obama and company will attack the lds church at some point just like ted kennedy
did when he was behind to Mitt in the senate race. it worked for teddy. I hope
americans are smart enough to see through it this time.
ute alumni,It appears you are still fighting an invisible Obama.
Your credibility drops with each of your posts.Why not defend Obama
when his religion is attacked? Go BYU!
"Why not defend Obama when his religion is attacked?"Other
than the extreme leftists (including Obama) who want God wiped out of
everything, Who is attacking Obama's religion?? Or better yet, WHAT is his
religion? Seems to me, the only question about "Obama's religion"
is "What is it"??? Some say he is Christian, and some say he is Muslim,
depending on the day and how the wind is blowing.
To Whos Life RU Living? 9:59 a.m. Sept. 11, 2012ute alumni,It appears you are still fighting an invisible Obama. Your credibility drops
with each of your posts.Why not defend Obama when his religion is
attacked? Go BYU!---------------------Agreed. The President is a Christian, despite what the hate merchants try to
claim. Sad that they would do so.
I hope the genuinely curious don't just stop at the officially approved
sanitised information available from church PR. There's a lot more
interesting stuff on the church than that out there.
At the minimum, even if mitt looses, we still have spread the word to the
world.So in the end, the lord is happy.That's pretty much the
purpose folks.Mitt, wins missionary of the month!
I think that it would be political suicide for obama to demean Romneys religion,
he saw what happened to the other republican candidates when they did the same.
@ute alumniHigh-risk ideas like attacking someone's faith are only
done by campaigns who are losing and Obama leads by almost 3 points in the RCP
average. His team isn't stupid, they already know attacks on faith would be
worthless anyway.@Tom in CAHe's a protestant. The fact
you even ask what his religion is... that's an attack on his religion,
because it doesn't take much observation to know the answer. He's not
a Muslim or an Atheist, he's a semi-active attending protestant, quite
possibly the most common religious status in America.
This is not good news for Romney, and yet he has no one to blame but himself.
Romney has shied away from doing any good job of owning his faith proudly. He
has tried to find common ground with the religious views of the GOP mainstream,
and as a result, most Americans have no idea what he actually believes. He is so
worried about saying anything that the base will find "controversial"
that all he can do is talk in vagaries. Given the makeup of most of
the info related to Mormonism that is available online, that information would
most likely lead the person to NOT want to cast a vote for Mitt or have a
favorable opinion of the LDS church.I will leave it up to the reader
to decide if this is unfair, or justly deserved.
O.K.It's time for some fun. How do we not know Mitt Romney is
secretly a Muslim (which there would be nothing wrong with incidentally)? Maybe
the LDS thing is just a cover just like Obama's Christianity is a cover.
How do we know? How do we know! I think Mitt Romney is trying to take away our
guns...how do we know? Are we sure we Mitt Romney was born in Michigan--I
haven't seen his birth certificate--no not a copy, I want the real one.
This paranoia about Obama (Obama Derangement Syndrome) has got to
stop--it's just not healthy. You don't have to like him or agree
about his political stances, but to believe that he is a "foreigner"
with a design to destroy America is really out there.I hope people
don't just look at one person like Mitt Romney, I hope they see a variety
of LDS people in the spotlight: Harry Reid, Jon Huntsman Jr., Bryce Harper,
Andy Reid, Thomas S. Monson, etc. and see that LDS people are very much their
own people, and that the LDS religion is far from a cult.
"The fact you even ask what his religion is... that's an attack on his
religion ..."alt134 - are you being serious, or is that just a
joke?? So, to ask any question is "an attack", is that right??
Romney's religion should be a non-issue, just like Obama's religion
should be a non-issue. I haven't seen any Democrats making an issue of
Romney's religion. For a while some of his primary opponents or their
supporters (especially the Christian religious right) were. On the other hand,
I've seen LOTS of Republicans or their supporters making a big issue of
Obama's religion - including some commenters here. Hypocrisy, much?
What reason is there for the Deseret News to post a link to a Fox News report
citing "my sources" (unnamed) who reportedly informed the author that
David Axelrod was discussing a "nuclear option" (Fox News’ term,
not Axelrod's) of "unleashing an attack on Romney’s Mormon faith
via the mainstream media."That’s a loaded charge to be
making using ANY source, much less one who is allowed to remain unnamed.
So, Tom in CA, if you are LDS I assume you welcome with delight all the people
who want to know if you are really a Christian. You are not offended. No!
They are only asking a question! That the question implies that they don't
think you are Christian is absolutely fine with you. You never complain about
anyone who says LDS people are not Christian. You tell all your LDS friend,
"They are not attacking us, they are only asking a simple question!"
Yesterday Romney promised backers from the religious rights that he would keep
God in his platform and on coins and currency. That makes Obama the only
candidate in the race who is not making religion an issue.
The other day, I was reading a "liberal" thread on a "liberal"
chat board...The topic of Mitt Romney being a"Mormon" came
up, the next 72 replies and comments went something along these lines
---"I thought Mormons were supposed to tell the truth?""Isn't lying a sin in the Mormon Church?""I
don't think he is a practicing Mormon. The Mormons I know show honor and
integrity - Mitt Romney is a flip-flopper, he doesn't show any of
that.""Sure he's a family man, Mormons believe in
families. He's just so happens to also be a selfish, greedy, self-serving
cut-throat businessman. Hardly a meek and humble Christian. Like to fake TV
evangelists --- it all show, and Jesus is the back drop for making
money."If he was a Missionary, my Mission President would
have sent him home early for not setting a very good example.
My Catholic grandmother told me at a very young age that a person's
religion was private, personal and intimate. Why politicians continue to pander
to xyz religious group is beyond me and those that wear it on their sleeves for
political gain seem disingenuous at best. This Nation was not only
founded on religious freedom but freedom from religion within our government.
No where is God mentioned in the Constitution or Bill of Rights.
"Nature's God" is used once in the Declaration of Independence. The
primary founders of our Constitution were theistic rationalists not evangelists
and in 1776, fewer than 30% of Americans attended a church. The
candidates should constantly remember that they represent a country with diverse
religious and cultural mores. Pandering to one group only creates division and
not unity and the Presidential race should be free from that.
BTW - Seriously, I have a question....Let's pretend for a
minute that Mitt Romney actually DOES win the election in November.Does he stop attending weekly Sacrament Meetings and stop attending the
Temple?, orDoes the Secret Service have to be 100% Temple worthy
Mormons and the entire building swept before, during and after?I
don't think they allow armed gurads and sniper rifles in Church or Temples.
Would it be an attack on his faith to ask Romney how closely he intends to
follow the 14 fundamentals of following the prophet? The 9th and tenth
fundamentals could be troubling to some.F-9 The prophet can receive
revelation on any matter—temporal or spiritual. F-10 The prophet may
well advise on civic matters.Would Romney obey the prophet if Monson
advised him on civic matters?
@LDS Liberal"If he was a Missionary, my Mission President
would have sent him home early for not setting a very good example."Sounds like you had an incredibly strict mission president. I have
never heard someone getting sent home for 'not being a very good
example.' Is donating millions to charity not being a good example? Is
being successful not being a good example? And since when do liberals care
about setting a good example. You voted for a president who had an affair with
a 21 year old intern. LDS Liberal, if you are going to make an
argument against Mitt Romney's policies, fine. That's an honest
debate. If you are going to try to cast him as some sort of fundamentally bad
person, you have no argument what so ever. Nobody is buying it. Harry Reid
bore false witness against Romney. As a Latter-day Saint, that should trouble
@Tom in CA"to ask any question is "an attack", is that
right??"No. But asking a question for which there is a clear,
provided answer that has repeatedly been stated... is either an attack or
outright ignorance. I thought we all knew who Rev. Wright was and that Obama
spent 20 years there (at least occasionally showing up). But no, some people
insist that Wright's church isn't Christian. Some people insist
Obama's a Muslim. Others insist he's an atheist. I'm just going
to go with the religious institutions he intends (Christian) and what he says he
is (Christian). What sort of reason would there be for someone to think
otherwise unless they legit haven't been paying attention... or they want
to plant the idea that Obama is some sort of "other" (of course this
option would also be bigoted against Muslims or atheists)? If
someone questioned whether or not Romney was part of the polygamist sect
it'd be It's easy to look up so to suggest otherwise is either someone
being ignorant on the matter... or a means of trying to attack him.
I am interested in replacing a floundering president with someone who has some
idea on the economy and jobs. Religion is not the issue in this election and
only detracts from discussion on the critical problems of our time. It is much
easier to talk about Mr. Romney's tithing than the 23 million unemployed.
@Alt134YOU WROTE:"He's a protestant."MY
RESPONSE: Alt134, Protestant isn't a religion. Christianity is a
religion. "Protestant" is a denomination of the Christian Religion -
please see the Wikipedia article on "Protestantism" if you have any
questions on this. And in a recent Huntington Post Interview Mr.
Obama self-identified like this: "President Obama: First and
foremost, my Christian faith gives me a perspective and security that I
don’t think I would have otherwise: That I am loved. That, at the end of
the day, God is in control -- and my main responsibility is to love God with all
of my heart, soul and mind, and to love my neighbor as myself. Now, I
don’t always live up to that standard, but it is a standard I am always
pursuing."(Huffington Post 08/21/2012) In the same
interview he states that he attends service at the National Cathedral which is a
cathedral of the Episcopal Church. However, in Chicago he attended Trinity
United Church of Christ. Therefore, Mr. Obama appears to be a non-denominational
Lds liberal.I agree with all your comments, cause I'm diet Mormon,
your new friend.Together we can fight to make sure Obama gets elected in
Mr_ITLAKE FOREST, CA - you are correct. And now even alt134, who was so
clear on the issue, is asking questions.
@Mr_IT and Tom in CAThe Episcopal Church and Trinity United Church of
Christ are both Protestant Christian churches. And Tom... I'm
not asking questions... Obama is clearly a Christian that attends various
protestant, christian churches. That's just a fact. Calling him Protestant
infers a sense of non-denominationalism since I am not specifying a particular
denomination (since protestant is a category of Christianity, not a
denomination) much like calling someone a Christian doesn't tell you what
denomination, if any, they belong to.
Since this is a national election, I believe it would not be as likely to
happen. South Carolina and Massachusetts and Arkansas probably would but other
states may not be as strong in doing that.Obama has done some odd
things and isn't necessarily rational when it comes to politics. He spends
a lot of time campaigning, which then leaves him open to make mistakes and then
Democratic strategists have discussed "what might be called the nuclear
option: unleashing an attack on Romney's Mormon faith via the mainstream
media."She adds: "There has been no indication of that kind
of attack yet."No, it's been far more subtle than that.
There have been articles rife with half-truths (Bloomberg), TV programs that
focused on LDS fringe and Ex-LDS as sources (Rock Center) and a variety of other
deceptive liberal media devices to keep that question of "weirdness" out
there, just as the Obama campaign stated they would do as soon as Mr. Romney
became the presumptive nominee.Outright attacks? No, they are far
too devious for that.....
fkratz;You forget where the Declaration mentions that men are
"endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights".
"Craig ClarkBoulder, COYesterday Romney promised backers from
the religious rights that he would keep God in his platform and on coins and
currency. That makes Obama the only candidate in the race who is not making
religion an issue."Craig, "God" on coins and currency is
not Religion. Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, Christians all believe in a God or
gods. "God" on coins and currency is a reflection of our overwhelmingly
religious populace. Even those who never attend church regularly invoke the
name of God. (Although not always appropriately).
@Alt134 I find this very interesting. When I, an Evangelical, try to
categorize Mormons by their observed behavior I'm reprimanded by them for
doing so and am told that I'm ignorant of your religion. I'm told that
ONLY Mormons really understand their religion. However, when I
produce evidence that demonstrates that your categorizing of Barak Obama's
religion as "Protestant" is in error and that he correctly belongs in
the box labeled "Non-Denominational Christian" you reprimand me for
being ignorant of my own religion. I see a pattern here! Can you see
how it would be easy to conclude that in the eyes of Mormons we Evangelicals are
just an ignorant, uninformed lot who need to subjugate ourselves to the superior
"light and knowledge" of Mormons.Or put another way, there
seems to be one set of rules for Mormons and another for everyone else.