Report: Mitt to give major speech on Mormonism on Thursday
posted at 4:42 pm on December 2, 2007 by Allahpundit
So says Mark Halperin, citing a Romney advisor. Two other Romney advisors told Beliefnet earlier this week that any speech on the subject would be delayed until next year because, after all, if it ain’t broke why fix it?
“A lot of people were talking about doing it before Thanksgiving and the holidays, but then we moved up in the polls, including in South Carolina,” a senior Romney advisor tells Beliefnet. “So the thinking became that the timing [for a speech on religion] was not as rushed.”
Well, now it’s broke. So they’re going to try to fix it.
Halperin breaks it down here. Exit question: Can Mitt get away with a generalized JFK-esque “it just doesn’t matter” speech? I’m guessing … no.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
Should be fun. I’m betting it’s more a “we’re more alike than we are different” message rather than a discussion of the particulars of LDS.
Slublog on December 2, 2007 at 4:46 PM
Yeah, I don’t think a discussion of the particulars of LDS will serve him well.
Allahpundit on December 2, 2007 at 4:49 PM
My prediction: He does precisely that, and it goes nowhere. This election has me in a foul mood lately. I’m not even a Romney fan, and I’m appalled he has to jump hoops doing this crap.
Bad Candy on December 2, 2007 at 4:50 PM
You have yet to catch the Huckabee fevah, I see.
HUCKABEEEEE!!!
Slublog on December 2, 2007 at 4:53 PM
Dammit…
Bad Candy on December 2, 2007 at 4:55 PM
Mitt is a natural politician, but mormonism dooms his electoral chances in the end. Mormon theology basically beleives that you can become a god through works on earth. Think about how the left would use that against him, the most powerful man in the world. no doubt the MSM would run stories on the religion and interview fundamentalist from Bob Jones to give their take on mormon theology…..I doubt they will have any problem with doing this too, since mormons vote Republican overwhelmingly. Though it may put Harry Reid in an awkard spot….but the point will be to make religious conservatives weary of him and stay home, and it will have an effect.
I also expect the South Park episode on the religion to get alot of run……’dumb da dumb dumb dumb’
jp on December 2, 2007 at 4:55 PM
Seems, you me and Allah have this thread all to ourselves.
Bad Candy on December 2, 2007 at 4:56 PM
Guess not.
Bad Candy on December 2, 2007 at 4:57 PM
I blame the NFL.
Slublog on December 2, 2007 at 4:58 PM
Everybody keeps talking about Rudy losing support when the base finds out he’s pro-choice. I’ve always wondered, given Mitt’s lower name recognition, if those same voters know he’s a Mormon.
Big S on December 2, 2007 at 4:59 PM
That episode was a good one, and actually, the point at the end was that even if you thought the beliefs that Mormons carry was silly, they’re overall decent people, which is quite fitting.
As for the Left, yeah, but they can’t press that too hard, or it looks like they’re bullying, and Mitt would get sympathy.
Bad Candy on December 2, 2007 at 5:02 PM
Well, I’m a bit surprised he is going to do it this early. But, of course, if he doesn’t do it ‘now’ there might not be a political tomorrow for him.
Spirit of 1776 on December 2, 2007 at 5:02 PM
yeah, but I expect them to use the internet and ‘indepedent bloggers” to do it. The internet is going to make this election different than any before it, I saw on fox today how the DNC is encouraging grass roots internet attack ads.
jp on December 2, 2007 at 5:05 PM
Ace has a pretty good post “in defense of Mormonism”:
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/245027.php
See also Harold Bloom’s book, “The American Religion”. If Mitt were to give a speech emphasizing how Mormon thought and American “myth” go together I think it would resonate strongly and surprise at lot of people.
WasatchMan on December 2, 2007 at 5:05 PM
There is nothing he will be able to do to say to convince evangelicals that he is not neck-deep in the secret society of Mormonism.
Valiant on December 2, 2007 at 5:05 PM
Dude, everyone knows he’s a Mormon, you say Mitt, and the first thing that comes to mind in 95% of people’s heads is Mormonism.
Beyond that, its probably a big part of why Huck is moving up.
Blech.
Bad Candy on December 2, 2007 at 5:06 PM
I’ve still yet to see anyone show me what decision he could make as President, based on Moronism, that would endanger the country….
and please don’t go all Star Trek on your response.
Limerick on December 2, 2007 at 5:07 PM
If he really is a Moron, I imagine he could do a lot of damamge.
Big S on December 2, 2007 at 5:09 PM
So far the electorate, the one outside of the core cronies, the media and the political blogs, are not yest awake – they’re just barely cracking their eyes open to next year. Any speech by him, regardless of what he’ll say, will emphasize to them only one thing “he’s a Mormon”.
Entelechy on December 2, 2007 at 5:09 PM
Beam me up a dozen wives from Rigel 7, Scotty.
Valiant on December 2, 2007 at 5:09 PM
Limerick on December 2, 2007 at 5:07 PM
Dearest Limerick, how many so far? Cheers!
I don’t want to correlate the two for you, lest someone get offended.
Entelechy on December 2, 2007 at 5:12 PM
Ace isn’t running for President, and he’s an Ewok, not a Trek character.
Bad Candy on December 2, 2007 at 5:12 PM
S/b “are not yet awake” – stuck on Moronism :)
Entelechy on December 2, 2007 at 5:13 PM
Some would argue that Mitt would not even be the first Moron President. I don’t get why he feels he needs to give a speech about it.
Big S on December 2, 2007 at 5:15 PM
In general, true, but I think Iowa and South Carolina are paying attention. IFthe speech would have the effect he hopes for, then it is his one trump card. I can’t imagine he’d want to play it except at the point with its most potential to improve the his chances.
If he plays it now (which remains to be seen; in the last NR Byron York’s interview said not now) that means he think Huck can sink him in Iowa and SC.
Spirit of 1776 on December 2, 2007 at 5:19 PM
Exactly. He’ll do as well with that as he Giuliani does nuancing his stance on social issues.
Theworldisnotenough on December 2, 2007 at 5:23 PM
Well, it’s on then. Be interested to see how the plays out.
Spirit of 1776 on December 2, 2007 at 5:25 PM
I’m still trying to figure if the angel “Moroni” is a typo.
Missing “c” at the end or not?
Mitt should keep it superficial and “Christian” or he’ll only attract attention to the mass of bizarrities couched within the Book of Mormon and its odd earthly history.
profitsbeard on December 2, 2007 at 5:28 PM
He’s got a better chance, as it depends on how receptive voters are to that message. Culturally, evangelicals and Mormons have quite a bit in common. If he can focus on those similarities that, along with Huckabee’s terrible fiscal record, it will help him in more secular New Hampshire.
Once New Hampshire voters learn about Huckabee’s tax record, he’ll plummet there.
Slublog on December 2, 2007 at 5:36 PM
Right. At any other time, but not now, during the hottest debate about the WoT, Islamofascism, not much happening in the moderate Muslim world, thus all being a bit suspect…The next question in a debate, to him, will be “Gov. Romney, if you believe us to be tolerant of Mormonism, would you support a Muslim president of the U.S. of A. at this time?”
“Mh…well,…this is a country with great religious tolerance…but, we have a war to fight, especially winning hearts and minds…and I don’t know if this is the most opportune moment for a Muslim leader of the free world…” or something similar.
Entelechy on December 2, 2007 at 5:36 PM
Mitt is going to have to walk a fine line if he in fact will give a major speech concerning his Mormonism. For I think he could get into trouble if a speech concerning his religion reached a level of specificity and attention that has yet been reached with any policy speech.
Weight of Glory on December 2, 2007 at 5:38 PM
If he’s completely vague about what Mormons believe he’ll do well. Most people don’t know and don’t care what the LDS church teaches or believes in. The nanosecond that he gets into actual Mormon theology he’s doomed. It’s so bizarre that it’s off putting to even the irreligious.
Mojave Mark on December 2, 2007 at 5:43 PM
Mitt Romney’s gonna explain the Mormons
Dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb.
mram on December 2, 2007 at 5:54 PM
Give ‘em hell, Mitt!!
madmonkphotog on December 2, 2007 at 6:05 PM
mram on December 2, 2007 at 5:54 PM
Haha. First thing I thought, as well.
Big S on December 2, 2007 at 6:09 PM
If Republicans reject Mitt because he is LDS, then I wash my hands of the Republican party as they will be revealed as gibots.
MB4 on December 2, 2007 at 6:10 PM
Yes, alone among all the religions on the planet earth, Mormons have funny beliefs.
MB4 on December 2, 2007 at 6:16 PM
From David S. Broder who is very well known for looking out for the best interests of Republicans and Conservatives!!!
Republicans would be wise to tab McCain and Huckabee
MB4 on December 2, 2007 at 6:18 PM
Am I giboted if I hate Morons?
Big S on December 2, 2007 at 6:18 PM
Wow. What a broad generalization. Care to explain in any more detail?
If this is true, then evangelicals truly are the “sheeple” that we deride so much, and I truly pity people so ignorant. What is this “secret society?”
If the general populous has more character than the evangelicals, then this might not be such a bad thing. After all, on this site, there have been numerous digs at the religious beliefs, but people seem to be pretty much in agreement that we “Mormons” are actually pretty decent people.
In the end, the choice on this issue become whether the “South” is really going to revert back to the Jim Crow Era. Only instead of race as the taboo, it has become religion.
Troy Rasmussen on December 2, 2007 at 6:24 PM
Oh the possibilities with this one.
But it is Sunday.
MB4 on December 2, 2007 at 6:27 PM
MB4 on December 2, 2007 at 6:27 PM
Big S on December 2, 2007 at 6:47 PM
Whew. What would we do without David Broder looking out for us?
Slublog on December 2, 2007 at 6:56 PM
See The Mormon Church and Freemasonry.
Although I do not have serious problems with the Book of Mormon or Pearl of Great Price, You have to be a loon to believe and practice the Mormon Doctrine & Covenants which the modern church is based on.
The stuff is right up there with Marshall Applewhite, Scientology, insert your cult here. My president will not believe in such nonsense.
As has been pointed out ad nauseum on HA, the Jesus Christ of Mormons is not the Jesus Christ of the Bible.
Valiant on December 2, 2007 at 6:57 PM
Oh lordy, Huckabee is the new Fred Thompson…
*aaaaarrrrgggggghhhh!*
BKennedy on December 2, 2007 at 7:01 PM
Only in his wildest dreams. :-)
The Huckster would be okay, but better the Fred.
Mojave Mark on December 2, 2007 at 7:09 PM
Yes, most Mormons are decent people. It’s their beliefs the rest have an issue with.
I don’t agree with it, I just pointed out that he’d be better off not speaking at all about it, as I see no benefit to him in it.
Entelechy on December 2, 2007 at 7:29 PM
Yeah, lets all root for Huckabee to win the nomination. The guy stands no chance of winning a general election, and only guarantees the Ice Queen and Slimey Bill another eight years in the White House…
stacman on December 2, 2007 at 7:32 PM
Wow, is everyone drunk?
shooter on December 2, 2007 at 7:34 PM
I was told by a Sage One,
“Your enemies will never accept your explanation
and your friends will never need one.”
Beto Ochoa on December 2, 2007 at 7:50 PM
I’m just waiting for some democrat to say we should keep religion out of politics…after they leave a black-oriented church and fake a twang, of course.
SouthernGent on December 2, 2007 at 7:58 PM
ROFL…..come on all….you know I can spell (or type)…..
great Caesar’s ghost! I better stick to watching football.
:)
Cheers!
Limerick on December 2, 2007 at 8:08 PM
Is this where he tries to pretend that Mormons are Christians and that he is a committed “Christian”… but that Mormonism won’t guide his presidency anyway?
What ever he says, he’ll be sure to flip flop 180 degrees on it a few weeks later.
Warner Todd Huston on December 2, 2007 at 8:20 PM
Who is your President right now.
Give me a B, give me a U, give me an S, give me an H.
BUSH!
George Bush says he speaks to god every day, and Christians love him for it. If George Bush said he spoke to god through his hair dryer, they would think he was mad. I fail to see how the addition of a hair dryer would make it any more absurd.
MB4 on December 2, 2007 at 8:24 PM
If he can win the R nomination against the stream, he can win the general. Don’t underestimate the power of the dark side…er charisma.
Spirit of 1776 on December 2, 2007 at 8:27 PM
I would have agreed with you but my guess is that his private polls, and they pretty much all take them, must now say otherwise.
MB4 on December 2, 2007 at 8:28 PM
Define drunk.
MB4 on December 2, 2007 at 8:29 PM
Mitt’s only hope is to go a mile wide and inch deep, except w/o the mile wide part.
It seems to me he’s aiming at his own foot here, but I’m no Mitt fan. Fire away!
TexasDan on December 2, 2007 at 9:25 PM
It’s the latest drinking game. Everyone tries to describe their theology, and when the guy talking says something that violates some fundamental truth of your faith, you have to toss one back.
pedestrian on December 2, 2007 at 9:27 PM
Come on! It was Freudian, and you know it. I gave you an out with the beer, and you claim “football”. Game over! Kidding, love,
Entelechy on December 2, 2007 at 9:33 PM
Exaltation, Man Becoming a God
jp on December 2, 2007 at 9:46 PM
It might be better if had the Tabernacle Choir behind him!!
SouthernGent on December 2, 2007 at 10:01 PM
Did you see them on UNC-TV? today?
Valiant on December 2, 2007 at 10:12 PM
The hair dryer is not in the Word of God, but I get your point.
Valiant on December 2, 2007 at 10:15 PM
Will there be an alter call?
ackrite55 on December 2, 2007 at 10:17 PM
There are three of those campaigns already;) Edwards wants meaningful change of all of Washington, Obama wants hopeful change, and Hillary wants most everything the same with just a little bit of change.
There may also be an altar call. When is Hillary doing her next church + accent bit?
Spirit of 1776 on December 2, 2007 at 10:21 PM
What God lacks is convictions — stability of character. He ought to be a Lutheran, an Evangelical, a Mormon or a Catholic or something — not try to be everything.
- Mark Twain,
MB4 on December 2, 2007 at 10:31 PM
A few years ago I was on a business trip to Salt Lake City, and stayed at a hotel within walking distance from the Mormon activities/center. Every night we visited something else, while politely being accosted to convert. One night I was privileged to sit in the audience while the Tabernacle Choir rehearsed, in the smaller, older building. Across the street is the new and very large auditorium where they perform. Most impressive is the translations system at every chair, for just about any language in the world. It’s really incredible.
Entelechy on December 2, 2007 at 10:42 PM
A speech on ‘Mormonism’. I wish this weren’t necessary. Now will Obama and Hillary give us a speech on their religions too?
petefrt on December 2, 2007 at 11:01 PM
Good thing that Lincoln did not have to give a speech on his religious views.
MB4 on December 2, 2007 at 11:09 PM
I asked if you could elaborate and this is what you give me? An anti-mormon website? This is the best you can do? This is not a valid argument. Should I quote Christopher Hitchens to describe what “mainstream” Christians believe? Or Richard Dawkins? I don’t think you’d appreciate that. Mix one part truth to four parts distortion and, VOILA!! Christiandefense.org!! Good one jp.
Personally, I find more comfort in knowing that God wants us to continually progress after this life with the hope that, in the Eons to come, maybe, just maybe, I may attain his level of perfection.
What do you think happens after we die?
Troy Rasmussen on December 2, 2007 at 11:25 PM
Reading these postings…i have come the conclusion…what B.S. all this bantering about a man’s religion. For you Bush fans, your in luck, you can vote for Huckabee.
oldernslower on December 2, 2007 at 11:28 PM
Did you see them on UNC-TV? today?Valiant on December 2, 2007 at 10:12 PM
No, I rarely watch UNC-TV (PBS). I did catch Suze Orman for a minute, though the other day on there.
SouthernGent on December 2, 2007 at 11:31 PM
Maybe they can air the South Park episode on Mormons before?
Hening on December 2, 2007 at 11:38 PM
They were on PBS today for the fundraiser. Quite good. I thought you might have seen it.
Valiant on December 3, 2007 at 12:08 AM
Why quote those two nobodies when you could quote Jefferson or Madison?
MB4 on December 3, 2007 at 12:14 AM
Another pious populist, William Jennings Bryan, argued that William Howard Taft, his opponent in the 1908 presidential election, was unfit to be president because he was a Unitarian, a persuasion sometimes defined as the belief that there is at most one God. The electorate chose to run the risk of entrusting the presidency to someone skeptical about the doctrine of the Trinity.
If Huckabee succeeds in derailing Romney’s campaign by raising a religious test for presidential eligibility, that will be clarifying: In one particular, America was more enlightened a century ago.
- George Will
MB4 on December 3, 2007 at 1:36 AM
I wonder if all those who describe Mormon beliefs as “bizarre”, “moronic”, etc., also condemn the beliefs of Roman Catholics as bizarre and moronic. (I personally don’t believe either set of teachings.) No need to list the corresponding details of all beliefs here, accepted totally on faith, by all the world’s major religions. They involve revered cows, monkeys, turtles, etc.
As Robert Heinlein so famously pointed out in “Stranger in a Strange Land”, Roman Catholics are taught that, during communion, ‘wine’ and bread actually are transformed into the blood and flesh of Christ. Heinlein described this as “ritual cannibalism.” Not to mention transmutation. Sounds harsh, doesn’t it? Maybe even ‘bizarre’? I don’t believe it – but Roman Catholics do.
If belief in ritual cannibalism and transmutation didn’t hurt Kennedy, why should a few golden tablets in upstate New York hurt Romney?
Why not concentrate on a candidate’s POLITICAL beliefs? Romney is making a big mistake if he makes this speech. Let’s talk POLITICS – like the current unfair trade agreements, illegal immigration, etc.
fred5678 on December 3, 2007 at 3:29 AM
I’m not concerned much about Mitt being a Mormon but I would like to hear him talk about Bain Capital Partners LLC and Huawei Technologies Co purchase of 3com. I am concerned about China buying up America and the bizarre money trumps everything free market thing like Bush.
Buzzy on December 3, 2007 at 3:42 AM
I’m really ticked that you evangelical types seem intent on driving Mormons out of the Republican party.
I’ve yet to see anyone explain how Mitt’s LDS beliefs disqualify him. What, exactly, in LDS beliefs is so threatening to American society? Please, answer me that. How will LDS beliefs harm you?
Instead, it’s yammering on about how Mormon’s aren’t Christian, etc etc etc. I swear, I feel like I’m at the Daily Kos sometimes here, my beliefs are bashed so much. At the Kos, it’s because I’m a republican. Here, it’s because I’m LDS. I don’t worship the right way (as if any of you evangelicals can agree on what the right way is anyway), so you will all vote for another “compassionate tax and spend conservative” who is eager to open the floodgates of immigration.
And what is wrong with trying to teach good works, anyway? Tell you what: You people bashing us for trying to do good works can sit on your rear ends and not lift a finger, because you are “saved” and I will try to do good works and be charitable and stuff like that, and let’s see who God is more pleased with. Excuse us for believing that Jesus meant it when He said “Keep my commandments.” He didn’t say “Hey, here’s some suggestions, it might be nice if you got around to following some once in a while.”
But apparently, we LDS people are the biggest threat to morality, Christianity, and who knows what else since we believe that God wants us to do something with our lives, and requires us to do so if we want to gain the highest rewards. That’s the vilest of heresies, apparently. *snort*
Vanceone on December 3, 2007 at 4:06 AM
I’ll say that I’m glad there are many here who are Evangelical who don’t take that route, and lots more. So thanks to them. But seriously, the Huckabee surge can really only be explained by people’s anti_mormonism, I think. Why? Because for all of Romney’s political faults, Huckabee has them in spades. So clearly, based on pure political reasons, there’s no reason to vote for Huck over Romney.
Vanceone on December 3, 2007 at 4:20 AM
Probably not with just a statement. But Kennedy, immediately following his statement, submitted himself to questioning by the Protestant ministers in attendance.
The Q&A was where Kennedy was most effective dealing with the issues. While the issues Romney faces are somewhat different than those faced by Kennedy, if he would directly answer the questions of those who are concerned about his religion he might be able to lessen the intensity of his detractors.
In a close election (like 1960) it may be the difference between winning and losing.
jaime on December 3, 2007 at 4:22 AM
I don’t yet know whether I would or could vote for Mitt based on the issues. As far as Mormonism is concerned, if we are to be religiously tolerant, then educating ourselves to its basic tenents gives us enough information at least to know what we’re tolerating.
Webutante on December 3, 2007 at 6:34 AM
Mitt would be better off campaigning on his religious beliefs.
A Romney candidacy would destroy conservatism- not because he is a Mormon, but because he is a LIBERAL.
Valiant on December 3, 2007 at 7:33 AM
Faith without works is dead, but…
For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves [it is] the gift of God Not of works, lest any man should boast.
Ephesians 2:8-9
I love Mormons, Catholics, Scientologists, and Born-Again Christians. One’s worldview does impact one’s decisions. If Mitt was running for president of a family organization, he would get my vote.
Valiant on December 3, 2007 at 7:41 AM
If the well is poisoned, it’s because self-styled Christian Evangelicals have poisoned it. The Christian Renewal movement has explicitly attacked the Constitutional separation of church and state (and its prohibition on religious tests for public office). Where in the USA, outside of a few states, could anyone run for office, even dogcatcher, and get elected as an avowed Mormon?
The objective evidence says Mormons are more law-abiding than Evangelical Christians, and far more law-abiding than Muslims. Despite this, lots of Christian sects relentlessly attack Mormons. Why? Because they’re “the competition”? Because someone who believes in “magic underwear” is a bigger threat than someone who believes in Allah, Mohammad, the Koran and Sharia law? Because they’re a very small minority, and safe to attack with impunity? (How very un-Christlike.)
Mormons are, and would continue to be, right alongside you in so many things if you weren’t so busy driving
trying to drive them away. If you want allies, SHUT YER DAMN PIE–HOLES. Quit demanding special respect or privileges for any religion; Islam will be destroyed if theocracy is criminalized, but Evangelical Christianity will not. Purge religious dogma and gibotry from your souls. Mormons may be as mistaken as the observers of contrary sects, but that does not make them evil or crazy. If you want their support, don’t treat them that way.
- Engineer-Poet +/-
MB4 on December 3, 2007 at 8:26 AM
No one said Mormons were evil.
Valiant on December 3, 2007 at 8:48 AM
If religion doesn’t matter, why does Mitt have more support in Utah than all the other GOP candidates combined?
Don’t throw the Salt Lake City Olympics at me.
Valiant on December 3, 2007 at 8:56 AM
I see… rational explanations won’t sway you, then? You have preconcluded it is Romney’s Mormonism. No attempt would change your mind.
BKennedy on December 3, 2007 at 9:24 AM
The same type of question could be asked of the evangelical support of Huckabee. Religion only matters in that it gives a person a more solid connection to a candidate. If they have the same political views, great. If they have the same religious views, great. That’s two connections. The problem comes when someone refuses to consider a candidate because of their religion. It’s Jim Crow all over again. Only now it’s bigotry based on religion instead of race.
Harp on Mitt all you want about his record, business and political. But complaining about a candidate because of the fine points of their religious belief when it poses absolutely NO threat, is beyond the pale.
Troy Rasmussen on December 3, 2007 at 9:27 AM
Giuliani and Huck are liberal. Giuliani and Mitt are the only two who could get the nomination. Mitt it is!
davenp35 on December 3, 2007 at 9:34 AM
I’m furious at evangelicals for jumping on the Huckwagon. Compassionate conservatism is a proven loser for the American people. My problem with Mitt is that his ideology is FAR to the left of most Mormons.
Valiant on December 3, 2007 at 9:41 AM
If he can get this message across, then he might have a chance.
AlexB on December 3, 2007 at 10:21 AM
First of all, you have the religion that is the most correct, that wants to be Christian, but the founders have this to say (one of many such statements by founders):
The second is that you have a religion that must follow a living prophet. Christians are wary of such “prophets”. The bible lays out what is a prophet and so far every Mormon “prophet” has fallen short. So in essence, we have a man running for President, sworn to follow a man that speaks to God (shorthand version). That is dangerous.
Third, Mormon facts like Jesus was a polygamist, is abhorrent to most Christians. Practices like polygamy is abhorrent (yes I know you say Mormons reject, but it is still canonized in Section 132, 61 & 62, you haven’t removed it, why? Because if you remove it Smith becomes a false teacher or your Gods can’t have multiple wives, how old was Smith’s youngest bride?).
Fourth, (speaking for myself) I am afraid of people who think they can become Gods, the fact that you are working to be a God scares me (and how many wives can you have as a God?)…maybe a little paranoid, but I am allowed that.
It is the “victim” card that is played so often, it is the arrogance that Mormons can walk through this world bashing Christians, stealing their sacred symbols, corrupting the bible, and feel that they can do and say what they want because you can’t criticize them. Mormons spend years bashing the Christians, saying they are wrong, knocking on doors, and you think that is okay. But state openly that Mormons are wrong, and oh boy, you are bashing Mormons. How arrogant of you. I quoted your prophets, your bishops, your books, and you come back with…you just don’t understand, you are bashing my religion. Not one quote attributed to your founders have been found false, but you attack me for posting them, try attack your founders for writing them.
So, Mitt is caught up in that dilemma, he has to prove that he will follow the laws of the land over the laws of a living prophet, from a church whose founders, abhorred Christians.
So far, Mitt has flip flopped on every major issue. Gun control, abortion, taxes, the war, on being a conservative, he has shown that he will say anything to anyone to get a vote.
But we will see if he distances himself from Salt Lake City. Does he want to lead a nation, or become a God? You can’t serve to masters.
right2bright on December 3, 2007 at 10:29 AM
actually, it was the first site that came up when I googled “exaltation” and mormons. Feel free to post an LDS sites explanation…..I fail to see how its not a polytheistic relgion. My comments are about the politics of this though(I’ll vote for Mitt if he’s nominated)…but the politics of this are not good. the left has spent the last 7 years claiming George Bush talks to God and God told him to ‘go to war’, etc…..imagine what they would do to Mitt. It’s a political problem…..and I’m certain there are many evangelicals who would not vote on him because they beleive it to be a ‘cult’.
the plus side of Mitt is he should do well in a debate against Hillary and he looks presidential.
jp on December 3, 2007 at 10:38 AM
The faith of evangelicals (Bush/Huckabee) is certainly an issue if they believe government should carry out the ministry of Christ. Socialism is always a Godless disaster and highly unChristian.
Valiant on December 3, 2007 at 10:55 AM
Well, then Huck has a problem too. Do we want a Christian minister (Huck) leading us?
bnelson44 on December 3, 2007 at 11:19 AM
By the way. Mitt is a minister too. That is seldom mentioned but if he was in a number of ministerial positions in the LDS church, some pretty high.
Kennedy was a somewhat lax Catholic.
bnelson44 on December 3, 2007 at 11:24 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »