Written on Thursday, December 6th, 2007 at 10:18pm by Alan Bedenko | 35 Comments
Mitt Romney
There may be a thousand reasons not to vote Mitt Romney for President.
But if one of them is “he’s a Mormon“, that’s ridiculous. I honestly couldn’t care less what some candidate’s religion is. Leave the Mormon thing alone. Hell, if the people of Massachusetts were ok with it…
As an aside, the whole special underwear thing is kind of fascinating.
35 Comments
-
Advertisement
-
Related Topics
-
Latest
-
Gabe Armstrong
Latest: Health Fail: Why America will (likely) never have meaningful reform -
Brad Riter
Latest: Monday's Show -
Eric Saldanha
Latest: Four Easy Pages to HCR -
Broadway Fillmore Alive
Latest: Video: Corpus Christi Church – 11:30 am Mass – 03/14/2010 -
Sports Insiders
Latest: Sports Insiders: Saturday, March 15 -
Tom Schuh
Latest: Hometown News at Noon: Monday 3/15 -
Entrepreneur Show
Latest: Mike Sformo Show: Sunday, March 14 -
Pink Bflo
Latest: People We Love – Cyndi Lauper on the Celebrity Apprentice -
In the News
Latest: Paterson Appoints Niagara County Treasurer -
Christina Abt
Latest: BuffaloStyle: Saturday, March 15
-
Advertisement
There’s a difference between allowing people to practice their religion freely and voting someone as president. There’s literally dozens of reaosns why Mormonism is a ridiculous religion.
Say what you will about christianity as a whole, but even if you separate out the more notion requiring faith, and don’t treat the gospel as fact, at its core there is a well developed philosophy which is the product of thousands of years of tradition. There is meaning and symbolism in every sentence. The ancient authors were very intelligent and sophisticated people.
Then we have mormonism, which is really just the Scientology of the 19th century. It was created almost instantaneously by a single man who desired only to exert control and take advantage of the status one can gain through “religion.”
If a Mormon wants to have ridiculous beliefs he should have to answer fo them. Just as a vocal racist who decides to run for president is not entitled to a free pass from voters because of the protections of the first amendment, neither is a Mormon entitled to a free pass for his religious beliefs.
Mitt didn’t even talk about his Mormon faith, and I’ll tell you why- because telling the american people that black people are black-skinned because they bear the mark of Cain probably isn’t a crowd pleaser
I am SO sick of organized religion and all this GOD talk with respect to our government. It’s repugnant. McCain, Romney, Huckabee – blech. We don’t need GOD in the Whitehouse. Romney made his fortune buying and selling companies, which is a way bigger red flag than his laughable religion.
Ah, the Tolerance of the liberal left. When did they change the sign on Tolerance street to “ONE WAY”?
I’m not a mormon, nor am I so inclined to become one. But there is much in the actual lives of LDS members that is different.
Tuesdays are “Family Night”, when the TV is off and the family does something together either at home our out on the town, one night a week to be sure the bonds of family stay strong. Every LDS family I know does “Family Night”.
LDS boys are REQUIRED to join the Cub Scouts and continue into Boy Scouts. LDS churches are the 2nd largest Sponsors of Boy Scout and Cub Scout units. (after the Catholic Church) The reasoning being that the Scouting Program teaches the values that LDS holds close–Respect for elders and authority figures,importance of family, respect for Flag and Country, and Respect and Reverence towards God.
I fully realize that much of the political left finds these values repugnant. Additionally, the fact that the BSA refuses to teach that homosexuality is a morally acceptable lifestyle “choice” (yet does not teach that it is wrong), got homosexual activists in San Francisco to pressure Levi Strauss and Co to stop its 1 million dollar annual donation to the BSA.
I’ll be the first to admit that my knowledge of Mormonism is scant, most of it picked up by a few Mormons that I’ve gotten to know through my 42 years in the Scouting movement, and from some light reading and TV documentaries.
But for the first two commentors to make sweeping indictments of LDS, makes me wonder if they’ve actually studied or read the Book of Mormon.
If not, they’re the same kind of blithering asshats that made Jack Kennedy have to make similar speeches, to reassure the majority Protestant (and KKK member) southern states that he didn’t take orders from the Pope or the Vatican Council, and that he would not push for Catholicism to become the “state religion”.
“Freedom Of Religious Expression”–I guess that whole idea,the reasons that the Pilgrims,Hugenots,Puritans,and most of the settlers and founders of this nation CAME HERE FOR, is now to be interpreted by self selected fucking heathens from the political left.
BP has it straight. Can you see the Cuban Missile Crisis being managed by a Quaker named Richard Nixon, as Kennedy was defeated for being a Catholic? Oy Vey!
The problem I have with Romney’s beliefs is that he is not as respectful of people who don’t buy into religious faith as he expects us to be of his faith. Kennedy made a point of saying that his religion was something separate from his civics. Romney and the majority of the rest of the candidates on both sides of the fence wear their beliefs on their sleeves, and actively seek to have us view their piety as a credential.
The fact that this is anathema to gospel teachings is somehow overlooked, but there I go again, the Devil quoting Scripture.
Right, because it’s the “liberal left” that objects to Romney’s Mormonism. Like Ike, I suppose. :rolls eyes:
I wondered how long it would take for someone to drag out a Thomas Jefferson quote. People on both sides of the debate love quoting him whenever this issue comes up. And there are plenty of quotes by him to support both sides of a discussion on the role religion in US politics. In fact, I’m pretty sure Romney was paraphrasing Jefferson when he said you can’t have freedom without religion and you can’t have religion without freedom. I didn’t hear the whole speech, but I wouldn’t be surprised if he had a more direct quote, too.
I voted for John Kerry, even though there are a lot of things the Catholic church espouses that I don’t agree with — because in many cases, he doesn’t agree with the church either. Similarly, I’d vote for a Mormon if he or she disagreed with his or her church on most of the major social issues.
So I guess I’m agreeing with BP. There are tons of reasons not to vote for Mitt Romney, his conservative stance on social issues and demagougery about evil evil “secularism” being chief among them. I was raised non religious and turned out just fine, and am proud to call myself an atheist today. We’re here, we’re godless, get used to it! I will not be demonized!!
Shorter version of Romney’s speech, courtesy of Sam Boyd at TAPPED:
“There are two things I hate in this world — religious intolerance and those damn atheists.”
By the way, I seriously doubt that Romney’s anti-secularist line about “no freedom without religion” was a paraphrase of anything that Jefferson wrote.
Tatonka, here’s the lines from Jefferson I think he took it from:
God who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God?
This quote is taken from a larger inscription on the Jefferson Memorial.
Eh. . . I’m pretty sure he wasn’t paraphrasing Jefferson. Anyone using Jefferson to support a “no freedom without religion” meme is grossly misrepresenting the philosphy exspoused by him and other deist from that era.
Hmm – that’s a rather loose paraphrase, to but OK.
Here is your guide to Joseph Smith, from a source that many Romney supporters probably admire.
I’ll agree it’s a bit of a stretch and it is disingenuous to Jeffersonianism, but there are lots of his quotes out there that folks use to support religion in politics. And all I was saying was that it’s funny how this debate, no matter what direction it’s taking, always ends up with some Jefferson thrown in.
Tatonka, South Park did a similar thing on Joseph Smith. It was great.
Just for the record, LDS boys are not required to join cub and/or boy scouts. While the values taught by both the church’s young mens program and scouts are similar and often complement one another, the scouting program is not required.
Wait, so liberals, those who think that people are free to do whatever they damn well want to so long as it doesn’t break the law, are the ones who are opposed to him being a Mormon? HA!
I feel the same way toward Romney as I do toward any other practicing religious candidate. Go ahead and sit in whatever type of church/mosque/temple/synagogue/back yard/park bench you want to and worship whatever deity you want in whatever way you deem fit. Or not, that’s fine too. But I’ll be damned if you try to turn a religious law into a secular American law.
Has anybody tried to turn a religious law in to a secular law ever in the US? And why do you think you can generalize a hole group’s views based solely on your own, or a couple people on this site? If it were just about you or a few others here, I think Romney would have just called you on the phone.
Excuse me, “whole” not “hole”.
Q: “Has anybody tried to turn a religious law in to a secular law ever in the US?”
A: Why yes.
I give you a CNN headline from 2/2004:
“Bush calls for ban on same-sex marriages”
http://edition.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/02/24/elec04.prez.bush.marriage/index.html
“And why do you think you can generalize a hole group’s views based solely on your own”
I’m not trying to generalize anyone else’s views. I just put up my own views.
i first saw the underwear as a boy, traveling through southern idaho and northern utah with my family, dangling from clotheslines. kinda like long johns with spooky symbols on them.
anyway, it appears that mike huckabee may settle romney’s hash, and certainly that of ron “the pretender” paul, if the current polling holds.
Huckabee has a wee bit of a “Willie Horton x 1,000,000″ problem.
Huckabee’s problem doesn’t quite rise to Willie Horton. It’s not hurting him as badly and came out much earlier so he should be able to get over it.
Um, Dave, same sex marriages have never been legal in most of the US and only very recently in the places where they are. It is a secular issue, but some people’s view or opinion may be informed by their beliefs. Try again.
hey, he only has to beat republicans. and that rapist/murderer he sprung was at the urging of bill o’reilly, steve dunleavy and various other rupert murdoch propagandists who claimed that the rapist/murderer in question was an innocent man, jailed for his opposition to bill clinton. hahaha. those things have a way of coming around and biting you. he’s at 11 percent nationally, and one point behind romney with 24 percent in iowa. ron paul, on the other hand, continues to languish with the bottom feeders. in the pew research poll released tuesday, paul is in sixth place nationally at 4 percent, tied for fifth in iowa with 5 percent, in fourth in new hampshire with 9 percent, and sixth place in south carolina with 6 percent. DEAD MAN WALKING!
His culpability is much greater than Dukakis’ was, and yes, it is early – and the story hasn’t gotten much play. Yet.
But these things tend to get emphasized only when Dems do them, so maybe it won’t be a big factor.
Crossed with Mike Hudson. Yes, if nothing else the Dumond story is a nice reminder of the halcyon days of batshít insane Clinton hatred in the 90s. Which are due for a return, with another Clinton as the Dem frontrunner.
it’s already brewing tatonka….you watched chris matthews letely? all hillary hate all the time. plus, if any of the right wing media slugs made an issu of it, huckabee could always come back with “you told me to do it!”
My God is bigger than your God.
The main reason that people should keep their religion to themselves is that it is a silly fairy tale.
Also, I generally wear underwear.
I posted a blog on the NEWS blog on Sat. but on Sunday, it had disappeared and was gone. I wonder if this was Buffalo News censorship? Was it too controversial for the old Buffalo News? Are there influential Mormons who would rather hide the history of their church? The following is what I re-posted on the NEWS blog:
Comments
[I am re-posting this. I posted it on Sat night but as of Sunday it was gone. Is the NEWS censoring my blogs, and if so, for what reason? Is the history of Mormonism too embarassing to publish? If so, I'd be happy to document my anything therin.]
At a time in our history when this country faces great challenges on many fronts, the last thing we need is another religious zealot in the White House.
Romney’s speech was well delivered, but as Mr. Pyle points out, his beliefs are indeed dangerous. Romney says Our freedoms depend on religion. Nonsense! We have freedom of religion and from religion, no mater what is printed on coins. And contrary to Mr. Romney this nation was not founded by Christians; Most of the founders were deists.
He didn’t mention some of the bizarre beliefs of Mormons , like their belief that native Americans are descendent from the ancient Jews. (Perhaps we should ask our local Seneca tribal historians about that one.)
I don’t want a preacher for president. When I need religion, I know how to find a church.
Can you imagine having a president who doesn’t believe in evolution and that the world is only 6000 years old? I can’t.
In 1945 Historian Fawn M.Brodie wrote the definitive history of Mormon prophet Joseph Smith, titled “NO MAN KNOWS MY HISTORY.” Unlike other religions, the history of the Mormon faith and it’s founder is well documented. Joseph Smith’s 1826 conviction as a con man makes interesting reading. The Chenango County court records still exist.
After reading his biography it’s easy to understand why Western New Yorkers ran Joesph Smith out of Palmyra and out of the State. I cannot fathom how Mr. Romney (or anyone) can venerate such an old style magician, se’er and flim flam man – and a man who delighted in marrying under–aged girls – but only under the condition that they keep the marriages secret from his first wife Emma. Sure it’s hard to believe – until you read the history.
I heartily believe in the separation of church and state
but unlike Mr. Pyle, I do indeed question any religion founded by a convicted swindler. If you can judge a man by his heroes, what does that say about Mitt Romney?
Little wonder Mormonism is considered a cult.
Posted by: BobbyCat | December 08, 2007 at 09:52 PM ——and then again on Sun, 12/9/07 @ 4:42pm
Posted by: BobbyCat | December 09, 2007 at 04:43 PM
Correction.
The NEWS did not remove my post as I suspected.
I failed to find it. There are Romney posts in two blogs – Politics and Opinions. I failed to find it.
My mistake, My apologies.
Bobby Cat shows he’s obviously a secular heathen.
You dont’ “Find a church when you need religion”. You need God in your life ALL the time. You don’t go to Church for a “fill-up” on religion when you find yourself needing some.
He DOES worship Seperation of Church and State. Not in the Constitution, but an opinion of the supreme Court. More judicial activism.
How lefties get this confused is beyond me. Most of the people who came and colonized this land mass came here because they didn’t care much for the idea of a National Religion, which monarchs in Europe were creating by law.
And that’s all the Constitution says. NO NATIONAL CHURCH. NO “CHURCH OF THE UNITED STATES”, or “THE XX CHURCH WILL BE THE ONLY RECOGNIZED CHURCH,ALL OTHERS ARE OUTLAWED”
Godless heathens see it differently. Freedom and TOLERANCE of religious expression was the vision of the Framers.
I don’t advocate any religion over another. All can be considered paths to God. I don’t believe anyone need be forced to believe in God or to worship God.
Moreover, I don’t believe freedom of religious expression includes removing all references of God from American life, as some here seem to wish it did.
If any organized religious denomination wants to bind persons of the same sex together, that would be a decision of the church, NOT OF THE GOVERNMENT. No license should be necessary for a couple to be married in a church anyway. But you can’t have it both ways. Either be married in a church, or NOT AT ALL. This Bullshit of Mayors preforming civil ceremonies and then the couples saying they’re “MARRIED” is a joke.
Regardless of Gender, if you got married in a church, you’re married. If you got “married” at the Justice of the Peace, that isn’t recognized by God. Which is it going to be?
I’m a “Godless heathen”, eh Hank. Ok, if stone-throwing makes you feel better, go ahead, make yourself feel better at my expense. I understand.
But I won’t return the insult. Instead, I will add an observation about evangelicals that’s got me stumped, which is -
Why evangelicals look forward to the biblical prophesy of the Book of Revelations, i.e. Ammegeddon – the epic battle against the anti-christ, in which Christ and a small handfull of his faithful will emerge triumphant but… all Jews and all the infidels and most Christians will perish, after which the remaining faithful will rise into heaven with Jesus.
How can these pious Christians (like yourslef, apparently) actually look forward to such carnage. And why would anyone in his right mind elect a president who believes this devastating prophesy, not to mention looks forward to it?
Yes, I think they are all delusional. In a word – nuts, crazy.
BobbyCat, when you say, “In a word,” you should use one word. I agree 100% with you, though, LOL. BTW, the settlers weren’t defenders of tolerance – they were zealots and xenophobes. Let’s clear the air! The bible belt is still filled with them. I only wish we had a few candidates who represent the secular among us – the rational, that is. Hillary, at least, keeps it mostly to herself. That’s more than we can say for Barack or any of the republicans. Umm, no secular-religious laws? Try illegality of drugs, no alcohol sale on Sunday, no gay marriage and no abortion (till the 60’s). Nice try, though.