…

Ryan Gandy on December 31, 2007 at 10:19 AM

Yes.

So in order to exhibit both “good faith” and “Christian charity” I must lie in the interest of political correctness and keeping people happy?

No. That’s not how it works.

Ryan Gandy on December 31, 2007 at 10:11 AM

Not only was your comment a lie, it was couched in language that tried to appear to be sympathetic to the LDS, just like the South Carolina Christmas card (which was, by the way, a truly despicable dirty trick that I’m surprised HotAir headlines hasn’t picked up on.)

I’m not interested in anybody’s theology. It’s ALL nuts.

PrettyD_Vicious on December 31, 2007 at 12:39 AM

Nothing illogical about that, if you approach it from a trinitarian stand point.

WasatchMan on December 30, 2007 at 11:26 PM

So in order to exhibit both “good faith” and “Christian charity” I must lie in the interest of political correctness and keeping people happy?

No. That’s not how it works.

csdeven on December 30, 2007 at 2:45 PM

Just put it in historical prospective, as vile as it was. The LDS were not saints, taking child brides was not considered (even then) appropriate, polygamy was an abhorrent practice, they felt they were above the law, and in that time, the law ruled. Add to it that the founder was a man of very suspect history, run in with the law, and a known con man. The LDS were heavily armed, and the great martyr of Smith, well, he took down a couple of men himself. When did the last martyr do that? Not saying his death was right, just saying he was no martyr.

PrettyD_Vicious on December 31, 2007 at 12:39 AM

The question you pose are from a finite mind to an infinite mind.
Like you explaining a computer to a snail. The trap of many “philosophers”, you think your questions are greater then the one who allowed you to ask, or gave you the ability to “reason”. You put limits on God, where there are no limits. Didn’t he say, if you new all that he knew, you would still not understand? Your questions are a good example, if you were given an answer, you would not understand…or care.

I’d really rather not be put in that position.

Professor Blather on December 29, 2007 at 4:58 PM

Me too.
*
What gets me is his “perhaps others” not exactly a statement of faith and commitment.
*
The good news is he appears to question his origin of faith…that’s a start…the bad news is he has questioned most all of his beliefs, since deciding to run for President.
He just needs to mature as a conservative candidate…give him four years and see if he still believes then, what he believes now. History tells us he will not.

I am amazed how the left, who claims there is a distinct separation of church and state, are so engrossed in documenting the spiritual beliefs of the candidates with an (R) after their name.

Does this mean that all those with a (D) after their name represent the anti-Christ?

Ryan Gandy on December 30, 2007 at 7:28 PM

Good faith and Christian charity positively drip from this comment. Tell me: done any mass mailings to South Carolina lately?

Buy Danish on December 30, 2007 at 7:13 PM

I remember that thread now. I believe it is this comment by nra4freedom that Vancone is referring to.

So, Beto Ochoa, you see why I disregard your opinion.

ronsfi on December 30, 2007 at 7:38 PM

And the Mormon gospel is one of obedience … if you don’t tithe, you expose yourself to God’s wrath at the Second Coming of Christ. How “extra warped” is that?

The only choice you have is to to decide if you can vote for him without pressing the faith issue, or get a theological brain freeze trying.

I really love how all these Mormon threads devolve into reflexive name calling and unjust accusations of bigotry.

Really.

Mojave Mark on December 30, 2007 at 1:09 PM

Not to mention that Adam himself was God.

Heck, even if you go beyond Young, you find a whole lot of weird stuff in Mormon doctrine. Like that “Eternal Progression” deal and the bit about Jesus’ death not providing full payment for sin.

Personally, I don’t pretend to confuse Mormonism with Christianity, but I’m not going to use the whole “fair and white” thing as an excuse to play the racist card either.

Check this out. One of the best appreciations of Mormons from an outside perspective I’ve recently read.

WasatchMan on December 29, 2007 at 5:01 PM

Yeah, I like that article too. I’ll never look at Battlestar Galactica the same way again.

As a Boy Scout commissioner, I deal with Mormons all the time. They’re about 20-25 percent of the BSA membership, so it’s hard not to. In fact, every LDS male ages 11 to 15 is automatically in the Scouts, as it’s apparently part of their priesthood formation, or whatever.

On one hand, they are the most civil of people with whom to ever do volunteer work. That can be a real plus when you want to cut down on the petty bickering. On the other hand, their ready source of youth membership makes them a bit naive when it comes to matters of recruitment. It’s as if they’re saying, hey, we don’t have a problem getting new members, why should you?

Try explaining any differently, it’s like they’re from another planet. Which might explain why they believe in eventually ruling their own.

But seriously, folks…

As a practicing Catholic, I can’t defend Mormonism, but I have nothing against them as people. Still, I wish the campaign would focus more on the issues. Where this comes in, it seems to me, is in the area of character. What does a man’s private belief say about his public conduct, including his prudential judgement while in office? If a candidate is going to “spin” his convictions to favor the moment, it says more about him than it does his belief system. Such is the extent of my interest in a candidate’s religion. Beyond that…. (shrug!)

This dude is the type who could have written the phony Christmas cards that were sent out in South Carolina. He’s motivated!

csdeven on December 30, 2007 at 5:37 PM

Now it is clear to me why you have no credibility on HA.

Beto Ochoa on December 30, 2007 at 3:01 PM

Just because you and I haven’t seen it doesn’t mean Vancone hasn’t seen it. That is my point. And it isn’t like it hasn’t happened before, ergo my comment about governor Boggs.

And I doubt it’s “whacky”. It is more likely an example of using hyperbole, which everyone uses on occasion.