Reader comments
Romney's speech champions 'Symphony of faith'

110 comments   |   Read story

GOP in trouble | 10:39 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
No matter how often candidates like Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee promise to uphold the Constitution and protect religious freedom, they are clearly seeking to impose the restrictive tests of faith that the nation's founders abhorred.

And the GOP nominee is:
Whomever comes across as "the holiest."
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
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~
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.
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"????????????

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.
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.
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.
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.
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?"
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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%



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.

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 .
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.
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?

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.

Image
LM Otero, Associated Press

Republican presidential contender Mitt Romney delivers his "Faith in America" address Thursday.

previousnext

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...

Jazz manage a magical win

He "needs more outside shooting to beat LA". He needs to design a real...

BYU football: NCAA awards

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...

Unga might enter NFL draft

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...

Utah/BYU rivalry can be more civil

I believe that a large part of the deterioration of the rivalry is a result...

Jazz manage a magical win

Good win Jazz!!! Now give Fesenko some Red Bulls and lets see how well the...

Advertisements