"The other question is where were the defenders of America's liberties
following this bigoted attack?"Romney has been bashing them for
months now, they're called Democrats. Why would they all of a sudden defend him
after he's been bashing them ruthlessly without any reason?Those who
are the biggest critics of Mormons? Romney's own GOP. This is exactly why he
cannot win as a repub. The radical and crazy right, whose base is the bible belt
south, will never allow a Mormon to be the GOP's candidate for the Presidency.
Romney would have a better chance campaigning as the true Democrat
that he is.
A cult graduates to a religion when it gets political power. All religions are
cults. Settling that, what people want to know about Romney is whether there
will be a hot line, so to speak, between President Monson's office and the Oval
Office. The broader question deals with how much wiggle room Romney will have
in implementing policy when the LDS church has taken a position on it. I don't
think I've heard straight up answers yet.
Jon Huntsman called the cult guy a "moron."Anderson Cooper
did a pretty decent interview with the guy, attacking him for his views. Fox
News? They just enabled him.If you're looking for defenders of
Mormonism, right now you want to look to the middle and left (Huntsman and CNN).
The right panders to the South, many of whom regard Mormons as a cult.
"Only non-Mormon fellow presidential candidate Rick Santorum strongly
defended Romney's right to worship"That simply isn't true. Ron
Paul and Newt Gingrich both defended Romney's right to worship, along with
Huntsman of course, and then said there were more important things to talk
about. Why should they be required to say any more than that? I suspect there
are some who would not be satisfied unless the other candidates began
campaigning for Romney.
Thirty or so years ago Republican strategists concluded that the politicizing
Evangelical Christians would help the party, so they did. They rallied the
fundamentalists and told them that GOP stood for "God's Own Party."
Now their monster has broken free and is laying waste to the
political landscape. The GOP mullahs are only too happy to use religion as a
political bludgeon.The party of Reagan, Eisenhower, even Goldwater,
is no more. Those three stalwart conservatives would be booed out of any
"values voters summit" on the basis of their beliefs and
accomplishments. Heaven help them if they showed up at a Utah state GOP
convention.Republicans, you made this mess, don't expect anyone else
to clean it up.
Santorum was not the only one who defended Romney, nearly all media outlets
blasted Jeffress.Though I doubt Romney needed any defense at all. I
am sure he is secure in his beliefs. I wasn't offended (I chose not
to be offended) by what Jeffress said. I just learned that I don't really value
what he has to offer.
"The other question is where were the defenders of America's liberties
following this bigoted attack? Fellow Mormons? "The strongest
defenders have been DEMOCRATS. Utah Democrats have been on national television
and have released several statements against the mormon-phobia of the right
wing.Voting against (or for) someone simply based on their religion
I find it ironic that Mormons complain about religion being used as a political
tool when they themselves engage in the same practice. How many times have we
heard in this state that you cannot be a good member of the church and be a
Democrat? There is much more to be said on this with other actions and
speeches, but bringing religion into politics is not a good thing and is
contrary to the wisdom of the Founding Fathers. Yet Mormons do it also when it
is politically expedient.
What a bunch of hypocrites conservatives are...It's perfectly,
"OK" for them to degrade Obama's religion by hatefully calling him a,
"Muslim" (As if being a Muslim is somehow, "evil" and
"wrong")... but now that the shoe is on the other foot we all need to
be, "civil"????I haven't heard one word from you all
condemning that... so why should we all feel bad when it is one of yours being
malign viciously? Sorry... but as long as Obama is a,
"Muslim" then Romney is a, "Cultist"... You can't have it
"Shouldn't all Americans passionately object to an attack on any of our
precious American freedoms?"---Absolutely. Now,
where were the Mormons when the freedoms of GKBT Americans were under attack by
Prop-8 and Amendment-3? Oh, yeah. They were leading the charge and
spearheading these attacks on our freedoms.You reap what you sow."First they came for the..."
Re: The Real Maverick | 12:07 a.m. Oct. 11, 2011 "Romney has been
bashing them for months now, they're called Democrats"Obama
made a bigoted suggestion to the GOP that They can come for the ride, but they
gotta sit in back. His problem now is that any candidate that is still breathing
will beat him in 2012. The only question now is whether Obama will even get the
Democratic presidential nomination to run in 2012.
To "Esquire | 7:24 a.m" I have never heard " that you cannot be a
good member of the church and be a Democrat." I have heard that you cannot
fully accept the LDS doctrine and be a liberal, and that is easily proven.Another thing you forget is the simple fact that people want somebody
who reflects their values, and who better than a member of their own church.
Think about it, could a devout Muslim fully represent a group of athiests?
"Another thing you forget is the simple fact that people want somebody who
reflects their values, and who better than a member of their own
church."So I suppose you plan on supporting Harry Reid?Mitt Romney, Jason Chaffetz, Chris Buttars, et al all share the same LDS
faith but their political views do not represent a large number of Latter-day
@ RedShirt, you need to get out more. Decades of experience in politics in
Utah, I've heard it plenty. It really started with the rise of the new right -
particularly the advent of Orrin Hatch, Reagan and the ERA. And also, I could
make the same argument that you can't be a good conservative and accept LDS
doctrine. What this amounts to is your definition of LDS doctrine, not the
reality of LDS doctrine.
Sutton,Some may be hypocrites, but not all. I know many
conservatives who were very dismayed at the attacks on Pres. Obama's
religion.First, there is no reasonable way to interpret Pres.
Obama's life as other than Christian and there is zero credible evidence that he
is a Muslim.Second, even if another candidate were to emerge who was
a Muslim (or of some other religion - too many to name), that should not be
reason to exclude him or her from office.The Founding Fathers were
adamant that there be no religious test. We should be similarly adamant.
Where has common decency, respect and civility to your fellow man gone these
days?? And why so much vitriol over how a man/woman/child decides to worship as
long as their belief system is not harmful to another? Where there was once
tolerance, there now is hatred (Westboro Baptists, etc.). And what gives anyone
the right to say, "You and your religion are NOT Christian"? Ok, so
you have your opinions, and feel strongly about YOUR beliefs. Reverse the role
and ask yourself how you would feel/react if a certain religious group decided
to attack you personally by telling you, oh, by the way, you're not a Christian?
I just don't get how anyone professing to be a true follower of
Jesus Christ can honestly say such a thing. How about live and let live and let
God be the Judge, which is how most Christians believe it will work out in the
Blame Sesame Street. They taught us a song about "one of these things is
not like the other". Its obvious that Mormons are different from other
Christians. One can celebrate the difference, or shun from the spotlight when
it shines upon you.
To "Esquire | 8:44 a.m." I can give you examples of people who
regularly post on these boards about how their liberalism is in direct conflict
with LDS doctrine if you want.
Just so I understand.It is ok to say that"all other
churches are "wrong," all their creeds an "abomination," and
all who profess them are "corrupt"As long as you don't say
they are not Christian or call them a cult?Do I have that right?
Well, if People will wolf down stale popcorn out of habit while listening to
Glenn Beck, they'll believe anything anyone says. Rush Limbaugh would ask, is
Capitalism a Religion?. Libertarians? Tea Partiers?. Then he would say,
"with all of the discussion on Reverend Robert Jeffress's statement that
Mormonism is a cult, I agree with him. Mormonism fits the definition of a
cult". According to the Random House dictionary, a "cult" is a
particular system of religious worship, esp. with reference to its rites and
ceremonies, a group or false sect bound together by veneration of the same
thing, person, ideal, etc; a religion or sect considered to be, unorthodox, or
extremist, with members often living outside of conventional society under the
direction of a charismatic leader; the members of such a religion or sect. Let
us break down each section of the definition of a cult, as it relates to the
religion of Mormonism: "A particular system of religious worship, exp.
With reference to its rites and ceremonies": Mitt Romney has participated
in the secret Mormon Temple ceremonies throughout most of his life. THAT'S HOW
Rush would put it.ONLY Jesus Christ can honestly say such a thing.
Most Americans and especially democrats, don't even know of this. It doesn't
have the same coverage in other areas as it has here. People tend to only watch
so much news, this probably passed by as "some nut pastor said something
nutty, tell me something new". Surveys show that Republicans
are more willing to vote for LDS members than Democrats but their reasons for
unwillingness are different in nature. With Republicans it's their belief the
LDS church is a cult. With Democrats... they remember Prop 8 and their reasons
are political in nature (they also know that Mormons are generally
conservatives). 4 years ago liberals were more willing to vote for Mormons than
conservatives. That reversal is probably due to Prop 8. Now every Mormon has to
go through the Prop 8 question to get support from a sizable chunk of Democrats.
@Rifleman"Obama made a bigoted suggestion to the GOP that They can
come for the ride, but they gotta sit in back."As a white guy I
have to say that that sort of thing can only even be considered bigoted if the
target of that comment was black due to the historical context. Otherwise you're
just reaching for something to take offense to."His problem now
is that any candidate that is still breathing will beat him in 2012. "Head to head polls show obama trouncing everyone not named Romney while
vs Romney it's too close to call (Romney up by less than a point based on an
average of the 8 most recent polls).@EsquireAs a liberal who
was LDS for four years I've heard that I'm following satan's politics, that it
would be better if my political views were more aligned with God's, that I'm
disobeying the prophet, that I need to see the bishop over my political views,
and those are from 4 different people from my wards.
continuedHow many people ever said that Mormonism is a cult?. The
Mormon Church collects at least $6 billion a year from its members, and
generates at least another $5 billion in sales from its various business
enterprises, total church assets exceed $30 billion. (At least 100 companies
are controlled by the Mormon Church, and some estimate its total annual revenues
in excess of $20 billion! The church also owns 18 radio stations in the U.S.)
Part of the Church's income goes to operate an elaborate internal welfare system
so its members avoid any governmental assistance. WHY DON'T THEY USE THIS
ANYMORE?. "THE SEVENTEEN POINTS OF THE TRUE CHURCH?." Just a few
here:Christ organized the Church (Eph 4:11-14) The true
church must bear the name of Jesus Christ (Eph 5:23) The true church
must have no paid ministry (1 Cor 9:16-18; Acts 20:33-34; John 10:11-13) Surveys show - ASK FAIR - the Apologist?. What the heck do they know
anyway?. Nothing.You be that judge.I told you I would
tell you the truths, I didn't say you would like them.These are my
views, not yours.
I will note however, that while as a liberal my views are very much in the
minority of the LDS church (when I was a member, Gallup survey 7% of LDS members
are liberal, 1% very liberal) most LDS members respected my political
differences. While I have a sizable number of instances of people not doing so I
was able to distinguish that from being any sort of majority position.
Unfortunately, that Gallup survey shows that 20% of inactive LDS members are
liberal. When you do the math with these stats8% of all LDS members are
liberal/very liberal20% of inactive LDS members are liberal/very
liberal79% of LDS members are activeyou get the result that
~50% of liberal LDS members are inactive. That's a huge number considering the
overall inactivity rate is 21% in that poll. There is a sizable portion of the
liberal LDS demographic that I imagine just does not feel welcome at church and
probably have had a few instances like I had of criticism over their political
views which caused them to leave (I left over lack of belief in doctrine, not
political issues though those didn't help any).
RedShirt: "...(H)e lived in Indonesia for 4 years where 88.2% of the
population is Muslim? Or do we have to ignore the fact that his father was
Muslim? How much evendence pointing to Obama's Islamic ties to we have to ignore
so that your statement can be true?"Let's review Civics 101:
From the U.S. Constitution, Article 6, Paragraph 3: "No
religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public
trust under the United States."RedShirt, with your comment
you've become the poster child for everything that is wrong with the
immune-to-reality theocrats currently dragging the GOP around by a nose-ring.Republicans, what are you going to do about this?
I could care less whether the President were Muslim or Christian. Just fix this
country!The sooner we get over this worrying about the President's
religion issue, the better!
I don't care what they say about him. He shouldn't be elcted over Ron Paul. I
don't want Mitt as my president I wouldn't even want him as my mayor.
To "Blue | 11:47 a.m." what are you talking about? I never said
anything about a religious test or anything else along those lines. Apparently
you have your adgenda to promote, so here is my rebuttal.If you
bothered to read Truthseeker's post, you would see that he claimed that there
was absolutely no evidence to link Obama to being a Muslim. From Obama's own
books, we find out that he lived in a highly Muslim country for 4 years, and had
a father who was muslim.Answer this, is living in a country for 4
years and having a Muslim father enough to at least say that there may be a
link?Personally I don't care what religion he is, my concern is if
he will help the country or destroy it. Your liberal President is killing this
nation, and you are cheering him on. Look at the Wall Street protestors, they
are protesting against Obama's policies while they are calling for socialism.
RedShirt | 8:05 a.m. Oct. 11, 2011 USS Enterprise, UT To
"Esquire | 7:24 a.m" I have never heard " that you cannot be a
good member of the church and be a Democrat." I have heard that you cannot
fully accept the LDS doctrine and be a liberal, and that is easily proven.===================== Why must you lie RedShirt?Even
you have been quoted as saying Democrats can't be good Mormons.FYI -
Jesus, Joseph Smith, and our Founding Fathers were all "Liberals".And just so the DN will STOP censoring my comment, I will reference a
common English Language Dictionary:lib·er·al
(lbr-l, lbrl) ADJECTIVE:1. Not limited to or by established,
traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from
bigotry. 2. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress,
and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded. 3. Of,
relating to, or characteristic of liberalism. NOUN:1. A
person with liberal ideas or opinions.
RedShirt | 12:26 p.m. Oct. 11, 2011 USS Enterprise, UT "Answer this, is living in a country for 4 years and having a Muslim
father enough to at least say that there may be a link?"Personally I don't care what religion he is..."============= Really?You can't possibly really mean that
RedShirt.Who could possibly take you seriously with Double-speak like
that?Why else would you keep bringing up the question that Obama
"might" be a secret Mulsim?Being Honest with your fellow
man, begins with being Honest with yourself.
"Personally I don't care what religion he is..."Baloney.
Of course you do. You wouldn't have even brought it up except for your fixation
on Muslims. Only in your fevered dreams is Obama a Muslim, and even if he was,
so what? Are you equating being Muslim with being unfit for office? Didn't we
cover that subject in the Constitution, above?"Your liberal
President is killing this nation..."More baloney. Two things:
1) the cause of our current economic mess isn't who's in charge now,
it's who was in charge when Wall Street decided our investments were casino
chips and they were the high-rollers.2) Obama is a liberal? Ha! I
only wish! He's caved to every greedy, childish demand made by the Republicans
and their corporate masters. I pains me that he hasn't had the backbone to tell
Mr. Boehner and his kleptocratic buddies to either grow up or take a hike. But isn't the purpose of this discussion to talk about how completely
nuts it is for people to render judgement on political candidates based on who
is or is not a "true" member of the dominant faith? What
are we, Iran?
To "LDS Liberal | 1:02 p.m. " and "Blue | 1:26 p.m." you
botha really should work on following a thread. If you did, you would find that
the first person to bring up Obama being a muslim was not me, or even a
conservative. It was the liberal known as "Sutton" at 7:33 a.m. The
next person who claimed that Obama was a Muslim was "Twin Lights" at
8:54 a.m., again, another liberal.From the evidence here, it appears
that liberals have a bigger problem with any link to Obama being a muslim than
any conservative does.Why do you, and others of your ilk project so
much onto Conservatives?So, Blue, apparently what you say is true,
those who bring up Obama being a Muslim do have a problem with it. The problem
is that it is your fellow liberals who bring it up and dwell on it all the
time.Yes, Obama is a liberal, and when he was a Senator was named
the most liberal Senator in 2007. Both CNN and the National Journal labled him
as the most liberal.
JoeBlow | 10:05 a.m. Oct. 11, 2011Joe, You've got that right.
Disagreeing is different than name calling, particularly if the name (cult) has
no defining quality other than to insult. Someone can say you are tragically
(pick your adjective) wrong, but not call you an insulting name for being wrong.
All religions think the other person is wrong or else they would merge into one
as resulted in the United Church of Canada.
@ RedShirt, your evidence is based on comments on this site? Wow, talk about a
strong position (not - wanted to make sure you knew I wasn't serious).
First Huckabee now this Dr. Whats his name. Guess some southerners still live
in the hills and drink moonshine (kool aid). 50 years ago I worked in the South
and the boss when hearing I was a Mormon asked how many wives I had. I replied
without as much as a slight smile, FIVE. He believed me!! So I guess I am
guilty of perpetuating some myths about Mormons.
The plain fact of the matter is this.If the tea party or Ron Paul succeed in
splitting the GOP, it will guarantee an Obama victory. Can anyone say Ross
Perot. paid his way in, got Clinton elected and then disappeared off the face of
the planet.It is a sorry state of affaies when you must choose the
lesser of two evils instead of the better of two goods. Parse that any way you
lean politically and it works.
"you merely cherry picked facts in order to justify being offended"2 thinkgsI can assure you that I am not offended. Amused
Yes, offended, no.I am just pointing out the hypocrisy of those who
actually ARE offendedCherry picked facts? Aren't my
"facts" the whole basis for the LDS religion?
The issue is a no brainer if you know your Constitution. As one contributoer
wrote: it's Constitution 101. Anyone who seeks to impose/promotes the
imposition of a religious test for any federal government office should not be
allowed within a mile of the White House, figuratively speaking.Still that doesn't make Romney a great candidate. Most of the people want to
end to the imbroglio in the Middle East, bringing troops home. Romney seem very
much at odds with that, and is he really credible on government health care
systems? We don't want 'em.Then we should take a look at Cain: a
NINE PERCENT NATIONAL SALES TAX!! Wake up America! We'd be paying the feds
nine percent (to start with, that is. sales taxes almost always increase. Add
that to six to seven percent State sales tax; Let's see that's a surcharge of
over fifteen percent on purchases, just for starters. Income tax? Just end it!
CUT SPENDING.Eliminate the hawks and the taxers and last man
standing is Ron Paul, the media cannot discredit him and they don't want to
remind us about him. A high recommendation I think.
RedShirt,You said "The next person who claimed that Obama was a
Muslim was "Twin Lights" at 8:54 a.m., again, another
liberal."Did you read my post? It said "there is zero
credible evidence that he is a Muslim."On what planet can that
be interpreted as claiming that Pres. Obama is a Muslim? It was the precise
opposite of that. Please, at least be honest about what I (and others) have
said. It is the true conservative way.The problem I have with folks
linking Pres. Obama to being a Muslim is that it is done by so-called
conservatives to sandbag him. It is an obvious lie and the propagation of that
lie makes conservatives look stupid to the voting public.As to my
being a liberal. I do not claim to be a conservative in the current mode.
Rather, I am a conservative from the Reagan/Bush I era. I value honest debate
about real issues. Not the current hysteria about non-issues.That
you (or anyone else) would interpret that as being liberal is exactly why so
many conservatives feel excluded from the current movement and, by extension,
the Republican Party.
To "Twin Lights | 7:59 p.m. " but you still were the first to bring up
the subject, and that is the point.From your posts, you typically
side with the liberals, pushing for more government intervention in our
lives.Again, you were the first commenter to bring up Obama being a
RedShirt,Please go back and reread the thread.Sutton had
called conservatives hypocrites for beating Pres. Obama up about being a
Muslim.Sutton brought up the point because many conservatives were
upset about Romney being sandbagged for his religion but had remained silent
when this happened to the President. A fair point for those this applies to.The point of my post was to defend conservatives and to tell Sutton that
many conservatives were not okay with the religious attacks on the President. I
then noted that there was no credible evidence that the President is a Muslim.
Also, that even if a candidate were a Muslim, the constitutional injunction
against a religious test should be strictly followed.Note that my
response was a defense of reasonably-minded conservatives. How does this
qualify me as a liberal?Is it your belief that that liberals are in
the habit of defending conservatives? Did you understand that my post was in
response to another poster? That is, did you know the context of what I
said?At a minimum, do you admit that your post was factually
incorrect and a gross misstatement of my position?
To "Twin Lights | 9:56 p.m." sorry taht I missed Sutton's post.The point of my post is still the same. It is the liberals the keep
bringing up an Obama-Muslim connection, not conservatives.
Good point on all the of ultra conservatives relentlessly attacking the Obama
as a Muslim and follower of a non mainstream religion, then pulling out the
Constitution and common decency for their religion.