Campaign advisers spin faith into values for Obama and Romney

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Social Mod Fiscal Con West Jordan, UT
    Oct. 11, 2012 10:23 a.m.

    What I have personally come up with re Romney:
    1. Romney is a great man. His moral values are strong, and he has shown a strong commitment to service throughout his life. He understands people at a level most of us never will (being a Bishop and Stake President provide training in this very few other situations can). He truly wants to do what is best for this country.
    2. Romney has a clear understanding of what it is to be American. He understands the culture that created the greatest nation on earth, and he believes that culture still exists in the hearts of the American people. He is a free-market entrepreneur who knows what it takes to get control of finances and turn them around. He is a leader of men who knows how to lead from the heart as well as the mind, and can get tough when the job requires it.

  • Social Mod Fiscal Con West Jordan, UT
    Oct. 11, 2012 10:18 a.m.

    If Obama claims to be Christian, it is not our place to nay-say that. The only defensible definition of "Christian" is that someone claims to be one. To say otherwise is to begin judging the orthodoxy of another person's faith.
    Instead, we must judge the candidate's values and political views based on their actions and history.
    What I have personally come up with re Obama:
    1. Obama is a good man. His moral values are strong, and he is trying to do what he believes is best for this country.
    2. Obama has a completely screwed up sense of what is right for this country. He is a keynesian and a moderate marxist. He believes that the bigger the federal goverment is, the better. He believes that given a tough situation, Americans are not capable of showing their greatness, so the government must coddle and protect them from the hard things in life.

  • ute alumni Tengoku, UT
    Oct. 10, 2012 9:20 a.m.

    This is easy, Obama has no values to spin.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 9, 2012 10:48 a.m.

    "One thing we do know however, is that he is not a Christian."

    You know, I would think (mind if I assume your religion for a second?) that a member of a Christian denomination that is frequently attacked from other Christian groups as not being Christian or being a corrupted version of Christianity... or some nonsense like that... I would think that a member of such a church would not turn around and make the same sort of attacks on other Christians.

  • A Scientist Provo, UT
    Oct. 9, 2012 10:43 a.m.

    Nowhere in the Constitution, nor in the commentary on it by the most esteemed minds, are Churches guaranteed freedom of speech. Individuals, yes, but not Churches.

    Churches are not people my friend. But we understand if you Romney supporters don't quite get that (anyone care for some more counterfeit intelligence?).

  • bigelhad TAYLORSVILLE, UT
    Oct. 8, 2012 6:31 p.m.

    I base my decisions more on a person's morals than I do on their values. The first debate showed me that Mitt can make a stronger left turn then most NASCAR divers. His continual flip-flopping on where he stands on the issues has now lost my vote. He has no integrity (moral decision making) and values money more than people ( values). People often have religious values but forget their morality when it comes to treating their fellow man and community.

  • Counter Intelligence Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 8, 2012 9:56 a.m.

    @A Scientist
    Once again in your irreligious zealotry you got it wrong. The First Amendment provides for freedom of speech for churches just as much as it does everyone else; regardless of how much you may hate them.

  • JWB Kaysville, UT
    Oct. 8, 2012 8:05 a.m.

    As a great book states, "By their works, you will know them."

    People are born with talents and abilities that carry into their whole life. You cannot take those skills and learned, not only inborn abilities, knowledge to help people and yourself in this life. Those inate feelins are solidified by family members are you are preparing for life and really, no one can take those from you. God gave them to us to make the world better and we have the choice to use or not use them but only to a certain degree.

    We cannot spoil God's plan but we can choose to make our own life miserable, which in turn makes it worse for our parents, brothers and sisters and humanity as a whole.

    Negative isn't part of the plan for us but we can't get rid of the positive as those parts shine on us and on God's creations.

    Thank goodness we are not left alone, even in politics. People would have us believe that politics and religion should not be discussed. Now it is that people of real Faith should not show it in any form. Let your light so Shine!

  • A Scientist Provo, UT
    Oct. 8, 2012 7:12 a.m.

    Hutterite is NOT the only one. not by a long shot.

    Citizens must have freedom of speech. But to simplistically insist that "Religion must have a public voice" ignores not only the Constitution, but the interpretation and conventions that have guided us for centuries. Those interpretations and conventions, made and propagated by the best legal and political minds in American history, can accurately be summarized as "There should be a wall of separation between Church and State", and there should never be even the slightest hint of an "establishment of religion" by government or public entities.

    Citizens are guaranteed certain rights. But Religions are corporations. Insisting that religions should have the unfettered right to do as they please (in the name of "religious freedom"), including meddling in political, governmental, legal, and public affairs, is no different than saying, "Churches are people, my friend"!

    While we do not want government meddling in religion, and we don't want religion meddling in Government by "cultivating candidates for office", or lobbying, or buying politicians, or manipulating legislation in their favor, or legislating away the rights of minority groups.

  • Caprice PROVIDENCE, UT
    Oct. 8, 2012 1:45 a.m.

    The amount of focus on Mitt Romney's religion has been extremely unfair and unbalanced in comparison to Obama's. Lucky for Obama that no one has bothered or been successful at determining what his religion is since he gives so many mixed messages. One thing we do know however, is that he is not a Christian.

  • PTM ,
    Oct. 8, 2012 12:56 a.m.

    OWL, you've got it wrong, Mitt Romney is not a Marxist!

  • Utejazz West Valley City, UT
    Oct. 7, 2012 10:27 p.m.


  • the truth Holladay, UT
    Oct. 7, 2012 5:32 p.m.


    You are the only one.

    The founding fathers founded this nation on religious liberty.
    So man may free express their beliefs, values, principles and ideas in the public arena which most certainly included religious.

    When you begin limiting which morals, values, beliefs, ideas that can be heard in the public arena,

    or limiting organization or groups,

    when you start picking and choosing who can participate in the public arena,

    then you most certainly have lost freedom.

    While we do not want government meddling in religion,

    We do not want to any person or however the people may organize themselves, no matter how they may think or believe forbidden from the public square.

    If you stop one person or group what will stop you or government from stopping other persons or groups?

    The founding fathers never had any intent of stopping any religion or religious persons from speaking in the public square.

    Do you value freedom and liberty for all or for none?

    Religion must have a public voice.

  • USA Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 7, 2012 4:44 p.m.

    It is wonderful that we have two equally God-fearing men, Mitt Romney and President Obama, to vote for in this election.

  • Owl Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 7, 2012 4:29 p.m.

    Everyone's ethos is based on values of some origin. One persons ideology is not automatically unacceptable because it is religious based and another's acceptable because it is not. I don't want to be in the partnership of some candidates and their values, secular or religious. Fabian collective mentality is the guiding principle of one presidential candidate and individual effort the other. The Marxist deity was flawed, faith-based sociology which is less defensible than theism. Marx' was the breatest distortion.

  • BYUalum South Jordan, UT
    Oct. 7, 2012 4:21 p.m.

    I would welcome a new president who I know would invoke the blessings of God each and every day to help him in the important decision making for the welfare of our people and our country. If it was good enough for Abraham Lincoln and others, why not for Mitt Romney? God-fearing men established the Declaration of Independence. They sought and received His help as they set out the U.S. Constitution. We should never apologize for being a God-fearing nation no matter what some may say.

    God bless America! Romney-Ryan 2012

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    Oct. 7, 2012 1:55 p.m.

    Fortunately, values can exist without the distortion of religion. Religion should be a private relationship between the candidate and their relationship with what they percieve to be god. I don't want in on that relationship, nor do I want my public institutions in that relationship.