could spur charges90
- Choir, guests unwrap musical magic89
- Cougar seniors see a new Bronco82
For the latest news in the health care debate and how it affects you...
Some forms of beauty are fleeting, fragile as life itself, gone in a...
First of all, to "20/20," how can you read newspapers and not understand...
Latest comments
strange question...why did it take over a month to report this.. Best wishes...
I have seen several young men in our Stake pressured into something they are...
My vote is for Ben McAdams.
Not only is golf a sport (and golfers athletes), but it takes FAR more skill,...
"And FYI, the presumption of innocence is not in the Constitution. Maybe YOU...
Miles why don`t you grow up. You post several times a day,using many names...
I don't know how Brent measures "smartness", but Cheney now is the best known...
Shameless hucksterism, but I agree with your take on the 4-D chamois!
Religious bigotry is alive and well.
Springville has met the challenges to date and they should clearly have been...
Advertisements
pedophilia, HIV, hundreds of other diseases, etc, etc. Now you tell "Face the Nation": "My church wouldn't endeavor to tell me what to do on an issue, and I wouldn't listen to them on an issue that related to our nation."
Of course, you would listen to your church--and any other USA church--and to millions of Americans as individuals and groups on issues related to our nation. What you meant was that you would not be dictated to by your church. Please be more careful and say what you mean the first time.