Tuesday, July 29, 2008
|
|
The Recycled Anti-Romney Story ...
|
|
Posted by:
Matt Lewis at
5:24 PM
|
|
As Allah Pundit points out, this story is nothing new. I was on Fox talking about this exact same story back in early April. So why has the Washington Times recycled the story? One possibility is that the reporter (and editor) missed it the first time, but a more likely scenario is the fact that "veep" speculation is nearing apogee has made this story "newsworthy" again.
... Except it's not. A bogus story isn't better the second time around.
Mitt Romney is not a perfect running mate pick, but reports of massive evangelical angst over his potential selection are highly suspect. My guess is that this is not a grassroots effort, but rather merely "astroturf." Most likely, this story is not the product of rank-and-file organic evangelical angst, but rather an invention of the Mike Huckabee forces (who, by the way, are more likely to "pitch" the story to a Washington Times reporter ...)
Sure, there might be some anti-Mormon votes out there -- but the threat that he would cost McCain 5-7 percent of the vote seems purely hysterical to me. A more legitimate concern about Mitt Romney is his fairly recent conversion to the pro-Life cause. But I'm suspicious that this is the rationale behind the anti-Romney forces. After all, if they are concerned about the life issue -- as I am -- why not use their clout to focus on stopping Tom Ridge?
Romney should be considered if McCain believes he can help win states like Michigan, as well as help with the economy and fundraising. He may -- or may not -- be a good pick. But make no mistake; the attacks on him are not "spontaneous" ...
|
|
|
I do not buy that all these Evangelicals hate him. But if you are going to convince independents that Romney is a plus as Veep, then Romney has to run as Veep on his economic and business credentials. If Team McCain does that, then Romney is an asset. If they fail to do that, then Romney probably doesn't help. |
|
|
There are many reasons not to like Mitt as a Candidate for VP, Go to this link to see 6 videos why he would be a horrible pick. http://www.hotpres.com This is just another indicator of the McCain Camps despration, I guess it doesnt matter. I dont think McCain can win as the GOP Nominee anyway. Could you imagine McCain even having enough energy to run your local Mcdonalds. Seriously. Think about it next time your in line watching the Mcdonalds manager run around taking orders and shouting orders. McCain couldnt do it. So I ask You, how will McCain be president??? Looks as though the RNC got behind the wrong candidate and they will pay for it., Guess they should of let the primary season play out without trying to minupulate the outcome.. Good news is i think McCain is just about done, I wouldnt doubt the GOP ditch him at the last second and run a younger more charasmatic charachter. Did you see him knock all that stuff off the shelf at the supermarket. the video is at http://www.mccanes.com all the while barack obama is looking like an NBA super star, (arrogence and all) even taking time to stop and have a cigar break video at http://www.theobamaplan.com |
|
Any conservative out there that doubts someone can change their mind on this issue really needs to take a hard look at Ronald Reagan . . . he did the exact same thing, and no one ever called him insincere or a flip-flopper.
I would think any conservative out there would be anxious to have everyone change their stance from "pro-choice" to pro-life.
Mitt Romney has so much to offer, and it disturbs me that those out there that profess to be Christian, are demonizing this man. Maybe they need to look at their OWN "Christian" life . . . and VALUES. |
|
they do not hate Huckabee. They hate that he cannot be bought. The establishment (both Dem and Rep. and liberal and conservative) is scared to death that the Fair Tax will take off and the repressive, destructive federal income tax will be eliminated.
The Fair Tax does not have loopholes allowing for tax avoidance. The Fair Tax reduces government control of its citizens. The Fair Tax allows citizens to know exactly how much government is costing them.
The Fair Tax focuses on consumption rather than production. With this focus, the Fair Tax makes the U.S. economy more competitive. By making the economy more competitive, it will be harder for the establishment to keep their current share of the pie.
It is important to remember what President Reagan said (and I paraphrase), "Government is not the solution, government is the problem." Why government is the problem is that the establishment has set the system up primarily to maintain their elite status and enormous wealth and incomes. That is why the federal income tax code takes up more than 60,000 pages. Even more than giving the establishment advantages, the federal income tax code makes it more difficult for people to compete in our economy.
Huckabee is not beholden to the establishment. He is a greater threat to them than an idiot like Obama. |
|
|
|
|
With his insistence on amnesty. The anti-Mormon contingent is the least of his problems. |
|
This is exactly right on target. I firmly believe that these people (Anti-Mormon hostage takers) are few in number and not representative of evangelicals in general. Romney, Huck and Mac all split the evangelical vote fairly evenly, and there are many evangelical/religious right leaders and voters who endorsed Romney and still support him as VP.
These people are indeed Huck supporters with sour grages, and I wouldn't be surprised at all if Huck is behind it. He still hasn't been able to get past his jealousy of Romney. Last night when asked about VP prospects, he refused to even name Romney.
mariesgofer- you need to look at Huck's past behavior to understand why Matt and what he said. Matt was always a McCAin guy, as far as I knew and had nothing against Huck until the truth was too obvious to ignore. |
|
Ticket.
That is the headlines from the Washington Times and the Boston Globe.
That was the headlines during the primaries.
According to Huck, God is too smart to run for public office.
Why do they think that using their religion to threaten politicians is a good thing?
I want a politician who will listen to Americans, not whore himself for this or that religious consituency.
Remember, crazies!! Jesus said to render unto Ceasar what is his and render unto God what is His.
These religious leaders reeking with the stench of worldly ambition and lust of political dominance, audaciously claim to be servants of Him who affirmed: "My kingdom is not of this world.
Voting for or against someone on the sole basis of their religion is a sure sign of crazed idiocy.
A good place to start would be the parable of the Good Samaritan.
|
|
[Pat on July 29, 2008 5:48 PM]"Ronald Reagan . . . did the exact same thing"
How come Romney changed from being pro-life to being pro-choice?
9 June 2007. Bishop Romney's Sadistic Anti-Abortion Counseling
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0706/S00066.htm
Judy Dushku: In the early 90s, our feminist newspaper Exponent II, did a theme issue about Mormonism and abortion. X said she’d like to write a piece describing her experience. We agreed to publish her story anonymously because we knew her and knew about the ordeal.
Then in 1994, when Romney was running for the Senate, he came out in favor of choice for women -- which was surprising to me. I was pleased and called, asking to see him. I told him I suspected that we had our differences, but that maybe I could work with him if he’d come to a really good position on women and childbirth.
And he said – Yes, come to my office.
I went to his office and I congratulated him on taking a pro-choice position. And his response was – Well they told me in Salt Lake City I could take this position, and in fact I probably had to in order to win in a liberal state like Massachusetts.
Suzan Mazur: Who’s “THEY”?
Judy Dushku: I asked him the same question. And he said “the Brethren” in Salt Lake City.
And I said, Mitt, it doesn’t make me happy to hear that. What you’re suggesting is that you’re not genuinely pro-choice. It’s a position of convenience.
He said – Oh no, I actually had an aunt who died of a botched abortion. So I have some positive feelings about choice, but basically I know that I have to take that position.
//////////////
Murdock, Deroy
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/DeroyMurdock/2008/02/04/ mitts_vietnam_flip-flop_his_most_disturbing_yet?page=full&c omments=true&voted=5
But nothing prepared me for Romney’s most amazing flip flop of all. Somehow, I missed it, despite months of researching his bipolar record.
|
|
I thought Huck was a gun-toting, religious, backwoods AR hillbilly. Yet, Matt Lewis thinks he can manipulate the media.
|
|
|
|
|
He is, and he can manipulate the media. All it takes is a phone call to one of his followers. Just like the anti-Mitt ad full of lies that backfired. Huckabee is nothing if not conniving. |
|
NOT!!!!
http://plutarch01.wordpress.com/2007/12/13/huckabees-weigh t-loss-scam/
|
|
apnews.myway.com/article/20080729/D927P9I80.html
Flip-flops again on "no new taxes pledge" while putting on display once again why he cannot be trusted. You can't be everything to everybody. He is only "mavericky" when sticking it to conservatives while assuring those demanding their entitlements that he on their side too. Worst campaign ever. Remember, bad campaigns signal incompetent leaders. This is what it will be like if this clown gets elected. |
|
|
is not a very good VP choice. I don't want to draw away from TH's audience, but if you go to Matthew Yglesias's blog at the Atlantic, he has a graph from Rasmussen showing Romney's unfavorability rating at 48%. People just do not like, whether it be the flip flopping, pandering, or the shameless attempts at "relating" the people. If McCain is in a position to win, I hope he goes with Pawlenty. If it looks like a landslide, pick Romney, so at least we won't have to deal with him in 2012. |
|
[Joe on July 29, 2008 5:41 PM]"then Romney has to run as Veep on his economic and business credentials"
[Joe on June 30, 2008 11:41 AM]"I like Romney as VP
So long as it is not just Romney as VP, but Romney as part of the McCain-Romney economic team."
What do you think of the flat tax?
Romney: flat tax "a TAX CUT for FAT CATS!"
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.republicans/msg /325636c3abbc6985
[Joe on June 16, 2008 9:49 AM]"I actually like Mitt (if he is sold as the economics guy of the team)"
[Joe on June 10, 2008 8:39 PM]"I like Mitt if Team McCain portrays him as the economic go to guy."
Do you think Romney handled the MA economy well?
Do you think McCain needs to shore up his levels of support among social conservatives?
Do you disagree with any of this Ruffini?:
Ruffini, Patrick. 2 February 2008. "Intransigent Huck Voters"
http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/blog/g/3e361230-a9d8-4d02-89 da-b74fcc04dced
fiscal conservatism is where the opinion leaders are, and social conservatism is where the votes are.
==
it seems to me that the conservative establishment's decision to go nuclear first on Huckabee (who never had a shot but speaks for voters we need in November) before McCain (who always had a shot but speaks mostly for himself) will rank as a pretty serious strategic blunder.
/////////////////////////////////////////
Murdock, Deroy. 14 January 2008. "Mitt's Mythical 'Mass. Miracle'"
http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=12568
disgusting Romney
http://www.spectator.org/blogger.asp?BlogID=11056
Romney hit hard on MSNBC -Taxes, Flip-flops, & Social Issues
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8bSyAihn18
SCM employees on Romney's job-cutting
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/05/30/these-ads-kept-mit t-romne_n_49954.html
|
|
[PC on July 29, 2008 6:25 PM]"he [Huckabee] can manipulate the media"
As well as Romney?
Bresnahan, David M. 3/27/2002. "Romney: The cover-the-road politician"
http://www.888webtoday.com/bresnahan6.html
Romney is a master politician and public relations expert. He was asked to speak to a luncheon gathering of LDS public relations people who were preparing more than a year in advance of the Olympic Games for handling the anticipated requests for information they expected would come from the media of the world. Romney spoke about his public relations manipulations during his 1994 U.S. Senate campaign against Sen. Ted Kennedy. Romney was candid about the methods he and his staff used to shape the views and thinking of the people, but he was defeated by the master manipulator, Kennedy. When he finished his presentation he excused himself from lunch and departed. The next speaker was Elder Henry B. Eyring of the LDS Church Twelve Apostles.
Eyring made it clear, in a very nice way, that the methods described by Romney were not the methods to be used by the LDS Church Olympic volunteers gathered in the room.
|
|
[Matt Lewis]"Sure, there might be some anti-Mormon votes out there -- but the threat that he would cost McCain 5-7 percent of the vote seems purely hysterical to me."
How much would a Romney VP nomination cost McCain in terms of votes?
////////////////////////////
[JoeB131 on June 13, 2008 12:44 PM]"Utah is the least of McCain's problems. If he takes Romney, the Evangelicals, who hold sway in most of the south, may well stay home, which gives Obama an advantage in VA (13), OH (20), PA (21) NC (15) and MO (11)."
What's Romney-supporters' explanation for Romney coming in:
4th in SC?
3rd in Missouri?
As everybody knows, Romney spent boatloads of money in advertising.
What's Romney-supporters' response to this?:
[Pro on May 5, 2008 11:07 PM]"Romney came in largely third or lower in the old Confederacy. He is poison down there.
South Carolina: 4th, Tennessee: 3rd, Georgia: 3rd, Alabama: 3rd, Oklahoma: 3rd, Missouri: 3rd, Arkansas: 3rd."
|
|
Has anyone seen the LDS church, at any level, writing letters and building a coalition for or against a candidate?
You won't find any because the church has a strict policy against endorsing political candidates. Every election cycle the church reminds us of this.
We are encouraged to study the candidates and the issues and make our own choices.
It is pretty clear that many evangelical "leaders" don't adhere to such policies. The mean-spiritedness of these attacks contradicts the teachings of Christ on several levels.
B.T.W. - Synth, the sanctity of the Bishop's confessional goes both ways. Judy Dushku violated that sacred trust by revealing her "private" discussion to the press.
Was Esther an apostate because she married King Xerxes, a non-jew?
Was Abraham a liar because he told the Pharoah Sarai was his sister? As God directed?
Was Saul, who became Paul, a flip-flopper because he turned from persecuting the church to becoming the greatest missionary in history?
Do we forever condemn Peter because he denied the Christ three times?!
Moses was denied entry to the promised land for his one mistake. Do we not revere him and honor him?
The daughter of Pharoah lied about the origins of Moses? Are we not glad for her deception?
Adam and Eve broke the first commandment they received. Do we not honor our first mother and father?
Are all the great Christian leaders without spot, without mistakes, without errors in their lives.
Take the beam out of your own eye before you worry about the speck in mine.
|
|
Mitt must be the veep pick. All the rats are starting to come back out on deck for Huckles!
|
|
I can't believe the Washington Times recycled this story! How's that for liberal bias, trying to spark in-fighting among the GOP as it appears McCain is likely to select Romney.
I for one and sick of liberal political reporting. I agree with Mr. Lewis. The whole avangelicals-won't-vote-for-a Mormon narrative is totally over hyped. Only two groups give credibility to this narrative: liberals and the pro-Huckabee/anti-Mormon crowd. Of course neither of those lobbies are credible. In fact I know MANY evangelicals who would support Romney as VP. Indeed many of these evangelicals voted FOR Romney in the primaries.
So let's move past this imaginary narrative and not give it any credibility, because it's just plain not based on the facts. |
|
|
|
|
The other part of that poll shows Romney with the highest favorability ratings among republicans, with your pal Huck coming in 2nd. |
|
That's nice, but the primaries are OVER!!!
It will be more than Republicans voting in November.
Geez... |
|
Loyaltee writes:
"So let's move past this imaginary narrative and not give it any credibility, because it's just plain not based on the facts."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Amen to that! This story is a waste of internet bandwidth as the number of bigoted-idol-loving-huckabee-followers is small and we need to STOP GIVING THE BULLIES THE ATENTION THEY CRAVE--maybe then they will go AWAY! Many evangelicals, including myself, voted for Romney in the primaries and are looking forward to voting for him again as VP in the GE!
Check this out-huckabee's fan club is pretty lacking:
John McCain’s Veepstakes: Mitt Romney
07/17/2008
By Brian, Arizona, Jul 17, 2008 @ 03:33 PM
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=27511&page=3#c1
”Romney was not a flop in the south – Huckabee was. Think about it. The former 10 year Arkansas governor was competing in the south against a western moderate McCain and a mormon governor from Mass. The results: the Huckster gets killed by McCain and Romney in Forida. In the few southern states Huckabee won, excluding his home state of Arkansas, he won by 2% of the vote!! For example, Huck wins Georgia 34% to 32% for McCain and 30% for Romney. The Huckster wins Tenn. By 2% of the vote.
The truth is that McCain, Romney and Huck essentially split the southern vote roughly in thirds. About 65% of Southern Republicans voted for McCain or Romney rather than their neighbor Huck. That is rejection.
Oh, one more thing, examine the exit polls for the primary. Huckabee only got slightly more evangelical votes than Romney – they essentially slpit that vote too with Huck generally only getting less than 10% more of the evangelical vote. Romney did reasonable well in the south and very well other places. Huck barely won a few southern states and was laugher most other places. While Romney only got under 15% of the vote once, Huckabee got 15% or less in 14 states before he withdrew!!”
|
|
Are you sure you are not ronwik incarnate? You seem to have a real anger management issue! (I just re-read you first post.)
You are the one who can't handle the truth, my dear. Every time someone tells the truth about the Huckster, rather than face it, you simply ignore reality and/or call them a liar. |
|
No one is focusing on Ridge because I don't think anyone honestly believes McCain would actually pick him. That's like asking why evangelicals aren't demanding McCain not pick Hillary. It doesn't seem conceivably in the cards. Romney however has been constantly pushed down my throat by "conservative" sites like Townhall, so it is only natural that he is going to be more heavily scrutinized.
As for Romney, look at his favorables versus unfavorables:
Favorable: 42%
Unfavorable: 48%
You do not win elections by alienating more people than you bring in. Compare these to Huckabee:
Favorable: 47%
Unfavorable: 39%
Huckabee has a +8 differential in favor of him. Romney has a -6 differential. The total difference between Huckabee and Romney? (8) - (-6) = 14. When it comes to a percentage of the electorate, that is not chump change. That's more like the equivalent of every black in America. On a pragmatic level, given also the love of populism and blue collar workers in swing states, Romney doesn't seem to help. |
|
The most important unfavorable rating wasn't polled, but McCain's dislike for Romney is well-known.
Mitt ain't it. |
|
For me, I am admittedly most suspicious of Romney on the issue of life. However, I also don't like being told to accept yet another fat cat from Wall Street. Remember when Huck posed the question of who you'd rather vote for -- the guy who you work with, or the one who laid you off? It was a hard-nosed judgment, but a fair one.
Furthermore, who can believe someone who claims that he pulled over to the side of the road and wept when he heard that blacks were going to be accepted into the Mormon church, or that he saw his dad walk with MLK Jr? These smack of being a phony. Gay marriage, Romneycare, the Big Dig, and being governor of anywhere from the 1st to 3rd most liberal state in the union don't help his case any more. (From what I understand, his judicial picks are nothing to brag about -- definitely not someone I then want tapping folks for SCOTUS)
Yet even all that has not completely turned me away from Romney. Talk radio more than Romney himself has done more to achieve that by creating a messianic cult of personality around him, while baselessly trashing anyone who isn't Romney (not just Huckabee). On these points, I am still resentful and resistant towards the idea of a Romney VP pick. |
|
PC writes:
"jritterbush calm down
The other part of that poll shows Romney with the highest favorability ratings among republicans, with your pal Huck coming in 2nd."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Thanks for clearing that up, PC! I knew there had to be more to the poll numbers than that!!!
|
|
For me, I am admittedly most suspicious of Romney on the issue of life. However, I also don't like being told to accept yet another fat cat from Wall Street. Remember when Huck posed the question of who you'd rather vote for -- the guy who you work with, or the one who laid you off? It was a hard-nosed judgment, but a fair one.
Furthermore, who can believe someone who claims that he pulled over to the side of the road and wept when he heard that blacks were going to be accepted into the Mormon church, or that he saw his dad walk with MLK Jr? These smack of being a phony. Gay marriage, Romneycare, the Big Dig, and being governor of anywhere from the 1st to 3rd most liberal state in the union don't help his case any more. (From what I understand, his judicial picks are nothing to brag about -- definitely not someone I then want tapping folks for SCOTUS)
Yet even all that has not completely turned me away from Romney. Talk radio more than Romney himself has done more to achieve that by creating a messianic cult of personality around him, while baselessly trashing anyone who isn't Romney (not just Huckabee). On these points, I am still resentful and resistant towards the idea of a Romney VP pick. |
|
In short, here's how I see things:
Huckabee:
- Consistently pro-life
- Consistently pro-gun
- Instituted covenant marriage as governor of Arkansas
Romney:
- Pro-abortion before, supposedly converted, little to show for it
- Praised gun registration laws while governor of MA, supposedly converted, little to show for it
- Cooperated with MA's Supreme Court on implementing its gay marriage decision
...Looking at these 3 issues, which guy would you take? |
|
Is that you Bill O'Reilly? Romney a cultist? Isn't that a bit much big guy? Well, at least he isn't Irish.
You are the target guy for Pasadena Phil's new army of guys in the bag for Obama. You better sign up! |
|
|
|
rather lose a campaign than lose a war."
That is noble; I would also like to hear him say, I would rather lose a campaign than be threatened by "agents of intolerance". |
|
at it again ,picking on huck and blaming all little mitty's problems with him . boooo hoooo
nobody likes mitt because he's a mormon and better than everyone else , yeah right.the simple fact is mitt; if mitt gets the vp nod, will cost mcain the election becuase he can't connect with the great majority of swing voters .huck nailed it when he correctly said mitt reminds people of the guy that lays them off and sends their jobs overseas . that one issue will allow the dems to drive a stake thru the heart of mcains campaign. should huck get the nod? probably not, he brings out too much animosity from the mormons,and we all can see how they hold a grudge look at pc ,queen 1 of 7 wives little gun bill and all the other mormons posts , not enough to cost mcain the election , but enough to hurt the party . if mitt cared for anything besides homself he would step uot of vp proccess himself . but he won't because he thinks that he's entitled to it , after all he almost bought the nomination .it sucks when you spend so much to get so little |
|
This blog completely ignores what a lot of this article was saying which is that Romney cannot be trusted on the issues that matter to a very large block of voters.
They will not allow it any press, they will turn it into a mormon thing as a red herring.
So go ahead. Put Romney on the GOP Titanic.
Maybe after a crushing loss in november, maybe they will finally learn.
They should have learned after Iowa. And after being told that Romney would do poorly in the South they ignored it.
I said months before super tuesday, not a single Southern state for Romney. Though I don't want to sound too harsh, it was nothing more than common sense.
The slash and burn, flip-flop, deny it, then attack, argue constantly and never let the other person talk may be favored by some people, but in other parts this type of behavior can get under people's skin. Like Hillary Clinton.
I know, I'm about to be called an liar and who knows what else. But this is just a typical example of why Romney doesn't work. Stop bashing people for critical thinking. It doesn't help. Give it some thought if you care to. |
|
Calling Mitt’s church a cult
Dr. Richard Jeffes said
“Be careful of any faith that says you need faith in Christ and...”
According to this minister’s version, Paul said that amounts to adding on to the gospel. Then the minister said, “that Paul is saying that if anybody names the name of Jesus, but adds to that gospel, the gospel of works let that person go to hell. That’s what he is saying. How is that for being tolerant? Paul was the most intolerant man alive when is came to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. He said there are not many ways to heaven. There is one way to heaven that’s by faith in Christ alone.” “Now I know that I am going to get in trouble for saying this, but it needs to be said right now. Many of you members know that one of the contenders for the presidency in 2008 is Governor Mitt Romney of Massachusetts.
Now let me be clear to say, I am neither for nor against Mitt Romney. He may be a great leader, he may make a great father and husband he may make a worthy president. But Mitt Romney is a Mormon, and don’t let anyone tell you other wise even though he talks about Jesus as his Lord and Savior he is not a Christian. Mormonism is not Christianity. Mormonism is a cult. And just because somebody talks about Jesus does not make them a believer. What really distresses me that some of my ministerial friends and even leaders in our convention are saying, ‘Ah well he talks about Jesus what’s the big deal?’ It is a big deal if anybody names another way to be saved except through Jesus Christ, there are not many ways to God there is one way to God, and it’s through his Son Jesus Christ. So this is clear, Paul is not saying, I don’t care what other people teach.” Now and the truth is we don’t all agree on some finer point on theology….there are a number of things where we can differ and still fellowship together.”
|
|
Good post.
Just to let you know, you are going to get hit by the wrath of LDS and their fellow travellers on this board for saying it, but good post, man! |
|
Here in a nutshell is why Mitt Romney would be an awful runningmate.
1) Evangelicals- They don't trust him. They don't trust Mormons, they don't trust the fact that Romney flip flopped on Gay Marriage, gun control and abortion when he decided he wasn't just running in Massachusetts anymore. McCain's already has a lot of problem with Evangelicals, taking Romney would dig him in deeper.
2) Women- A lot of career women would be off-put by Mormon doctrine that treats women as second-class citizens. THis is an area where McCain could clean up, because HIllary was treated so poorly, but not if he takes Mr. 19th Century as his wingman.
3) Hispanics- Romney drank the Tancredo Kool-Aid, and as a result, Hispanics don't trust him. This is an area where McCain could do well. He's been seen as fair on the immigration issue, and a lot of Hispanics couldn't bring themselves to vote for Obama in the primaries. But this won't happen if he takes Romney as a running mate.
4) Working folks. As much as the JayCee crowd gets all tingly about Romney's "business expertise", the fact is the guy made his millions by buying up companies, downsizing workers and shipping jobs overseas to some guy name Pradip who'll work for 10 cents a day. This is NOT the guy you want to make the face of your campaign when so many Americans are out of work or afraid of losing their jobs. Again, McCain can do well here, he's been one of the few to stand up to Corporate America, but not if he takes Romney. |
|
|
McCain is done if he picks Mitt. Why are all the pundits pushing so hard for this guy? He is a flip flopper, has no character, spent tons and tons of money on his run, and people rejected him time and time again. News flash!! we don't want him. Get over it. I think Sarah Palin would be a great pick. Push her. Another News flash!! We like her, we will come out in droves to vote for some one like her. |
|
and they’re spectacular – ignoramuses, that is
Listen – my wife is friends with a Lutheran minister, and this woman (who is reliably conservative on almost all issues) swears that she could never vote for Romney “because he belongs to a cult.”
Anti-Mormon bigotry is real, and it is virulent, and it most certainly could lead to the horrible spectacle of an ObamaNation presidency.
|
|
|
If people would put their bigotry aside and think of what is good for this country - they wouldn't have a problem voting for Mitt. Many Evangelicals voted for Mitt. Unfortunately, we are all going to pay the price if McCain doesn't choose Mitt to be VP and Obama wins...I think Mitt is the only one out there who has the best chance of helping McCain secure the nomination. I cannot get over the amount of unintelligent, uninformed people out there walking this earth. As Rush says "The most expensive commodity we have in this country is ignorance." |
|
You are exactly right. Why not focus on those 'candidates' for veep that are being touted, who have not come around to conservative thought? Ridge is Proabortion. But that's OK. He's not Mormon. Pawlenty is Al Gore with the R as far as being a global warming diciple. But He's OK, because he's not Mormon.
get a clue folks. Your tanking a perfectly good person, because he IS Mormon. And those that say it's not because of that...I saw your earlier posts from previous months. The current 'talking points' received in your little meetings in the basement of your church must have said that you have to say it's not about him being mormon, but.. |
|
So what if Mac Loses because of bigotry? That will only prove in my book, and others, that we have not evolved into a thinking people, but into a people who hate difference. Inspite of the talk.
With anyone else, polls show Mac has zero chance. |
|
I totally agree. I also think Cimmi has his little double standard going. I also know that while it appears there are many anti mo's here, there are actually only a handfull, with different screen names. either that, or they all went to the same anti mo convention (hearing huckie speak again?) and got exactly the same verbage to repeat over and over and over. They are so wrong, and will pay the price.
I do agree that Mac ought to stand on principal, get rid of the BIGOTS (yes, cimmi, you are one) and tell the country if they can't vote for a Mormon, that's their problem, not his. If he loses because of bigotry, oh well. 2012 will be here soon enough, then Mittwill look not like a gov running for office but a true savior of the country that went to hell in a handbasket because of BIGOTRY. |
|
|
Romney cannot save us from McCain. The Trojan Horse Democrat is the presumed nominee. Only a miracle at Minneapolis can save the GOP from certain defeat in November. |
|
None of the GOP candidates from the recent primary should be selected. None of them managed to defeat McCain--a weak candidate himself.
McCain should try to tap a popular political leader from a swing state who has personal charisma, business/economic expertise, successful executive experience, solid conservative credentials without being excessively pious, excellent public speaking skills, youthful attractiveness and physical vitality, and an admirable background with perhaps an umblemished stint in either the military or law enforcement.
Of course, if and when McCain finds such a person, we'll all be wondering why he or she isn't on the top of the ticket. |
|
|
you don't like mitt because he's a mormon? as i have stated prior to this. i don't like mitt as canidate for a host of reasons beyond his mormonism . i personlly have no problems with mormons practicing their "faith" as they see fit. How ever, i will not allow my vote to legitimize ,or lend any sort of credibility to this cult. |
|
Is bigtory!!!! Hellow????? Are you so blinded by your over paid preacher, and so insecure in your own faith, that you can't see that your a first class BIGOT? Hummm.. You lend such creedence to your faith! (not).
|
|
I think you'll be hard pressed to find one. But there are many states where he makes difference. MI, CO, NV.
Romney, Mac and Huck split the southern vote, and the evangelical vote. It's hogwash that Romney's Mormonism will hurt McCain. Sure, there are a few people who won't vote, but when it comes down to it they are not going to matter. There are a heck of alot more people - real conservatives - that Romney will bring into the fold who are unhappy with Mac.
Mac has internal polling for every state. He knows that Romney helps him in key states. He also knows the anti-Mormon scare tactics are a bunch of hooey.
I'm betting on Mac. He said he was going to make religious freedom an important part of his campaign/presidency. He has already decried "agents of intolerance" in the past. I think he has little sympathy for the hostage-takers trying to bully him again.
It's coming down to who he thinks will help him the most electorally. Pawlenty for MN, and possible WI, or Romney for MI, CO, and NV. Interesting to note that many are skeptical that Paw can deliver MN because even when he endorsed Mac in the primary, Romney won both MN and WI handily.
I'm still betting on Romney. He has the best skill set and brings the most states into Mac's column.
All this anti-Mormon drivel is getting old. All 10 people against Romney on TH better get over themselves and decide whether they want Obama or not. |
|
"How ever, i will not allow my vote to legitimize ,or lend any sort of credibility to this cult."
Me. I'm laughing so hard, I can hardly see to type! Your pretty dumb if you don't think this even remotely sounds like being a religous bigot?
Obama needs to fight the racial bigots. We need to fight the relgious bigots. I fear were fighting with the same people. |
|
Just because a few folks are playing hardball (because the stakes are high) by asking the right questions and only because we have pointed to some significant evidences regarding Mormonism – is it really fair to refer to this as “bigotry?”
Didn’t Christ himself call followers to “salt” the earth (the preservative quality) and to provide “light” where there was darkness (untruth)? I believe that the Biblical model is to confront false prophets with truth. How is it appropriate to reduce people that find substantive fault with a religion based on factual evidences to mere “bigots?” Isn’t that just like the age old tactic of relativists and liberals labeling the opposition as “intolerant”?
In the same manner that some of us chanted “character matters” during the Clinton administration, today, in the age of Romney (VP?), we are suggesting that “religion matters.” To some people, belief systems like Mormonism/ Scientology/ JW provide the soil for flipping & flopping (and Romney is a personification of these qualities - reinforcing the concern).
We need solid ground for our leaders. Can’t we ask the tough questions?
|
|
|
...the followers of the Obama are pitching this manure. |
|
I don't care that your Lutheran friends wife who is almost always conserative won't vote for Romney. Whoopie!
Guess what? I'm ALWAYS conservative and I AM going to vote for him if he is VP. So is almost everyone else.
Feel free to make fools of yourselves, all. The rest of us care a little bit more about our country than that. |
|
From your post, I can see that you are clueless about the founding of our great nation. You don't seem to understand that there should be no religious test required for office. You haven't seemed to notice that people of all faiths can serve our country. Maybe you don't even know that LDS people have given their very lives for your freedom.
You don't understand the difference between simply disagreeing with another faith (not bigotry), and refusing to vote for a qualified candidate based solely upon their religion (bigotry).
Then you throw out the silly notion that Mormonism makes one a flip-flopper. Gee, Doug, I wonder what caused Huck, Mac and all the others to flip-flop? Maybe the mere mention of Mormonism causes one to go into a flip-flopping fit! Be careful everyone!
I will not be surprised to learn that you are a Huck supporter. Can we ask some tough question of him? Why does he lie about so many things? Why did he steal furniture and destroy computer harddrives, why did he pardon 1000 criminals some of whom went on the murder and rape? Why did he try to divide social conservatives? Why did he trick the press with the negative ad fakeout? Why did he use religion and lie about the floating cross? Why did he lie about why he raised taxes, or who donated the money for his protrait (freshed ethics violation) ?
We need solid ground for our leaders! Can't we ask tough questions?
You'll notice not one beef I have with Huck is based upon his religion, I'm not a bigot. |
|
I am on solid ground. I have a family, we are a great family. We love our country, our children are growing up to be wonderful people. We love our church, we love the other members of our church. When we go to church we find our faith in God and Jesus strengthened. We contribute to society, we vote conservative, for crying out loud!
Romney is a decent, qualified man. He was the best choice, but he did not make it. He is winning all of the internet polls and millions upon millions of people who are not Mormons want him for leadership, the majority of the party, in fact.
You are not on solid ground when you imply that LDS people aren't. Who are you to think that YOU little Doug, are the all-knowing judge of which faith God accepts or rejects? I certainly would not want to take on that mantle.
Get over it already, Doug. If Romney is VP, I guess you'll have to answer your own question about how much you love your country. |
|
|
he will hurt mcain thru out the south with decreased voter turnout and in the rust belt states , colorado will still be up for grabs ,and the rest of the states pc listed don't have enough electoral votes to fill a teacup much less win an election .the big question for romney is where can he deliver outside the mormon strong holds ?michigan is his only chance and that's marginal he barely won that primary and its not a state with a lot of republicans anyway. |
|
|
If I'm not mistaken, Romney won handily in MI. But it doesn't matter, because little old you knows more than Mac and his staff; and all those polls showing Mac winning with Romney are secondary to your superior widsom. Right? |
|
Romney won MI 39% to Mac 30%. Huck got 16.
Shoot, a ket state loves Romney. What are you going to do now? |
|
|
for holding office . last ichecked there is not one single law promoting one religon over another!as for individuals using religion to decide whom they will vote or not vote for is their buisness . this is not a religous test nor is it bigotry . it is simply one way that people of all faiths may use to decide if they can or can not support a canidate . |
|
|
And be your own fool. Nobody cares who you vote for. |
|
|
Earlier I said that Romney won WI. He didn't, I dont know why I thought that, but I was wrong. Sorry! |
|
Our founding fathers didn’t want there to be any official religious test in the legal code. On the other hand, the population was well rooted in Biblical Christianity at that time, and it might well have been an expectation for people to behave (at the ballot box) in ways that were customary for that time period. The wonderful result of what our forefathers established was that I – as a voter – may disqualify a candidate for any reason whatsoever. If I don’t like the color of his shoes, the fact that he’s left-handed, or maybe that he beats his wife, I don’t have to pull the lever at the ballot box (even though my party prefers complete loyalty).
In the case of Mitt Romney, do I really think that he would be worse than Obama? Well, based on his record, it’s really hard for anyone to speculate. He has taken at least two positions on almost every important issue (please visit my blog). At age 60 he decided that he was suddenly “conservative”, yet he has single-handedly institutionalized left-wing, socialist tax-codes and health policy that would make George McGovern blush. Aren’t you the least bit suspicious about this 11th hour “conservative” conversion? Between now and 2012, how else might Romney fluctuate based on the political demands?
The religious test is one of the best available to me as a Christian. I don't want to vote for a Muslim or a Scientologist (or maybe even a Mormon). Please don't tie my hands at the ballot box.
|
|
and vote your bigotry, I don't care. You are perfetly free to make a fool of yourself if you wish, and good luck with that.
It's unfortunate that you have not bothered to know Romney's real record, though. Or, if you do know it, you are distorting it and flat out lying about it to serve your own anti-Mormon purpose. You're perfectly free to do that, as well!
Go right ahead, Doug. But don't think you are fooling anyone but yourself. |
|
Here is what a bigot is.
big·ot: noun A person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.
Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.
My first time on this board, and I agree there must be just a handful of the "Mormon's need not apply" crowd. Cimaronne, there is a difference between the Mormons believing they have the truth (just as the evangelicals do or any other religion does) and refusing to vote for someone of a different faith. The Mormons have been voting for evangelicals and others for years. Why is it any different for evangelicals? The answer is in the definition above.
Seriously, if Romney were an evangelical (whatever that is - maybe that is what needs to be defined) and had made the same changes and is now taking up the fight for conservative positions, would you still feel the same way? You don't have to answer, just a question.
I don't get it. Well, I get it, I just can't believe people can be so obtuse. The Jesus I have believed in all my life taught tolerance and forgiveness. Never understood the salt of the earth or light of the world teaching to be salt in a wound or white lights in the eyes of nonbelievers. I don't care what the Mormons believe about Jesus that may be different or if they are "real" Christians or not by someone's definition. With a little knowledge of Christian history, people would realize the basis for the term as defined today didn't even exist until after the Council of Nicea and a vote on what to accept as dogma 300+ years after Jesus died. Is that really what we should be basing our presidential vote on 1700 years later?
Vote for the best guy! And don't use rehashed flip flops as an excuse not to if you don't are only refusing to vote for a non-Christian. If that is the case then you don't understand this country anyway, and I hope you are a small minority whose votes we can afford to lose. |
|
I had been waiting for your okay to vote. I appreciate the latitude...
Perhaps now that it appears that the base GOP has communicated thoroughly to the McCain campaign the need to avoid the wrong VP choice, we can enthusiastically continue our work with less than 100 days to go. |
|
|
I don't know anyone that I have heard or talked to that think Huck is in the running. He lost his bid also. Did not know when to throw in the towel. I am not saying Huck instead of Mitt, I'm saying we already have a luke warm conservative on the ticket. We need some one Like Condi, or Sarah Palin or Jindal. We don't need some one that can change so quickly his core beliefs. It seams to me that the LDS folks are leaning to Mitt becasue of his LDS beliefs and should back a way from that and look at some of these other people. |
|
|
|
You as a citizen of the US have the right to vote for whom ever you wish for what ever reason you wish. You are free to be a bigoted moron hypocrite as well.
But remember the fundamental principle of true Christian behavior is to treat others the way you would want to be treated.
If you are ok with others refusing to vote for someone of your faith simply because they are of your faith, then fell free, as a true Christian, to NOT vote for a Mormon because he is a Mormon.
If however you are not ok with others refusing to vote for someone of your faith simply because they are of your faith, then you are not a true Christian, but a bigot, a hypocrite and a moron.
Cheers!!! |
|
we do not have to disclose or justify our vote. That is why it is a secret ballot.
I will not vote for someone who supports eliminating traditional marriage. That makes me a bigot, I guess, against those who run supporting eliminating traditional marriage. I oppose them because of their beliefs. In this case, I see my bigotry as a good thing. |
|
It is not surprising to read the various LDS comments which predictably label others as bigots or intolerant. It's unfortunate that Mormons rely on this tactic almost exclusively in an attempt to shut down any type of scholarly or intellectual criticism. I would hate to live in a guarded intellectual cave.
PLEASE NOTE: This is the same tactic most commonly relied upon by the left-wing and liberals as well.
It is also interesting to read the entirely erroneous descriptions of Jesus as some type of milquetoast "giant tent-making" peacemaker - who shunned debate. After all, at the heart of our(religious) disagreement is the ongoing LDS mischaracterization and doctrinal distortion of Jesus.
I believe Christ described a road which was narrow and challenged false teachers in the Temple. |
|
|
Are you ok with others refusing to vote for someone of your faith simply because they are of your faith? |
|
Get a clue ed2.
Refusing to vote for some one because of his religion is NOT the same as refusing to vote for someone because of his political positions.
You seem to have a hard time with this concept.
ed2: I will not vote for someone who supports eliminating traditional marriage.
GB: Good! Don't vote FOR Obama! |
|
Thanks for missing the point. I was a big supporter of Mitt in the primaries – in fact, I wrote him in, since by the time PA’s turn came around, he was officially gone.
However, you had better take seriously the close-mindedness of the Mitt haters. My primary point is that you never know where they are going to show up, or in what numbers. The propaganda out there against the LDS can turn sensible people into Mormon-hating baboons. Can that make a difference in a close race? I don’t know if I want to take the chance.
|
|
if he or she is convinced that a group's teachings are dangerous to the salvation of souls? Is it best just to ignore the group or should the person point out their misgivings about the group's teachings? What is a person of conscience supposed to do? |
|
I was referring to the post about the definition of bigotry. It is not always as simple as quoting a definition. That was my point. |
|
ed2:What should a person do if he or she is convinced that a group's teachings are dangerous to the salvation of souls?
GB: Don't join their church!!!! Or you could violate their constitutional rights by getting pitchforks and torches and burning their house down, raping their women and then killing them all.
ed2: Is it best just to ignore the group or should the person point out their misgivings about the group's teachings?
GB: You could always distort their history, misrepresent their doctrine and vilify their leaders.
Or you could follow the example of Jesus and overwhelm them with your Christian kindness and love to the point that they would want to listen to you. |
|
one thing for sure, the LDS certainly have their preachiness working. |
|
do you think it odd that 1.3 billion Christians are offended when a small group continually tells them that they are misled? |
|
but he is a far better choice for conservatives that any other name on McCain's short list.
There are tons of evangelicals who like Mitt...these minority groups of evangelicals who hate Mitt are (as Matt Lewis suggests) a very insignificant portion of voters. |
|
are unable to engage in reasoned discourse. |
|
"do you think it odd that 1.3 billion Christians are offended when a small group continually tells them that they are misled?"
The 1.3 billion Christians are already too busy arguing with each other that they are being misled. |
|
"A sign of a cult is when its members are unable to engage in reasoned discourse."
Its also a sign someone has better things to do than spend all day posting on message boards.
|
|
If it is true that Matt Lewis is Mormon, it would seem appropriate that he recuse himself from this type of biased commentary.
Also, just wondering if Matt has done any current research by attempting to communicate with any of the long list of Evangelicals (Tim LaHaye included) that have cut the chord with Romney(?) |
|
|
Are you ok with others refusing to vote for someone of your faith simply because they are of your faith? |
|
eddie,
Don't Catholics (your church if memory serves) teach that all other Christian faiths are apostate? Don't you think that hindu, muslim, and buddhists in the world could be offended by the Catholic claim to being the one true church? It seems like you are operating with a double standard here.
I don't care that faithful Catholics, Baptists, Lutherans, or Jews contend for their faith, believing it is the right way to God. If you don't believe your church can help to save you, why attend? Most churches are able to get along fairly well these days. While the disagreements are there, Christians of good will can work together promoting common values and respect others who are trying to follow God. As Gamaliel advised in Acts (rought paraphrase), Let them alone, if it is not of God it will die, if it is we will be fighting against God. |
|
There's a big difference between being anti-Huckabee (or Romney, McCain, or any other INDIVIDUAL) for political reasons than being anti-Mormon, Baptist, Jew, black, women, etc. No one here cares that Huck believes baptism is a requirement for salvation, or about any other particular Baptist belief.
I'll agree that Huck gets jumped on a bit much on these boards, but it doesn't compare to broad based prejudice of bigots who want to malign millions of people in a given group (race, sex, or religion). |
|
the Church calls them heretics. That is different from apostate. They are also called our "separated brethren".
Gamaliel was speaking at a formal hearing. If LDS are brought before a court for their preaching, I will join in with Gamaliel's exhortation.
I do not intend to encourage people to ignore their consciences. |
|
the LDS are not apostates, because they never held traditional Christian beliefs. They are also not heretics, since they are not disagreeing with teachings they once held. Nor are the LDS "separated brethren" since they were never joined to the Catholic Church. The LDS are a separate and unique version of an old faith. Its version comes from a human being who claimed to have revelations and objects from God. Its origins are unrelated to traditional Christianity. |
|
"We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according the the dictates of our conscience and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may." LDS Articles of Faith
I'm glad to see that we agree on that. I don't know how an "apostate" compares to a "heretic", but I doubt the LDS attitude is that different from what you have expressed. We try (imperfectly) to reach out with love to help others want to be apart of what we have. The effort is supposed to be entirely positive - bring the truth you already have and see if we can add to it. There are no anti-Catholic or Baptist classes taught for the purpose of tearing others down.
|
|
the basis of your religion is an attack on traditional Christianity. Traditional Christians believe that no additional salvific works or teachings (beyond those of Christ) were necessary for humans to be saved.
Your beliefs are founded on the position that additional works or teachings are required. If that is not the LDS position, what is the point of the LDS existing? |
|
is a commitment to Christ.
Wether you are Catholic,Protestant, or Mormon.
What makes a person American is their commitment to America.
To say that Mormons aren't Christians is pure slander.
To further say that a Mormon should not be considered for public office because he/she is a Mormon is also saying that a Mormon is also not American.
For religious fundies to say who is and who isn't qualified to run for public office based upon their views of Jesus Christ is not compatible with Christ's teachings.
I want a politician who will listen to Americans, not whore himself for this or that religious consituency.
Remember, crazies!! Jesus said to render unto Ceasar what is his and render unto God what is His.
These religious leaders reeking with the stench of worldly ambition and lust of political dominance, audaciously claim to be servants of Him who affirmed: "My kingdom is not of this world.
McCain said: "I would much
rather lose a campaign than lose a war."
That is noble; I would also like to hear him say, I would rather lose a campaign than be threatened by "agents of intolerance".
Whosover diggeth a pit shall fall in it. |
|
|
|
The tactic of creating confusion about LDS beliefs is often done by contrasting "Christian" belief with some mischaracterized LDS belief.
This can be done in lengthy diatribes, but it can also be done in a short drive-by postings or list of bullet points, like the "Mormonism vs. Christianity" list at the disreputable MormonCult.org.
In typical anti-Mormon style, LDS doctrine is succinctly misrepresented and then "contrasted" with "Christian" doctrine. |
|
You are a hypocrite and a viper.
If God is so good in your life, why do you tear down others faith rather than share the good news of the gospel?
Especially to your fallen brother in the Catholic faith, Eugene.
|
|
You loved it when Eugene said the Mormons were too stupid to think, you loved it when Eugene said Mormons wee as bad as Nazis but dumber, you told Pasadena Phil that Eugene was honorable and was sincerely warning others of the "dangers of Mormonism."
Come to find out Eugene also said that the God of the Bible is a sociopath worse than the Joker in the Batman movies.
So one is only intellectually honest if they bash the Mormons?
What hypocrisy!
Screwtape and Wormwood.
|
|
"the basis of your religion is an attack on traditional Christianity."
That doesnt justify all the slander and distortion of our beliefs. |
|
|
Me and the other wives... we applaud your bigtory. You are in rare form today. |
|
Eddie don't catholics believe that "additional works" like the sacraments (baptism, confirmation, communion, etc.) are required for salvation? Belief in Jesus, coupled with these ordinances is required, right?
Mormons believe that the authority to perform saving ordinances like these was lost when the apostles were killed and not replaced. This is not meant to disrespect those who tried to carry on the work, but if the apostolic authority given by Jesus was not there, then the authority to lead Christ's church was lost.
Joseph Smith was called as a prophet to restore that authority to the earth. I know you believe it was never lost, but that authority is where the disagreement is. Either the Catholics (or Eastern Orthodox) authority was properly passed down, or it wasn't. If not the priesthood had to be restored to men on Earth. There are plenty of examples (Big G has provided them in earlier posts) of prophecies of a falling away in the Bible. |
|
When you say "traditional Christianity" are you talking about the traditional Catholic Christianity or the traditional Protestant Christianity?
Also, are you ok with others refusing to vote for a Catholic simply because they are a Catholic? |
|
To be fair to eddie, he has said that he will vote for McCain even if he chooses an LDS running mate. He just thinks a significant number of others won't be able to stomach it. He did get it right in his 2:19 post, the Founder of the LDS Church started His work about 2000 years ago:
"The LDS are a separate and unique version of an old faith." :)
|
|
if people hold a candidate's religion against him/her there is nothing I or anyone else can do about it. To me, it is a non-issue. People may vote for whomever they want for any reason they want. I am not going to go around judging their motives. |
|
|
I agree with you. I wasn't a fan of Huck's, but given the lack of "buzz" around his name in the veepstakes, there isn't much point in bringing his name up just to bash - as has happened here. |
|
"To me, it is a non-issue"
You are so full of crap!!!
You have lead and followed in the parade. |
|
If you think it's a non issue, why haven't you shut up yourself and told others to do so, and why have you aided and abetted the rabidity of the likes of Eugene?
Talk about self-righteous preaching. |
|
why should I be telling others what to do?
Also, there are clear, significant and distinct differences between what has always been Christian teaching and what is LDS teaching. Pointing the differences out are neither inappropriate or bigoted.
If people do not understand your faith, it is up to you to make it clear to them what you believe. If people are mischaracterizing your beliefs, it is incumbent upon you to state the correct character of your beliefs.
If your postulation of your beliefs is rejected, it is up to you to either re-postulate your positions or to give up the discussion. |
|
the truth as revealed in the Life, Death and Resurrection of Jesus is all that is necessary for salvation. If you get upset because I reject the the teaching that a revelation to Joseph Smith is necessary for me to know the truth, too bad so sad. |
|
why should anyone believe in Joseph Smith's so-called revelations? Is there any reason at all? |
|
For the same reason you should believe in the "so-called" revelations of Isaiah, Jeremaiah, and Daniel. |
|
First, I only bring up Huck when the post is about him, or someone else talks about him first.
Second, I'm getting tired of you always trying to bring Romney down to Huck's level. You are constantly whining that Romney doesn't get as much criticism as Huck. Well, NO ONE gets or deserves as much criticism as Huck! He was a royal stinker in the primary and still is. That was the point yesterday, he was trashing McCain and failing to even admit that Romney was on the VP list. What is up with that! People rightfully called him on it. They rightfully called him on his sick assassinate Obama joke. I can't help it if Huck keeps presenting opportunities to mock him.
No other candidate on our side deserves a tongue-lashing like Huck. He is a dishonorable man, period. He needs to be called out for it. He wants to run again, and people need to know what a skunk he really is.
Go ahead and try to find Romney doing any of the dirty deeds like Huck. You can't. They are not equal, Marie, and neither are any of the other GOP guys on Huck's level. He is his own category. I'm thoroughly and completely disgusted by him. And for once, believe me - IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RELIGION, BUT EVERYTHING TO DO WITH CHARACTER!
I don't care when folks disagree with Romney, I only care when they say he is unfit for office because he is a Mormon. There is abig difference that you're not acknowledging, marie.
So don't hold your breath waiting for me to find one good thing aboout Huck. It's never going to happen unless he repents publically for all his misdeeds. Don't hold your breath for that, either. |
|
exactly what revelations of Jeremiah, Daniel and Isaiah are you talking about?
As far as I know, their revelations were about the coming of Christ.
Joseph Smith's revelations are about how Jesus could not ensure His truth would be available to all men.
Since Christ came as Jeremiah, Daniel and Isaiah foretold, I have good reason to believe them.
Since Joseph Smith had no reason to receive revelations (Christ having already come and accomplished salvation and redemption), I have no reason to believe him. |
|
you are better person than I, still trying to reason with PC. |
|
the religion stuff. You can't win, and you still haven't answered the question of your support for FLDS sex practices. I'm willing to give you a break and never mention it again if you just explain yourself. As far as I know, you never did.
I know you are going to vote for Mac if he chooses Romney. I'm glad about that, but will you give up the religion bashing if he does? I hope so.
|
|
|
marie never tries to reason with me, she just tries to get me to say Romney is as bad as Huck, which he clearly isn't. She can't handle anyone telling the truth about Huck. |
|
Me and the wives got together today and figured out Why it's been so quiet the last 2 weeks. Mitt's been on vacation, and will be through end of the week. Pawlenty trial balloon was floated, and he fell flat. No spark. Huck overlooked the obvious (mitt) and McCain has stumbled more times without his catchers' "Mitt".
Then today we saw this:
Wednesday Afternoon Intrade Update
Republican Vice Presidential Nomination
Mitt Romney 38.5
Tim Pawlenty 30.0
Tom Ridge 15.0
Sarah Palin 13.1
Charlie Crist 13.0
Ok, we'll be back to deciding who sleeps where tonight :) |
|
|
they are mormons ,they make it up as they go and call it a revalation. even several of their own scholars have determined that smith found no golden plates and pretty much made it up. there is no arguing with people who refuse to think critically .the koolaid they drink must be awesome, for so many to be decieved by such an obvious fraud. |
|
One the most effective tactics Satan has used against souls and God's angels has been to divide our Lord's followers. The further Satan can move believers away from God's Church the more successful Satan is. |
|
You're jumping off a cliff now with all the lies. "Several of their own scholars have determined Smith found no plates and made it all up?" Where did you get that gem?
Sheesh. You deserve to be ignored now right along with Eugene and I'm suggesting it right now to everyone.
Fixating on anti-Mormonism appears to be a mental disorder. |
|
Big G:To say that Mormons aren't Christians is pure slander.
To further say that a Mormon should not be considered for public office because he/she is a Mormon is also saying that a Mormon is also not American.
For religious fundies to say who is and who isn't qualified to run for public office based upon their views of Jesus Christ is not compatible with Christ's teachings.
I want a politician who will listen to Americans, not whore himself for this or that religious consituency.
Remember, crazies!! Jesus said to render unto Ceasar what is his and render unto God what is His.
Me: Does that mean that you are going to support repealing the Bush tax cut? Because that's what Jesus was talking about, taxes.
Since I served in the military and you didn't, I would say you don't have much say on who or who isn't an "American".
THe opinion that Mormon's aren't Christian IS a theologically valid one. (It isn't one I share, I say worship whatever invisible sky pixie you want to.) Come to think of it, what is the point of belonging to ANY one church if all of them are right. Either all of them are right, which means it's pretty meaningless, or only one of htem is, which makes your God kind of inept, since so many of his creations are getting the wrong message.
Of course, the reason I would disqualify a Mormon from office is because they don't have the intelligence or integrity to admit they follow A LIE! We are five years into a war because our leaders (both parties) didn't have the intelligence or integrity to challenge conventional opinion (Saddam had WMD's, but he really didn't) or to challenge a strategy that wasn't working.
Sorry, I want better thinking in my President. I want a better decision maker.
|
|
[Loyaltee on July 29, 2008 10:04 PM]"let's move past this imaginary narrative and not give it any credibility, because it's just plain not based on the facts"
Do you agree that "Romney on the ticket likely would cost Mr. McCain 7 percent to 10 percent of the evangelical vote"?
If not: what #s are more accurate?
Hallow, Ralph Z. 29 July 2008. "Evangelicals warn against Romney on ticket
Huckabee backers least flexible"
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/jul/29/evangelical s-warn-against-mccain-romney-ticket/
An evangelical leader who, though he has close ties to Mr. McCain, confided to The Times that polling suggests that putting Mr. Romney on the ticket likely would cost Mr. McCain 7 percent to 10 percent of the evangelical vote - enough to spell defeat for Mr. McCain in a close race with Sen. Barack Obama, the presumptive Democratic nominee.
White evangelicals have become the Republican bedrock in recent elections, providing President Bush with 35 percent of his votes in 2004.
|
|
You're jumping off a cliff now with all the lies. "Several of their own scholars have determined Smith found no plates and made it all up?" Where did you get that gem?
Perhaps from here...
http://packham.n4m.org/101.htm
B. H. Roberts, a General Authority of the church until his death in 1933, studied the Book of Mormon extensively and concluded that Joseph Smith could have authored it himself, using as a source the 1825 book A View of the Hebrews by a protestant minister.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brigham_H._Roberts#Studies_of_ the_Book_of_Mormon
When Roberts confessed that had no answer for some of the difficulties, and the General Authorities chose to ignore them, Roberts produced "A Book of Mormon Study," a treatise of more than 400 pages. In this work he compared The Book of Mormon to the earlier-published View of the Hebrews, written by Ethan Smith, and found significant similarities between them. Finally, Roberts wrote "A Parallel," a condensed version of his larger study, which demonstrated eighteen points of similarity between the two books, and in which he reflected that the imaginative Joseph Smith might have written The Book of Mormon without divine assistance |
|
Eddie:why should anyone believe in Joseph Smith's so-called revelations? Is there any reason at all?
Big G: For the same reason you should believe in the "so-called" revelations of Isaiah, Jeremaiah, and Daniel.
Me: And none of those came true either.
It seems like the kneejerk repsonse of LDS cultists seems to be attacking other elements of Christianity. It doesn't defend Mormonism; if anything, it makes a case for Atheism...
Of course, there is a major difference between Joseph Smith (dum-dum-dum-dum-dum) and those Biblical prophets. No one caught those other guys in a lie.
Joseph Smith claimed to have translated the Book of Abraham from a papyrus he acquired. That papryus was correctly identified as a funerary scroll that had nothing to do with Abraham, in fact, was from a time period 2000 years later than when Abraham (supposedly) lived.
In short, we know that he either lied or deluded himself into thinking he had powers. (I'm going with "lied".)
That in and of itself should cast a doubt on everything the guy claimed.
(Waiting for LDS to either pretend to ignore me or attack me personally, because not a ONE of them can come up with a logical explanation for the discrepency in the Book of Abraham.) |
|
Eugene writes: "Since I served in the military and you didn't, I would say you don't have much say on who or who isn't an "American"."
I joined the ARNG in 2006 and my unit is looking at being deployed in late 09. So I would say you dont know jack.
|
|
Im done talking religion with an apathetic agnotistic that thinks God is a Sociopath worse than the Joker and thinks Mormons are dumb Nazis.
You are a disgrace to the American soldier and the Army values.
|
|
If an E-6 talked to me as you do I'd make sure he got tossed.
You are a disgrace to the Army uniform and Army values. |
|
Loyalty
Duty
Respect
Selfless Service
Honor
Integrity
Personal Courage
|
|
Oh Gawd, give up the anti-Mormon rhetoric Eugene and Eugene. Give it up seriously...and get a life.
You guys keep trying to hammer home that if McCain picks Mitt the anti-Mormon/bigot evangelicals will protest by not voting. You know what: GO FOR IT! Go ahead ahead and sit on your damn hands on election day. But I'll tell you what, if Obama wins because of it all the GOP will blame you, and then we'll kick you out of the party. We don't people in our party who put mean-spirited religious squabbles above the good of the party.
Honestly I imagine that the majority of good evangelicals out there would be utterly ashamed of you and would not want to claim you as their own. And Eugene, don't disgrace the US Army by using your membership in as as evidence of your authority. As pointed out above, your religious bigotry and intolerance for others is a disgrace to the Army uniform. If I knew where your bigoted butts lived I'd come give you a good old fashioned arse whippin'. |
|
|
|
|
Amen. Mac is going to call the bigots bluff and it's not going to matter anymore. |
|
Here this guy and many others say that Evangelicals are saying no to Romney but not to someone like Ridge.
That isn't true. They are saying no to Ridge. It is just that Ridge is not being seriously considered and promoted in the media none stop like Romney.
Evangelicals faced the wrath of the GOP fake conservative media when they said that they wouldn't vote for Guiliani.
Now they aren't saying anything about Guiliani.
It is because Guiliani isn't being constantly pushed any more like he was back then. Romney on the other hand is.
Its called common sense. |
|
These people have never been through true bigotry.
Real bigotry throughout the world is where people are hated and chased and killed, not even able to speak their mind, having their tongues cut out and being burned at the stake.
This is true bigots that should be spoken against. But not voting for a cultist isn't bigotry.
Is it descrimation? Maybe. But saying that you will not vote for a member of a cult is certainly a right I think people whould want to protect even if they agreed with it or not.
My opposition to Romney is because he is a liberal, so I don't have to wonder about the mormon issue because Romney is out because of liberal and flip-flop issues.
All this bigot calling is something very common to hypocrit liberals to anyone who disagrees.
There are the largest amounts of mormons in places like Utah and Nevada. In Nevada you have mormon Harry Reid. You know the senate majority leader? The first mormon senate majority leader. And for years in Salt Lake City you had liberal democrat mayor Rocky Anderson. Who was endorsed by liberal Mitt Romney.
In these areas the mormon wins, and no one screams bigot.
So if you want to keep screaming bigot then go ahead. I don't think its going to help. And if you want to refuse to vote for a cultist then go ahead. People have a right to vote for or not vote for someone for any reason.
|
|
Your true colors showed. Cultist? Hardly. I firmly belive you belong to a cult as well. I read with tears in my eyes the first hand accounts through journals, of my ancestors who were killed. Raped. Property stolen. Driven out of their homes in the dead of winter.
Talk to me about your bigotry, after you read some of what YOUR types did to my people. Don't want to vote for Mitt? don't. we won't miss your and about 12 others. It is time to purge the party. If we lose because of brown shirt bigots who piously sit in pews on sunday, then treat others who are not of their 'brand' of Christina s badly on Monday, fine with me. I personlly wont miss them. |
|
|
|
Cultist is refering to Romney being a mormon which most Evangelicals and even most of the nation regards as a cult.
Even Evangelicals who voted for Romney would regard mormonism as a cult so if you still want to call them bigots then go ahead.
This isn't just done out of meaness or over "brands of Christianity". It is done because Christianity and mormonism (which claims to be Christianity) are two different things.
Many religions teach a simular moral code, however that is only one thing. All that shows is that mankind knows he is a sinner.
Mormonism teaches loyalty to the mormon church, mormon views on morality and being righteous through your good works and loyalty to mormonism.
Christianity is all about Salvation in Christ Alone. No Church ever takes the place of the Gospel. Churches are supposed to be centered on the Gospel, not trying to take the place of the Gospel. And the Gospel is all about Salvation in Christ, not traditions or percepts of men.
So if you want to call anyone who thinks that mormonism is a cult a bigot, then you just called most of the nation a bigot, and will have more in common with the far leftists in this nation.
Christians can say that some mormons have morals and try to live moral lives, and may even consider voting for one. They could say the same thing about atheists or some other false religion. But how can a Christian say that mormonism is not a cult?
Perhaps this helped you to understand or perhaps you are an angry mormon, who doesn't think that people have a right to reject mormonism without being called a bigot.
I hope that rather than in anger and zeal for your tradition, you would clamly consider the things which I have said, and we could have a conversation about the differences between Christianity and mormonism.
|
|
The tactic of creating confusion about LDS beliefs is often done by contrasting "Christian" belief with some mischaracterized LDS belief.
This can be done in lengthy diatribes, but it can also be done in a short drive-by postings or list of bullet points, like the "Mormonism vs. Christianity" list at the disreputable MormonCult.org.
In typical anti-Mormon style, LDS doctrine is succinctly misrepresented and then "contrasted" with "Christian" doctrine.
|
|
is a commitment to Christ.
Wether you are Catholic,Protestant, or Mormon.
What makes a person American is their commitment to America.
To say that Mormons aren't Christians is pure slander.
To further say that a Mormon should not be considered for public office because he/she is a Mormon is also saying that a Mormon is also not American.
For religious fundies to say who is and who isn't qualified to run for public office based upon their views of Jesus Christ is not compatible with Christ's teachings.
I want a politician who will listen to Americans, not whore himself for this or that religious consituency.
Remember, crazies!! Jesus said to render unto Ceasar what is his and render unto God what is His.
These religious leaders reeking with the stench of worldly ambition and lust of political dominance, audaciously claim to be servants of Him who affirmed: "My kingdom is not of this world.
McCain said: "I would much
rather lose a campaign than lose a war."
That is noble; I would also like to hear him say, I would rather lose a campaign than be threatened by "agents of intolerance".
Whosover diggeth a pit shall fall in it.
|
|
How old are you, anyway? you are begining to sound like a kid.
|
|
To Mitt
Shall they stoop from claiming authority of Almighty God, to be handled as a monkey's cat-paw, and pettify themselves into a clown to act the farce of political demagoguery?
When they leave the dignity and honor of heaven, to gratify the ambition and vanity of man or men, may their power cease, like the strength of Samson, when he was shorn of his locks, while asleep in the lap of Delilah.
Truly said the Savior, "Cast not your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you."
Woe to tyrants, mobs, aristocracy, anarchy, and all those who invent or seek out unrighteous and vexatious law suits, under the pretext and color of law, or office, either religious or political.
Exalt the standard of Democracy! Down with that of priest craft, and let all the people say Amen! That the blood of our fathers may not cry from the ground against us. Sacred is the memory of that blood which bought for us our liberty.
|
|
I suppose your comments were directed at me.
Which were comments to qweenmumof8 about calling someone a bigot because the say mormonism is a cult.
If you had actually read my post you would have seen that I was making the point that even Evangelicals who voted for Romney regard mormonism as a cult. They would say things like they aren't electing pastor and cheif and things like that to point out that they regard mormonism as a cult, but think Romney might be a good president.
Big G, there clearly are differences between mormonism and Christianity on their core beliefs and issues. If you would like to discuss those differences I would be glad to. Like for example, mormons believe that Joseph Smith was a prophet. Christians do not. Evangelicals do not. There are many many more differences, which I would be glad to discuss.
PC, sadly your comment didn't sound like much of anything other than an attack. If you wish to attack me then that is your choice and you can do whatever you want. If you want to have an intelligent conversation then I would be glad to do that too. |
|
Eugene
If an E-6 talked to me as you do I'd make sure he got tossed.
You are a disgrace to the Army uniform and Army values.
ME; You're kidding, right? Then again, it's been a while since I've been in, who knows what kind of silliness and political correctness have set in.
Hey, and maybe instead of whining about my remarks about the bible, how about analyzing them. I mean, you whine a lot and take a lot of umbrage, but you never seem to actually analyze anything.
The God of the Bible committed THREE mass slaughters of children. The Flood, the Destruction of Sodom and Gomorah, and the tenth plague on Egypt. (That doesn't count all the times the Israelites slaughtered children at God's command, and there's a lot of those, too.) Exactly how do you justify those actions of being those of a 'good' diety?
I have a simple way of resolving the question. God didn't do any of those things. They are myths, made up by a backward and primitive people. (And it's kind of laughable to think that a God who has billions of galaxies to run would really get all up in the grill of a small tribe wandering around a desert.)
A LOT of evil has been committed in God's name throughout history. Inquisitions, crusades, holy wars, burning of heretics, Mountain Meadow Massacre, flying planes into buildings because you don't like pictures of naked ladies. It becomes a lot easier to do evil things if you let your God get credit for truly evil acts.
|
|
You guys keep trying to hammer home that if McCain picks Mitt the anti-Mormon/bigot evangelicals will protest by not voting. Go ahead ahead and sit on your damn hands on election day. But I'll tell you what, if Obama wins because of it all the GOP will blame you, and then we'll kick you out of the party. We don't people in our party who put mean-spirited religious squabbles above the good of the party.
Honestly I imagine that the majority of good evangelicals out there would be utterly ashamed of you and would not want to claim you as their own.
If I knew where your bigoted butts lived I'd come give you a good old fashioned arse whippin'.
Me: Actually, I don't really believe McCain can win regardless of who he takes as a running mate. I really don't. Bush has clearly screwed things up so badly Jesus couldn't win as a Republican this year.
Actually, I'm not an evangelical. I'm a free thinker. I don't need a minister or a priest or a 'bishop' to tell me what to think, I'm pretty much capable of reading the good book and making my own decisions, thank you. I just point out that there is a lot of hostility between the LDS and SBC, and has been for decades.
I consider a Mormon in the White House more dangerous than any Democrat, even Obama. I can live with Obama. I lived through Carter and Clinton, I can live through Obama. As Voltaire observed, the world is divided between fanatics and scoundrels, but you can reason with a scoundrel.
Oh, I kind of love that last line. In your "Christian" mercy, you are going to come over and inflict physical violence on me... Right, because nothing shows the superiority of a creed than its ability to inflict violence on people who disagree with it... |
|
Amen. Mac is going to call the bigots bluff and it's not going to matter anymore.
Me: You're right. After he does that, he'll be behind B. Hussein by double digits, and lose states Democrats haven't won since Goldwater was beaten by Johnson...
|
|
Then I can with all knowing knowledge about YOUR faith call YOU a cultist as well.
Because I firmely belive you are in the hands of satan. |
|
What we have here is a failure to communicate!
Anyway, NO I DO NOT go ballistic when someone trashes Romney. YOU DO THAT WITH HUCK! You are so emotionally connected to him it's scary.
I go ballistic when someone trashes Romney FOR HIS RELIGION.
Go ahead, criticize Romney all day - on his record, statements, actions, etc. But I'll have something to say if folks tell me he is unfit for office because of his religion. Otherwise, I simply respond to people when I think they are wrong in their analysis of Romney.
And yes, marie, you always try to get me to admit that Romney is just as bad as Huck (in fact everyone is according to you), which he clearly isn't, and neither are the others.
No double standard at all. I apply the same standard for all the candidates. Those who are skunks (Huck) get called skunks. Those who are not (Romney, Fred, Rudy, Hunter, etc. ) don't.
You might want to try facing the truth about your own candidate and stop trying to pretend he doesn't have major character issues. |
|
|
My point was that it doesn't appear that you are capable of having an intelligent conversation. |
|
It is upsetting to me when people attack Romney for his religion. It is an attack on ME. So I'm going to respond to that. (Except for Eugene who is a lying idiot.)
You said that I must despise Huckabee.
YA THINK?! |
|
|
is that everything you said in your 2:45 am post (timing may explain your incoherence) was a bunch of hooey. There is no point in arguing with you over Mormonism and Chistianity because it's just trouble for nothing. You are not going to be reasonable, thoughful or fair. We can go through the motions and spend all day on it, but in the end, you will not have convinced anyone, and neither will I. I know that Mormonism is indeed Christianity, that Mormon doctrine teaches that we are saved by the grace of Jesus Christ, after all we can do, and that my religion strengthens my faith in my Savior. You can't take that away from me no matter how hard you try. The question is why do you yahoos keep trying? I'm not trying to convince you of the fallicies of your faith. This is all perfectly ridiculous. |
|
have been preachers and self-proclaimed prophets teaching that Jesus is not the Eternal Word. There is nothing new in that teaching. The teaching existed at the time of the alleged (by the LDS) apostasy and it has existed throughout human history. Why Joseph Smith should be given any more credibility than all of those preaching the same things throughout the centuries is a good question.
I will never understand why the LDS insist on demeaning Christ by claiming He is not the Eternal Word. |
|
There you go again, falsely declaring Mormon beliefs.
GIVE IT UP!!!!
SHEESH!!!! You really are dense!!!
When it comes to Mormon doctrine, you are an ignoramus! |
|
I never said that you attacked Romney for his religion, never. I'm sorry if I gave that impression, I was just trying to explain what makes me ballistic.
As for being a good Christian. The good Lord gave me a brain and wants me to identify my enemies. Huckabee is an enemy to my church and to Christian ideals. Until he apologizes for his attacks on the Mormon church, for his lies and misdeeds all around, I will not stop telling the truth about him. Yes, I'm sure the Lord wants me to forgive him, and I should be working on that. But even when I finally do, I will still tell the truth about him because I want the best men running for leadership. Huckabee is a divisive, dishonorable man, he doesn't deserve anyone to overlook his dealbreaking character flaws.
And I guess if a man running for the most powerful position in the world wants to tell the world that he eats fried squirrel, then it's fair game. Lighten up. |
|
Would you please stop lying about what LDS believe? Sheesh! What do you possible get out of it? I just don't get it, but a normal person wouldn't do it. You are simply a whackadoo nutjob. Right down to your belief that adult/child sex is not evil.
Eddie too, I'm willing to give you a break. The other day you said we were on the same team in supporting Mac. If you want people at TH to accept you and give you credibility, you should start acting like you deserve it. |
|
Jesus was not created. I am not lying when I say Joseph Smith taught and the LDS still teach that Jesus is a creature. He had a beginning in time. He was brought in to being by the Father. I also am not lying when I say that there have always been (since the time of Jesus) preachers and self-proclaimed prophets who say Jesus is a creature. Joseph Smith is not the first and he obviously was not the last to proclaim that Jesus is a creature.
Also, there have always been preachers who have claimed Jesus is uncreated, the Eternal Son of God. In fact, that has been the standard teaching of the majority of Christians since the descent of the Holy Ghost upon the Apostles.
If I am wrong about what the LDS teach about whether Jesus was created or is uncreated, please set me straight. Provide me with a reference where the LDS teach that Jesus is the uncreated Son of God.
That is the only LDS teaching that I am referring to in these posts. If I am wrong about this LDS teaching, I would be happy to set the record straight. But I have to tell you I have been schooled by some of you who are posting now, that Jesus was brought in to being by God the Father. |
|
You do seem a bit foolish. You said:
"I will never understand why the LDS insist on demeaning Christ by claiming He is not the Eternal Word."
I have been meeting some Mormon Elders for several weeks to learn more about what they believe, and, unless they are, for some unknown reason, lying to me about their belief in Jesus, you are way off base. You do realize that the church is not really names the Mormon church, right? It's the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Days Saints. And you are claiming they demean Christ? You really should do some homework before exposing your ignorance. |
|
if I have stated the LDS teaching on the origin of Christ incorrectly, you now have every opportunity to state it correctly. |
|
From you posts it is obvious that you are uninterested in actually understanding Mormon doctrine, so for me to try to straighten you out would be A WASTE OF TIME!!!!!
Anyone who is really interested in learning what members of the Church of JESUS CHRIST of Latter-Day Saints actually believes can;
1) Ask a real member.
2) Invite the missionaries over.
3) Go to the official web site lds.org
|
|
This is a political site. If you want to discuss Doctrine of the Church of JESUS CHRIST of Latter-Day Saints you are invited to go to http://logicalsanity.com/
(where you have been before) and ask your questions.
Until you become an actual member of the CJCLDS, you should refrain from declaring their doctrine. |
|
|
|
that is part of the problem. No one will provide their doctrine. As you pointed out, I have been to a pro-LDS site. I learned their that Jesus has a special place in LDS theology, but that the LDS believe He is the spiritual son of the heavenly father. They teach the father brought the son into being.
That is a big difference from what (for lack of a better term) creedal Christians teach. It is beyond me why the LDS are not forthcoming about this teaching. It is not a complex, complicated or difficult teaching. The LDS believe Jesus is a creature (albeit a very, very special creature). Creedal Christians believe Jesus has always existed and rather than being a creature is the Creator.
How is it that I can state explicitly what creedal Christians believe, but members of the LDS refuse to talk about their beliefs? That is so strange. It is almost as though their religious leaders have advised them not to tell people what they believe. |
|
I think you meant to post a different site. |
|
ed2: The LDS believe Jesus is a creature (albeit a very, very special creature).
GB: Can you provide documented support for this assertion? Can you show me anywhere in LDS canon where this is said?
The ONLY WAY to create a spin-free, objective appearance in presenting Mormon doctrines is to use THE PRIMARY SOURCE for official Mormon teachings, and that is the Mormon scriptures.
NOWHERE in LDS canon does it call or describe Jesus Christ as a creature. |
|
ed2: How is it that I can state explicitly what creedal Christians believe, but members of the LDS refuse to talk about their beliefs?
GB: You KNOW this is a FALSE statement!
I and others have been in conversation with you before, where we answered all of the questions you asked of us.
So my question to you is; Why are you lying about it? |
|
|
|
thank you. After reading that essay, the LDS teaching sounds to me like they believe in three Gods. The Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. I am sure I am misunderstanding what the man wrote.
But I quote, "We believe these three divine persons constituting a single Godhead are united in purpose, in manner, in testimony, in mission. We believe Them to be filled with the same godly sense of mercy and love, justice and grace, patience, forgiveness, and redemption. I think it is accurate to say we believe They are one in every significant and eternal aspect imaginable except believing Them to be three persons combined in one substance, a Trinitarian notion never set forth in the scriptures because it is not true."
From this I conclude that the LDS teach that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit have three distinct substances. Or in other words, three God with identical characteristics. Is that conclusion incorrect?
For me, the article begged the question of how does the author define his use of the word substance. Does he mean they have the same consciousness?
|
|
If you really want to know and understand what we LDS believe about Jesus Christ, I would suggest that you get a copy of;
"Jesus the Christ" by James E. Talmage.
It was first published in Sept 1915 and is still in print.
It is a very interesting read but not for the faint of heart nor the ignorant (it uses a lot of big words). |
|
Again, I am probably not the one to be making this argument, but it says to me that the Godhead (Trinity, if you will) consists of three personages - not necessarily with identical characteristics but with identical purpose.
I have have always had difficulty understanding Christ praying to the Father or saying he was doing the work of his Father if there is no Father/Son relationship. When Christ was baptized the voice of the Father was heard. Upon the stoning of Stephen he saw the Son standing on the right hand of God. Does that not clearly show they are different personages?
Maybe that is heresay in your eyes but it makes sense to me and seems to clarify the scriptures. |
|
Apparently "Jesus the Christ" is available online for down load at;
http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/22542
|
|
|
I second the suggestion from gunlock. I hope you are sincere in really wanting to know, but somehow, I doubt it. |
|
It's silly to fry squirrel and eat it in a popcorn popper, and even sillier to admit it when you are running for president.
But I don't realy care about that. You're right, it doesn't make him a terrible person. I'm sorry if I gave the impression that I thought it did. I care about the real things Huck did that disgust me. |
|
Romney is winning plenty of them.
Reuters, WND, Ambinder, Seattle Times, RightWingNews, Topix, Rinosaurusrex, USAPresidential Poll, ABC, PajamasMedia, AOL Veepstakes
Huck is also winning some: US News, USA Today, About-(by 1 over Romney).
Sarah Palin: CBS. |
|
Now that is funny! Good for you. But I don't think I'll try it!
Maybe we can declare a truce. |
|
is just a rat with a fluffy tail.
I think it's strange the PC claims that I lie, but can't CITE ONE CASE where I have done so. (nor can any of hte LDS apologists who come here. They're more like "oh, God, he's calling shennanigans on us!")
Funnier still is her claim that she doesn't go "balistic" when people criticize Mitt Two-Face.
|
|
We are united in our love of country. Let's hope Mac gets his act together. He is coming up in the polls, I see.
I'll never talk about fried squirrel again!
Thanks. |
|
I'd bet I could find a better way to cook it than in a popcorn popper though.
I once ate a rattlesnake on a campout with some boy scouts. We cooked it over an open flame. Wasn't bad either. |
|
Eugene said:
"Actually, I'm not an evangelical. I'm a free thinker."
Me: Free thinker = confused
Eugene said:
"In your "Christian" mercy, you are going to come over and inflict physical violence on me... Right, because nothing shows the superiority of a creed than its ability to inflict violence on people who disagree with it."
Me: There's a difference between mindless violence and teaching a bigot like you some manners. People of your sort don't learn any other way. I'm surprised that your amazing "free thinking" abilities haven't led you to recognize this flaw in yourself. Sad. |
|
You eating a snake? Man, whatever happened to professional courtesy?
|
|
Two points.
There is nothing "confused" about not listening to corrupt religious institutions in matters of faith if their advise makes no sense and you have a pretty good idea that they are only serving their own interests, not yours.
I really don't think ANY church has the answer. I figured this out at a young age, when I would pose questions to the nuns and priests at my Catholic school, and found most of their answers kind of stupid. (For instance, why do Luke and Matthew give different lists of Jesus ancestors, and trace them both through St. Joseph. How can you teach Eden in religion and evolution in science when they contradict each other? I had a nun try to tell me that maybe Adam and Eve were apes.)
On the issue of manners, beating people up because you don't like their opinions is not only bad manners, it's un-American.
I have an opinion on the Mormon CULT because I've studied its history, its doctrine and have had discussions with its adherents (who are probably the most prickly people I've ever had such discussions with.) Sorry, guy, Mormonism is a lie, started by a con man who discovered it was not only an easier way of making money than scamming people in gold-hunting schemes, but you could get fools to turn over their 15 year old daughters to boot.
The difference between Joseph Smith and David Koresh?
Original and Extra Krispy! |
|
Eugene said:
"There is nothing "confused" about not listening to corrupt religious institutions in matters of faith if their advise makes no sense and you have a pretty good idea that they are only serving their own interests, not yours."
Me: I'm sorry you've had such a bad experience with organized religion. I truly am. Just please recognize that many people have had very positive experiences with it. So I'd advise you to not launch into generalizations about how all religion is bad just because your personal experience with it has been negative. Your experience isn't reflective of everyone's.
Eugene said:
"I have an opinion on the Mormon CULT because I've studied its history, its doctrine and have had discussions with its adherents (who are probably the most prickly people I've ever had such discussions with."
Me: I'd venture to say that you don't have near the level of knowledge about Mormonism you think you have. I know many outstanding Mormons with exceptional intellects who know Mormon history doctrine better a lot better than you do and yet are still deeply committed to the Mormon faith. Watch the hubris there Eugene. I guarantee that your intellect doesn't hold a candle to some of these people.
Lastly, I was raised in an area with a high Mormon population and have many Mormons friends. Contrary to your assertion, most Mormons I know are outstanding people. They are smart, hard-working responsible, and loving. Again, don't assume that you can generalize about Mormons just because you may have had a few negative experiences with them. People like me who know lots of Mormons will properly dismiss you as a misguided ignoramus with an axe to grind. |
|
|
Tabloid news. Very little real journalism goes on there. |
|
I'll refute it.
Rassumssen needs to say where he polled. NY and Arkansas will have a very different flavor than anyplace else. AND it also is for whatever the questions were asked. Rassmussen has said many times, he is not a Romney guy. AND he's been wrong more times than right in the past 8 years. I mean, he called the election for Kerry last time. |
|
I am a Mormon. I believe the Entire story of the restored church and our latter day gospel. It has not changed the teachings of christianity one iota. It HAS cleared up misunderstood doctrine and practices among various groups contending for recognition as the ones with the truth. That is not adding too, but is called clarifying doctrine.
If the entire block of voters in America reject this truth and wish to use this assertion as a basis to not vote for Mitt Romney, then they are free to do so. I am sure that the many LDS posters here, and Brother Romney, himself, feel the same way as I do.
All sincere and honest people can come to a knowledge of the truth and they can then use this truth to set themselves free from false teachings, concerning principles to live by.
We Mormons love our country just as much as all of you and our desire is for it to be strong and free. Therefore, we would prefer a holder of the Priesthood of God to lead us. I'm not saying Brother Romney is perfect, yet, but he is growing faster than most other men in this wonderful nation.
|
|
I saw two really good and unique comments posted on Hotair.com regarding the rabid evangelicals against Mitt:
"Huckabee refutes the experience that converted Saul of Tarsus to become Paul. Huckabee plays Saul the assassin and refuses to fall off his horse and accept the epiphany God holds in store. Pride goeth before the fall. Get it over with, Huckabee, so you can measure up to your own talents to actually bless instead of curse America. Christians repudiate Saul but love Paul. Besides, where is Huckabee’s attack on Obama’s “Christian” “conversion”. If Huckabee has to be a hate monger throughout eternity, at least knaw on Obama’s Marxist bones and quit being such a Republican cannibal."
By: maverick muse on July 30, 2008 at 10:31 AM
***
"You have to wonder whose side is Huckabee on after indicating on FOX that McCain appears like an angry Bob Dole. Maybe he does, but leave the attacks to the other side. This is all about his quest to sink McCain and build himself up. He’s probably imagining how big of a wedding registry he could get as president since it worked so well to get gifts as Govwerner."
By: hanzblinx on July 30, 2008 at 10:37 AM
|
|
Huckaphoney is an Anti- Mormon. That's a simple fact. Huckster brought religion into the primaries because that was a way he could gain more support. Conquer and divide. His policies as a Governor of Arkansas were liberal. He even took money from a pharmaceutical company for speaking, knowing they manufactured the Abortion "Day After" Pill. Pot calling the kettle black. Don't you think?
FYI, 1998 was quite a year for the Southern Baptist Convention in Salt Lake City, Utah. Thanks to the Huckster and many of the conference members( Mostly Pastors ) for visiting our neighborhoods, knocking on our doors, asking us to come unto Jesus or you Mormons will go to hell.
Funny how Huckster answered that question of the New York Times Reporter, when asked about Mormonism, he replied, "Don't they believe Jesus and Satan are brothers"? Nice try, playing stupid. If Huckster didn't know the Mormon Doctrine then why were the Southern Baptist in Salt Lake City preaching to Mormons about being Saved or they would go to hell?
You now know why I as a Mormon have no respect for this Snake Oil Salesman.
|
|
Pretty much, calling these evang 'leaders' on the carpet for their williness to lie about Mitt Romney.
She lays out the case on all the 'hot button' issues they are concerend about.
http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/mostert/080731 |
|
For you God The Father, Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost are the Same Being.
That's why you believe while Jesus was in the Garden Of Gethsemane, he was literally praying to himself.
For me I know that they are three separate distinct personages. When Jesus prayed, he prayed to his Father and my Father. That's why I address him as Heavenly Father during prayer. I don't pray to Jesus because he taught me by example to pray to Heavenly Father. |
|
I see I got a typical cultist type response to my posts.
Jim Jones claimed to be Christian. But he and his followers were cultists. They thought that they had been treated unfairly. Finally jim jones killed them all and himself. They drank the coolaide. They were decieved by a cult. It was their master.
Today we have many cults. The way they decieve many is by re-defining terms. They have a right to believe what they want to, but we also have a right to say that they are cults.
And just look at the hatred spewed out by these people.
Typical of a cultist defending their cult.
They don't want to have an intelligent conversation about the differences between Christianity and mormonism because they don't want to face that there are differences.
So I will just go back to saying that people have a right to call a cult, a cult. Maybe in the future if people don't wise up we may become so politically correct that we cannot say cult anymore, but right now we still can, and it is quite ok.
|
|
L: Lastly, I was raised in an area with a high Mormon population and have many Mormons friends. Contrary to your assertion, most Mormons I know are outstanding people. They are smart, hard-working responsible, and loving. Again, don't assume that you can generalize about Mormons just because you may have had a few negative experiences with them. People like me who know lots of Mormons will properly dismiss you as a misguided ignoramus with an axe to grind.
ME: "Careful with that Axe, Eugene" (that was a famous Pink Floyd song, by the way.)
You know, I get very tired of the personal testimonies. My only expereince with Mormons was that they were the most back-stabbing mother lovers I ever met in my life. (And that's saying much, given how many I've met.)
I don't how much they con you with the fake acting nice bit. Actually question some of the goofier elements of their faith, and see if they still act so nice. You want to see the real person, make them mad.
As far as being 'loving', do you think it's a coincidence that Utah has the highest rate of teen suicide in the country? OR that Utah has the highest rate of women being treated for clinical depression? When you let a religion or a cult control your entire life, you pretty much open the door to that kind of thing.
Maybe we need to get the FDA to regulate religion.
"Mormonism- Side effects include depression, delusions, short-temperedness, having a stupid, dopey smile on your face." |
|
Eugene, I honestly feel sorry for you. I'm sincere when I say that. You have apparently been deeply hurt by religious organizations, Mormons in particular. While it's a human self-defense mechanism to respond with anger, it's certainly not the morally correct thing to do. My hope is that some day you'll recognize that.
I'm surprised you don't recognize the irony in your behavior. In one of your posts you criticized me for being "Un-American." It's tough for people to take that comment seriously when you spend most of your time on Townhall brutally demeaning an honorable religion and those who support it. Now that's what I'd call Un-American.
With all due respect Eugene, your mean-spirited, hateful rantings against Mormons on this website lead me to believe that you'd be well served visiting a reputable psychiatrist who can help you calm down and overcome your anger. I sincerely hope you will help yourself. |
|
Dean Barnett:
"The Tao of Huck"
http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2008/07/the_tao _of_huck.asp
'Last night, Mike Huckabee appeared on Hannity & Colmes. I was occasionally critical of Huckabee during the primaries – okay, I was more like "very often" critical of Huckabee during the primary season - but his appearance on H&C was extremely impressive. The McCain campaign should be listening to this guy.
Huckabee provided the perfect plan for how McCain should have dealt with last week’s Obama World Tour. McCain has positioned himself as the grumpy uncle alternative to Obama’s irritating prodigy of a candidate. While the election will essentially boil down to Obama vs. Not Obama, it would behoove McCain to become more endearing.
And this is where Huckabee had a great idea. Rather than go 100% combative last week, the McCain campaign could have used some self-deprecating humor. It could have run a spot juxtaposing Obama swishing a three-pointer with McCain air-balling a lay-up and Obama basking in the adulation of hundreds of thousands of Germans with McCain making way for cleanup on aisle five. Then McCain could have said to the camera words to the effect of, “I may not be able to hit three-pointers or make the Germans love me, but while Barack Obama is out doing those things, I’m working every day to solve the problems of ordinary Americans.” A brief spiel on gas prices and drilling would have amplified the spot’s impact.
It’s a brilliant idea, or at least it was. While the moment for such an ad may have passed, the McCain campaign should realize that it has an ally in Mike Huckabee who knows a thing or two about connecting with the voters. His skills in this critical area dwarf those of all his Republican contemporaries. If John McCain has a kitchen cabinet helping him run the campaign, Mike Huckabee should be in it.' |
|
There is a ton of difference between Huckabeen critiquing past situations and other people vs his own spontaneous eruptions. Never, ever forget the Obama assassination shocker! Huckabeen is a major disgrace/gaff just waiting to happen AGAIN! Give it a rest--he's done himself in in more ways than one. |
|
First it was JoeB, then it was Eugene, now it's White Salamander. This anti-Mormon bigot keeps getting banned by Townhall because of his ludicrous rants, so he's got to change his name every other week or so. Give it up dude. We're all onto you!
I wonder if you realize, Mr. Salamander Lizard, that the hateful anti-Mormon garbage you spew on this site probably has the REVERSE effect of what you'd like it to have. Believe it or not, your rants are so ludicrous that anyone with a respectable intellect is going to dismiss your arguments out of hand, and have compassion for your victims. So if you want to increase sympathy for Mormons, keep up your silly rants. |
|
"I put out the challenge. Prove ONE THING I've said about Smith is a lie, using a NON-LDS website as a reference. Seems like a simple enough challenge."
Prove one thing you've said to be true about Smith is true using LDS sites as a reference rather than two axeginders and an atheist.
Seems like a simple challenge enough, the kicker is, the truth isn't as fun as fiction.
Why do you have to constantly change your name?
It's not like we dont know who the official turdburgler of TH is.
|
|
It has a lemon sauce, nice and yellow.
Obama is afraid of McCain, hence the reason he will not debate him in a townhall (even though Obama said anyplace, any time, he would take on McCain).
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/08/03/its-official-obama-ru ns-from-town-hall-debates/
As poster "David" so elequently stated here previously:
Brave Obama ran away.
Bravely ran away, away!
When danger reared its ugly head,
He bravely turned his tail and fled.
Yes, brave Obama turned about
And gallantly he chickened out.
Bravely taking to his feet
He beat a very brave retreat,
Bravest of the brave, Sir Obama!
|
|
|
|