Comments about ‘At BYU, Lieberman says Romney nomination would test American fairness’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, Oct. 25 2011 5:20 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
kiaoraguy
Provo, UT

Sure seems like there is something in water some our posters have imbibed- I was at the forum and it was a pretty innocuous speech- far from being the fodder of dissension that some of you think it was- it was just a speech..and the idea of a sitting US Senator, who happens to be Jewish, talking about the importance of observing the Sabbath in a speech at a Private Religious school-well, imagine that...

American man
WOODS CROSS, UT

procuradorfiscal
2:17 PM,Oct.25,2011
Tooele,UT

How can you threaten something that does not exist? I'm talking about your remark concerning the "separation of church and state".

There is no such thing as, separation of church and state. If there is you will have to show me the docutment which makes it a law, or tell me where it is in the Constitution. I doubt that I will hear from you.

atl134
Salt Lake City, UT

@DSB

"I think anyone who tries to tell me that I'm Un-American or trampling on the Constitution for having this "religious test" is far more Un-American than I, for presuming to tell me what I can, and cannot, consider as a motivating factor in my vote. That's my constitutional right. "

1. You can totally use that as a factor to vote but it's also a constitutional right of people like myself to be able to criticize your position.
2. You just told people what they can and cannot call you unamerican for based on their telling you what you can and cannot use as a factor in your vote.

@coleman51
"we can now break the religion barrier."

Let's not... not that I have anything agianst there being an LDS president (if I had a choice of Obama + republican congress or Huntsman + democratic congress, I'd take the latter, I like Huntsman but I can't trust him to veto the crazy a republican congress would pass), I just want Obama to win re-election.

fatcaesar
Las Vegas, NV

If Romney fails to win at least one southern state in the republican primary it will prove that the southern evangelicals have a deep prejudice for Mormonism. It will be like saying that the Constitution should be rewritten with the qualifier that no Mormon ever need to apply for the Presidency! What a shame. This decade's new bigotry will be against Mormons.

mightymite
DRAPER, UT

How much was the fee for Lieberman's speech? I am not being critical but these guys don't just speak for the sake a speaking. Everything has a price tag and the price almost always sways the line of thinking.

Pagan
Salt Lake City, UT

'Once again, Pagan has succeeded in making the whole comments section almost completely about him and his opposition to things Mormon! Congratulations!' - Moracle | 5:35 p.m. Oct. 25, 2011

Well, since there are 12 replies on this story alone....

AND, I'm not the one brining up Mitt Romney's faith....

atl134
Salt Lake City, UT

@fatcaesar
"If Romney fails to win at least one southern state in the republican primary it will prove that the southern evangelicals have a deep prejudice for Mormonism."

Not necessarily. They might just hate Romneycare, or his flip-floppiness, or a bunch of other things. Anti-Mormonism would be a component... but it would not be the only issue.

Greggory Wood
SALT LAKE CITY, UT

Amazingly one sided view from Liberman who asks for the electorate to 'be fair'. He is off the mark regarding Article VI, Paragraph III of the Constitution: there is no federal religious test; but individuals may --and do-- use any criteria for whom they vote. If Liberman is making the case that people who don't vote for Romney --if he gets to the general election-- solely on his religious beliefs are being unfair, then ipso facto so are those who vote for Romney because he is Mormon.

FDRfan
safety dictates, ID

fatcaesar | 8:38 p.m. Oct. 25, 2011
Las Vegas, NV

Lets not write off the South so easily. Just wait and see. I believe you will be surprised how many will go for Romney if he can make it past the ill conceived primary system. Lieberman would be a good VP choice for Romney.

DSB
Cedar Hills, UT

@atl134 8:14 pm - Criticizing my opinion is completely American. It's called Freedom of Speech, and I'll take responsibility for my words, defend them if it's worth my time. Perhaps it's not so much Un-American to say that I or anyone else is "trampling on the Constitution" by applying any personal religious consideration as it really is just plain ignorant and laughably idiotic, which is also Constitutionally protected.

However I still think it's Un-American to tell anyone that they can, or cannot, use any criteria in their voting decisions. How exactly would you enforce such a "violation" of the Constitution? Should each voter fill out a "motivation affidavit" to ensure they don't use religion as a consideration? Could we also somehow enforce a ban against voting for someone based on having a full head of hair? Hopefully we can all agree that such a voting motivation is merely stupid, and not a violation of the Constitution in any way.

You can think I'm stupid for considering a person's faith when determining my vote, but I don't think I'm alone by any stretch of the imagination, nor in violation of the letter of spirit of the Constitution.

DRay
Roy, UT

The LDS First Presidency has hosted world leaders of every different philosophy and political persuasion, including Presidents both Democrat and Republican.

Harry Reid is LDS, and I would not vote for him, as I disagree with his views and agenda. I would vote for Mitt Romney because I agree with most of his views and agenda, more than with any other candidate.

In this free, self-governing America, we are supposed to have the right to vote according to our conscience. That should be allowed all Americans. I do admit I would be disapointed in those who cannot vote for someone of Mitt's ability and outstanding citizenship, because he is a Latter-Day-Saint.

Bill in Nebraska
Maryville, MO

Dsb I fully agree with you. I could not ever justify voting for an atheist. The reason is because I believe that it comes down to trust. I would much rather put an egocentric religious individual in the White House than one who adheres to everything being about them. Athesist have shown what type of government are run by them, USSR, Nazi Germany, China and others. We don't need that here in the United States. The test that is implied is for one to be allowed to run. Once they start running then ones faith does have a determining factor in whether I or some like me will vote for them. I careless about their race, gender and party. However, their faith is one reason I select as an American to do so. I didn't vote for Obama because of his stances on certain things which the democratic aspires to. I almost didn't vote for McCain because I really couldn't trust either so I took the lesser of two evils. Unfortunately, what I felt of Obama has come true. Some things I applaud but over all he has failed the American people.

Denys Picard
near montreal, QC

Poor Mitt Romney,

While Lieberman's attention to Romney means Mitt will probably win the Republican Partys candidacy; it also means the political death sentence of Romney's potential career in Washington DC, as it is always with anybody Lieberman associates with.
And this means 4 more years of Banana Republic administration. When will we get an independent Presidential Candidate that does not bow to Israel and is not caught in the corruptions of both current political parties? And when, Oh! When will Lieberman with Schumer and Frank retire to Israel so that the US can prosper again!

MRFOOTBALL
DRAPER, UT

I think that Romney might win the GOP over Cain but he would lose to the Obama. Romney body language alone is very "I am above you attitude". Remember he made a speech and said he was unemployed! He mocks society who is an average JOE. He is for the very rich, and he is not the right person for the presidency at this time.

djk
blue springs, MO

i have had many friends ask me to answer their questions about my faith. i answer with what hopefully will help them understand we are Christians and that hopefully will vote our conscience towards whom we want to be our leader of the USA.
sadly with people in politics spouting off it has become about religion NOT about what Romney would do for our country. personally i am broke because of the 'change' our current leader gave us. Romney has experience and yes he is human and has made a few business mistakes as we all have.
this election will be made all about politics because of perry, cain, obama, and HELLO that is the past. we do NOT support nor condone such as polygamy. We are a dry church meaning no alcohol. we do not support sex before marriage. we are taught to respect our bodies...so in turn respect others.
lieberman is sourgrapes because of the last election so how can we think he will be there to be positive ?

skeptic
Phoenix, AZ

The issue is not if voters should consider a candidates religion in evaluating him/her for office. Of course, voters should evaluated all aspects of a candidates qualities, a candidates religious believes are as important as his/her political believes, family values, organization memberships, community service, etc. It seems the problem is that Mormons fear voters may view Mormonism unfavorably and ungenuine. But that is the voters right of freedom to evaluated and make their own best conclusion and decision. It is the Mormons responsiblity to make themselves better understood if they feel they are being viewed incorrectly.

ClarkKent
Bountiful, Utah

Consequences ... sometimes it takes a lifetime or more to pay for them. When a group of people are claiming unfairness in their treatment, perhaps they should take a good look at their own history to find some answers.

Grace
Bakersfield, CA

C. Warnick: You should also ask how many posters here have been LDS and understand why other Americans know why they will never vote for a Mormon, a Moonie or a Muslim. For voters for whom religious beliefs are an issue, we don't need anyone telling us what factors we should consider in our candidates. I have no prejudice or bigotry, but I know exactly which LDS teachings will always be an issue for me. I guarantee you that Lieberman has no clue. He's just trying to be sweet and inclusive. He doesn't know the theological issues that separate Mormons from historical, Biblical Christians. That's obvious from his statements.

Neither has he understood Pastor Jeffress' comments: wrong venue, but he also has free speech. He just happened to describe Mormons the same way any evangelical bookstore does. Browse one sometime. The good senator from Conneticut would not be so gracious if this were pre-1978, would he?

Coleman51: Mormons did not experience bigotry in any fashion, no matter how many posters here repeat that mantra. Biblical Christians were told by our founders that they were all "an abomination" and that the Bible was "corrupt". That was the battle cry.

DSB
Cedar Hills, UT

To MRFOOTBALL - you're probably right - the last thing we need "at this time" is a highly educated President who understands economics and has a proven track record of turning unprofitable private and public sector entities into profitable ones. Who wouldn't choose Obama over Romney, especially considering Obama's sterling success creating jobs for average JOE's and turning the economy around?

J-TX
Allen, TX

@speed66

You said, "Republicans may vote for Romney but many will do so reluctantly. What they will do is vote against Obama...sad that so often it comes down to voting against someone rather than voting for them."

Sad indeed. I just turned 50, and my entire life I have had to vote for the lesser of 2 evils for POTUS. Not once has there been a candidate I thought was worthy of the office. No. not even the Conservative Mormons' patron Saint Reagan (who, by the way was the initial catalyst for the irresponsible fiscal policy that has snowballed into the $14T debt we see today.) So yes, I voted against the worse one, rather than for the "good" one. I am happy to say, I have never been on the winning side of an electrion for President. I am however sad to say that neither has the United States been the "winner" in any of these elections.

I anxiously await the day there is a nominee for POTUS who I can get behind because he / she is the best option for our country.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments