Romney offers his troubled party a vision.
Comment: As Republicans, we need to get all the way behind Romney. I'm not on the payroll, I just believe that he is the answer to the needs of the party. He's a businessman first. Not a lifer like Harry Reid from my state. Happy New Year everyone. A couple more minutes to go here in Las Vegas.
Comment: It appears the Governor Romney has a strong record of working in a pluralistic environment based on the successes of the state of Massachusetts while he served as their Republican governor in a mostly Democratic state. Also, I applaued his strong convictions in the face of public persecution. This experience will serve our country if he is president. It sounds like Governor Romney has risen above any other candidated as one who has experienced what we as citizens rely on the Constitution to protect our rights to speak, worship or not to worship like others, and he would protect the Constitution better than ahy other candidate because of his personal convictions and experience.
Comment: I am beginning to believe Americans ,voters , whatever are a bunch of idiots.It seems that no matter what a candidate says ,if 40 people are listening , they have heard 40 different things, making me come to the conclusion; they hear and think exactly what they wany to based on pre-determined assumptions, If you really want to know what a candidate stands for examine their individual records.I personally do not care what their religion is ,none of us has the straight poop , if we did we could finally shut up about all things religious and try to make this world a better place In other word no one knows what the hell they are talking about when they express religious absolutes so as I said before looking for a good homest guy to run this country examine their past record.
Comment: I am beginning to believe Americans ,voters , whatever are a bunch of idiots.It seems that no matter what a candidate says ,if 40 people are listening , they have heard 40 different things, making me come to the conclusion; they hear and think exactly what they wany to based on pre-determined assumptions, If you really want to know what a candidate stands for examine their individual records.I personally do not care what their religion is ,none of us has the straight poop , if we did we could finally shut up about all things religious and try to make this world a better place In other word no one knows what the hell they are talking about when they express religious absolutes so as I said before looking for a good homest guy to run this country examine their past record.
Comment: I have lived in Salt Lake City for thirty years. I am not Mormon. This is a highly arrogant and isolated culture. The favoritism afforded to the "faithful", and the disdain for non believers is very subtle and carefully masked, but those who have been the target of its exclusionary practices know well its sting. Underneath that "Prozak smile" is a lot of hostility, and on occasion, even violence. I can not believe that Mitt Romney-or any of the other evangelical Christian conservatives- has no religious agenda. I am not Catholic either, but comparing him with a man of the caliber of John F. Kennedy is absurd. I hope that one day this American society will grow up. Do we really want a leader who believes the earth is 6000 years old? Do we want a leader who denies the most basic biological priciples of nature, who would deny our children adequate sexual education so they can make rational choices, who would send 4000 young people to Iraq to be slaughtered and disabled for no reason whatsoever except to protect their private monetary interests? Separation of church and state is real freedom, and now it is in great danger.
Comment: We all need to understand that we as God's children have our agency to choose as we see fit. We as members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints (Mormons) believe that men should be allowed to worship who, wher and waht they please and we ask to be afforded the same priviledge. There are many politicians from our religion and none of them receive direction from the leaders of the church. We are reminded constantly not to conduct any political purpose using any assets of the church. Mitt Romney has a firm religous conviction and will use his conviction to lead this country in the best way possible. I believe that Mitt has the capabiltiies to lead this country to the next level and benefit all of us.
Comment: Hmmm... I thought that Romney spent about half his speech telling us why religiong shouldn't matter and then the other half of his speech tell Christians he was religious enough so that they should vote for him. I thought he was trying to have it boths ways. "Religion shouldn't matter - and, oh by the way, I'm really religious so you can vote for me."
Comment: His target audience was everyone in the country, not evangelicals only. If you listened, that was nearly axiomatic. Why are we not past the point of bigotry for a man's religion? Are we still in the stone age? Are we so bigoted against a man's religion that we won't vote for him, no matter how well he would do and how great his policies are, simply because we disagree with his faith? A faith that does nothing but serve? This is an example of the LDS faith's service: besides having tens of thousands of missionaries serving people all day everyday in nearly every square inch of the world, the LDS faith seeks to serve people all the time. The USA is the most charitable nation in the world, according to the latest data. And Utah is the most charitable state in the country. With a LDS population of nearly 75% what does that say about the LDS people? The most giving, charitable state in the most charitable nation means they are the most charitable in the world. Their faith informs their life, just like Romney's faith will inform his presidency, but will not make the calls for him.
Comment: A person can be both a good President and a Mormon at the same time. However, the point is whether Mitt Romney can be a good president. His speech revealed a lack of logic and common sense for a person to be president. The fact that he was sincere in his speech compounds this lack of logic and common sense. Moreover, it showed a lack of respect for the U.S. Constitution.
The most troubling thing is that Romney used the Constitution and the intent of our founding fathers for his own political gain. Notice, Mitt Romneys Constitutional rights were not violated in any way. His Constitutional arguments were questionable and misapplied. Unfortunately, it showed a lack of respect for the Constitution. When public figures misuse the Constitution the way Romney did, it weakens the value and legitimacy of our Constitution.
Similarly, although Romney???s personal faith is probably genuine, the use of his religious faith was questionable. Whenever a Mormon (or any other religious group) uses their religious affiliation for political gain or business advantages, it somehow diminishes the appearance of authenticity of their faith.
Comment: It's simple people . . . in this country everyone has the right to worship God in the way the think is best or for that matter, not worship or believe in Him at all. Why anyone would make an individuals faith (or lack of sam) a major issue in a Presidential election, is something I just can't understand or abide. I would vote for the best person based on how he or she stands on the issues . . . period. If the candidates are individuals of strong character, we can believe their stated stands. If the candidates are not individuals of strong character, we had better not believe their stands. What does anyones religion have to do with their personal character. All we need to do is to examine their backgrounds and history. The truth lies there!
Comment: Good Lord! I just read every post below and all I can say is "Johnny1967" is freaking blind! How in the world he thinks that Romney "insulted" those who converted to / were baptized into the LDS faith is beyond me. He claims that because Romney said he would be true to the faith of his fathers that he was somehow taking an offensive, "elitist" type attitude towards LDS converts because HIS father was LDS but LDS converts' fathers were not so whereas Romney does not have to sacrafice for his religion, Mormon converts do? Dude, how stupid a position can you argue from? Christ said in the New Testament that ANYONE that loved their father or their mother, etc more than Him was not worthy of Him and His glory. The same is true today in the day to day practice of Mormonism, whether one was born into the LDS faith or was baptized into it later. So some LDS converts, whose "fathers" disapprove of their choice to become LDS, may have to sacrafice relationships for God (which really isn't THEIR choice but the choice of those who choose to be angry over their decision!). OK, Mitt Romney doesn't have to make that sacrafice but he surely "sacrafices" in other ways, like, quite frankly, having to endlessly put up with idiotic thinking from people like Johnny1967 who are so blind concerning what Romney said (and meant) in his Houston speech that they couldn't lead a group of Girl Scouts out of a wet paper sack. Go Romney! and ANY OTHER TRUE AMERICAN PATRIOT! And, one more thing....."Howdy is so lost spiritaully that he couldn't even FIND the above mentioned paper sack. God is real, Howdy, and one day you'll see for yourself.
Comment: The point about Mormon converts is a minor point of the flaws in the speech.
My main point is that Romney???s speech was not well thought out. Because this was such an important speech, its lack of logical consistency will haunt him here on out. Clearly, the speech was driven by a want of evangelical votes. This is fine. However, the problem is that Romney attempted to veil his personal interest with something greater such as religious freedom, the Constitutional, and conviction in the Mormon Faith.
Unfortunately, he used questionable Constitutional arguments to support his point. Instead of keeping it simple, he went too far. For crying aloud, what does Romney really know about the intent of our founding fathers, and Constitutional rights? It???s a classical case of a person knowing just enough to be dangerous!
In contrast, JFK???s speech in 1960 was ingenious because it was so simple and the logic was not open to question because it was clearly supported by the Constitutional separation of church and state and the spirit of religious freedom. As for the Separation issue, he simply stated that no church will influence his decision as a president. Also, he did not look favorably on people, or blocs of people, who would indirectly impose religious influence on the president by the way they vote. JFK did not proclaim to voters that he ???believed in Jesus Christ.??? Nor did he suggest that faith has anything to do with high morals. He simply pointed out that an attack on his faith is an attack on all religions and religious freedom.
Romney also got himself into trouble by attempting to use the Mormon faith as a vehicle to get evangelical votes. Too many flaws arise because rather than fitting the Mormon faith with all other religions, he narrowly fitted it in with other Christians. For example, he tried to showed conviction by not being afraid to declare that he believes in Jesus Christ (as do all Mormons), which conveniently is what the evangelicals believe. Yet, he doesn???t (or cannot) show the conviction of his belief in a lot of other Mormon doctrine that are not so popular. For instance, something that came up recently, ???Do Mormons believe that Jesus and Satin are brothers???? A Mormon would answer, ???Yes, Jesus and Satin were brothers at one time.??? Although the question is unfair, Romney opened himself to such attacks by cherry picking Mormon doctrines that are in line with other Christian groups. More attacks and questions will be sure to come ??? and rightfully so.
Again, he should have had an expert writer write that speech!
Comment: I thought it was VERY well thought out. And by the way, an expert did write his speech, his name is Mitt Romney.
Comment: As a Southern Baptist, I was taught doctrine that contrasts the differences between Southern Baptist theology and other Christian faiths. I have also learned that tolerance that is not forced and that comes from prayer and the heart is the most desirable. Mitt Romney articulayed a vision of tolerance that allows me to embrace how others define their faith and, at the same time, enthusiastically espouse my traditional values and beliefs. His message was uniting, inspirational and visionary. I am strongly leaning toward supporting Mitt. Unfortunately, "Johnny 1967" must have been listening to someone else speeking. Mitt was right on as he blended his life view and Americam experience in an artful manner. He was, in fact, not pouring salt on anyone, but rather, creating a template for reconcillation and a strong common ground for significant progress in a pluralistic society. Sorry "Johnny 1967", you unfortunately missed the depth and sincerity of Mitts message.
Comment: I agree with you.
Comment: 2008 Presidential Election Weekly Poll
Comment: Iran???s Ayatollahs, Iraqs Imams, the basis of Radical Islam, use region to obtain dictatorial government powers over their people. Huckabee is also using religion as his stepping stone to government power. On this basis alone I will not vote for him. I believe our current President received much of his support using that same mechanism. In contrast, his opponents religious persuasions are not adding to their presidential popularity ??? good reason to consider them.
Comment: Hey "standinginsomething' - Your either very foolish or very calculatingly evil. The majority of what you wrote is an absolute LIE - and we all know where LIES comes from. Do your homework - better yet, get a life and stop trying to tell people about things you don't know of. Mormons ARE Christians who believe in the Bible and in their Lord and Savior Jesus Christ - ANYONE who says they aren't are in danger of being NON-CHRISTIAN themselves - let alone highly arrogant.
Comment: By definition, Mornons are Christians. Granted, their beleif and faith in the atonement of Jesus Christ is absolute. Also, there is no doubt that the Church leaders will not impose their will on Romney. As an example, do you think Harry Reid (a Mormon) consuls Mormon church leades when he make senetorial decisions? No way. Mormon members are very rational and would not allow Church leaders to impose their wants on Mormon polititions. In fact, it would probably be illegal and risk losing their tax exempt status. However, the point whether Romney can be fair minded toward all people with different cultures and religions. I think that his speech was flawed in so many ways that showed a lack of respect for the diverse cultures and religions within the United States of America (including the diversity of members within his own faith). Moreover, this would translate into a lack his ability to be the leader of the World.
Comment: How did it show lack of respect for diverse cultures and religions within the United States? He was addressing his own perosonal beliefs, there where dignitaries at the speech from huge spectrum of faiths and nobody has yet to state that they were disrespected. Also, how did it show lack of respect to the diversity within the Mormon faith?
Comment: Romney said, ???My faith is the faith of my fathers - I will be true to them and to my beliefs.??? Obviously Romney is very proud, and rightfully so, to be brought up in the Mormon Church. His ancestors probably go back to the early Mormon pioneers, which is also something to be proud of. However, compare this to someone like Sally. Sally???s parents, and anscestors, are devout Catholics. Sally converts to Mormonism after taking the missionary lessons and touched by the Spirit. After her conversion, relationship between Sally and her parents are extremely strained. Sally???s story is shared by many Mormons throughout the world. Romney???s statement is somewhat like throwing a little salt on the Sally and her parents??? wounds. It???s the diversity between ???Mormon Converts??? and ???Traditional Mormons.??? Of course, Sally will be understanding toward Romney???s little ???pride??? ??? but her parents may not be so foregiveful. The point is, Romney should have had gotten advise from others when writing the speech. It???s so clear that the Speech was only about Romney himself and the Christian votes he was trying to get. It was little about the Founding Fathers, Separatation of Church and State, or other Constitutitional issues.
Comment: ANYONE who tries to claim a person ISN'T A CHRISTIAN, ISN'T a Christian themself! (I go to the Catholic Church) Jesus was pretty clear on his feelings toward hypocrits. If Mormons consider themselves Christians because they believe in Jesus Christ, than THEY ARE CHRISTIANS! I'm sick of HOLIER THAN THOU attitudes from people like Huckabee. Thankfully the rest of the country isn't taken in by this charlatain like Iowans seem to be.
Comment: I am LDS or Mormon and appreciate your comment because I do believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. Thank you from Utah Joe!
Comment: Governor Romney is a flip-flopper. Doctor Ron Paul is a more worthy vote for the real American conservative - just look at his voting record. Paul was elected to Congress in 1976 and his conservative values haven't changed a bit. If you believe in the Constitution, then Doctor Ron Paul should be a candidate that you seriously consider.
Comment: I'm almost certain that if Senator Lloyd Bentsen who once had to correct another JFK-wanna-be in 1988 were able to speak out to respond on this comparison from Eleanor Clift in front of a national audience in which she makes parallels of Mitt and JFK, he might say something like " I served with Jack Kennedy, I knew Jack Kennedy, Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine. Governor, you are no Jack Kennedy."
John F Kennedy already made this speech back in 1960 in which he paved the way for politicians like Mitt Romney to make similar claims without fear of political fall out. JFK set this precedence almost 50 years ago. I fail to understand the significance. Mr. Romney is getting credit for stating principles that are inherent in our Constitution.
Comment: Its nice to hear real quoted words from the candidates, americans and to be reminded about what JFK said instead of just the polls, the polls, the polls. Too many authors quote a few statements then use the polls as their support when we all know the polls are not accurate anyway.
Emily
TEXAS
Comment: Romny's speech was not well thought out for the long run. In the near future, the speech will be known as one of Romney's biggest blunders because he did not have professional writers write it, and did not have the Mormon Church approve it. For exmample, by stating that he will not turn against the faith of his ancestors, he just offended all of the converts to the Mormon Church who have foresaken their anscestors faith. The speech is also an appology to those Christians who show little tolerance to other faiths in order to get their votes. The speech may also be offensive to the athiest, buddhist, hindus, and others who are clearly not within the Christian/God-believing circle. The speech was a blunder because it showed Romney who he was -- A well meaning person who has lived a privledged life who cannot be fair and imbalanced to all citizens of the United States of America.
Comment: "The speech is also an apology to those Christians who show little tolerance to other faiths in order to get their votes." Again you obviously didn't listen close enough.
From Mitt Romney's speech;
"There are some for whom these commitments are not enough. They would prefer it if I would simply distance myself from my religion, say that it is more a tradition than my personal conviction, or disavow one or another of its precepts. That I will not do. I believe in my Mormon faith and I endeavor to live by it. My faith is the faith of my fathers - I will be true to them and to my beliefs.
Some believe that such a confession of my faith will sink my candidacy. If they are right, so be it."
Let me know if anybody else thinks this sounds like an apology.
Comment: As for "apology" I am talking about the fact that Romney finds it necessary for other Christians to accept the legitimacy of his faith. He could have just stated that people should be tolerant of Mormans and all religions.... period. However, It's no secret, the speech was specifically designed to get the evangelical votes. In the short run, he may get those votes. But it will come back to him in the long run.
Comment: That is just what he did "stated that people should be tolerant of" Mormons " and all religions. If you are reading anything else into the speech you are doing just that. Applying something that is just not there. The whole point of the speach was that doctrine and creed do not matter only convictions.
Comment: I disagree. The target audience was the evangelical voters. Romney wrote the speech believing that it was what the evangelicals wanted to hear. If Romney were merely stating that people should be tolerant of Mormons and all religions, then the speech would have lasted no more than 2 minutes. He could have told the evangelical listeners something like, "I'm proud to be a Mormon. If I lose because of my faith, so be it. But you shouldn't vote for a President based on religion." But he went further, much further. He tactically used his religion and the Constitution to support his plea. Ironically, his statement "Some believe that such a confession of my faith will sink my candidacy. If they are right, so be it. But I think they underestimate the American people. Americans do not respect believers of convenience. Americans tire of those who would jettison their beliefs, even to gain the world." may be true ??? but not in the way Romney hopes. Romney???s candidacy might sink because he underestimated the American people, who find that Romney was using convenience and revealed only selective Mormon beliefs (such as, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Savior of mankind.) to gain the world.
Comment: I happen to agree with Johnny1967 in that he was targeting, for the most part, evangelical christians and here's why.
My evangelical aunt made the following comment prior to a "mormon's, a cult" church sponsored event; "since we have a mormon running for president, i think its REALLY important to understand just exactly what he believes." I've grown to be a pretty liberal LDS thinker . . . i enjoy learning and understanding philosophical, scientific, theological perspectives of any kind . . . they open my mind, they deepen my understanding, i find truth where i would not have looked for it . . . it's incredible. Yet, this little get together wasn't exactly enlightening . . . not unless your were evangelical seeking affirmation. the guest speaker candidly shared an assortment of beliefs and listed reasons why they were wrong. At first i chuckled to myself until i realize that everyone around me was buying into the propoganda . . . what was taught, and the way it was taught vilified mormons. He planted some pretty obsurd lies about common/basic beliefs placing mormons on an eqiutable level with heathens. When i try to talk to my sister, aunt or stepmom about anything Christ related "Wow sis, God sure blessed me this week" they don't respond as they would to a christian friend . . . they give me a searching look instead, like they're assessing my mental stability, and give me a careful response. Whenever "mormon" talks or is mentioned, they go back to what they heard and felt during those meetings and a wall goes up. Ask any evangelical that has been attending for a year and you will not find one who hasn't been briefed on Mormonism per thier pastor. It's this wall that would stop a vote for a better candidate merely based on his religion affliliation. It is to be argued who is the better . . . this note is not to say, for I still do not know. But the existance of this wall amongst so many was reason enough for Romney to deliver his speech. It was also attended for all those who were exposed to similar, wall building, progress stopping bigotry. As LDS, i recognize a list of qualities in evangelicals that we, mormons, could improve by . . . the same walls exist amongst us and that saddens me all the more
Comment: You sorely missed the WHOLE point of his speech. Go read it again. Wow, you are WAY off and not just a little!
Comment: Why does he need the Mormon church approval to give a speech? How had he offended converts to the faith by "foresaking" them? He was talking about his own lineage.
Comment: Romney's actions will reflect greatly on the Mormon Church and surely he does not want to give a bad impression of the Church. Furthermore, Romney needs the Mormon support -- financially, spiritually, socially, etc. However, the Mormon Church sends out missionaries throughout the world all of the time in effect asking new converts to "forsake their parent's religion." Although not intentional, the litteral message is that converts are somewhat disloyal or disrespectful to their parents.
Comment: The idea, as i hope the idea of all faiths, is to come nearer to God. Rather than "foresake all you know, all you believe, all your hopes and dreams, your faith and love and join us!" its on the lines of "We have a message about Jesus Christ, one that will bring you closer to him, closer to what you've been striving for". If a Mormon kid joins up with evangelicals and becomes a better person (stops using drugs, becomes charitable, successful) I hardly think he'd be dishonoring his parents. (me being LDS) The kid foresoke the greater light but he's better off. Point being that its about improving, little by little . . . . God will take it any way it comes.
Comment: I see, disrespectful to you as an individual. They dont go asking people to "forake" their religion. Last I checked and individual regardless of any situation has free agency and is able to make a choice on their own conscious. So, to the person or individual it is on their own conscious to leave a previous belief. This goes for any religion, do not other religions have people trying to find individuals to join their beliefs? What your saying is not about what Romney said, it is about you. You do have a biased position against the Mormon faith and your ignorance will guide you to vote for someone based on religion.
Comment: Just ridicules. This speech was a masterpiece. You have to be either completely biased of hopelessly lost to not see it. Please listen to or read the speech again as the whole point is to say that is does not matter what faith a person has only the conviction that we have in common. I am not on the other hand saying this is going to change the die hard I wont vote for Mormons groups. It was never meant to. This was an awe-inspiring; bring us to a new level of think, reminder of what we could all be striving for in America.
Comment: That is exactly how I felt after watching it, personally I had planned on voting for Ron Paul. But after watching that I felt this is a guy that I may not agree with on everything 100%, but can trust. He truly did put faith on the table bluntly to America and that is what America needs.
Comment: I also believe Romney is a very good man. We all understand that he is a righteous person, who is in a heated political race. My criticism is made with the utmost respect for the man as a person. However, the speech itself was simply uninspiring and even somewhat disheartening. He arguably misused the Constitution and Religion, two of the most sacred things to our Nation in order to gain a political advantage. I could only imagine how great the speech could have been had he thought less of himself and more about religion, the Constitution, and people.
Comment: I served in the U.S. Army 1st ID 3rd Brg 2/2 C company in Kosovo and Irag as an infantryman. When a person is near death they cry out to or exclaim a supreme beings name, why is this? There is no such thing as an atheist. No one can truly claim to be an atheist, people use their or a supreme beings name in conversation to help express an emotion. In their dying moment you will use a name to cry out to, its always a loved one and supreme beings name. Always.
Comment: opps. new user. Didn't realize I posted twice, sorry.
Comment: I served in the U.S. Army 1st ID 3rd Brigade 2/2 C company as an infantryman in Kosovo and Iraq. I found that there is no such thing as an atheist, when someone is near death they cry out or exclaim a supreme beings name. This always happened, why do they do this? I do not even for one moment believe that anyone can truly claim to be an atheist, because in their dying moment you will cry out to some supreme being. In their daily lives they use the name for expression of emotion, why? If you truly are an atheist you would not do it in daily conversations. In death it is near impossible to avoid.
Comment: You know, I'm two parts astonished and one part unsurprised to hear comments like Howdy's in a forum like Newsweek. I'm really pleased with this speech, and I'm gratified by the way howdy is responding--this is the sort of behavior that gives actual, thinking atheists grounds to review their tolerance of religion. Their worried about being found in camp with people who characterize WWI as god vs. demoncracy/science, who don't understand the various Christian stances on the age of the world, and are otherwise willing to make such sweeping and, to be frank, idiotic generalizations about religion, Christianity, and culture. Your assertion that, "The price for believing in fairy tales is just too high," is not only indefensible, you're asserting that our beliefs are fairy based on flawed perceptions of what we actually believe, and apparently lack the respect for others to throw about comments like, "He's Dead! Just get over it!" on a comment board many are likely to read.
Thank you for bolstering the Christian position, Howdy, I recommend a few classes on Physics, Chemistry, Literary theory, and Philosophy (maybe a few on religion, just so you actually understand your enemies' position) before making your comeback.
Comment: Geologic time is probably the best example of why the Christian fairy tale is just that, a fairy tale. The earth formed either 4 billion years ago in geologic time or 8000 yrs ago in the bible. The first guess is made with the latest in technology the other one done by some guys who swore the earth was flat. While religions try to give a good uplifting message on how to live your life right, their time has come and gone. The price for beleiving in fairy tales is just too high. WWI was god vs democracy/science and god lost.
Comment: Some leaders in my Church (which is LDS or Mormon) have said that God is the ultimate scientist. I agree. By the way, my father, myself, and many others in my family and close circle are scientists so do not use that as a way to debunk Christianity. When you study it, it actually confirms more and more that there is a God. God does not and has not lost to weak man and their cankered, finite thinking. Science has also thought some very strange things that are not even kind of close to being true. Our science, is at the very best, mediocre.
Comment: Eleanor's comments really surprised me. She always leans pretty far left. Nice to hear a rational comment rather than those out there who live from paycheck to paycheck and envy those who have succeeded in life. Howdy "Doody" is a great example of the decline in education in the USA. Howdy has no concept of geological time. Obviously, his minimal brain will never provide a blip on Jesus" radar. To coin a phrase, Thank, God!
Comment: Eleanor's comments really surprised this
conservative.
She leans pretty far left. After reading the "Daddy Bush" comments, et.al., I suggest these lowlifes read a couple of biographies on the Clintons! I suggest these folks first get an education. If Jesus does come back, "howdy" will be at the end of the line!
Comment: All the plaudits of the nabobs won't do squat to get Mr. Magic Underwear votes from the Christians at the demographic core of the GOP. And his bloodthirsty warmongering isn't winning any friends either. Mitt is running the GOP into the dirt.
Comment: You're a bigot. By they way, does your spouse know that you talk about men's underwear? Pervert!
Comment: The establishment (read rich white boys) of the GOP want Romney. This is why Daddy Bush helps Romney with this speech platform and why Drudge, the Weekly Standard, the National Review, and FOX have all been trying to make Huckabee's perceived errors mainstream news. This "lets get a bump in the polls" speech will not trick the values voters even if Daddy Bush is finally going along with wafflers.
Comment: Mitt Romney is not a Mormon like George Bush is a Christian. Romney was a Stake President, he was responsible for thousands of Mormons. They would be required to confess their sins to Mitt Romney in order to enter the Mormon temple.
Romney would have attended the temple dozens of times while there making the below covenants:
...I covenant before God, angels, and these witnesses at this altar, that I do accept the Law of Consecration as contained in the Doctrine and Covenants, in that I do consecrate myself, my time, talents, and everything with which the Lord has blessed me, or with which he may bless me, to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, for the building up of the Kingdom of God on the earth and for the establishment of Zion.
Each of you bow your head and say yes."
Romney's priorities are the Mormon church's priorities he wouldn't need to be given direction from the prophet. He already knows what direction they want and he has covenanted to do so.
Comment: "Let me assure you that no authorities of my church, or of any other church for that matter, will ever exert influence on presidential decisions. Their authority is theirs, within the province of church affairs, and it ends where the affairs of the nation begin.???
"We separate church and state affairs in this country, and for good reason. No religion should dictate to the state??????
???I will put no doctrine of any church above the plain duties of the office and the sovereign authority of the law.???
???When I place my hand on the Bible and take the oath of office, that oath becomes my highest promise to God.???
If you cannot understand how this refutes your ridiculous claims then you are either so bigoted you are blinded to the truth or hopelessly naive.
Comment: I hear what he says, but I also know the history of the LDS church from Jospeh Smith to Gordon Hinckley, from 19 year old missionary to 80 year old prophet, Mormons lie whenever it's more helpful than the truth. Some times it's called "milk before meat", sometimes it's Packer saying "not all truth is useful" It's joseph Smith saying we don't practise polygamy when he had ten wives. It's LDS missionaries with holding the racist practises of the mormon church to get a person baptized. It's Romney saying I am pro gay when it's expedient, then voting against gay's when it's expedient. Mormonism teaches people to lie.
Comment: You are a deplorable person! You are also very dimwitted. You say you know the history of the Mormon Church and then say President Hinckley is 80. He is 97! You weren't even close! Do you actually think anyone will listen to your embittered and effete rantings? What you say is actually plastered over with hate and half-truths, so much so that it negates everything that drips out of your foul mouth. You deserve every bit of castigation that comes in this life and the next. Shame on you for trying to tear down another person's faith and desecrating that which is sacred! Jesus is the Christ and you will know that one day, to your everlasting guilt. That is the end state of those that fight against the Lord and His Church.
Comment: Romney was right about there being a push to make aetheism the new religion of America. Why? Because its been 2007 years and he's still a no show. Jesus aint coming back, he's DEAD! Just let it go.
Comment: Romney was right about their being a push to make aetheism the new religion. Why? Because its been 2007 years, Jesus aint coming back. HE'S DEAD! Get over it.
Comment: Acutally Jesus Christ is alive! I know that to be true! And yes, I am LDS/Mormon.
Comment: When even Eleanor Clift can see the obvious home run that this speech is, it makes you what is happening on conservative right. How can some of them attack this speech without destroying the very foundation they stand on? Just goes to show how they can be just as politically expedient as those on the left if their self interest is threatened.
Comment: His religion is really personal pragmatism, doing hat it takes to win where he needs to win. TrueHawk
Comment: We all need to understand that we as God's children have our agency to choose as we see fit. We as members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints (Mormons) believe that men should be allowed to worship who, wher and waht they please and we ask to be afforded the same priviledge. There are many politicians from our religion and none of them receive direction from the leaders of the church. We are reminded constantly not to conduct any political purpose using any assets of the church. Mitt Romney has a firm religous conviction and will use his conviction to lead this country in the best way possible. I believe that Mitt has the capabiltiies to lead this country to the next level and benefit all of us.
Enter comments if any for reporting abuse
PROJECT GREENPassing the 'fossil fools' in a CNG-powered car
Sponsored by
|
Loading Menu
