Reader comments
Romney's speech champions 'Symphony of faith'
110 comments | Read story
- Page:
- < Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next >
My2cents | 10:48 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Loved the speech. I'm sure Richard G. would be saying the same thing if
Obama or Ms. Clinton had given that same word-for-word speech, right? It's
about time someone said that this mad dash away from God should be stopped and
re-thought. That it should be OK to have a Creche or Mennora in the town
square, or crosses along the road marking where a fallen servant had died.
It's OK to have a faith. It's fine to have a faith, and a common goal
to be the best we can be. Mitt hit it out of the ball park, and touched the
American spirit.
Jim D | 10:49 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
I have read the speech several times. It it will go down as one the great
speeches of our time. It rose above the petty wranglings that have
unfortunately risen among religious sects today. It addressed the real issue of
the role of faith in God and religious liberty that permeates and underpins our
constitution and culture. It seems that with our total obsession with the
economy we have forgotten the true foundations of prosperity and happiness; and
that is a moral life; and that is founded in the fostering of religious liberty.
Jim Duffin
Jim Duffin
Comments continue below
Milt | 10:58 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
When Chris Matthews of CNN praises ANY republican about ANYTHING they said you
have to know that what that republican said will reach the hearts of many
democrats as well as republicans. This is a very rare thing.
I am a volunteer for Mitt here in NH and last night I was working a phone bank polling NH residents and it was incredible how excited most of them were over Mitts speech. Things here seem to still be looking up for Mitt.
Several respondents to this column in the paper have complained that Mitt is only saying what he thinks the people want to hear. NOTHING could be further from the truth. I have known Mitt for quite a few years and I have attended numerous town meetings that he spoke at during this campaign and I tell you as a friend that what he says is the truth, which is what most voters want to hear.
I am a volunteer for Mitt here in NH and last night I was working a phone bank polling NH residents and it was incredible how excited most of them were over Mitts speech. Things here seem to still be looking up for Mitt.
Several respondents to this column in the paper have complained that Mitt is only saying what he thinks the people want to hear. NOTHING could be further from the truth. I have known Mitt for quite a few years and I have attended numerous town meetings that he spoke at during this campaign and I tell you as a friend that what he says is the truth, which is what most voters want to hear.
to Re: Richard G | 11:02 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Bravo! Your comments are right on target.
Pittakos | 11:05 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Great speech. I was actually moved by it's patriotic theme. However, now
can we move on to something really important? I, for one, want to hear a speech
from Mitt on how he will turn this country's debt into a surplus like he
did for the Salt Lake Olympics; like he did for the State of Massachusetts. We
are $9 trillion in debt! It'll be 10 by the time the next President
assumes office. Let's stop worrying about what religion someone is or how
many times they have been divorced. Let's start hearing some concrete
solutions to the Nation's problems.
Hmmm... | 11:21 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
It's amazing how Christians in America have ever been insistent on taking
credit for the creation of the Constitution and that this nation was founded as
a "Christian" nation. This is simply not true and historically
incorrect!
The bulk of the founding Fathers, including Jefferson and Washington, even referred to themselves as "Deists," not Christians per se.' The Constitution is not based on Biblical precedent per se,' but on the Articles of Confederation which were decidedly based on the Iriquois Confederation (a pact held among Native Americans). This is not to say that Biblical and 'Christian' principles played no role, but to only say that the role was not as primary and overriding as claimed by contemporary Christians. In fact, the founding Fathers wanted nothing to do with institutional Religions having sway over the affairs of State, AND VISA VERSA! The operating principle here being fairness and equity, which is why the separation clause was added to the constitution, which interestingly was insisted on by the South Carolina delegation, who named Christian ministers among their group. Protecting personal religious freedom was the overriding intent, separating institutional religion from state affairs to protect both from each other was the underlying intent.
The bulk of the founding Fathers, including Jefferson and Washington, even referred to themselves as "Deists," not Christians per se.' The Constitution is not based on Biblical precedent per se,' but on the Articles of Confederation which were decidedly based on the Iriquois Confederation (a pact held among Native Americans). This is not to say that Biblical and 'Christian' principles played no role, but to only say that the role was not as primary and overriding as claimed by contemporary Christians. In fact, the founding Fathers wanted nothing to do with institutional Religions having sway over the affairs of State, AND VISA VERSA! The operating principle here being fairness and equity, which is why the separation clause was added to the constitution, which interestingly was insisted on by the South Carolina delegation, who named Christian ministers among their group. Protecting personal religious freedom was the overriding intent, separating institutional religion from state affairs to protect both from each other was the underlying intent.
CTR Art | 11:28 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Romney said a positive thing about Islam. But, previously he has said"
�We must civilize Islam.� No other
candidate has that 'big world picture' in my observation. Mitt has the
marvelous ability to discern betwen truth and error. I Choose The Romney.
davidutefan | 11:42 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Teresa, maybe you should study your history. The puritans did not come here to
establish religious freedom. They came to establish their own religion, not
equal opportunities for all.
Screen Age | 11:45 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
It is amazing to me that a single speech has had so much coverage and
commentary.
In the last 24 hours I've watched analysts on CNN, MSNBC, FoxNews, NBC, ABC, CBS discuss it, and have read about it all over the Internet.
The two most intelligent and insightful commentaries I've seen so far were those from the Wall Street Journal, and Pat Buchanan of all people.
The truth is, whether you are a rabid soccer mom, an atheist, an anti-Mormon, a Mormon, or a CTR wearing trash talker ...
Sadly, most people see ONLY what they predispose themselves to see, and attack that which threatens them.
Before the speech I wrote that the speech won't matter -- bigots will still be bigots and supporters will still be supporters -- but I was wrong.
Regardless Romney's political fate, his speech yesterday will live on. It will be studied, quoted, and referred to in years to come. It is already an "instant classic" in the library of American religious freedom.
In the last 24 hours I've watched analysts on CNN, MSNBC, FoxNews, NBC, ABC, CBS discuss it, and have read about it all over the Internet.
The two most intelligent and insightful commentaries I've seen so far were those from the Wall Street Journal, and Pat Buchanan of all people.
The truth is, whether you are a rabid soccer mom, an atheist, an anti-Mormon, a Mormon, or a CTR wearing trash talker ...
Sadly, most people see ONLY what they predispose themselves to see, and attack that which threatens them.
Before the speech I wrote that the speech won't matter -- bigots will still be bigots and supporters will still be supporters -- but I was wrong.
Regardless Romney's political fate, his speech yesterday will live on. It will be studied, quoted, and referred to in years to come. It is already an "instant classic" in the library of American religious freedom.
Nice speech, no difference | 11:57 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
I am not a Romney backer, but I am LDS. As a Mormon, I felt that Romney gave a
good speech (in spite of a few slip-ups, such as the "freedom requires
religion" remark), and it will be remembered in LDS culture for years to
come.
However, it seems to me that Romney's religion is not the real issue - it's his changing stances - and that is what will ultimately doom his presidential candidacy.
However, it seems to me that Romney's religion is not the real issue - it's his changing stances - and that is what will ultimately doom his presidential candidacy.
Jim | 12:03 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
In some of the commentary published in newspapers recently the point is made
that those who won't vote for a man because of his religious belief are
bigots. I do fear the prospect of having a Mormon in the White House because of
the tendency I see within that church of a jingoist leaning. Will Mitt Romney
be led by his obvious deep faith and patriotism into the mistake of thinking the
American way is the correct way, all other countries are in error. Historical
study will show that in Nazi Germany, the LDS Church leadership told its members
that they either join the Nazi Party or be excommunicated. It is this sort of
blind nationalism that I see in Romney's speech.
Yes to Huckabee | 12:28 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
When the heck did Huckabee attack Romney's religion?!?
Common Sense | 12:30 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Being anti-Romney doesn't make you anti-Mormon. It just mean you are
conservative.
Buh bye Mitt!
Buh bye Mitt!
Zippy | 12:38 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
The speech was like the man himself: a cipher
Christians are persecuted? | 1:07 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Christians indeed are persecuted in China (as are Baha'i and many other
groups). That's worth complaining about.
But I believe Rose is making the claim that Christians are persecuted in America. No Rose, we non-Christians are simply trying to protect our own rights.
I should point out that the Germans complained about persecution by the Jews.
But I believe Rose is making the claim that Christians are persecuted in America. No Rose, we non-Christians are simply trying to protect our own rights.
I should point out that the Germans complained about persecution by the Jews.
Freedom w/o Religion | 1:18 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
How about posting about things you know, not things you think from now on.
The Framers believed in a Diety, w/o any religious affiliation. Freedom and Religion do go hand in hand, and Romney was well within boundries with this assertion.
HATRED OF RELIGION WAS imbedded in Marxism-Leninism. Marx had called religion "the opiate of the masses" and said that "Communism begins where atheism begins." His chief disciple agreed: "There can be nothing more abominable than religion," wrote Vladimir Lenin, the founder of the Soviet state, in a letter to Maxim Gorky in January 1913. Religion, howled Lenin, was "a necrophilia," akin to a virulent form of venereal disease.
The Framers were Christians, and did not model the Constitution after the Articles of Confederation.
The Articles of Confederation DID NOT WORK, so they threw them out and started ove.
There is way too much false information on these boards.
The Framers believed in a Diety, w/o any religious affiliation. Freedom and Religion do go hand in hand, and Romney was well within boundries with this assertion.
HATRED OF RELIGION WAS imbedded in Marxism-Leninism. Marx had called religion "the opiate of the masses" and said that "Communism begins where atheism begins." His chief disciple agreed: "There can be nothing more abominable than religion," wrote Vladimir Lenin, the founder of the Soviet state, in a letter to Maxim Gorky in January 1913. Religion, howled Lenin, was "a necrophilia," akin to a virulent form of venereal disease.
The Framers were Christians, and did not model the Constitution after the Articles of Confederation.
The Articles of Confederation DID NOT WORK, so they threw them out and started ove.
There is way too much false information on these boards.
Dutchman | 1:21 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Great speech but in the end Mitt Romney is trying to get the nation to do
something even Salt Lake City will not do--elect a Mormon!
Melva McKenzie | 1:28 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
I thought his speech was excellent. He's the man for the time I think.
Mitt Supporter | 1:33 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
This is to "Nice Speech, No Difference"
And you have never changed your mind on an issue; PLEASE - there is nothing wrong with evaluating various issues and re-evaluating as you gain addition knowledge and insight. Name just one Politician who has not changed their mind on a particular issue!! Let me count the ways with Hillary~
And you have never changed your mind on an issue; PLEASE - there is nothing wrong with evaluating various issues and re-evaluating as you gain addition knowledge and insight. Name just one Politician who has not changed their mind on a particular issue!! Let me count the ways with Hillary~
Oregon Ute | 1:37 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Wow, a Mormon political leader (Republican)says he will do what's best for
the nation and not take direction from his religious leaders. I think
that's a great statment/position. I believe Mitt has demonstrated this in
the past. . .congrats. However, I wonder if the string pullers on Temple Square
and the puppets in the legislature understand Mitt's position, much less
are capable of acting on it?
need help | 1:57 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Please forgive me, but just a quick perusing of these posts leads me to believe
a lot of Mormon people need psychiatric help.
RE:Duckman | 2:05 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Wow, did you miss the point, or what?
So you wish the next President of the United States of America to be a person with the character of Rocky Anderson?
The point is not to elect a MORMON, it is to elect the best American.
The past few elections it has been difficult getting excited about any American. I hope this election is different.
So you wish the next President of the United States of America to be a person with the character of Rocky Anderson?
The point is not to elect a MORMON, it is to elect the best American.
The past few elections it has been difficult getting excited about any American. I hope this election is different.
RE:Hmmmmm | 2:11 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Separation Clause in the Constitution is found where?
(There is an Establishment Clause and a Free Exercise Clause, but neither create any "separation". -- 1st Ammendment)
Where do you people get your "facts"????????????
(There is an Establishment Clause and a Free Exercise Clause, but neither create any "separation". -- 1st Ammendment)
Where do you people get your "facts"????????????
Sort of Plastic | 2:16 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Of all the Republican candidates, Romney is the one I can stomach the least. He
reminds me the most of GWB -- the empty suit whose very emptiness is his appeal.
you people make me laugh | 2:21 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
its hilarious to read all of these religious arguments. Richard G who im
assuming is a 7th grader from his comments, is afraid of the words Mormon, God,
and Religion. Mormons write in biasedly and praise mitt. Protestants who are
smart write in and say "love thy neighbor" nice things but don't
support romney.
All of you write in and argue about the one thing in this world that you can't win an argument about..Religion!
Watch the debates and realize that no canidate wants to answer questions about his/her religion, but since mitt romney is a strong believer in Jesus Christ and the mormon faith he gets targeted. Mormons can believe what they want, protestants, catholics etc. athiests, muslims, jews...etc etc etc. but when it all comes down to it this country was founded on people wanting to believe what they personally hold dear to them. What they feel inside. Respect that. And realize that your personal beliefs are as weird as another persons.
You can't prove religion. That's why its so amazing. Its between you and what you believe and no one else.
All i want is an honest president...So far Mitt fits that description best.
All of you write in and argue about the one thing in this world that you can't win an argument about..Religion!
Watch the debates and realize that no canidate wants to answer questions about his/her religion, but since mitt romney is a strong believer in Jesus Christ and the mormon faith he gets targeted. Mormons can believe what they want, protestants, catholics etc. athiests, muslims, jews...etc etc etc. but when it all comes down to it this country was founded on people wanting to believe what they personally hold dear to them. What they feel inside. Respect that. And realize that your personal beliefs are as weird as another persons.
You can't prove religion. That's why its so amazing. Its between you and what you believe and no one else.
All i want is an honest president...So far Mitt fits that description best.
wrz | 2:21 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
"Like Richard G., I too noticed that while Romney was careful to be
inclusive of all faiths, he did seem to stop short of including people who do
not believe in God."
The whole point is that this nation was founded on the principle on a belief in a God. Atheists don't believe in God. And that's OK. But if enough of us were atheists the country would cease to exist as a nation that our founding forefathers envisioned.
The whole point is that this nation was founded on the principle on a belief in a God. Atheists don't believe in God. And that's OK. But if enough of us were atheists the country would cease to exist as a nation that our founding forefathers envisioned.
False statement from Romney | 2:22 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
"Freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom ... Freedom
and religion endure together, or perish alone." - Mitt Romney
This statement is so patently false that it scarcely deserves refutation. If Romney has studied the bloody history of his own church, then he knows that the religious fervor of its adversaries drove them to deprive the Mormons not only of their freedom but their lives, and that the Mormons reacted in kind. If he has studied the bloody history of the world's older religions, then he knows that the most devout Christians of all sects have not hesitated to suppress, torture and murder "heretics" throughout history. Only the strictest separation of church and state has permitted the establishment of societies where freedom of conscience prevails -- and those freedoms are firmly rooted in societies where organized religion has long been in decline.
This statement is so patently false that it scarcely deserves refutation. If Romney has studied the bloody history of his own church, then he knows that the religious fervor of its adversaries drove them to deprive the Mormons not only of their freedom but their lives, and that the Mormons reacted in kind. If he has studied the bloody history of the world's older religions, then he knows that the most devout Christians of all sects have not hesitated to suppress, torture and murder "heretics" throughout history. Only the strictest separation of church and state has permitted the establishment of societies where freedom of conscience prevails -- and those freedoms are firmly rooted in societies where organized religion has long been in decline.
Bill Keshlear | 2:22 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
If Mitt Romney's presidential fate was not already sealed by the right-wing
of the Republican Party before yesterday's speech, it certainly
would've been had he closed the way Sen. Harry Reid did on Oct. 9 at
BYU:
�I bear testimony of the truthfulness of the Gospel of Jesus Christ � the foundation for the blessings we now enjoy laid by the young boy and assassinated Prophet Joseph Smith and with certainty, I testify of Gordon B. Hinckley as our modern day prophet.
�It is finally my plea and prayer that we will follow the teachings that we know to be true, and in so doing create a better world.�
This closing, a public testimony and benediction in front of every news camera and reporter of significance in Utah, coming from Romney could never happen because he is a Republican. It could and did happen coming from Reid because he is a Democrat.
Democrats have many issues. Some of the most pressing and historically significant involve Sen. Reid because of his position. But his faith and his expression of it are not on the list.
�I bear testimony of the truthfulness of the Gospel of Jesus Christ � the foundation for the blessings we now enjoy laid by the young boy and assassinated Prophet Joseph Smith and with certainty, I testify of Gordon B. Hinckley as our modern day prophet.
�It is finally my plea and prayer that we will follow the teachings that we know to be true, and in so doing create a better world.�
This closing, a public testimony and benediction in front of every news camera and reporter of significance in Utah, coming from Romney could never happen because he is a Republican. It could and did happen coming from Reid because he is a Democrat.
Democrats have many issues. Some of the most pressing and historically significant involve Sen. Reid because of his position. But his faith and his expression of it are not on the list.
Amanda | 2:22 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Well done Mitt! Excellent speech and congratulations! Clearly your religious
commitment has helped make you a successful husband, father, business and
political leader! Thank you for your continued service to make our nation
excellent!
zrw | 2:39 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Warning from the South: "Ministers will pick up where Mitt left off. It
will be brutal, just as the polls will indicate at the close of the
weekend."
Ministers won't need to pick up where Mitt left off. The have been non-stop brutal for the past 160 years... Since Smith's death and before. The big question to answer is, or should be, "why the fanatical, rabid bigotry and abject, despicable unrelenting, obnoxious, vile hatred of Mormons?"
Ministers won't need to pick up where Mitt left off. The have been non-stop brutal for the past 160 years... Since Smith's death and before. The big question to answer is, or should be, "why the fanatical, rabid bigotry and abject, despicable unrelenting, obnoxious, vile hatred of Mormons?"
txmistake | 2:52 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Tai H's remark about the CTR ring is a mockery. Live as you please, why
mock someone elses religion.
Scooter | 2:55 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
What a classic! Not only did he touch my mind & my heart, but he showed
total class, tolerance and the importance of attaching ourselves to our past.
We must remember what our founding fathers represented and believed. If this
man isn't elected president we have missed a golden opportunity.
We need to remember how America became the great country it has become. Understanding history is essential.
We need to remember how America became the great country it has become. Understanding history is essential.
holiest candidate | 3:13 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
When it comes to which candidate is "closest to God"
(which is sadly what it might come down to with the ever-sinking GOP) Romney would be the "one of ours" favorite in Utah and Huckabee would get the nod because he's more likeable and from a mainstream religion.
(which is sadly what it might come down to with the ever-sinking GOP) Romney would be the "one of ours" favorite in Utah and Huckabee would get the nod because he's more likeable and from a mainstream religion.
Barry Bonds | 3:13 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Those of you who are "non-believers" such as Richard G. Good for you.
Do you not realize however that your denunciation of a God is your form of
religion. The very definition of religion is a set of beliefs concerning the
cause, nature, and purpose of the universe. Atheists and others who profess not
to believe in a supreme being have their own beliefs system and ideals about the
very cause, nature and purpose of the universe. Is there a God or isn't
there. I have been told I can not prove God exists. Can those of you who
don't believe in God prove that He doesn't? Regardless God and Christ
are always at the center of the Universe. "For everything has his
opposite" Darkness has light-Evil has good-Sour has sweat-Where God
isn't There also God is.
Rich | 3:21 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Is this right? Mormons believe the Bible literally that Jesus is the only
begotten son of God, the Jehovah of the Old Testament, the savior of mankind,
and the God of this world and maybe this universe. They believe that God the
Father sent his son Jesus to earth to atone for our sins. Christ was
resurrected and gained a body of flesh and bones. He is so like his father in
purpose, in righteousness, in power, in immortality, and so forth that if you
have seen him, you have seen his father. Evangelical Christians reject these
interpretations of the Bible because they are counter to the so-called
"traditional Christian viewpoint" that has its roots in the Nicean
Creed, adopted under political pressure well after Christ's resurrection.
They believe that Christ is an embodiment of God, often described in confusing
and contradictory terms as an incomprehensible and unexplainable power beyond
the scope of man's ability to understand. Since the LDS view is different
than this revised modern Christian view, Mormonism is considered a cult. And
this is the real reason for Romney's speech. Enlighten me.
Anonymous | 3:31 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
You are right Scooter about needing to remember how America became a great
country.
It was the Founding Fathers' abhorrence of any kind of Theocracy.
It was the Founding Fathers' abhorrence of any kind of Theocracy.
General election speech | 3:36 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
All in all, the speech was perfectly calibrated for a general election race - or
for a Republican primary campaign that did not include a candidate by the name
of Mike Huckabee. Romney has a strong case to make that the shared political and
social concerns of religious conservatives across faith traditions require them
to join forces in the public square. But that argument only holds so long as
evangelical Republicans have no other candidates to choose from. The question
isn't whether evangelical voters could support a Mormon, but whether they
would back a Mormon over an equally appealing Catholic or Protestant. Like, say,
Mike Huckabee.
Les Moore | 3:38 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Would Romney uphold the Constitution? He chose not to talk much about the
doctrines of the Mormon church, and rightly so. But that does not prevent the
rest of us from discussing doctrines. So consider the following doctrines of the
church:
�We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.
�We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.� (Articles of Faith 1:11 - 12)
�And that law of the land which is constitutional, supporting that principle of freedom in maintaining rights and privileges, belongs to all mankind, and is justifiable before me. Therefore, I, the Lord, justify you, and your brethren of my church, in befriending that law which is the constitutional law of the land;�
(Doctrine and Covenants 98:5 - 6)
I could also point out dozens of Mormon scriptures which make it amply clear that freedom of choice is one of the most sacred and fundamental doctrines of the church. The freedom to disbelieve is just as sacred as the freedom to believe.
�We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.
�We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.� (Articles of Faith 1:11 - 12)
�And that law of the land which is constitutional, supporting that principle of freedom in maintaining rights and privileges, belongs to all mankind, and is justifiable before me. Therefore, I, the Lord, justify you, and your brethren of my church, in befriending that law which is the constitutional law of the land;�
(Doctrine and Covenants 98:5 - 6)
I could also point out dozens of Mormon scriptures which make it amply clear that freedom of choice is one of the most sacred and fundamental doctrines of the church. The freedom to disbelieve is just as sacred as the freedom to believe.
To the "non-believers." | 3:41 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
You atheists apparently haven't had a dying child in in PICU for months. I
understand your thought processes, I too didn't believe at one time in my
life. Then I grew up, realized the world wasn't about me, relied on a
faith and a higher power that I didn't know was there and now I am finally
at peace with myself and the world. I too was once too blind and stubborn to
truly see the world as it could be. Yes, it took a dying child to show me the
way but when I found it, it's so much better, and more real, than the
defiant "no one can make me" life I used to live. Don't try to
fool yourself like I did for 15 years. Life's to short to be mad at every
notion of a higher being. I know, I was there. Romney or not, faith in God is
the only way to truly be happy.
John Swenson Harvey | 4:01 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Here is an example of how to think about a religiously *neutral* approach to
government.
I pledge allegiance to the Constitution of the United States of America, and to the republic which it defines. One nation, indivisible, with liberty, justice, and full rights for all.
I care about the constitution, not the flag. The phrase "under God" in our current pledge was added by Eisenhower in the 1950s, it is not an artifact or cornerstone from the early times of our country.
Likewise the motto on our currency "in God we trust" was added during the 20th century as well. While I admit I like the signs which say: "In God we trust, all others pay cash!" I find it odd that *anyone* thinks associating God with the value of the currency isn't an insult to God.
I feel a lot better teaching my children about my beliefs than having some right wing Christian fundamentalist attempt to do it through a government back door.
I was disappointed in Romney's speech in that he did not address how he proposes to integrate God into his decisions, but not into the government's formal functions.
I pledge allegiance to the Constitution of the United States of America, and to the republic which it defines. One nation, indivisible, with liberty, justice, and full rights for all.
I care about the constitution, not the flag. The phrase "under God" in our current pledge was added by Eisenhower in the 1950s, it is not an artifact or cornerstone from the early times of our country.
Likewise the motto on our currency "in God we trust" was added during the 20th century as well. While I admit I like the signs which say: "In God we trust, all others pay cash!" I find it odd that *anyone* thinks associating God with the value of the currency isn't an insult to God.
I feel a lot better teaching my children about my beliefs than having some right wing Christian fundamentalist attempt to do it through a government back door.
I was disappointed in Romney's speech in that he did not address how he proposes to integrate God into his decisions, but not into the government's formal functions.
Brett | 4:07 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Those who were reluctant to back Romney due to his LDS faith have now been
replaced by those who are reluctant because they are not religious. It is clear
that Mitt is going to the evangelical right, and could care less about the
millions, such as myself, who love the USA and all it stands for.... but do not
count themselves amongst the religious faithful. Does this mean we are less
patriotic, or deserving representation in Washington? Mitt is a very clever
guy, but he could have mentioned that he would be President of all Americans,
whether they had faithful convictions or not. This speech seems to be the
beginning of a dialog that will now vilify non-religious people as somehow
"un-American". Pity. We vote too.
Reality check | 4:14 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
I'm sure the good people of Utah love Mitt Romney and his recent speech.
But the world outside Zion has already spoken.
In an Iowa poll just this afternoon:
Huckabee - 39%
Romney 17%
In an Iowa poll just this afternoon:
Huckabee - 39%
Romney 17%
a.B | 4:23 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
The "unchristian" attempt by the "cult mongers" to
marginalize Mitt Romney's presidential candidacy reeks of the un-American
persecution of Catholicism that prompted the historical JFK speech in 1960.
Romney with his defining defense of the legitimacy of religious liberty in the
market place, presents the clarion call for all Americans to remember and
cherish the roots of the Constitution which made possible the creation and
continuation of this great country.
Secularists and humanists | 4:49 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Surely Romney knows that Mormonism, in particular, was historically hostile to
liberty for blacks as well as women. The founders of his church believed that
God had cursed the world's dark-skinned people. They rejected abolitionism
and later the civil rights movement. And their acceptance of full membership for
African-Americans in the LDS church dates back only 30 years.
If Romney is going to attack humanists and secularists as "wrong," then let him explain why they were so far ahead of his church on the greatest moral issues of the past half-century.
If Romney is going to attack humanists and secularists as "wrong," then let him explain why they were so far ahead of his church on the greatest moral issues of the past half-century.
mylo | 6:57 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Soo Mitt did not detail LDS Doctrine .
There is no need . Doctrine is for those who believe ! My opinion is that it should not matter to those who do not believe . The important question arises how does one treat his neighbor .
That really counts as far as I am concerned .
There is no need . Doctrine is for those who believe ! My opinion is that it should not matter to those who do not believe . The important question arises how does one treat his neighbor .
That really counts as far as I am concerned .
KYDEEPA | 7:36 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
For all the anti-romneys, I know he was talking about religion and government,
but what did you guys want, Political Correctness or what Mitt believes????? He
has freedom of speech too!!!! To the secular and humanist comment above, Mitt
doesnt have to justify mormon theology, just like Kennedy didnt have to justify
the holy inquisition.
Poll reader | 7:45 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Reality check, get a grip on reality. You'll have to wait till the next
poll to see whether Romney's speech had any effect. My opinion is that the
liberals would love Huckabee to win the Republican nomination because they think
he would be easier to defeat in the general election. They fear Romney and
Juliani most, especially Romney with his good looks, suave manner, outstanding
speaking ability, etc. As President, Romney could make great strides in moving
America toward conservatism. Huckabee would be tolerated much as Bush is. As
a former Baptist minister, he won't assuade the voters who fear a
theocracy, that's for sure.
qrz | 8:37 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
"I would like you to help me on something. Will you please name one US
president that did not mention something about faith while he was in the white
house?"
Good point. Some presidents even meet with religious leaders... such as Billy Graham.
Good point. Some presidents even meet with religious leaders... such as Billy Graham.
TOT | 8:52 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
DesNews makes no sense on which posts they allow.
Here's the short version and I hope they will post this-
Romney will not win the primary and he will not win the general election. What issue can we get worked up about next?
Here's the short version and I hope they will post this-
Romney will not win the primary and he will not win the general election. What issue can we get worked up about next?
- Page:
- < Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next >
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.
LM Otero, Associated Press
Republican presidential contender Mitt Romney delivers his "Faith in America" address Thursday.
Related content
- Stronger retail boost stocks 11:37 a.m.
- A dozen ways to save money 11:36 a.m.
- A shining tabletop for the holidays 11:35 a.m.
- Arrests in Riverdale ammo theft 11:30 a.m.
- Dr. explains Mitchell review change 11:28 a.m.
- Two injured in Magna stabbing 11:25 a.m.
- Go ribbon-less this holiday season 11:20 a.m.
- Hobbies: No-sew fleece pillows 11:14 a.m.
- Research before cleaning air ducts 11:12 a.m.
- Budget hinges on economic growth 11:10 a.m.
- Disappearance called 'sususpicious'
- LDS to emphasize helping needy
- Defense witness goes on offensive
- Unga might enter NFL draft
- Jazz manage a magical win
- Few details on missing W.V. mom
- Nude bathers cited for lewdness
- BYU football: NCAA awards
- Pitta doesn't win award
- Construction worker injured in jump
- Letters: Global warming a lie
258 - TCU to play Boise in Fiesta Bowl206
- BYU football: Bronco weighs in on Hall193
- Palin signs books, chats with fans167
- Utah/BYU rivalry can be more civil151
- Cougars going back to Vegas150
- Andersen apologizes for Jordan hoax142
- Nude bathers cited for lewdness129
- Max Hall wants to look ahead127
- Jazz fall apart late at L.A.110
David Rankin, one of Utah's youngest and ablest astrophotographers has...
There was a time when free shipping was rare. This holiday season, you...
Love him or hate him, Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch knows how to get attention.
Latest comments
Don't make this a political issue and criticize republicans or you'll force...
Great comments, I too have a hard time believing people like living with...
For crying out loud. He kidnapped and raped a little girl. It doesn't matter...
'suspicious' is an understatement...
all you BYU fans do is Cry Persecution for every aspect of the game. This is...
Go after the guns of criminals not law abiding citizens. There is a BIG...
We lived in Utah County for 10 years. When a job offer came from the eastern...
The utopia reps that came never said anything about the total bill being...
I loved watching CJ play well last night, but he'll never be an All-Star. He...
Ignorance feeds terror: Radical Muslims Ultra-Conservatives Nazi's...
Advertisements
And the GOP nominee is:
Whomever comes across as "the holiest."