If you do not want to be a Mormon that okay, more then okay as a matter of
fact.However you should Resign and give the Toys Back, There is a
proper way to Resign from the Church. However the Fundmentalist will
still call you Mormon and the Mormons will call you every name in the Book, not
trust you and not vote for you for Dog Catcher let alone President.However you do have your choice and Agency. Just Resign Clean.
Not Quite as Smart as I would thought he would be. I do not think
this topic is a blip on the Radar, out side of Utah.I know we have
degrees and levals of everything and label everything and everyone. Some people grab their kids away form other peoples kids if they do not think
the othr people are up to their standards.Single Moms, Single Dads,
Returned Singles over 30.Method of Conception, Status at Birth, etc
etc.Active, Inactive, less Active, TR Holding or Not. Jack or Jill or evan Molly. RM or Sister RM. etc.etc.However that
is for US and we deal with it as we cna and in some cases have to.Outsiders Do Not Understand that you are either Mormon or Your Not. You are
either Hot or Cold. They will pull Matthew: 5:13 on you and you will be done.
I think he has successfully offended both sides on this issue.The
Mormons now question his integrity because he gave a vague answer to a
straightforward question, and for those who wouldn't vote for a Mormon anyway,
he has created enough doubt to keep them from voting for him.He may
have been trying to appease both sides, but he actually did the opposite. I
suspect he will quietly fade out of the race pretty soon here.
one vote | 6:47 a.m. May 16, 2011 Salt Lake City, UT Will he lose
the eighty percent Utah support if he is not "active"? Why is it all
about religion? =================== Hahah, ya!He would be running for the President of the United States, not the
President of the LDS Church!Utah and it's 0.09% of the total USA
population, of which less than 50% are even LDS, and less than 50% of that is
I'm not sure what concerns me more: the ambiguity of yet another presidential
hopeful, or the defense of that ambiguity. 3 years ago we elected a man who ran
on "Hope and Change" with no definition of what kind of
"Hope" or "Change." We can clearly see now where that type
of sloganeering has brought us--escalating inflation, accelerated deficit
spending, poor credit rating, stagnate employment, and universal health care.
Now we have a GOP candidate who can't answer a simple question regarding his
faith, and there are those who are defending, or worse yet celebrating, this
blatant obfuscation. I am Mormon, and I don't plan to vote for either Romney or
Huntsman. With Romney refusing to admit he screwed up on Romneycare and now
Huntsman afraid to commit one way or the other regarding his faith, or lack
thereof, it is clear that the only potential LDS candidates are too busy with
their church callings to run for office. We can only hope that someone
convinces Chris Christie to run.
It appears that Mr. Huntsman is following in our current president's battle
plan. Hide as much as you possibly can about the person you really are. In this
world of instant media the less that is known about you the fewer people you
alienate. Obama has spent millions keeping his past secret and it worked for
Will he lose the eighty percent Utah support if he is not "active"?
Why is it all about religion?
The comments of Robert George are quite harsh and unreasonable. Presumably, a
person can be a Mormon without accepting all of the LDS Church's most difficult
history and doctrines (some of which can at times test one's integrity). If this
is not true, then the Church should officially say so--but it has not. Giving
Huntsman the benefit of the doubt that he is telling the truth, his response is
quite candid, and he would in no way be pandering to bigotry (what bigotry would
he be pandering to begin with--the bigotry of not being sure?). I would suggest
to Mr. George: judge not that you be not judged.
I wish that people were dedicated to the things they believe in, luke warm does
not seem to be successful any where. I would like to see where politicians were
honest and respectful, and cared about their neighbors for real. I feel Romney
and Huntsman, Reid are first off, politicians and then a hint of religion in
them. Religion should play a huge part of every persons life, why, because most
religions ask every body to try and be a decent person and love their families
and neighbors. Every body needs to practice those ideals every day.
And seeing the unkind comments being left by some Church members, it is
understandable why he might not feel comfortable going into full detail about
his relationship with the Church. As I have experienced first hand and as
evidenced in these comments, an unfortunate minority of Church members can be
cruel and unsympathetic to those who complicated feelings about the Church. He
has probably learned from experience that it can be a thorny issue that is often
So Huntsman has a complicated relationship with the Church. So what? THat
doesn't mean he is a bad guy or is trying to distance himself from the Church
for political gain. Being someone who left the Church over a period of about 3-4
years, I know it is a complicated, difficult journey with no quick and easy
answers to those who ask about one's faith. It can be a very thorny and personal
question to answer, that he didn't want to get into with a reporter who might
take it out of context and spin it into more than it is (which as already
happened anyway) is fully understandable. Cut this guy some slack, like many of
us his relationship with the Church isn't black and white and he gave an honest,
though not detailed answer that seemed sufficient for his purpose.
No way !!! Someone must have read his statement wrong.
DSB,You wrote: "@vanka 10:49 - seems to me you're a
"sheeple" of anti-Mormon thought. Most LDS member don't think so
uncharitably toward fellow members with doubts, questions, or lesser commitments
of the heart. Such judgmental ones are the minority."I don't
even KNOW any "anti-Mormons"!You have rose-colored glasses
on, bud. I attend Church almost every week. I see the judgmentalism constantly.
It is pervasive and obvious. If I was not so in love with my LDS wife, the last
place on earth I would spend any of my time is among such superficial,
judgmental, holier-than-thou, arrogant Mormons.But if Huntsman has
enough intelligence to see Mormonism for what it is, and he sincerely, and with
real intent, seeks to free himself from the shackles and darkness of that
strange belief-system, then he has enough intelligence to lead this country.
Huntsman without Mormonism is a great candidate for POTUS.
Huntsman is the only Republican I'd consider voting for.
@ VankaYou mention members of the LDS church as being judgemental.
But isn't it judgemental for you to put ALL church members (or another much
heard favorite -"utah mormons") into a box? You are doing the very
thing that you seem to contemptuously accuse others of doing.Like I
mentioned before, human beings are way too complicated to put into tidy little
boxes with labels. Do members of the LDS faith display weakness- OF COURSE!
Should they be more Christlike? YES. That is what Christ's gospel is all about-
bettering oneself, and is for everyone. Really ALL of us are in this experience
called "humanity" together! I think it would help if we could do our
best not to categorize one another- no matter who we are- and just recognize
that we all make mistakes...I don't think Gov. Huntsman should be
judged for his personal spiritual beliefs. But one does need to judge, since he
is a political candidate, whether or not we think he would serve well. There are
different types of judgement. Some is appropriate and other kinds are
not-(personal issues). It may be easy to mix up others intentions.
I know of a few members who send their children to catholic and/or Christian
based schools over what is offered at the public schools in the areas they live.
It's no different that if he were to send them to a private school which I
think most Catholic and Christian based schools might be. I think Mr. Huntsman
is seeking for the best education available for his children and where his
children go to school is a decision only for him and his wife to make.
I have several thoughts on this but the one I'll share is this: If we don't
want people throughout the country criticizing Mitt Romney for being LDS, people
in Utah (or anywhere else) shouldn't criticize Jon Huntsman for whatever his
religious beliefs are.
Every member a missionary. And I do believe Huntsman is a missionary, just
not something one wants to repeat on the campaign trail every day, nor should
one say it; there are a thousand different ways to be a missionary. Despite
all our flaws and peccadillos and differences in the church, there are few
organizations out there as united and on the same page as LDS. If one thinks
we are fragmented and divided---we may be----but it is worse elsewhere. How
many organizations out there have the ability to reach out and bring global
unity? Huntsman will be president some day------how many people can say they
speak Chinese and have worked for the last 5 US presidents, and have adopted
children and can truly say they are conservative and liberal?
To Article-Reader: "You either believe the church is true or you
don't..." Ever heard of Agnosticism? Every naturalist (i.e, Darwinism, The
Platonic concept of Knowledge), atheistic, or theist concept contradict one
another in some way. This in turn proves and disproves every one, validating the
possibility while excluding the probability. It's a very earthly, accepting, and
fool proof "belief" system that inspires intellectual pacifism: where
you can be strongly opinionated yet not point fingers and say someone's religion
is wrong. Instead of jumping to conclusions and calling Huntsman a political
sell out we can take a step back and look at the strong philosophical influences
involved. In my view, the reason he uses the term "tough to define" to
describe his falling away from the LDS faith is to try and avoid the vehement
criticism we see posted on this comment board. This doesn't lessen him as a
person or politician in my eyes because I see where he is coming from as an
I find it unfortunate that he his beliefs or faith has to be questioned and
scrutinized. If he says he has a spiritual side stronger than his religiosity,
then that should be acceptable. Who are we to judge? Active or not; just
because his father is an area Seventy and the late David B Haight was an
apostle, should not be the litmus test. The choice is his. He has his reasons
and personal convictions. To even report that his children attended private
Catholic schools creates a false sense of wonderment as to why? What's wrong
with the non-religious schools? Or to ask, "Don't you like being a Mormon
anymore?" Perhaps it is only that he, like Mormonism teaches, searches for
and embraces ALL truth; and sole ownership does not belong to just the Mormon
church. I also believe that it is ridiculous to delve into a man's belief
system and then pass judgment. Is he a good leader? Will he serve the country
well? Does he care for those he has served? Or, does he speak with a forked
tongue? As successful as he has been, he will have his detractors. Time to
@VovalLocal - why did JHJ feel the need to "clarify" his view of
Mormonism? I think it's naive to think there was any reason other than to
distance himself from it. What is there to gain? Well, if you think you can
trade Mormon votes for Evangelical votes, that's a monumentally positive
tradeoff for a politician. I can't imagine that Mormons outside of Utah/Idaho
are swinging elections for anyone, and those states are going to vote Republican
no matter what. So if JHJ makes it through the primaries, where Evangelical
votes play a far more significant role than the Mormon vote, he'll own Utah and
Idaho in a general election anyway.Even though I think JHJ
miscalculated the impact of his intentional ambiguity, he can't possibly be
stupid enough to think he could claim a "born again" Christian
conviction. To have any credibility with the Evangelicals, he'd have to
completely denounce Mormonism, and have a history of "conversion" far
earlier than the instant he chooses to run for President.I still
think his best option is to leave it with "that's a personal issue I'm not
going to discuss."
@DSB I don't think there is much to gain by distancing himself from the LDS
religion. The reality is Mitt Romney received huge amounts of donations from
LDS believers and Huntsman has essentially cut off those donations by expressing
ambivalence about his LDS faith. As to appealing to a larger audience the other
reality is that to make it through the funnel of the Republican primaries
candidates almost always have to express a complete loyalty to Christianity and
Huntsman didn't take this opportunity to act like he had become a born-again
Christian as I'd expect a political opportunist to do. I think he's trying to
be honest and while he is technically a member I think he wanted to add clarity
to that since he no longer accepts an orthodox view of his faith.
Huntsman is dead wrong. Now is not too early to have an opinion of his faith or
the lack of it.It would be far more possible for him to win the Democratic
than the Republican nomination.Evangelicals may not be happy with Mitt the
Mormon, but they will completely reject Huntsman the religious waffler.He
cannot be seriously eying the Republican nomination for President. He has to be
running only for Vice-President. But no GOP nominee will be dumb enough to add
him to their ticket. I predict he will flop early as a GOP candidate
(accomplishing nothing but damaging Mitt - the real candidate the Dems fear
most).....and be available for Obama to put on the 2012 ticket in place of Biden
- as a grand gesture of bi-partisanship.If I wasn't a Mormon, I'd take
bets on it.
Former Governor Huntsmans response lacked a show of devotion to his church. Many
people felt that during his tenure as Governor he failed to do the heavy
lifting in regards to important issues, but was always available for photo
opportunities. We dont need more talking heads in government, but leaders of
courage and conviction!
A Southern Evangelical, a Catholic, or even an atheist, won't respect a
weaseling comment like that, much less a Mormon.I can't help but think the
promotion that the liberal-leaning press is giving this guy is a mere pathetic
attempt to split the LDS vote from Mitt.
Well we know what's really important in Utah. Over 200 comments, really?
What do the readers of the DN think about Huntsman sending his children to
Romney yes, Huntsman no. He may be a decent person and was a good governor.
Unfortunately his attempts to distance himself from the faith don't sit well wih
a lot of LDS faithful. I don't think he has a chance at winning the
nomination. He is virtually unknown outside of Utah.
Mr. Huntsman isn't the only Mormon(s) that try to pretend and/or distant their
LDS/Mormon roots from their existence.For some reason BYU-tv, the
satellite/cable channel that is ultimitely owned by the Church itself through
BYU and the Church Education System (CES), is doing the same thing. Other than
Sundays and real early in the morning for just a couple of hours or so, the TV
channel will air anything BUT Gospel flavored programs. Looks like they now
want to get "better ratings" or some other "WORLDLY"
Approval distinction. In the first decade or so of BYU-tv, it was almost 50% or
more LDS Gospel flavored programming (A Mirror of the LDS Culture and Beliefs).
I used to tell people who wanted to know what "Mormons Really Believe"
to tune it in and see and hear for themselves. But now it's just another
attempted copy of PBS and/or ESPN type programming.Maybe the former
Governor of Utah got his ideas of "hiding" from his roots by watching
the "new" version of BYU-tv??
When I read the first answer he gave about being a member and active I got this
sick feeling in my stomach which said, he does not have a testimony of the
truthfulness of the Gospel or he would not have answered as he did. I'm sorry
for him, for his family and his Eternity. He seems to be a man who is confused
as to what is most important - the earthly things or the Eternal things. I think
he is struggling within himself and I pray he will come to his senses and do
what is right - if not he faces many trials and heartaches.
@VocalLocal - I challenge you to go to anyone in your local bishopric and start
asking them about people in the ward, whether this person or that person
"is a member." In fact, ask just about any member about the people in
their neighborhood. It's just not a question that's "tough to
define." Even though General Authorities have asked us not to
divide ourselves as members and nonmembers, active and inactive, we still do,
and even inactive members who don't believe at all are identified as members,
although there may likely be a follow-up referencing activity or commitment or
belief, or lack thereof.The question asked by the reporter seemed
pretty straightforward, and unless JHJ has been excommunicated, the very simple,
honest, and only answer is a simple "I am still a member." If he
chooses to follow that up with an explanation of his commitment level, I have no
problem with that, no matter the answer. But, the non-answer he gave to the
very simple question begs the follow-up dialogue of whether he's intentionally
distancing himself from the religion for crass political gain.
Obama might be Mormon will he when Utah?
Matt 10:32-33 "Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I
confess also before my Father which is in heaven. But whosoever shall deny me
before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven." Why
would you not acknowledge your faith instead of fishing for the fleeting, vain,
pathetic, empty, rotten, fake, Hollywood praise of the telestial world.
'Being a member' IS tough to define. Technically someone on Church record is a
member and I'm sure Huntsman still is a member in this sense. However, many
members only consider someone a member if they actively participate and believe
in the religion. I think Huntsman has made it clear that he no longer fulfills
this definition of member. I think his responses are sincere. He clearly no
longer fully believes and follows the LDS religion but he retains an
appreciation of his LDS heritage and culture.
If Huntsman were somehow able to earn the republican nomination, he might well
be the first republican in my lifetime NOT to win Utah.
@vanka 10:49 - seems to me you're a "sheeple" of anti-Mormon thought.
Most LDS member don't think so uncharitably toward fellow members with doubts,
questions, or lesser commitments of the heart. Such judgmental ones are the
minority. Although we dream of the perfect politician who's also a
strong defender of the faith, I think we primarily hope our members are honest.
JHJ's comments seem disingenuous and politically calculated to prevent offending
one camp or another. As one commenter said, a question like "Are you a
member?" is not in any way "tough to define," especially for
someone raised in a devout LDS family. He could have said "Yes" or
"Yes, but regarding my personal convictions..." His level of personal
conversion may indeed be tough to define.His intentionally ambiguous
answer opened him up to questions and speculation about his religious commitment
and forthrightness. Personally, I agree with whoever said JHJ should have just
answered that his religious commitment and faith were his own personal business
and had no bearing on his ability to govern. Instead, his answers gave credence
to the line of questioning, and opened himself up to unnecessary, irrelevant
Huntsman is a RINO and a MINO. I guess he is hiding his candle under a bushel,
Don't kid yourself, Obama has cultivated Huntsman as a liberal republican that
cannot provide significant opposition to a very liberal incumbant. Of course
they are trying to push him up the scales in Republican esteem. The last thing
we need is another fiscally soft, domestically soft republican than cannot
separate himself from the democratic opponent. Obama is playing a very cunning
game. Huntsman is somewhere left of McCain and Dole and you know what happened
to them. This country is going in exactly the opposite direction and needs
fiscal conservatism and responsibility, it needs reduction of budgets in the big
and political areas, it needs president that can provide leadership to congress
on these issues not pander to the media and the public. Obama cannot provide
that because he is the poster child for it. Huntsman also cannot be what he is
not. He has always been a liberally minded republican. That is why he gets
almost no support or press outside of Utah. Oh... excuse me he is getting the
endorsement as the best Republican candidate from Obama. Humm...Kind of like
the spider saying the fly is the best at getting out of its web.
It is interesting to me that JHJ gets a ton of support from liberals and
anti-mormons and almost none from actual conservatives. What more really needs
to be said.One more thing - when we vote for a candidate we are
making a judgement. Those "don't judge" people really need to
understand what they are saying. If a person cant keep the commitments he has
made to his church, family, elks club, etc... then that tells us how he will
keep his commitments to his constituents. Of course religion is important to
look at if the person wanting to be your politician. Everything he does is
I see absolutely no problem with Huntsman's comments. I think every member of
the LDS church who is being honest would admit there are thousands of levels of
church commitment. Everyone close to him knows he has not been a devout Mormon
for a long time. Who cares? He still loves his ancestry and is proud of his
roots. The man is a proven leader with good values. There is a reason why he had
80%+ approval rating as governor.
peck posted "TIME is typically a more liberal magazine":.No, its not and never was. It was founded by an important Republican business
family, and its a mainstream Republican magazine.Just because they
published this story about one candidate you may think highly of, does not
negate decades of mainstream corporatist Republican editorials and stories. The expression MORE LIBERAL in your post is funny, actually. I hope the
DN will let me challenge you on your post.Go ahead and clip in some
stories from past Time articles you found "more liberal". Then read
the Utne reader and Mother Jones magazine articles on the same topics. THOSE
will be 'more liberal'. Time is all business, all the time.Not one
populist or socialist or pro-union bone in their editors' bodies.
Re:bandersen 1:01: Did you misunderstand what Mr. Huntsman said. He didn't say
he lacked conviction in himself or that he doubted himself. He said he was not
sure about the Mormon church and that he had some doubt about it. I think if
you study human history, even in the Bible Peter and Thomas had doubt, it is the
people that think they know everything and have no doubt that are the problem
and the destructive dangerous ones.
Poor thing. 1. He's afraid of the well known pounce factor, and keeps his
opinions to himself.Its clear to me that he's not prepared to run. He's
waiting for his staff to poll and write his opinions for him, lest he accidently
speak his truth in a way that offends some core constituency of the Republican
party. He quite correctly remembers the distinctions that the Republican
National committee fund raising manual said about the party faithful, before it
was outed public and withdrawn. That is, reactionaries are among the core
givers to the party. Reactionaries, like an adolescent, are easily swayed by
buzz words, and will polarize to any threat to their identity. Careful, step
gently, dont rile the reactionaries. 2. I am astounded at his attempt to
not have a point of view on LDS. Whether you believe Barack Hussein Obama
is really a Christian in his heart, (or not), Obama does claim that. The
TIme article says Californians might be ok with Huntsman's non-position on
religion. Maybe. Bush carried every county in California outside the SF Bay
area. Kerry had 74% of the vote of the 6 SF Bay counties.
I would still vote for a Catholic Huntsman.
wow, finally a candidate that is a reflection of many 'Americans', i.e. very
little conviction! Why do I want a leader who is still confused about what his
convictions are? No wonder he is finding support amongst the 'Big Brother can
give me an identity' crowd! In the end, it is just another politician seeking
for more power and fame without revealing the dearth of conviction that surely
haunts him/her ('Since I still don't know who I am, perhaps becoming President
will help me feel important!'). The poor exploited followers who want someone
like him! They don't know where they are going and want someone to lead them
I have to wonder what Jon Huntsman Sr. thinks about Jr and his apostacy? Sr. was
close friends with Pres Hinckley and is still very connected to the LDS First
Presidency - doing alot of great things. I'm sure he is very disapointed in how
his son has drifted away from his faith. People in the US want a man in the oval
office that has conviction and not someone who is wishy-washy. Pres. Reagan
didn't attend an offical church but his Christian beliefs were solid and he
wasn't afraid to proclaim them publically.
In my opinion this is not about Huntsman's religion.The back lash is
about the fact that we thought we knew this guy, and it turns out we didn't.
Most people saying they will not vote for him has a reason other than his
beliefs. I don't think anyone is saying they are not going to vote for him
because he is not sure of his beliefs. While he was in office in
Utah he never tried to distance himself from the church. When people were
bringing up his missionary service he never once said "Yeah, but I am not
so sure of my beliefs right now." Assumptions were made, and now those
assumptions were wrong. This article is just making people question all other
assumptions they made about this man, and they are no longer giving him a free
pass.This piece of news didn't change Huntsman, it changed the
assumptions that people were making about him.
A person that bright and priveleged who can't even tell people the articles of
faith. How can he be president?
He just lost my vote.
What a total political animal. He won't carry the state of Utah let alone the
nation. Go back to China JHJ.
OkThat makes sense and it so it sounds like he is sincerely wanting to
work his way back. Many are kept from sin for lack of opportunity.
Or maybe he wants to quit the LDS church. After-all, he quit being governor and
he quit being the ambassador to China. Yup, he probably is just planning to
quit the church.
I am suprised that vanka is not denied her statement. Many folks have been
denied for much less harsh words.The church is true. This is a utah guy,
what else would you expect from utah folks.The church means more than a
Maybe he got excommunicated and he just doesn't want everyone to know.
When you are excommunicated from the church, you are not a member anymore.
Obviously, I don't know if this is the case. But it can make one wonder.
Gosh, if he does not want to be a Mormon, isn't that ok?
"So let me understand, if someone is a member, but has questions or doubts
in their own personal testimony, they need to leave the church? Such sole
searching is not allowed? You can't remain a member while you sort things
out?"No it has nothing to do with membership/searching. I am
extremely sorry if I gave that impression. It has to do with knowing if its true
or not and whether your committed to being active or not. "...Joseph Smith
was a prophet who saw God the Father and His Son, Jesus Christ. The Church is
true. If you do not already have a testimony of these things, do that which is
necessary to obtain one. It is essential for you to have your own
testimony..."-(Thomas S. Monson, General Conference April 2011, Preisthood
Power) If you don't know, than do what you need to to come to know. It
has nothing to do with whether or not you need to revoke your membership or stop
attending (please come!). Again we are not enemies if you don't know or
are "not in", just that simply either you know for yourself or you
Dude, are you drunk with power, ambition, and greed? You should have stayed in
China, where you could have worked to stop the economic takeover of our country.
Instead, you cut short your service to take a shot at the top job
by denying your faith? You now have no principles or integrity to stand on.
Your only option now is to retreat within your Dad's company and
mend your soul.
I like Huntsman.I really dislike the fanatic LDS reactions to what
Huntsman said.It is typical of LDS to try to "shame" those
who do not agree with them, and they are especially judgmental of those
"vile betrayers" who were among the flock and appear to be
nonconformists.What a complete and absolute confirmation that LDS
are actually "sheeple" after all.That is pretty pathetic.
ECR - and it is for the exact reason you state that I went from Republican to
Independent, and haven't regretted it ever.
I guess i will avoid voting for him. If he wasnt mormon from the begining, then
i would possibly vote for him. But knowing he is, and acting this way, answers
all the questions i have for him.
UtahBlueDevil - I appreciate your thoughtful comment but I can't say I agree
with everything you said. Since you live in North Carolina I'm sure you must be
familiar with the general disdain evangelicals have for Mormons. According to
my son's former girlfriend who attended his church, one local minister here in
Northern Virginia literally spends 15 minutes of each sermon, each Sunday
blasting the Mormons and warning against their enticing message.In
the Senate today, the most influential Republican Senator is not the Minority
Leader, Mitch McConnell. It is Jim Demint from South Carolina who often mixes
his evangelical ferver with his political speeches. I know evangeicals
appreciate the support they receive from Mormons when it comes to social issues
but it seems they are quick to point out their religious differences so as not
to assume any association (ever listen to the Bible Answer man on radio?)Abortion and gay rights - those two issues are what keeps most Mormons
from embracing more of the Democratic platform. The compassion in the beliefs
of the Democratic platform more accurately reflect the things I've learned over
a lifetime in the Mormon church than anything the Republicans have presented.
This is so incredibly interesting. Mormons were so upset that people would even
consider Romney's religion in the last election. But now that Huntsman is
getting exposure as potentially a less than a full believing member many LDS are
ready to eat him alive. Do we recognize how important our perception
is in the church? It is the reason the PR and apologetics arm of the church has
so much influence. It is why we love to announce our numbers. So what that less
than half continue to have anything to do with the church, 13 million and
growing makes us feel so good! It is why we love to drop famous Mormon names. A
lot of it is normal and okay. But when we won't vote for JH because he is not
devout enough we are being phenominally hypocritical.I truly hope JH
recognizes that the MAJORITY of the 6 million US Mormons relate more to him than
Romney. JH, if you do not believe everything LDS please don't be afraid to be
honest about that. You may be shocked at how many Mormons both respect and
relate to that.
OK, for me the plot does not thicken, it only sets into concrete. This story has
reached all around the country. I am on several other political and economic
blogs/webgroups and what is amazingly consistent is how the battle lines have
been drawn. The Left is in love with Huntsman and the Right either was never
there or kicking him to the curb. The most vocal defense and adoration of
Huntsman yet comes from a couple of my friends who are self-identified marxists
and communists. I kid you not! It simply cannot get better then this. I have a
marxist buddy of 10+ years bragging that with Huntsman the GOP will finally be
on the right path.I now want to adopt a little Chicago style
politik'n myself. How many dead people can I line up to vote NO on this one?!Politics is mostly frustrating but every now and then its a real
Mormon Faith: hard to define = Since I am affiliated with the Church, I am
hoping to cash in on the LDS vote AND now since I can distance myself from the
faith, I hope to cash in on the anti-Mormon vote too!Opportunistic
politicians. I'm voting for Romney. At least he's willing to stand
up and be counted as LDS.
I think it is politically wise for Jon Huntsman not to make an issue of
religion. That should not be an issue. What should be the issue is if he can
get this country out of its downward slide. Can he put our economy back on
track? Is he wise enough to be president of this great nation? Can he fix the
housing, the gas prices, the cuts in pay for many, and the unemployment? Could
he fix the illegal alien issues? He is a brilliant politician. Religion should
not be an issue if he can fix America. Why should Jon Huntsman have to explain
his religion? Is it because he is a Mormon? Is that not being bigoted and
unfair? The media feeding-frenzy about Jon Huntsmans comments is totally
ridiculous. No one talks about his talents for fixing America. They only talk
about whether he is a Mormon or not. Why dont they have some newsworthy stories
like how Jon Huntsman will fix our broken country if he gets elected.
Jon Huntsman is the only one who knows what he is talking about.I
could listen to him for hours and not know what he was talking about, and so
could you. The author of the Time Magazine article knew less about Huntsman
after he answered the question than before.I don't know what he is
talking about.You don't know what he is talking about.Jon
Huntsman is the only one who knows what he is talking about.
Mr. Huntsman has lost my vote.....he is too undecided as to what he believes!
Will he waffle on important moral issues? Does his religion define him....or do
political aspirations??? I am not sure he is trustworthy to represent Republican
issues..like supporting the Constitution; protecting our borders; and reign in
honestly, he isn't one bit better than Obama..he wouldn't carry Utah.
Jon Huntsman Jr. represents over fifty percent of the present Mormon church
membership and is the typical member of the near future. Mormonism can not cling
to the dark past in light of the present day access to new discovery of
information and intelligence. Myths are now much easier to expose and explain;
and to educate people about than in past years when communications and research
were more limited. But, the real question is: can Mr. Huntsman best serve our
nation. Is he the best choice for the job. That is what really matters.
There is no shortcut to integrity. You either are Mormon or you are not. Even
if you have you own idea of what constitutes a 'good' Mormon, there is no guess
work about the expectations, standards, etc. of the church. Huntsman comes
across as ashamed of his 'roots'. His cosmopolitan view shows an utter lack of
conviction or an unwillingness to address whether he is a believer in LDS
theology or not. I prefer someone with deeper convictions. I don't care what
religion my president is, but I won't support someone who is running for office
because he is trying to hide from figuring out what he believes! No thanks!
I'll take a flaming socialist before I'd do that.
All I know is that I really appreciated Huntsman as a governor. Despite being a
republican, I thought he incorporated the strengths of both parties well in
governing the state. He'll have my vote if he gets that far.
Anyone who does NOT have a tough time defining his religion probably does not
know enough about that religion or the outside world to discern the dichotomies
that exist. When proclamations over an individual's religiosity
enter the political square, both religious and political discourse are
cheapened. Politicians making overt religious statements to win votes is
something both parties should avoid. Huntsman may possess a nuanced
and discerning religious world view. It would be a tragedy if such people were
alienated by the electorate or by their religious communities.
His religion or lack there of isn't (shouldn't) be on trial here. I think the
issue is whether he is being truthful or evading the question. The question
that seems to be throughout the comments is whether he can be a "true"
member of the LDS church. The Bible (New Testament) shows Christ to be an
accepting person who took people at face value. He saw where they were and
showed them the way He thought was the best way to live. There is no instance
of force or condemnation of a person. Huntsman is where he is right now and
that is non-committal on his beliefs. The question that should be asked is
whether you (only you) can support someone who is non-committal. Condemnation
and judgment of this choice should have no place in a discussion of his fitness
for office. There is absolutely no one who has posted on this board who has the
"authority" or "right" to condemn this man's actions. If
you are a "true" member of the LDS church you realize only the proper
authorities have that right and then it isn't something to be shared openly.
As a former Mormon myself, if Huntsman really is in a transitioning period with
his faith that truly is tough to define. Or rather, maybe he knows he is a
former Mormon (or a name-only Mormon), but isn't ready to say it out loud
because the ramifications can be so difficult. I don't even come from a strong
line of Mormons, and it was tough for me to start calling myself a former Mormon
out loud. Mormon friends and family think of you differently once they know and
can become distrustful, and of course with the whole eternal family concept your
close family members are extremely disappointed once they know. I can't imagine
having to address such a personal topic in such a public manner, but of course
that's part of the package when you become a politician (whether you like it or
Seems to me that anyone who has a "tough time" defining his religion
doesn't have enough religion in him/her to be a significant factor to consider
in the voting booth.
JHJ is too clever by half. His campaign will implode of its own weightlessness.
Ever wonder why he is said to be the most feared GOP candidate among the
democrats? As if!
He will never get my vote. The last thing we need is another wishy washy
I think Jon Huntsman JR, gave an honest answer to a question that many
politicians would have lied about or side stepped. I have gone through similar
times in my own life... most of us have, even the most faithful in the LDS
Church have times like this even though they might not admit it. I have seen Jon
Huntsman JR in church with his family, they are the nicest people. I also
believe Jon that he is a spiritual person. For me I respect him more for
Many have considered Huntsman's comments to be slick or pandering to both sides.
Perhaps he is just being completely honest. I know that if someone interviewed
me and asked about my religious beliefs it would be very hard to answer. I am
lifelong LDS, attend church, but have a lot of confusion around what I truly
believe about a lot of the LDS history/doctrine. And I happen to know that I am
far from being alone in that view. True believing members just don't get that
but what they also don't get is how many thousands of their fellow members share
this struggle to one degree or another. Perhaps Romney is the one
who is being less than candid. Check out his response to whether or not he
supported the LDS ban on blacks holding the Priesthood. He was very noncommital
and evasive and literally refused the interviewers request to be more clear. And
yet, maybe he truly does not know what he thinks about that either.Many things about our LDS faith are not clear or easy. I don't know may be a
very honest answer for many members.
ECR - there are groups out there that believe either overtly or as a matter of
conscience that unless you are white, anglo-saxon, and protestant, you are not
worthy of being in office. There was a huge uproar when a catholic Kennedy
became president, only to have American resolve that issue for the most part by
the time Reagan became president. There are many who have an issues with a
black urban raised man being president. There are those who had issues when a
person of Jewish faith run for the top office. And there are many who simply
could not understand how a woman could become president. This isn't anything
new, nor is it anything "mormon". Even Sarah Palin's evangelical
beliefs at one time made headlines. Sure there are those that
don't like mormons..... but in reality, that block of voters votes the same way
every time and are hardly a factor in swinging elections. Obama wan't elected
because of any movement in that crowd. And if a Mormon gets voted in, it will
not be because that group did one thing or another. They are not in play.
I find it refreshing that Huntsman wants to keep his religion to himself.
Between him and his god, which is the way it should be.
Is really unsure? Or is he hiding who he is to play to the crowds he's hoping to
win over? I hope it's the former.
Brother Huntsman reminds me of the current president. You get what you vote for.
At least with Mr. Obama, he doesn't try to hide what he is.But then
I suspect Brother Huntsman is not hiding who he is, either.
Wow! 173 comments. I like to see that kind of response. I did a cursory
review of the comments and may have missed it but it seems like no one picked up
the most interesting quote from the article. '"The only thing worse than
being a Mormon is being a nothing," said David Woodard, a political science
professor at Clemson University in South Carolina'. So here is a distinguished
professor from Clemson University, who has been a political advisor to South
Carolina's most priminent conservative politicians including Lindsey Graham and
Jim Demint, who thinks there is only one thing in the world worse than being a
Mormon. Doesn't that tell it all. The conservative evangelical south, that
ultimately controls the Republican Party, has total disdain for Mormons. When
will the good folks in Utah and elsewhere, who are devout Mormons, stop thinking
they have a legitimate voice in the Republican Party. They don't. They are a
convenient partner in conservative issues relating to gay marriage and abortion
but otherwise they are no more welcome than members of the Socialist Workers
Party. Wake up Mormons, the Republicans don't respect you.
Regarding issues of "black and white" (e.g., fence sitters)..."I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou
wert cold or hot."So then because thou art lukewarm, and
neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth."Revelation 3:15 & 16
This just makes me laugh so hard I almost wet my pants! Read it to my wife and
just exploded in laughter. Huntsman is as Mormon as Thomas S Monson.
When he ran for Governor his Mormonism was oozing from his pours. His crew
talked about how his dad flew the Prophet around on his private jet. How his dad
was a Mormon 70 General Authority. Mormon this and that. In fact, it was his
Mormon faith that helped him adopt the children he has.He isn't in
Kansas anymore and being Mormon is now bad, so he is no more. The
key characteristic of a RINO is they will say or do anything to be popular. If
he will kick his Mormon religion to the curb...what next? What other truth or
principle will he jettison when it suits him? What freedoms will he dump as
President to convenience him?This is cowardice to the umpteenth
degree. He should receive ZERO votes.
My question is why is it everybody's business? It sounds like he is like a lot
of Mormons out there in that they attend regularly, fulfill their callings, read
or study occasionally, but truthfully are not sure where they stand with respect
to the whole truth of it all. This is natural and a lot of people go through
it. Problem for Huntsman is he's about to enter the most visible stage on the
planet and so now is not the time to begin equivocating about beliefs. Romney
has already shown us that that strategy does not work.
Big Sports Fan:Really? You've met every member of the LDS faith and
know they fit into one of those 2 categories? Human beings, members of the LDS
faith or not, do not conveniently fit into boxes of A or B. All human beings are
just not that simple to define. I definitely agree that members of the LDS faith
are not perfect- I know because I'm one of them and know I have many faults. But
that is EXACTLY what the gospel of Jesus Christ is all about- there is hope for
all of us who mess up. (a lot!) (And that excludes no one).I think
in comment boards like this it's just way too easy put people (and their
comments) in boxes, when none of us have all the answers. (I believe that God
does).I agree that Ambassador Huntsman should have the right to his
own opinions and beliefs, that he shouldn't be "judged" (on a personal
level) by others. But as a politician we do have to "judge" whether or
not we think he would be a good candidate. Please don't mix up the two types of
@ razzle:since when was star wars part of the God's word?
Huntsman shouldn"t have equivicated, but the answer to the question should
mean nothing to anyone else, and it should not have been asked. This amounts to
nothing less than a religeous litmus test and that is bad. He is not
considering running for pope or prophet after all.
Matthew 19:29"And every one that hath forsaken houses, or
brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, (or
political aspirations) for my names sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and
shall inherit everlasting life."
My first knee-jerk reaction to the Time article was "What?! Are you selling
out your faith?" But who's to say he was even quoted correctly or his
answer was taken out of context. I don't know. I've seen a lot of shoddy work in
the media lately and who's to say this is not the case this time. Not sure what
his reasons for saying this to Time and then stating he is a member to the
Deseret News. He has his reasons.
Wow. Are you kidding me? Answered like a true politician. Either he doesn't
know what he believes, or he is lying, or he is something worse. Not a hard
question to answer. "Are you still Mormon"? Sounds like he is scared
to answer it.
Well, although I may be one of last ones to comment here, I think it's important
to understand that the issue isn't why Mr. Huntsman said what he said, it's what
it means.What it means is the end of his political career. That
simple. You can count on it. If he eventually listens to people who have an
ounce of sense, and not the yes people he has surrounded himself with, then he
won't even waste the money on a preliminary campaign.He shot himself
in the foot worse than "The Donald"
Why is this even on the news. Why does it even matter if he is Mormon or not.
Cant a man have his own belief and personal views. That is all that really
matters doesn't it. We don't have to prove to anyone that we are of some faith
Put aside the Mormon issue for a minute. This guy seems like the classic
politician. He smiles a lot, seems to say all the right stuff, and can't fully
commit to a position. I have a problem with a politician who says that it's
'tough to define' something like this. I have dealt with people like this
before. They are nice to everyone but not affiliated with anyone or anything.
They are constantly looking to 'keep their options open.' The weird thing is
that we are even having a discussion on his candidacy for the office of
President. He has NO CHANCE. Seriously. There are twenty more politicians on
both sides of the aisle just like him.
Did the JHJ bashers based only on religion read the Time article? Time is who
you should bash. They did all the could to trap Mr. Huntsman and I think he
came out shining. By the way, for those quick to judge, he didn't say he was
not an active Mormon, you jumped to that conclusion on your own. (Quick to judge
seems to be creeping more and more into our society causing a wider divide even
among the Utah LDS.)
I say give Jon some slack. It is too early to pass a quick judgment on this
candidate. With some time and patience, we will eventually see how his campaign
unfolds and get to see how he stands on the real issues burdening this nation of
ours. Only then can I talk about whether he gets my vote.
UtahBlueDevil: Yes, it would be lonely. Please stick around and keep going to
So let me understand, if someone is a member, but has questions or doubts in
their own personal testimony, they need to leave the church? Such sole
searching is not allowed? You can't remain a member while you sort things
out?How telling that so many members think like this. If they only
really knew about the discussions that happen behind closed doors with
conversations between leader and member about how they may struggle with this,
or that part of the gospel. Sacrament meeting would be a very lonely place if
it were only for those who don't have questions.
As Republicans continue to dine on their own, it's refreshing to see a guy who
is willing to dine upon himself by being neither non-Mormon enough for most of
America or Mormon enough for his own religion.
I can understand if he wants to keep his religious preferences private, in which
case he should have said so and maybe he wishes he had. I can understand other
members getting a little upset by being vague in his answer, because we promise
to stand as a witness at all times, in all things, and all places. One thing to
think about is the apostle Peter. He denied the Savior three times, yet he was
an apostle of the Lord and became a great leader. Mr. Huntsman has some
experiences that would make him a great president, and other things like any
other politician that concern me. Wish him best of luck.
Should Huntsman have given a straight answer? Yes. His answer should have
been:"My religious beliefs are private and unrelated to whether
or not I would be an effective leader."Isn't that the sentiment
most of us LDS members felt when Mitt Romney was facing all of those ridiculous
questions about his religious beliefs in the 2008 campaign? Didn't we all cry
foul? Didn't we all agree then that there should be no religious litmus test
for the office of POTUS?Why are so many of us now judging Huntsman
the (potential) candidate based on his personal religious beliefs? Seems pretty hypocritical to me.
Honestly -- My "guess" is Jon Huntsman Jr.'s "tough
to define" relationship with the LDS Church has nothing to do with his
personal "faith", but rather the bizarre and extremely
"peculiar" Mormons here in Utah.I remember full well
distancing myself from "those" kinds of Mormons when living outside of
the "bubble".BTW - Jesus was rejected and ultimely
crucified by his own (the ultra-Conservatives of his time) for being too
"RINO" [isn't that what you guys call Liberal Republicans?].
The LDS Faith is just not one of wishy-whashyism. It requires allot of effort,
work, service, and commitment on top of religious conversion to the doctrine.
It is not a religion where you go once a year and say "Awe shucks that was
nice, maybe we'll visit next year". Don't get me wrong, visitors, and
those struggling with their faith are welcome to attend our Imeetings and
worship services, but it is definitely a you know or you don't, a its true or
not sort of religion; not a maybe. People don't get offended with the army, but
you can't say I'm sort of in the army. You can't say I'm kinda the president.
Its just one of those positions where either you believe it or you don't and if
you don't know than you don't believe it yet. That's ok, it is what it is.
People don't need to be offended by that. It's just the nature of the religion.
And that's OK! If your a don't it doesn't that we are enemies! Just that your
not in. moving on.
Another interesting aspect of this is that Huntsman's brand of Mormonism (not
able to accept everything) probably resonates with more of the 6 million U.S.
Mormons than does Romney's (I know the church is true - period) brand. In addition, Huntsman is probably much less threatening to the large block of
ultra conservative southern born-again republicans than Romney. And he probably
resonates with independents more.So, while he won't win any Deseret
News poll, he is probably a more acceptable candidate nationwide than Romney.And for those who think JH was wishy washy in his response, go to
Youtube and watch some old Romney interviews. He was asked very directly how he
felt about the LDS Church's stance on black members prior to 1978. He was 31
when the ban was lifted and as a result it is a legitimate question whether or
not he supported the ban. He out wishy-washes JH big time.
I'm terribly disappointed in Mr. Huntsman. It's either, --- I'm a member or not.
He is a terrible example and a coward. Be true to the faith Mr. Huntsman!
Who cares? I think too many of you. 170 posts, wow. Donnie and Marie for
It is "tough to define" why Huntsman thinks he has a prayer in a
nationwide election. If Mitt Romney can't do it with Massachusetts and Michigan
connections, along with a strong Mormon vote, how does Huntsman think he is
going to do it, with none of those things? Plus, having a stiff-as-a-board
Like everyone else on this board, I do not know what JH believes or what he does
not. I do know that he seems to represent a very large number of LDS - those
who struggle with or outright do not accept some of the LDS truth claims but who
still have a strong connection to the Church.The reality is that
there are thousands of members who are struggling with their relationship to the
Church in light of the fact that they cannot say that they believe all things
LDS.I think it will be interesting to see how the Church responds to
this large block of members - many who still attend and remain active despite a
substantil lack of belief. If JH becomes a serious candidate they may have to
address this sooner rather than later.The question is whether there
truly is room in the Church for "soft", "doubting",
"liberal" or "cafateria" members. Some in the Church see no
place for these members. This has been reflected by the "in or out"
comments to this article. Others are very accepting of the different journeys
different members are on. We shall see...
Not someone I'd vote for. Did like his governorship either.
uummm... Get off the fence Huntsman. I honestly question his
intelligence if he thinks sitting on the fence is the answer to a very relevant
and legitimate question that will not go away.Is this how he plans
on handling the tough decisions if he gets to the Whitehouse. Sitting on the
fence? Good luck this that Johnny.
Huntsman is a politician first. He went back on his word when he was governor.
Do and say anything to get elected. I am not surprized at this. Smiling johnie
Huntsman is a typical whimpy politician. Vote Rick Santorum!
Re: AT 5:04 For the blessed who have it, money pays for a lot of penance and
buys a whole lot of forgivness. And maybe that is a good thing; who knows.
Anyway, after reading so many of the self righteous comments it almost makes the
label Jack-Mormon sound like a badge of courage.
Huntsman has attempted to remove himself from the taint of being a Utah Mormon.
He is a true politician, talking out of both sides of his mouth. When in Utah
play to the Mormon side....When running for a president of what may be
determined as a pro liberal country, bring up the family trash.....It'll
probably work. The next thing we might hear is that he smoked marjijuana in
high school only a couple of times but didn't inhale. By employing such
methods, Mrs Huntsman's boy might very well be the next president of the United
This is political pandering denying the truth and hoping others will accept his
betrayal.As far as the Church being the true Church Christ said that
himself in the Doctrine and Covenants section 1 verse 30. You can say you do
not believe that, just as the Jews refused to believe Christ is the Savior.
Either you believe this statement or do you do not. Either you believe Jesus
Christ made that statement or you do not. To be a faithful member of the Church
you must believe that statement or you are not faithful, regardless of how good
As I commented earlier, I believe Jon Huntsman should have just given a straight
answer. However, I think he'd be a good president. It is possible to disagree
with someone or with someone's actions while still supporting him or her.
Huntsman's non-answer doesn't affect how or if I vote for him but that doesn't
mean I agree with him giving a non-answer.Re: AT "A reason that
really makes you question how [Huntsman Sr.] now part of the Church
leadership."What that shows is that you believe Huntsman Sr. is
a "MINO" but clearly the Lord believes differently. Is Huntsman Sr.
perfect? No. Is Huntsman Jr. perfect? No. Are any of us perfect? No. Should we
judge others? Of course we should, to the extent of our limited understanding.
We'd be mindless robots if we didn't judge others. Should we ever pass a
"final judgment" on others? Of course not.
Can anyone say, "Jack Mormon"?
@xscribe: Only one person has earned the right to label anyone a hypocrite. And
it's not you and it's not me. We should all be more tolerant and less
judgmental. I think we should examine how well Huntsman's political walk matches
his political talk. Why is it OK for us to put more value on his religion (or
his color, or his ethnicity, or etc.) than on his ability to lead with
principle? We bristle when we hear people say they could never vote for a
Mormon. Then why do we not bristle when someone says they could never vote for a
non-Mormon or even a former Mormon? As an active member of the LDS
church, I feel a twinge of regret when I hear JHJ waffle on a question about his
faith. But that will not affect my decision about whether to vote for him.
OK, let me at least describe good ole shallow, mindless me. First of all, I
don't vote for someone cause they are white, and I would not vote for someone
cause they are Mormon. On the other hand, I will not withhold a vote because of
color or religion. So maybe I a white Mormon girl will vote for a black non
Mormon man, and I am not talking Obama. But maybe I will like Cain, and again
maybe I will like Romney, but either way, it will not be based on color or
religion. So that is what this shallow mindless person has planned. As for
Huntsman, I don't think he is going to do well and I was not pro Huntsman before
I found out that he might be a white Mormon version of Obama. Obama shunned his
church in the name of politics.
Here's an idea, why don't we as Mormons take this as a teachable moment ... for
us! We can understand that there are, as another commenter said, varying degrees
of belief and activity in the LDS Church. How about we just realize that we're
all human and we're all unfinished products? Be patient with people. Be
understanding if they don't believe the same things you do. How many people are
impatient with us to the point where they're screaming at the top of their lungs
for us to abandon our beliefs and take up theirs? I have a relative who said it
"drove him nuts" that someone in his ward didn't seem to have a strong
testimony. Why should that drive someone nuts?Anyway, I'd vote for
him. I like the job he did here.
I'm not sure what this article says about Huntsman and his faith. But I think
that many of the comments to this article say quite a lot about many members of
the church (LDS) and their judgment of others.
First, Deseret News - thank you for trying to make the comments section a more
controlled civil discourse environment.Huntsman is doing his best
imitation of a candidate that the Obama administration fears the most - one that
imitates Obama, but is Republican. Be vague on your positions, long on
promises, short on performance of promises,appealing to the independents, not
incumbered by his or any other religious beliefs, and full of sound bites
intended to be cool like the superstars of the etherial realms of green America
and Hollywood. Oh, and surround yourself with a bunch of "experts"
who's primary goal in life is to scheme how to make everyone in the opposing
party look like either and idiot or a radical. And you must control the
uneducated masses.He's not real folks, he is a real politician.
George:I don't recall saying any such thing. I'm not sure how you
got that out of my comments????
Forget the evangelical conservatives who dictate Iowa and the early Presidential
Primaries. It's obvious from these comments that Mr Huntsman's most vitriolic
opposition will come from people of his own faith.At a time when the
country desperately needs nuance and bi-partisanship, moderates like John
Huntsman are being run through the "all or nothing" buzz saw. That's a
loss for us all.
It is obvious that he has finally come to his senses and realized that the
church he grew up in is not true. He now has my vote!
After reading this article I was eager to comment, but I can see that so many
already demonstrate what I was about to say; John, if this is your "Mormon
issue" strategy, it will bite you.
Hey, whatever is cleaver. I won't be voting for him, but he can define himself
any way he wants. He has no obligation to tie himself to one religion. Be what
you will Gov. Huntsman
Utah Republican Mormons are strange in the way they see the world so let's play
the Holier Than Thou Game!LDS Republican Kevin Garn=Admits to being
naked in a hot tub with a 15 year old girl, defended and got standing ovationLDS Republican Sheldon Killpack=DUI, defended and praised as a
"good man"LDS Republican Bob Bennett= Ran out of town for
one bill and vilified for not being conservative enoughLDS Democrat
Harry Reid=claims that he is a bad and evil man has never cheated on his wife of
had a DUI.LDS Republican Jon Huntsman="Not Mormon enough",
has never cheated on his wife of had a DUILDS Republican Mitt
Romney=Passed a bill that the current health system is based on and current flip
flopper.I would encourage my fellow LDS on this forum to not judge
Huntsman. If you don't like him, don;t vote for him. You are not the Lord, so
you should refrain from bashing him spiritually.
Ive never been that impressed with Govenor Huntsman. I have had interesting
ancestors in my line but so what, they are just as human and as fallible as I
am. To me, he has been wishy washy on lots of things and that is one reason I
would not want him for the presidency. I dont know who Id vote for if it came
down between the choice of him or President Obama. I would really have to think
hard about it.
re:Hank PymWashington, Adams, Payne, and other signers of the
constitution.... all devote Christians.... oh and pretty decent leaders too
wouldn't ya say Hank???
I guess I would consider myself an active member of the Church of Jesus Christ
of Latter Day Saints though I am not sure what "active" means. I
raised my children in the Church teaching them the principles that I believed
in. One of my children chose to live her life differently and you know what, I
love that child. She is young and trying to find out what is right for her, she
is a good person who accepts and loves all people. At first it was difficult
because I felt that she was saying that what I taught her was wrong. That was my
issue, she wasn't saying that at all, I had to learn that I had the problem of
judgement. I love and adore her no less now than I did the day she was born.
Governor Huntsman is a decent man, he assisted our family during a very
difficult situation. He has the right to express or not express his convictions
without judgement from me or anyone on this board. Quit quoting scripture,quit
passing judgement, no one on this board has that authority anyway.
Some of you seem very uncompassionate about Mr. Huntsmans stance. Life is a
journey, and sometimes life takes you in a different direction, maybe he's
rethought things and isn't quite sure about what he believes or where he stands
religiously. But what is sad is that it shouldn't matter. The constitution
guarantees that there shall be no religious test to hold office, so why should
it matter what someone's religion is? To me religion is a private matter, not
something you go around sharing with everyone like a zealot loon. If someone
has to sell you on their personal qualities by proclaiming their religion, then
run! It's like those shysters who doop people out of money because they
convinced some sucker that they were a good Mormon or a good Christian, if your
main selling point has to be your religion, you've got problems and should not
be trusted. If I should vote for someone for no other reason other than the
fact that they are a good _________ (name your sectarian affiliation here) then
I'm voting for someone else. Maybe he doesn't think his religions should define
Harry Reid at least says he believes and is active in the church. He may not
practice what he preaches but at least he isn't ashamed of being called a latter
day saint like Huntsman. Huntsman would do good to open his New Testament and
read where the St John makes it clear what happens to those that are "luke
warm" in their belief.
THE GREAT DIVIDEThere is a divide in the church.Group A - Staunch,
close minded, judgmental, superiority toward others, ultra conservative.Group B - Open minded, accepting, laid back, more liberal.
What's hard to define??? Either you are an active , believing Latter Day Saint
or you are a jack mormon. Pretty easy. Hunstman is a jack Mormon which makes it
REALLY easy for me to decide who to support - ROMNEY!!!!!
Freud once said, "Loss of Religious faith isa sign of maturity."Its politicians like Huckabee, W, Palin, etc... that are so hooked on
hocus-pocus that you have to worry about.
Problem with voters is they would rather vote the easier path along "party
lines" than look at each candidate or issue and vote for the one that best
personifies their beliefs. JHJ lost my confidence when he resigned as governor
and accepted a position that would further his political career. Mitt Romney is
not much better. But to then cover his personal or religious beliefs is nothing
more than being a "wolf in sheeps clothing". Of course, I am now
waiting for him to come out and say he was misquoted.
I believe Mr. Huntsman's answer is both honest and refreshing. Ambiguity exists
in our lives and our faith. I often ponder what religious teaching do I really
believe in and why. Certainty becomes variable.
Huntsman would make a good defense attorney
Another goof-ball Mormon candidate. Why can't we get someone who is not a
Never have voted for Johnny Junior, not because he's too liberal, but too
slippery. And this article confirms it. Junior John keeps slipping on . . .
dc260 | 3:14 p.m. May 12, 2011 Roy, Ut"Shame on
Huntsman."Just who are you to shame someone? Who do you think
you are? What makes you so much holier than thou?
Huntsman was a bad governor, why would anyone want him for President?
Disappointing, but not surprising. Reed Smoot, former prominent LDS senator
from this state took a lot of heat for being Mormon and had to fight just to be
seated because of the prejudice against him for his religion. He later
established himself as one of America's premier statesmen of his generation.
According to the account in Bryant S. Hinckley's book "The Faith Of Our
Pioneer Fathers", Senator Smoot was offered the Republican Presidential
nomination twice, the catch that he had to renounce his LDS faith. Senator Reed
is to have declared, "I would rather be a deacon on the LDS church than to
be President of the United States." Shame on Huntsman. A Reed Smoot he
So far he strikes me as a decent guy, with decent positions. As long as he has
good character, I'm not going to be concerned with how active he is in Church.
What is very evident in these comments are the people who are just like the
people you attend church with in your local wards, the judgmental ones that
think they can do no wrong. The same people that spread rumors about how
someone isn't as faithful as they are to the LDS Church. They are the ones who
judge another's relationship between an individual and God.Huntsman
is running for President of the United Staes, not for President Monson's
Presidency. Don't like Huntsman, don't vote for him but don't go on a forum
tearing down his character to make yourselves feel holier than thou.
I would rather be true to my faith, than to be a politician. It has fewer
eternal consequences. The man has lost my vote.
It depends on what the definition of "Is" is... Sounds like a past
political figure that had problems telling the straight truth with a simple
I dont care what Huntsmans personal beleifs are my decision to never vote for
him has nothing to do with his personal life my decision is based on political
differances and I will never vote for Romney either and I also dont care what
religion he belongs to. his political view is something I would never support.
As a huge Romney supporter, I think Huntsman would win my vote if it meant we
could have Barack Hussein Obama move out of the White House.
@cats"Huntsman is either a member or he's not."So
he's hot or cold, yes or no, in or out, up or down, wrong or right, black or
white? Does this standard apply to everyone? If it does then I guess this
inactive LDS member has a letter of resignation to write.
"A couple of interesting things to note: any other candidates out there
asked about their faith except Republican Mormons? Let me know if they
are."Barack Obama. (All that muslim stuff and the Rev. Wright
"The Dems would like nothing more than to be opposed by a RINO governor
from Utah. "Absolutely not. Democrats may and do like Huntsman
(those who know of him) more than the other republicans but the thing we
absolutely do not want is to have a Republican president rubber-stamp the
insanity that comes from a republican congress (one would assume if the
republicans take the presidency they're probably also flipping three senate
seats). A RINO governor makes that scenario highly likely.
You know, the tenet "let them worship how, where, and what they
may..." applies to all men (and women). And yet, a lot of posters here
seem to think they know more than this man's bishop about Jon Huntsman's
spirituality and standing in the church. Judging JHJ's faith based on a Time
Magazine article? Shameful. Diving deep into someone's personal
religious beliefs should be kept out of politics. The ultra-right tried to do
that to President Obama during the last presidential campaign--and to Utah
favorite son, Mitt Romney. Whether it's Barack Obama, Mitt Romney, or Jon
Huntsman, take them at their word on matters of religion, and judge them on
their politics. They are, after all, running for political office, not to be
chief theologian of this nation.
"They just want everyone to believe that Huntsman is the candidate that
Democrats most fear because he is more like a Democrat then the rest of the
Republican field."Yeah, that's why they fear him. Huntsman
would be brilliant with independents and would be a strong general election
opponent. That's why after the election Plouffe said that Huntsman was the only
one he feared for 2012.
I commend Jon Huntsman for his honesty. As a former Methodist, I grew up
surrounded by every level of spirituality. There was no
"Active/Less-Active" categorization, just a whole spectrum of members.
All understood that everyone was different when it cane to religious faith.Jon reminds me of that experience. He can't accurately describe his
testimony. Who can? I can't. Do I believe in tithing? Yes. Do I
undestand where it goes, why I need to, what happens if I cheat, exactly what do
I owe? No.I believe we members of the LDS church are very much like
Jon. It's easy to say we're active. It's virtually impossible to define our
faith. We rely on what others say and how others have talked about their faith.
Rather than be objective and open, like Jon.
Sorry, Governor. I don't care about your religion, only your politics and that
doesn't seem very well defined either.
It is sad when a person lacks the strength to stand faithful and true to
conviction. That is a politician for you. "Neither cold or
All the more reason why I'm voting for Mitt Romney!!! Huntsman won't have a
chance if he tries that approach!! Now who's the flipper?
I doubt Huntsman is a sellout for political reasons for the simple reason that
it's been fairly well-known among the political class in this town that Huntsman
was pretty "soft" as a Mormon. This isn't new. I've heard the rumors
(from quite credible sources) for years that he wasn't particularly observant,
and that he largely stayed with the church to accommodate his parents. And he
certainly made a point of visiting all kinds of churches while governor rather
than attending his ward. I think he's just being more honest than political in
all this. After all, "I'm spiritual, but not sure how" isn't exactly
going to win him a lot of evangelical votes either.
Well, another reason I WON"T vote for HUNTSMAN any time soon. NO GUTS NO
GLORY. As a former fundamentalist Christian (BAPTIST) and now active
"MORMON" I feel I can say that his statement will offend not just
members of the LDS CHurch but other christians as well. Failure to stand for
your faith is a fatal flaw as many non-Mormons already know.
His strategy is intriguing. He is leveling the playing field with other
candidates when it comes to religion. Religion should not be a
major factor in a presidential election. No other candidate(exept maybe Romney)
faces as much scrutiny regarding their religion.He is dodging the
question and I hope he continues to do so.
"Huntsman was so cryptic..."Cryptic. Well,
we'll see how this tactic plays out. We know where being up front
and forthright about LDS Church membership landed Romney the last time round.I applaud Huntsman for this evasion and giving the appearance of
mystery. Giving people the right out, straight up, honest answers didn't work
last time--maybe they'll prefer this.As for the author's statement
"that she knew even less after questioning him"---I'm pretty
skeptical. They know so little to begin with about Mormonism and its
relevance to a Presidential campaign, that its hard to imagine it even being
possible to know less than they do. :)
If he has lost his faith, or it is severely diminished, the man needs to be
outright honest about it.I think he's attempting to stradle the
fence in hopes of gaining more votes while not losing the fundraising donations
of the faithful.At least he is not pulling a "Harry Reid"
and pretending to be devout...
He's the type of moderate candidate we need.
I know tons of people who take pride in saying they are "very spiritual but
not religious." What many of them mean is that they follow their own
spiritual path, go out in the woods or into a windowless cubicle to meditate,
answer only to their own interpretations of everything, want to be free to
accept or reject any religious, moral, or ethical teaching if it doesn't suit
them, and don't want to be tied to a congregational or communal form of worship
(which is how almost all religions share, strengthen their members, and unite to
bless the world around them). I guess I'm left wondering which is
harder to define: his elusive supposed membership or affiliation with the LDS
church, or his aspirations to pomp and power. Which is more important, which is
going to gain the upper hand?Whatever... all this hazy double talk
will serve him well in any political office he might eventually hold.
LDS Liberal Dell Schanze comes to mind, over a couple of liberal
clowns. Pelosi said we just need to make both parties the same and then there
would be no bickering. John and Obama make her dreams come true.
If you are going to judge Mormons individually to see if they are "in or
out", do it by their service, not meeting attendence.
I don't care if Huntsman is still active in the LDS Church or not. This is the
same as when he was Governor - do anything to put your name in the paper! He
couldn't give a straight answer if his life depended on it. That is why I will
never vote for him. He will say anything to get elected then turn his back on
the voters who put him there. Remember when his wife wanted a soccer stadium so
he ran roughshod over Salt Lake County to get it put in. Typical sleazy
You guys crack me up!Seriously!C'mon -- Be honest. Especially
with yoursleves.If Jon Hunstman Jr. is the Republican nominee --
each and everyone of you nay-sayers will vote for him regardless of your mouthy
opinions.Who else you gonna vote for? Your sworn enemy - Pres.
Obama?Hunstman vs. who? Newt?, Palin, Bachman, Pastor Huckabee??? --
pathetic.BTW - if Hunstman actually wins the GOP nomination, I
would guess that for every ultra-far-right Tea-Party Republican that drops out,
5 other Moderate, Independant and big-tent Reagan Democrats would step in.
At this point if Huntsman ran, he wouldn't carry the state of Utah.
Huntsman can practice as he wishes. None of you are worthy to judge his
religiousness, only The Holy One of Israel will. I am LDS and I have voted for
him because he is a proven pragmatic leader, not a religious nut.If
this makes him different than the LDS filled legislature that passed awful bills
this year, I will take him over those jokers any day.
Huntsman may have lost points with some voters, but I would be happy so have
religion not be a part of the way the country judges him. Let's
focus on how he would improve the economy and promote peace in the world.
So if Obama goes through the process of getting his name on the records (yes I
do know what that entails) and then goes back to the church in Chicago you all
love so much and attends there instead of his local LDS ward you would accept
him as Mormon if he claimed he was Mormon?
This sounds like the type of candidate I could vote for...NOT!!! 30 pieces of
silver comes to mind.
These are excerpts from a Time Magazine article (not even the whole article).
Really? You are going to judge him on that? Although, I attend my LDS Church and
temple regularly I am ashamed to be associated by some of the commenters here.
"If there is anything of virtuous, lovely, or of good report or
praiseworthy, we seek after these things." This is the opposite of
"The ONLY true Church" "In or out", "with us or against
us, these terms are stiff-necked."Believing in absolutes leads to the
dark side" Obi-One
Come on everyone, We all know that there are many varying degrees for believing
Mormons. No ones faith is the same as the next guys. Huntsman is just being
honest.The real problem as I see it is that he passes himself off as
the son of a General Authority, and a Returned Missionary, when he is here in
Utah running for office. When He is running for national office he will
represent other sides of himself.That doesn't make him a bad person,
it just makes him a good politician. One that wont take a stand on anything, and
tries to be everything to everyone. That type of politician (one that is
spineless) isn't need now. That is his big problem.This will hurt
him in the long run because America is looking for a leader that can stand on
his own, and Huntsman just showed he can't do that.
Reading the responses here is quite telling. You will vote for a mormom whether
or not he would make a good president. Now that he has distanced himself from it
you people run like rats from a sinking ship.He has gone way up in
credibility in my opinion. At least he's not trying to pander to mormons purely
for their votes. You see that type of obvious pandering in state elections...
jon huntsman took the sack off his head and can see the truth..know he thinks he
can win the presidency..i wont vote for him,i made that mistake once befor hes
to libral for me.he,d probably make mitt romney vice president and legalize
OK, he might be in the church, he might not be, but one thing he is for sure. A
Dear Everest: You post is COMPLETELY beside the point. NO ONE is claiming that
Huntsman is unfit for office. That's a completely seperate issue. The question
was if he is a "MEMBER" of the LDS Church. He gave an evasive,
swquishy answer. That's what people are questioning. NOT his fitness for
@article-reader and of course your spin on what makes someone LDS or not
LDS is based solidly in church doctrine including your right to decide if
someone is a worthy LDS member right? What chapter and verse was that found in
Article-Reader, your comments explain exactly why it is "tough to
define". Although you may claim all Mormons are like you, we are not.
Christian love and empathy are not Mormon-only traits.
@snurge: Just to be clear, the development company of the LDS Church that is
building the City Creek development doesn't take any tithing money. Perhaps
that is like your other inconsistencies. The Church is by no means perfect nor
are the members but then again, who is?
Article-reader - I see what you are saying. I am simply stating that if you
think that it is either 'black or white' or 'in or out' with the church then you
are living in the dark. I don't think most people of mormonism or any faith
attend because they think their church is true. I think people attend to become
close to god and to become a better person. I have never ever heard a methodist
say that they are the 'only true church'. Think about it. It is great that you
believe it, but it doesn't mean it is the true church. That has what your study
and your life experiences have led you to believe. As a member myself, I am
bothered when we say we are the only true church. How sad that we think a
relatively small world church (13 million compared to 500 million catholics) is
the only true church. Active mormons don't have to either 'believe or not', that
is an arrogant statement. You can go to church to better yourself. The church
has too many errors and changed doctrine to be the one true church, yet I still
Dear George: Membership in the LDS Church is NOT "tough to define."
Either you ARE a member or you are NOT. There is no in between. It's cut and
dried. That is not a hard question. Anyone who is LDS knows that. The
question was if he was a "member of the Church." Either you are a
member or you're not. It's an easy question. Unless his name has
been taken off the membership rolls of the Church, he's a member. If he's not a
member, it means his name HAS been taken off the rolls of the Church. There's
no fuzzy area. That's why the answer is such a squishy, wishy-washy answer. IT
WAS CEARLY AN EVASION. Anyone who is LDS knows that. This isn't
like being an Evangelical where all you have to do is stand up and make a
declaration of faith. In our Church there are official records that define
whether you are a member or not. Plain and simple.His answer was an
EVASION!And....Dear LDS Liberal: Huntsman is NOT going to be the
nominee, so you have nothing to worry about.
I really feel he is being honest about his faith. Many of us question our
religious roots eventually. It is ok to be a free thinker. Mormon leaders are
just men, trying to keep the "dream" alive.....Jon, I believe, has the
experience to be a great president....just my thoughts!!
I never liked him much before, he was always too liberal. Now it seems like he
doesn't stand for anything. He has lost all credibility in my
After viewing the comments it's disappointing to realize that the Utah Mormon
hasn't changed much...If the Governor wants to keep his own
"spiritual" walk more private then why should anyone here care?My relationship with the LDS church is "touch to define" as
well...now everyone quickly blast me!
While I respect Hunstman as a politician, now is not the time to be ambiguous
about personal issues (unless he isn't going to run for president). If he's
going to run, he should take a position and either way (active LDS or not), it
will blow over come campaign time. That's all he has to say, "I consider
myself Mormon but I don't really attend church" or "My background is
LDS but I no longer consider myself LDS." Not that we need to make religion
a major focus of the candidates but it's best just to get it out of the way -
either way - like Mitt Romney did or anyone else where religion might be an
issue to a large number of people.Re: MormonDemSo you're
saying you are going to vote for someone [Pres. Obama] whose has made neither
his personal nor policy positions clear? If anyone thinks Pres. Obama's policy
positions are clear, look at what he did and said as a Senator, on the campaign
trail, and as President. We see vast differences [Iraq, Guantanamo,
transparency, health care, environmental policies, economic policies, and so
It seems likely that there are others out there whose Church membership and
participation is "hard to define." Does that make them unfit for
public office? Maybe he doesn't like being treated like a celebrity when he
walks into the building.
Brahma, what's funny is that posters like yourself spin the churches beliefs to
fit their own logic. What is illogical would be to attend a church you don't
fully believe in, when that church insists that it is the ONLY true church.
Also, having 'Mormon' roots, or your name on the records of the church does not
make on a Mormon. Plenty of Poly groups claim to be Mormons, but they don't
belong to the same church. Being LDS is standing up for what you and the church
believe in all aspects of your life. Now, you mentioned the 13+ million members
of the church, I can't speak for all of them, especially since only approx 50%
are active members. What I can speak for is the fact that I myself believe the
church is true, and when I see someone trying to capitalize on the LDS religion
in one state, yet shrug it off in a National Newspaper it upsets me. Huntsman
either believes it or he doesn't. You can't serve God and Mammon. That's in the
Bible my friend.
This be a non-issue with mormons as it really is none of their business what his
exact stance is with the religion. To imply that anybody is more honest, good,
or anything else because they are 'mormon' is just plain ignorant. Look at all
of the ward members near Provo that have swindled other members (often elderly)
out of their life savings for some pyramid scheme. Now if that is not a red flag
to what the religion might breed, I don't know what is. I know most mormons are
generally kind people and honest, but the simple title of 'mormon' does nothing.
It is called integrity and character. Some people have it, some don't. Integrity
is an individual thing that religion has nothing to do with.
Sounds like Utah Republicans are still mad at him for jumping ship. Now don't
get me wrong, I won't be voting Huntsman either way. His connection with a
polluting chemical company responsible for much of the cancer epidemic in this
valley is way more important than his religion. But I am surprised that no one
commenting here is questioning whether or not the journalist--A Times writer for
crying out loud--has a bias here as well. The Times is not known for being an
exceptionally credible magazine. So let's give the man a break and actually hear
what he has to say for himself, not what Times has to say for him. Either way,
don't vote for him. He won't do the country any good.
@catsI find it interesting that you and other like minded posters see fit
to decide for others what it means to be LDS. How exactly is this in keeping
with the LDS teachings?
Daddy gave him the opportunities he has, grandpa his faith, no wonder Johnny is
The fact that his religion matters is appalling to me. From most of these
posts, it would seem that the LDS have two choices for candidates, and that will
be the one that is most "Mormon." And this whole "you're in or
you're out" nonsense is what made me an "out" in the first place.
The hypocracy of my small-Utah-town upbringing was shameful, and the hypocracy
continues to this day.
there's a lot of things i like about huntsman that i think would make him a very
good president for america, but if he truly is just posturing for votes then i
don't think i can respect that. i am an active lds member who goes through a
lot of what huntsman has let on. i feel that there's a lot of good in the
different ways people choose to live their lives whether religious or
irreligious. i didn't donate to prop 8 but i never spoke out against it nor
fought friends and family on the issue. what i like about huntsman is that he's
a guy that seems to want to find ways to work with opposition and his
international ties with china would be a very good thing for our country.i'm very happy with my lds faith and my "mormon roots" and
even more so with the balance that i find in my life, but it puts me off a
little bit when huntsman tries to downplay who he is and where he came from.
unless he's really going through a conflict, he should just be straight forward.
You guys crack me up!Seriously!C'mon -- Be honest. Espicially
with yoursleves.If Jon Hunstman Jr. is THE Republican nominee --
each and everyone of you nay-sayers will vote for him regardless of you mouthy
opinions.Who else you gonna vote for? Your sworn enemy - Pres.
Obama?Hunstman vs. who? Palin, Bachman, Pastor Huckabee??? --
pathetic.BTW - if Hunstman actually wins the nomination, it would
mean the first time I vote for the GOP in 28 years.
Wow, it must be tough trying to be a Mormon with all the supposed wolfs running
around in sheep's clothing and no one understanding who or what they are
supposed to be or why. It reminds one of the story in Farm Animals; all members
are equal, it is just that some are more equal than others. I wish Mr. Huntsman
luck, he appears to be talented and dedicated, and he is not alone in not
knowing the unknown; he may just be more honest.
Look...Huntsman is either a member or he's not. That is not "hard to
define." That's a question that requires a "yes" or
"no" answer. His mushy, mealy-mouthed answer is typical of the kind
of person he is. I can't believe there is ANYONE who "admires" him
for that answer.No matter what anyone thinks of Mitt Romney as a
politican, he had the courage and the character to stand for his faith.
Regardless of the battering he took and the lies that were told, he always stood
up for his faith. That's what's admirable. Not a mushy, wishy-washy guy who
isn't willing to stand up for anything and tries to straddle the fence because
he thinks it might gain him a few political points.I voted for Jon
Huntsman twice, but I've never really liked him. It's becoming increasingly
Huntsman is right on. The LDS Church is not black or white, there are many many
historical examples. Huntsman is not what many Utah politicians such as Jason
Chaffetz are doing, selling his birthright for a mass of potage.
That's kind of like being "a little bit pregnant;" you are either an
active member of the LDS faith or you're not. It's not really a religion for
@mormoncowboy So you honestly believe just because someone like Romney
professes a strong belief in the LDS church it somehow tells you more about him
then huntsman professions about his political views? No wonder our country has
such a poor record of electing qualified officials. We care more about hiring
the guy with the best image then the intellectuals that actually now what the
heck they are doing. I am not saying Hunstman is an intellectual but I sure
would not classify someone like Romney as one. I often disagreed with Huntsmans
policy choices when he was governor of Utah and I still lived there but I found
his reasoning thoughtful and reasonable. As a democrat I can tell you I for one
am not afraid of Huntsman I would actually appreciate the chance to have a
republican candidate like Huntsman or Powell run even if it means Obama might
lose its time to but reason ahead of propaganda wars.
If you're in, its not hard to define.If it is hard to define, he's
A couple of interesting things to note: any other candidates out there asked
about their faith except Republican Mormons? Let me know if they are.As
for Mr. Huntsman, he is so squishy about so many things, I have little faith in
him...afraid he would be off signing any and every "green" bit of
legislation that came his way, no matter what it cost.
I think it's sad, actually. Not that he won't "define" what he is, but
fact that Mormon peer pressure is so strong that he can't come right out and say
he's a former member (if that's the case). He knows that if he says something
like that, do you know how many people in Utah will get offended? I think his
statement is fine.
I have had the honor of working closely with Jon when he was our Governor. I
have never met a nicer more honorable man. To read people of the LDS faith
making comments like "your either in or your out, what will it be?" Do
you find wonder why the rest of the world thinks of your church as a crazy cult?
Second, reading comments of the faithful devout Mormons saying that
because he is "denying" his faith they are not going to vote for
him... Aren't you doing the same thing the Christians do to your devout Mormon
politicians? The fact is, despite what you may believe culturally, a rather
large percentage of "members" of the LDS church are in the same place
as Mr. Huntsman. Having a relationship with God, does not need to involve a 3
hour block, and strict temple attendance. Stop judging this man by your own
definitions of worthiness.
I don't think Huntsman is shifting in the sand like Romney did. If anything, he
is answering the question honestly, and presenting himself as himself, rather
than a charecture of what the right thinks a proper conservative should look and
feel like. I feel he is answering more truthfully then Romney ever did.The honest truth is other than the ERA or Friend version of the church, there
are many who struggle to put the church into context of real life. The more you
travel and are exposed to the world outside Utah, the more you see how complex
semingly simple things become. The standard lds answer is only one
"true" church, and all others are evil. In reality there may be just
a single church that has the fullness of the gospel, but many other faiths also
have a good portions of truth and goodness in them. Acknowledging the goodness
in these other faiths normally would not require a renunciation of onces own
faith, but LDS culter doesn't accept that liberality very well. Name
calling and branding like RINO are just more examples of the "fall in line
or get out" mentality previlant.
"Interviewer":Jon:What do you think about:Being ambivalent, evasive, and/or inconsistent, and/or all three, at the
same time?"Jon answering":I'm a successful
politician.It comes with the territory.
Wow, a bunch of judgmental armchair columnists are posting today. None of you
know this man - you don't understand his personal life, much less his spiritual
one.I know many people who are pretty active Mormons who still
embrace many philosophies from other religions and cultures. We members of the
LDS church should never judge people on their relationship with God, much less
on how they integrate with the church's culture (which is often bizarre and
changes drastically from state to state or even ward to ward).Maybe
he just shies away from religion talk because he wants to talk about other
issues and keep his religion private. He can do as he pleases, and from the
quotes I read, he is not throwing his religion under the bus. And frankly even
if he did, what's it to you? So a "famous" Mormon leaves the fold, we
have better things to focus on don't we?
Hy Folks - this religion thing is just a smoke screen. The real issue is Time's
slimy attempt to deceive gullible Americans into thinking that the Dems are
afraid of JHJ. The Dems would like nothing more than to be opposed by a RINO
governor from Utah. Presidential Journalism 101: sing the praises of the weakest
viable Republican candidate during the primaries; then, once you get 'em
elected, destroy 'em.
Anyone know what Huntsmans worth is? Not his Dad's, but his. I keep hearing
how rich he is, but is he really or is it just his father?
He who straddles the fence ends up with a sore crotch sooner or later. I think
JHJ is a good man but question his dancing around the religion topic. I don't
understand what he thinks he is gaining by being vague. Whether he believes in
the LDS faith or not, just be open about it. It sounds like he is trying not to
offend mainstream LDS and not rile those who dislike the LDS at the same time.
Personally, I would respect him more if he had just said that he is not
practicing the LDS faith or is no longer active in the LDS church if that is how
he feels. Or the opposite if that is truth. I still think Romney can solve the
countries problems better than anyone else.Romney 2010!
The two major political parties want to expand their tents and invite in folks
of every stripe. Maybe that is why so many are ready for a third party. Some
of us are hungry for a party united on principles. I do not wish to join a
political alliance made up of the left and the right, the moral and the immoral,
the patriot and the traitor. I will not support a candidate who cannot bring
clarity to his identity.
Lux:Your honesty is what Huntsman lacks. I believe that
a person is or is not a member of his faith. You may still hold on to certain
beliefs and practices that shaped you, but you either are or are not a member of
a faith. Simple.
LOL @ Uteman! "From BLIND faith to educated and informed passive LDS church
members" kind of caught my eye. I wonder how Brother Brigham would respond
to that? I'm pretty sure what J. Golden Kimball would've said...... spoken like
a TRUE UTE-man. =)
Frankly, it is difficult to define the Mormon Church at all these days.I
used to understand our teachings on the law of the land. Now, I am not sure
what to believe.
These are they who are not valiant in the testimony of Jesus; wherefore, they
obtain not the crown over the kingdom of our God.Doctrine and
Covenants 76:79I hope he does define what it means to him.
This puts Hunstman in an even more difficult position than Romney. All the
publicity around Romney was "Does America want a Mormon President",
whereas Huntsman runs the risk of having the media exploit his crisis of faith
in lieu of covering his political agenda. Ouch!Still, he has
politely indicated that he is in a crisis of faith, but would rather not discuss
it with the public. While a candidates faith does matter in my opinion (only
that the public ought to have the right to know), I think Huntsman has satisfied
that obligation. It should be clear to the public the Mormonism will not have a
tremendous influence on his policies or behavior, were he to become President.
The constitution is clear that you don't need a trial of your faith to run for
office. So Huntsman can state what his beliefs are, or tell us that is a
private issue and then focus on the politics.
Well, I think it's become PAINFULLY obvious to me that the reason Mr. Huntsman
is downplaying his tie with the church is because he thinks it'll help his
campaign. It'll be interesting to see what really happens when they pin him down
on his religion. Personally, I'm not sure why everyone has to know which church
he belongs to. But in the end, if the press won't relent on the questions about
his religious ties with the Mormon church, we'll see how steadfast he is with
his answers. Thanks for your comment California Steve. That puts
things into perspective.
I hope he is a Catholic now.. I would vote for him.
I like how of all the interesting things that were said about him in that
article, Deseret News picks this to write about. Seriously? This is what is
wrong with our state.
Many people feel this way including me. I do not define myself as LDS anymore
because, as you can see by most of the comments on this board, too many people
insist that you are either completely in or completely out of the Church. OK,
have it your way, I'm completely out. Nonetheless I'm proud of my ancient
heritage and believe most of today's Church leaders are wise and caring people
who preach ethical values that are useful to both believers and non-believers.
No I don't smoke, drink, or sleep around. I would be the perfect Mormon but I
don't believe in the Supernatural and I don't think religious leaders should be
above question. I'm not going to give money to ban Gay Marriage just because you
say so. I suspect I'm not alone.
MormonDem | 11:19 a.m. May 12, 2011Provo, UT Why would you
care about policy positions over personal issues if NO president actually sticks
to their campaign promises? I guess at least you know exactly what he's not
going to do but even still it would be nice to know what kind of integrity he's
going to bring to whatever he does.
I believe Huntsman is simply being honest.Many Mormons, while not
active in the faith, still hold on to cultural practices associated with
Mormonism.For example, I grew up in the LDS Church but am not active
in it now. While I don't desire organized religion in my life, I still
recognize the positive social lessons and cultural associations I gleaned from
my Mormon upbringing.Am i not culturally Mormon in that sense? It's
difficult to define.
Well said MormonDem. I don't agree that Huntsman should be backed into a corner
regarding his religion. I applaud his response and relate very well to his
stance. Many of us former missionaries have moved on in our lives, from blind
faith to educated and informed passive lds church members. Nothing wrong with
that in my mind.
The "you're with us or you're against us" culture of the LDS faith
creates this to be specific to what seems like this faith only. I believe this
is what causes the media to drill down on people such as Mr. Huntsman. Most
people still think that President Reagan was a religous person yet he attended
church something like one time during his eight years as president and that was
probably a photo-op.
It sounds like he doesn't want to offend devout LDS members (including his
parents) but that he isn't devout himself. I think many of us would appreciate
him stating such. I am sick of politicians who are always vague. Tell us where
you stand--on issues and in your personal life. (Maybe that's why Trump's
approach is a bit refreshing. Say it like it is for once.)Personally
I cannot vote for JH Jr. since I never cared for him as governor. I think he is
I am with "Livestrong", Maybe he is being totally honest. I come from
a long line of LDS faithful. Jon's father at one time came out and blasted the
church for being in competion with LDS business owners...ie..retail, farming,
etc. Maybe Jon is alot like myself, always a believer until I did my
homework. Found so many inconsistancies, that I no longer believe in the claims
being the only one and true church. The Jesus I know, wouldn't build
a mult-billion dollar elitest shopping and high rise condo project. He would
concentrate on the homeless, hungry and downtrodden in the valley of the great
Salt Lake and beyond. Yes, they do humanitarian projects, but two billion
dollars ???? That money originally came from faithful tithe payers !!!!!!!!
It was Reed Smoot, when offered the nomination for president a hundrend years
ago if he would renounce his religion, who said: I would rather be a Deacon in
my church than be President of the United States.Think about it Jon.
It's either "you're in or you're out" when it comes to the LDS faith.
Well, what is it, Jon boy? Just answer the questions. Dare to be forthright.
Some folks are suggesting or saying that Huntsman is ashamed of his LDS Faith.
I don't see a problem with his answer, "tough to define"; it's
probably the case he just doesn't consider himself a committed member of the LDS
Church. He probably has some very serious doubts, as I think he should.
Religion is divisive. Let's forget about religious beliefs and know people by
their fruits and their kindness. If people in your religion leaves, don't
attack them for it or look down on them. It's highly likely they have worked
out a very good way to live apart from any particular religion.
Time is typically a more liberal magazine. They just want everyone to believe
that Huntsman is the candidate that Democrats most fear because he is more like
a Democrat then the rest of the Republican field.I agree that
Huntsman is trying to be what 'he thinks' most of the voters want him to be.
Article-reader - You have to come back down to earth my friend. You are wrong
when you say 'you either believe the church is true or you don't.' Come on now,
you are more intelligent than that. You don't think that of the 13 million
members that there are varying degrees of belief within the church? You don't
have to think the church is 'true' to attend its services or bring your children
to teach them good values. The church could be un-true, and still teach good
things just like alot of other churches. So don't make blanket statements of
what you think all 13 million members must know or not now, because it doesn't
go well for your case that the church is 'true'. That term itself doesn't even
make sense. How can a church be 'true' ? A church can be good, can be right, but
true? What is true about it? Ease up on the black and white stuff, not everybody
falls into your black and white categories of belief.
As a fellow conservative, I don't understand why my ultra-con peers seem to get
wound up about the lamest things. If you even use the word RINO, think twice
about how you're limiting the scope of all conservatives. Just because not all
share your definition, they don't belong? Nice. The GOP can come in all shapes,
colors and sizes and variations of conservative. The sooner we recognize that,
the better and stronger we'll be as a *party*.Why does JHJ have to
go into detail about his precise feelings about the Mormon faith. Who's business
is that? If he's a staunch believer, or has found spiritual satisfaction is
other ways, let him keep that to himself. I don't see how it's relevant to
Well said, jemod!
Funny, everybody accuses him of lying and selling out his faith. Maybe he was
just being honest. Maybe he isn't sure of where he stands or exactly what he
believes. There are many different degrees of mormons. He stated that he is
proud of his mormon roots. Well, maybe that is as far as it goes with him and
that is fine. You can't call somebody a sellout of their religion if they simply
are that religion by heritage, but don't follow all of the teachings of that
faith. He is still mormon as in his name is on the records of the church, but
does he believe in all of the stuff, who knows? Not a big deal in my book.
I'm voting for Obama so it doesn't really matter to me, but I'd rather vote for
Huntsman, whose policy positions are clear while his personal issues are
ambiguous, than Romney, whose personal issues are clear but whose policy
positions are ambiguous.
We now know everything we need to know about Huntsman, the candidate -- his
positions are neither decipherable nor credible. They are designed to
bamboozle, rather than inform. They are stated in such a way that he can never
be held to account for any violation of them.Sounds like just more
of the same, to me.
"Tough to define?" Is you is or is you ain't? Not tough at all.
Chachie,Or maybe he's found a differnt path. Honestly, it's either
"your in or your out" when it comes to the LDS faith.
Well said, Chachi. This man appears to be a politician who will do or say
anything to be elected. It won't work. People don't respect this kind of thing.
I'd love to define it for him - He should call himself a lapsed Mormon or
former. Active members don't do and say the kind of things he does. He looks
like a political opportunist.
The reason I won't vote for him is "tough to define."
I agree that if Huntsman is still truly a believer but trying to deny it, then
that's stupid and wimpy. If, as it appears to me, he simply isn't as much of a
believer as his parents, or as much as he perhaps used to be, well, I don't
blame him for being honest. It doesn't not make him a good person just because
his faith is not as strong as it once was or has changed. For me,
I'm more impressed if he's just honest---with whatever his real beliefs really
He is a politician first. He could gain some good advice from Marie. Politics
isn't for Eternity. Well, maybe that's the primary difference between the CK and
the TKs: All the same perks, but no politicians in the CK. That makes me want to
be a better man.
True enough, Chachi. The question to ask is why he is distancing
himself from his faith. Is it because he thinks it will help him win the
election, or because he finds himself disagreeing with it?
I find it funny how he won't simply say that he no longer affiliated with the
LDS church. Not sure why he feels he has to dance around the issue other than
for election purposes. In that case he lost my interest in his quest and most
likely many others will do the same. I'm still angry he left one of the most
important State Department positions with little chanceo of being elected.
Obviously Huntsman is ashamed of his Mormon Faith and Church! No surprise given
his political history......Huntsman is a RINO! He would do better to say he
admires Harry Reid...
Funny, he just got done being an ambassador to china, yet how did he learn to
speak chinese? hmmmm. . . being a missionary for the LDS church. Now he's
selling his religion for politics. Is this a classic example of a politician
being afraid to be drawn in black and white? You either believe the church is
true, or you don't. . . you can't do both Mr Huntsman. It was a pretty easy
If Huntsman thinks he'll make himself more popular by publicly distancing
himself from his faith, he's wrong. He'll just look like a political
opportunist. It's more respectable to stand up for unpopular beliefs than to
very publicly make a point of buckling under pressure.