Reader comments
Mitt dodges questions about LDS faith
211 comments | Read story
@ Get A Life | 8:59 a.m. Oct. 18, 2007
8:53PM last night: I find it amusing that 'Get A Life' accused me of
reading too much 'Anti' because I posted information about Joseph
Smith being in jail for destruction of private property, and not because he was
being persecuted. For the record, that information was gleaned entirely from
BYU's website. There is an abundance of information available to anyone
who cares to look that might shock some who grew up believing everything they
were (or were not) told.
Anonymous | 9:08 a.m. Oct. 18, 2007
Re: Answers were loud and clear (above)
It's nice to know Romney is not Hitler.
It's nice to know Romney is not Hitler.
Comments continue below
Convoluted History | 9:34 a.m. Oct. 18, 2007
The history of Mormonism is way too convoluted to try to explain to conventional
Christians. It's no wonder Romney opted to blow off any questions.
Can you imagine Romney fielding questions such as, "Tell me more about Urim and Thummim Mitt?"
Can you imagine Romney fielding questions such as, "Tell me more about Urim and Thummim Mitt?"
Marc | 10:05 a.m. Oct. 18, 2007
If Mitt Romney were to become president and only accomplished 50 percent for the
United States as what he did for the Utah Olympics, we will be in good hands.
Thomas | 10:35 a.m. Oct. 18, 2007
Anonymous 8:42 -- Think again. Some of the most obnoxious attacks on
Romney's religion have come from so-called liberals.
Reality -- An outside observer would consider these theological arguments pretty arcane, and irrelevant to whether Romney would make a good President. I think you've been taught to make more of the differences between Mormonism and your faith (at least as they touch on the nature of Christ) then is justified. You said "God is different from man," and Mormons absolutely would agree. Man is not divine -- yet. We only get that upgrade through Christ in the resurrection.
As for your belief that Christ ceased to be man when he returned to his "natural state in heaven," that's heretical, according to classical Christian doctrine. From the Athanasian Creed: "For this is the true faith that we believe and confess: That our Lord Jesus Christ, God's Son, is both God and man."
Take it up with your pastor, if he's the source of your understanding. What branch of Protestantism are you affiliated with?
Reality -- An outside observer would consider these theological arguments pretty arcane, and irrelevant to whether Romney would make a good President. I think you've been taught to make more of the differences between Mormonism and your faith (at least as they touch on the nature of Christ) then is justified. You said "God is different from man," and Mormons absolutely would agree. Man is not divine -- yet. We only get that upgrade through Christ in the resurrection.
As for your belief that Christ ceased to be man when he returned to his "natural state in heaven," that's heretical, according to classical Christian doctrine. From the Athanasian Creed: "For this is the true faith that we believe and confess: That our Lord Jesus Christ, God's Son, is both God and man."
Take it up with your pastor, if he's the source of your understanding. What branch of Protestantism are you affiliated with?
Registered non-Mormon | 10:39 a.m. Oct. 18, 2007
I have a complete understanding of Mormonism's teachings and doctrines....and I have Mormon friends.
Do I fear having a Mormon president? Absolutely.
Discernment and integrity are high on my list for the office of presidency.
TJ | 10:40 a.m. Oct. 18, 2007
Well, don't hold your breath, Marc. Too many people are fixated on what the
heck's an Urim and Thummim.
Not taking anything away from Romney's business skills - he's going to have to do some fast talking for his flip-flopping stances on abortion and gays.
The conservative morality police will be all over him for that.
Not taking anything away from Romney's business skills - he's going to have to do some fast talking for his flip-flopping stances on abortion and gays.
The conservative morality police will be all over him for that.
Reality | 10:42 a.m. Oct. 18, 2007
The American public and voters have a need and right to unravel the religion:
believes, faith and loyalties of Mitt Romney because the man is his religion.
The people can not know the man with out knowing his religion. Nor can the two
be totaly seperated as idependent issues. They are too much of one and the
same. To know him may be to love him, or maybe not; but, to know him is to know
his religion and to know his religion is necessary to judge the man and what
kind of president we think he will make.
Anonymous | 10:44 a.m. Oct. 18, 2007
Just wondering, Marc.
Who is "We" (as in "WE will be in good hands")?
Are you part of a special interest group?
Politicians are all the same, you know.
Who is "We" (as in "WE will be in good hands")?
Are you part of a special interest group?
Politicians are all the same, you know.
Nonsense | 12:09 p.m. Oct. 18, 2007
To Reality,
By his own admission, Mitt's religion can and must be separated from "the man" who is running for president. You give religion too much credit. Most religions today (including the LDS church) do not make bad men good or good men better - instead, they either just "get lucky" to have good people in their masses (or "unlucky" to have bad people), or they just attract certain types of people who are good, bad or otherwise, independent of the religion's actual influence. That is why there is a regular distribution of good, mediocre, and bad in every religion, just as there is the same distribution among non-religious and even atheist groups. Religion really makes no real difference. Look into it.
By his own admission, Mitt's religion can and must be separated from "the man" who is running for president. You give religion too much credit. Most religions today (including the LDS church) do not make bad men good or good men better - instead, they either just "get lucky" to have good people in their masses (or "unlucky" to have bad people), or they just attract certain types of people who are good, bad or otherwise, independent of the religion's actual influence. That is why there is a regular distribution of good, mediocre, and bad in every religion, just as there is the same distribution among non-religious and even atheist groups. Religion really makes no real difference. Look into it.
Anonymous | 12:10 p.m. Oct. 18, 2007
Thomas - And you forgot to add that some of the most obnoxious attacks on
Romney's religion have come from Conservative Christian groups (mostly in
the Southern U.S.). Remember when Pat Robertson ran for president? Want to know
how HE feels about Mormonism?
Politics is a nasty game. Just listen to Limbaugh or Coulter sometime.
Politics is a nasty game. Just listen to Limbaugh or Coulter sometime.
TJ | 12:26 p.m. Oct. 18, 2007
In 2004, George W. Bush told reporters he "was serving a higher
power." Well, the "mission accomplished" photo-op on the aircraft
carrier was a total joke and there are now a clear-cut majority of Americans who
don't support preemptive, illegal wars and war-mongering in general. If I
was Romney, I'd dummy up about religion too.
Anonymous | 12:37 p.m. Oct. 18, 2007
To:"Nonsense," "Religion makes no real difference"
Tell that to the Conservative Christian Right-wing Republicans. They'd tar and feather you for that.
Tell that to the Conservative Christian Right-wing Republicans. They'd tar and feather you for that.
Thomas | 12:38 p.m. Oct. 18, 2007
Nonsense -- Good point. My impression is that while an effective religion may
make (some) bad men good and good men better, it will also make proud men
insufferable and unstable men absolutely nuts.
Anon 12:10 -- Oh, I know how obnoxious *some* evangelicals can be towards Mormonism. I just don't hear that many of them translating that into opposition to Mitt Romney. (The only major figure I can think of is one guy in Florida whose name I forget.) Heck, Bob Jones III (as in Bob Jones University) just endorsed him.
On the other hand, there have been plenty of attacks on Romney's faith from the Left. The New Republic ran an article which argued that Romney's affiliation with the LDS Church (whose claims are supposedly so obviously false that no thinking person could ever swallow them) spoke poorly of Romney's judgment, for example.
BTW, Limbaugh and Coulter aren't in the same league. Limbaugh is bombastic and aggressive, but is certainly more fair-minded than your average left-wing college poli-sci professor. (Granted, that's not saying much.) Coulter -- well, Coulter is basically the right-wing Michael Moore, except that she's just obnoxious, not obnoxious and deceitful, too.
Anon 12:10 -- Oh, I know how obnoxious *some* evangelicals can be towards Mormonism. I just don't hear that many of them translating that into opposition to Mitt Romney. (The only major figure I can think of is one guy in Florida whose name I forget.) Heck, Bob Jones III (as in Bob Jones University) just endorsed him.
On the other hand, there have been plenty of attacks on Romney's faith from the Left. The New Republic ran an article which argued that Romney's affiliation with the LDS Church (whose claims are supposedly so obviously false that no thinking person could ever swallow them) spoke poorly of Romney's judgment, for example.
BTW, Limbaugh and Coulter aren't in the same league. Limbaugh is bombastic and aggressive, but is certainly more fair-minded than your average left-wing college poli-sci professor. (Granted, that's not saying much.) Coulter -- well, Coulter is basically the right-wing Michael Moore, except that she's just obnoxious, not obnoxious and deceitful, too.
Big Difference | 12:46 p.m. Oct. 18, 2007
To Nonsense,
Your point is a valid one in one sense. But in another sense it is patently obvious that religion makes a HUGE difference - the world is being torn apart by religiously-motivated terrorists who are doing what they are doing, NOT because they just happen to be the bad apples in the barrel, but because they are being the most righteous, literal believers in their religions! From their perspective, the "moderates" in Islam are those who are not taking their religion seriously. And the Koran supports their radical position (just as the Bible supports a radical religious fanaticism, too)!
Your point is a valid one in one sense. But in another sense it is patently obvious that religion makes a HUGE difference - the world is being torn apart by religiously-motivated terrorists who are doing what they are doing, NOT because they just happen to be the bad apples in the barrel, but because they are being the most righteous, literal believers in their religions! From their perspective, the "moderates" in Islam are those who are not taking their religion seriously. And the Koran supports their radical position (just as the Bible supports a radical religious fanaticism, too)!
Anonymous | 12:50 p.m. Oct. 18, 2007
TJ @ 12:26 what does serving a higher power have to do with anything about
mission accomplished and Mitt "dummying" up about his religion. And I
thought video gamers used poor logic.
Religious Candidates | 12:51 p.m. Oct. 18, 2007
The Religious Right has obviously and patently become little more than a
propaganda machine for the Republican Party in general and for President G.W.
Bush in particular.
Another disconcerting feature of today's Religious Right is its attempt to Christianize political entities which it supports and to demonize political entities which it opposes. This trend is especially scary.
Another disconcerting feature of today's Religious Right is its attempt to Christianize political entities which it supports and to demonize political entities which it opposes. This trend is especially scary.
Reality | 12:59 p.m. Oct. 18, 2007
Thomas, On earth there is the ANIMAL KINGDOM and the PLANT KINGDOM. Man belongs
to the Animal Kingdom. God doesn't belong to the Animal Kingdom much less
being of the same species as man. I suppose God belongs to the God Kingdom that
is in Heaven. As to your other question, I am more like you than different.
Nonsense, In most cases I would agree with you, but in the case of Mormon religion, Orthodox Jew, Radical Muslin, extreme fundamendalist Christian these are exceptions that must be examined in more light of day.
Nonsense, In most cases I would agree with you, but in the case of Mormon religion, Orthodox Jew, Radical Muslin, extreme fundamendalist Christian these are exceptions that must be examined in more light of day.
Anonymous | 1:01 p.m. Oct. 18, 2007
Thomas -- So, you believe Limbaugh is "fair-minded."
When I think of Limbaugh, I see a bloated man smoking a cigar and flopping around on camera mimicking Michael J. Fox's Parkinson's Disease.
This sort of "fair-mindedness" is hilarious entertainment for his loyal fans. And in a very real sense a prime example of what has gone wrong in this country.
When I think of Limbaugh, I see a bloated man smoking a cigar and flopping around on camera mimicking Michael J. Fox's Parkinson's Disease.
This sort of "fair-mindedness" is hilarious entertainment for his loyal fans. And in a very real sense a prime example of what has gone wrong in this country.
Texan in UT | 1:25 p.m. Oct. 18, 2007
My utahn friends always joked years back, "We'll never have an LDS
president because lds politicians always lose the mormon vote. It doesnt matter
how much worse the alternative is." Some of the comments I've seen
here reminded me of that. I'm not trying to be critical, everyone can and
should vote how they please. Its just an funny little quirk(that may or may no
longer be true). I guess we will see.
Arm of Orion | 1:27 p.m. Oct. 18, 2007
To Reality
Alright, look at the basic principles and ordinances of the Gospel in Mormonism what are they? They are first faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, second repentance, third baptism by immersion for the remission of sins, and fourth obtaining the gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands. Where is that so odd or strange. Where in any of that is an extreme. Oh and don't you dare try to go into the "deep" doctrine most of that is idle speculation. Stick to the basics for we are all children in the Gospel and must be fed milk.
Alright, look at the basic principles and ordinances of the Gospel in Mormonism what are they? They are first faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, second repentance, third baptism by immersion for the remission of sins, and fourth obtaining the gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands. Where is that so odd or strange. Where in any of that is an extreme. Oh and don't you dare try to go into the "deep" doctrine most of that is idle speculation. Stick to the basics for we are all children in the Gospel and must be fed milk.
Anonymous | 1:28 p.m. Oct. 18, 2007
To the poster who is having problems connecting the dots: When George W. Bush
declared he "serves a higher power" people trusted him and believed
there actually WMD's in Iraq (Hey, God wouldn't lie to Bush about
this). None were ever found and his war goes on and on. People from the same
faith are now attacking each other - Mormons vs. other Mormons (ie., Harry
Reid). With me so far?
I think it wise say nothing about his religion or anyone else's.
I think it wise say nothing about his religion or anyone else's.
Anonymous | 1:33 p.m. Oct. 18, 2007
To Arm of Orion: What do you think about a debate between Catholic Guliani and
Mormon Romney?
The topic: Baptism - sprinkle or dunk?
The topic: Baptism - sprinkle or dunk?
Arm of Orion | 1:49 p.m. Oct. 18, 2007
anon 1:33 PM
That is a moot issue and you are putting at naught the things of God please try to be less flippant. But here is a good point why did Jesus go to the river Jordan just to be sprinkled.
That is a moot issue and you are putting at naught the things of God please try to be less flippant. But here is a good point why did Jesus go to the river Jordan just to be sprinkled.
Thomas | 2:15 p.m. Oct. 18, 2007
Anon 1:01 -- Read what I said. I said Limbaugh is *more* fair-minded than the
average left-wing poli-sci professor, not that he's objectively
fair-minded.
Limbaugh at least occasionally lets people who disagree with him be heard on his show. I've had professors literally become enraged when someone questions them. Plenty of academics are small, insecure types, insulated from the rough-and-tumble of the real world, and absolutely allergic to having their worldview questioned.
Is any of that "a prime example of what has gone wrong in this country"? Or does incivility only count when it's not your side that's dishing it out?
Limbaugh at least occasionally lets people who disagree with him be heard on his show. I've had professors literally become enraged when someone questions them. Plenty of academics are small, insecure types, insulated from the rough-and-tumble of the real world, and absolutely allergic to having their worldview questioned.
Is any of that "a prime example of what has gone wrong in this country"? Or does incivility only count when it's not your side that's dishing it out?
Brad | 2:22 p.m. Oct. 18, 2007
Why can't Mitt "turn off" being a Mormon? Why does religion have
to be such a part of who he is? Why can't his membership in the Mormon
church be no different than his membership in, say, the Kiwanis Club? No big
deal. Just set it aside if it causes a problem.
Anonymous | 2:23 p.m. Oct. 18, 2007
"Flippant" is in the eye of the beholder "Arm."
Just wanted to prove that when people interject religious jargon into debate today and do it with the utmost sincerity (albeit sanctimoniously), this is somehow supposed to be the last word in a discussion. They have a patent on this in Utah.
Lighten up "Arm." I have no doubt that Christ had/has a good sense of humor.
In the study of symbols and metaphor it's the cleansing part that's most important sybolism in the case of baptism. The other is just a way to set people apart. And I don't think God would want that.
Just wanted to prove that when people interject religious jargon into debate today and do it with the utmost sincerity (albeit sanctimoniously), this is somehow supposed to be the last word in a discussion. They have a patent on this in Utah.
Lighten up "Arm." I have no doubt that Christ had/has a good sense of humor.
In the study of symbols and metaphor it's the cleansing part that's most important sybolism in the case of baptism. The other is just a way to set people apart. And I don't think God would want that.
TJK | 2:32 p.m. Oct. 18, 2007
Dear "Arm of Orion"
You introduce your personal religious feelings about God sanctimoniously. And this is supposed to end all debate? There is too much of this going on today. All it does is divide people.
I thought this blog is about politics - "render unto Caesar the things ..." (you know the rest)
You introduce your personal religious feelings about God sanctimoniously. And this is supposed to end all debate? There is too much of this going on today. All it does is divide people.
I thought this blog is about politics - "render unto Caesar the things ..." (you know the rest)
Lynda | 2:44 p.m. Oct. 18, 2007
What can also be considered moot is the practice of astrology, Arm of Orion.
Conventional Christianity frowns on that sort of thing you know.
What you are saying however, is no different than Jesus changing the water into wine - just so people would NOT have a good time.
Conventional Christianity frowns on that sort of thing you know.
What you are saying however, is no different than Jesus changing the water into wine - just so people would NOT have a good time.
Anonymous | 2:49 p.m. Oct. 18, 2007
At least you admit, as a loyal Limbaugh fan, that he "at least occasionally
lets people disagree with him."
I don't need that sort of authoritarian trash that some call "entertainment" in my life so I don't listen to that ilk. But I understand he hangs up on callers after he screams at them.
Strange choice of heroes, Thomas. Ever listen to music on the radio?
I don't need that sort of authoritarian trash that some call "entertainment" in my life so I don't listen to that ilk. But I understand he hangs up on callers after he screams at them.
Strange choice of heroes, Thomas. Ever listen to music on the radio?
Reality | 2:57 p.m. Oct. 18, 2007
Arm of Orion, we all need to know and understand the things we profess to
believe including the deep doctrine. That is what keeps us free from cults and
tyrants imposing their will on us. And the truth will set you free. I guess
some people are comfortabe living in the Jim Jones camps, etc. but I think most
of us prefer to think for ourselves and as you say know what milk or meat we are
being feed. And this is why we need to know the politics of our community and
who we are voting for by our knowledge and not just blind obedience. And in
America it is the politican or candidate's responsibility to give the
people the information about themselves. Otherwise, why not just tell us how
you want us to vote.
Anonymous | 2:58 p.m. Oct. 18, 2007
Okay, put it this way Thomas: Rush Limbaugh, a drug addict, by his own
admission, taped himself flopping around on his show mimicking a person with an
incurable disease to make his political point. Is this is an example of what is
being "dished out" (as you put it) in today's political debate -
and people love this sort of style and form -- somebody is going down the wrong
road.
Wendy | 3:08 p.m. Oct. 18, 2007
How does a Christian choose a church? Why are there so many Christian faiths?
The Bible is the foundation right? Is it up for interpretation? Our family
moves to a new city...we need a church to attend..... we look for a building
closest to where we live...convenience....we want a pastor that is a good
communicator, entertaining, is available and friendly...how much money will it
cost to keep our pastor....do you feel the spirit when you attend services....is
there an active youth group for my children....do I have friends in the
congregation....is their a Bible Study group....
Churches advertize....we shop around to find the right fit. We do the same thing when we buy cars, houses, look for schools for our children. It is the American way. It doesn't sound much like God's way.
Churches advertize....we shop around to find the right fit. We do the same thing when we buy cars, houses, look for schools for our children. It is the American way. It doesn't sound much like God's way.
Wendy | 3:12 p.m. Oct. 18, 2007
Do pastors get creative to draw membership to their fold? They have to make a
living. It cost money to heat, light, and keep a building. It costs money to
take care of a family. Pastor's have families too. Is all equal for
pastors....are their rich and poor pastors? Why is one pastor more wealthy than
another. Why is one pastor more popular than another? Did one get higher marks
coming out of Seminary? What if my pastor says something I don't like....I
can shop again.
Danielle | 3:47 p.m. Oct. 18, 2007
How can he know why people are scared of his religious views? It's not that
he's dodging anything or not wanting to talk about his faith, it's not
necessarily a quesiton he can answer from his view. He doesn't know why
people are scared.
Anonymous | 4:03 p.m. Oct. 18, 2007
It seems to me religion is quite simple. Be good today - be better tomorrow.
Everything else takes on a club atmosphere with somebody always a bit too excited about telling you how to live your life. This is fine as a child but most adults know what the right thing and the wrong thing is.
Everything else takes on a club atmosphere with somebody always a bit too excited about telling you how to live your life. This is fine as a child but most adults know what the right thing and the wrong thing is.
Thomas | 4:13 p.m. Oct. 18, 2007
OK, Anon, this has obviously gotten way off topic, but I'm not sure that a
person who hasn't listened to Rush's show in about eight years counts
as a "loyal fan," or could be accused of hero-worshipping the guy.
(No point in listening to talk radio when your commute drops from an hour to six
minutes.)
Interesting that you know so much about Limbaugh's show, but never have listened to it. I don't recall ever hearing him "scream" at a caller for disagreeing, however obnoxiously, or hang up on someone unless the caller had gotten totally incoherent. (I suspect the marijuana consumption of lefties who call up Rush Limbaugh is measured in bales...seriously, some of those guys are truly unhinged.)
So the Rush Limbaugh show isn't "The McLaughlin Group" or the late lamented "Firing Line." Not everybody's taste runs to dry policy wonkery or brandy-'n'-cigars-flavored witty civilized repartee. So don't listen to it. Don't listen to Bill Maher, Randy Rhodes, or Al Franken, either; Rush is an honest-to-Fred gentleman compared to those boors.
Interesting that you know so much about Limbaugh's show, but never have listened to it. I don't recall ever hearing him "scream" at a caller for disagreeing, however obnoxiously, or hang up on someone unless the caller had gotten totally incoherent. (I suspect the marijuana consumption of lefties who call up Rush Limbaugh is measured in bales...seriously, some of those guys are truly unhinged.)
So the Rush Limbaugh show isn't "The McLaughlin Group" or the late lamented "Firing Line." Not everybody's taste runs to dry policy wonkery or brandy-'n'-cigars-flavored witty civilized repartee. So don't listen to it. Don't listen to Bill Maher, Randy Rhodes, or Al Franken, either; Rush is an honest-to-Fred gentleman compared to those boors.
Anonymous | 4:22 p.m. Oct. 18, 2007
Well Thomas, it's always going to "get off topic" when every
topic that is addressed has to have the word "liberal" or
"leftie" in it. (seems like you've done it again, above).And this
is supposed to be the final word in civil discourse.
I wish I had a dime for everybody that uses Limbaugh-ese and then say they never listen to him.
I understand the psychologists and social scientists have been working overtime on that one.
I wish I had a dime for everybody that uses Limbaugh-ese and then say they never listen to him.
I understand the psychologists and social scientists have been working overtime on that one.
Thomas | 4:38 p.m. Oct. 18, 2007
Fight! Fight!
Look, Mr. Anonymous, I've told you what I've told you. You can believe it or you can call me a liar, at your pleasure; since you're Anonymous, it's not like I'm going to challenge you to a duel or egg your car or something.
Re: "liberal" and "lefty," I understand that people in Utah to whom those labels objectively apply are a little touchy about being called such, but dude, if you're wearing a Che Guevara T-shirt, think mankind is a polluting cancer on the earth, believe organized religion is a destructive force, are convinced that America is a fundamentally oppressive society, say things like "the rich get richer and the poor get poorer," and believe Rush Limbaugh is awful and Bill Maher is wonderful -- sorry, you're a leftist.
(Although you can call yourself an independent anti-fascist Gaia-worshipping anarchosyndicalist if it makes you feel better.)
Look, Mr. Anonymous, I've told you what I've told you. You can believe it or you can call me a liar, at your pleasure; since you're Anonymous, it's not like I'm going to challenge you to a duel or egg your car or something.
Re: "liberal" and "lefty," I understand that people in Utah to whom those labels objectively apply are a little touchy about being called such, but dude, if you're wearing a Che Guevara T-shirt, think mankind is a polluting cancer on the earth, believe organized religion is a destructive force, are convinced that America is a fundamentally oppressive society, say things like "the rich get richer and the poor get poorer," and believe Rush Limbaugh is awful and Bill Maher is wonderful -- sorry, you're a leftist.
(Although you can call yourself an independent anti-fascist Gaia-worshipping anarchosyndicalist if it makes you feel better.)
Anonymous | 4:56 p.m. Oct. 18, 2007
Oh Thomas, don't be absurd. How do I know your real name is Thomas?
What's it going to be next? Post mailing addresses and email addresses to
prove who is the real American? Come on big guy.
It's obvious you cannot make a comment without throwing in "liberal" or "leftie." This is everyday jargon from our friends that are huge fans of that
sad, bloated OxyContin-inspired conservative guru, Rush Limbaugh.
These are truly hard times for some. Change is good Thomas.
It's obvious you cannot make a comment without throwing in "liberal" or "leftie." This is everyday jargon from our friends that are huge fans of that
sad, bloated OxyContin-inspired conservative guru, Rush Limbaugh.
These are truly hard times for some. Change is good Thomas.
TJK | 5:12 p.m. Oct. 18, 2007
Judging by Thomas' tirade, and the fact that the Bush Administration is now
at the lowest approval rating in it's history, these are tough times for
NeoCons.
In Mitt's Defense | 9:38 a.m. Oct. 19, 2007
Mitt can be forgiven for not trying to explain the LDS faith. Truthfully, who
really can? Trying to defend Baptisms for the Dead, early Church Polygamy,
Racism in the Priesthood, theological contradictions (look up why the Lectures
on Faith were removed from scripture), Mountain Meadows, and many other issues,
and all a Mormon can do is stand there speachless! Mitt's best move is to
change the subject and "dodge" the questions. It is not his fault he
was born a Mormon!
K | 10:35 a.m. Oct. 19, 2007
Democratic congress has a lower rating than the prez. Choke on that, Lib.
Thomas | 11:00 a.m. Oct. 19, 2007
*sigh*
OK, fine. Apparently "liberal" is a dirty word, but "NeoCon" is not.
So just what *am* I supposed to call you guys? Chartists? Anti-Federalists? Know-Nothings? Whigs? Jacobins? Girondists? What?
Political science generally groups political ideologies on a spectrum whose sides are arbitrarily labeled "left" and "right." I didn't invent the classification, and neither did His Awfulness Rush Limbaugh. If a person has a certain grouping of political beliefs, he can usually be classified as falling, overall, on the left or right side of the spectrum.
That's not to say that a liberal might not have some political beliefs that are more commonly associated with conservatism, or vice versa. (I.e., you could have a pro-life liberal, or a conservative conservationist). But since it's impossible, as a practical matter, to run down an exhaustive list of a person's political beliefs when you're trying to describe his politics, we have to add up the sum of those beliefs and place his overall ideology somewhere on the left-right spectrum.
You guys are liberal. In my neck of the woods (coastal sage scrub, actually), that's not a dirty word. Be proud of it, and argue your case as best you can.
OK, fine. Apparently "liberal" is a dirty word, but "NeoCon" is not.
So just what *am* I supposed to call you guys? Chartists? Anti-Federalists? Know-Nothings? Whigs? Jacobins? Girondists? What?
Political science generally groups political ideologies on a spectrum whose sides are arbitrarily labeled "left" and "right." I didn't invent the classification, and neither did His Awfulness Rush Limbaugh. If a person has a certain grouping of political beliefs, he can usually be classified as falling, overall, on the left or right side of the spectrum.
That's not to say that a liberal might not have some political beliefs that are more commonly associated with conservatism, or vice versa. (I.e., you could have a pro-life liberal, or a conservative conservationist). But since it's impossible, as a practical matter, to run down an exhaustive list of a person's political beliefs when you're trying to describe his politics, we have to add up the sum of those beliefs and place his overall ideology somewhere on the left-right spectrum.
You guys are liberal. In my neck of the woods (coastal sage scrub, actually), that's not a dirty word. Be proud of it, and argue your case as best you can.
Reality | 11:04 a.m. Oct. 19, 2007
In Mitt's Defense, I have smpathy for your veiw. There needs to be some
court of defense from child relgious abuse that change and effect people their
whole lives. We have truth in lending laws, we have truth in labeling laws; why
can we not have a truth in preaching law where churches are held accountable for
what they teach and control religious propaganda and brain washing. And it is
not just the Mormon church to blame for this sin.
Arm of Orion | 12:06 p.m. Oct. 19, 2007
To Reality/In Mitt's defense
Oh yes Mormon's can never defend themselves against these claims. That's why I can slap scripture after scripture from the bible on the theological points can't I. Racism in the Priesthood I think a recent General Conference talk clears that up. The basic message was that the PEOPLE, note not just African Americans of the church but all the PEOPLE of the church were not ready for it. The racism never resided in the gospel but in the general populace of the church. Mountain Meadows not endorsed by the leadership. It would be physically impossible for a messenger to come up to Brigham and back down to the Mountain Meadows with an official kill orders. This was from the overzealous nuts that were a tad skiddish after what they went through. Please show me theological contradictions instead of stating they were their it is rather...dull.
Oh yes Mormon's can never defend themselves against these claims. That's why I can slap scripture after scripture from the bible on the theological points can't I. Racism in the Priesthood I think a recent General Conference talk clears that up. The basic message was that the PEOPLE, note not just African Americans of the church but all the PEOPLE of the church were not ready for it. The racism never resided in the gospel but in the general populace of the church. Mountain Meadows not endorsed by the leadership. It would be physically impossible for a messenger to come up to Brigham and back down to the Mountain Meadows with an official kill orders. This was from the overzealous nuts that were a tad skiddish after what they went through. Please show me theological contradictions instead of stating they were their it is rather...dull.
Thomas | 12:11 p.m. Oct. 19, 2007
Reality: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of
religion, nor preventing the free execise thereof."
Religious freedom is a real pain for some people, I know.
Religious freedom is a real pain for some people, I know.
Orion's Belt | 12:31 p.m. Oct. 19, 2007
In Mitt's Defense, something that I thought you might find interesting is
the fact that Polygamy, Baptisms for the Dead and selection of those who could
hold the priesthood, are all beliefs that are based on the teachings of the
bible. The issue at hand however, is that Mitt is running for president. His
religion, while peculiar to many, is not what qualifies or disqualifies him for
the presidency. Besides he was in a debate about politics, not religion.
David | 3:58 p.m. Oct. 19, 2007
For those who can accept walking on water, virgin birth, raising the dead, water
to wine.....What makes gold plates, angels, magic rocks, etc. too much to
swallow? Logically, the only folks that should be laughing at (or fearing)
Romney's religion are the atheists.
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.
Mitt Romney
Related content
- Jazz missing 4 to injuries 12:55 a.m.
- Pitta doesn't win award 12:47 a.m.
- Jazz manage a magical win 12:43 a.m.
- Speed skating tuneup Friday 12:41 a.m.
- BYU football: NCAA awards 12:30 a.m.
- Magic unable to continue road act 12:26 a.m.
- Fans should worry about lousy teams 12:24 a.m.
- U.S.-born Hispanics see gains 12:23 a.m.
- Editorial: Extremism spike alarming 12:23 a.m.
- No need for more stimulus 12:22 a.m.
- Nude bathers cited for lewdness
- Few details on missing W.V. mom
- Defense witness goes on offensive
- BCS = power conference monopoly
- Jazz fall apart late at L.A.
- Unga might enter NFL draft
- 5 officers lose their certification
- Y.'s Emery bruised, but rarely beaten
- Crash landing next to I-15
- Palin signs books, chats with fans
- Letters: Global warming a lie
256 - TCU to play Boise in Fiesta Bowl206
- BYU football: Bronco weighs in on Hall193
- Palin signs books, chats with fans165
- Utah/BYU rivalry can be more civil150
- Cougars going back to Vegas150
- Andersen apologizes for Jordan hoax142
- Max Hall wants to look ahead124
- Nude bathers cited for lewdness123
- 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
I too agree that Booz and the team are NOT just going through the motions....
The springs have a long history of being clothing optional, and they provide...
He "needs more outside shooting to beat LA". He needs to design a real...
NCFAA Contribution to College Football Award: LaVell Edwards, Brigham Young,...
Why did the Jazz play so bad against LA and really well for a 1/2 against...
We Coug fans will be forever grateful for your three or four years of bearing...
When was the last time Utah even got to the dance three times in a row; let...
His speech was quite good, I agree with what Gingrich said. However, for...
I believe that a large part of the deterioration of the rivalry is a result...
Good win Jazz!!! Now give Fesenko some Red Bulls and lets see how well the...
Advertisements
Of course it's important. Doesn't the marjority of the U.S. believe in God of some kind? Even if less than half of those practice, deep down they believe something.