Replies

"He was a Bishop and Stake President which is a high ecclesiastical position. He is a Temple endowed member which means he has passed an interview regarding not only his strong faith but his knowledge and obedience as well."

Oh, now THIS is really irritating. Now I'm more annoyed at Romney than I was. My problem is not that Romney is "a Mormon." My problem with him is that he isn't Mormon ENOUGH. Theologically I think the Mormons are off in the weeds. This wouldn't in and of itself stop me from voting for a Mormon. Had I lived in Utah, I'd have no problem voting for Orin Hatch. I look at what a man or woman DOES, and I don't automatically assume that they follow everything accord to "brand name." It's how a person actually walks the walk.... For instance Rudy's "I don't personally believe in abortion, but blah, blah, blah, I'll uphold abortion rights" STINKS in my opinion, and he is supposed to be the same religion as I am. I'm voting for the Baptist, Hunter. Because when push comes to shove he VOTES the right way on the values. HOW he got there, is his business. THAT he got there is what's important. I don't trust Mitt in the sense that he's been a blow dried slickster trying to get in good with the creeps from Massachusetts and for years he sold out on the prolife position. Now he's claiming to be prolife -- wanna bet he'll move back left again if he gets the nomination? As a Mormon, he SHOULD have been prolife all along. He wasn't. No one is perfect, but he compromised a core belief. Nuts to him. Again, not because he is a Mormon, but frankly, because he isn't a GOOD ENOUGH Mormon with some consistency on core values.

And as long as Wolf BLITZED gets to ask religious questions, I really wanna know how Barrack HUSSEIN Obama's early religious beliefs affect him, and why he supposed turned on that headhacker religion. Is he REALLY "done with it?" Or just "posing." And if that's racist...or bigoted...too bad. I won't vote for an atheist and I'm not voting for a headhacker supporter. REAL Jew, REAL Protestant, REAL Mormon, REAL Orthodox, REAL Catholic, REAL Mormon, no problem. REAL wishywashy? Forget it. I'm not having it.

Here's an excerpt of Hugh Hewitt's interview with Jon Voight. Note that even Jon Voight's admits the movie's depiction of the events is "Poetry" and that presenting evidence in favor of Brigham Young's innonence would ruin that purpose of the film.

HH: We’ll do you movies later in the interview. I want to get back to Benedict. You know, you’ve done this movie September Dawn about an atrocity 150 years ago in a mountain meadow in Utah. And from that, you’re drawing a lot of lessons. You’ve been out there a lot talking a lot about this. How does the movie depict Brigham Young’s letter let them pass, the letter that many of his defenders say exonerates him from complicity? How does the movie treat it?

JV: You know something? The movie does not get into that. The movie…it is not a court session, you know, and I don’t really want to get into a court session about it. In a sense, that’s for others to do. What we’ve depicted in the movie, I think is very accurate from all that I have read. And of course, when we’re dealing with a film, we’re dealing with a metaphor of some sort, or you know, poetry of some sort, where you have to condense things down to another form. And then you have to determine, if you’re an artist, you have to determine whether that represents the truth. And in my judgment, it does represent the truth, this film under two hours, represents the events as they happened.

It will be interesting to see who here holds this film in high esteem or not. Who will on this forum will coveniently ignore the facts just because a film fits his or her agenda?