Posted on 11/20/2006 8:24:45 AM PST by areafiftyone
Mitt Romney (R) begins the 2008 campaign season in fourth place among those seeking the GOP Presidential nomination, trailing Rudy Giuliani, John McCain, and Condoleezza Rice. While many Republican insiders believe the Massachusetts Governor could become an attractive candidate to the party's social conservatives, a Rasmussen Reports survey finds that Romney's faith may initially be more of a hindrance than a help.
Forty-three percent (43%) of American voters say they would never even consider voting for a Mormon Presidential candidate. Only 38% say they would consider casting such a vote while 19% are not sure. Half (53%) of all Evangelical Christians say that they would not consider voting for a Mormon candidate.
Overall, 29% of Likely Voters have a favorable opinion of Romney while 30% hold an unfavorable view. Most of those opinions are less than firmly held. Ten percent (10%) hold a very favorable opinion while 11% have a very unfavorable assessment. Among the 41% with no opinion of Romney, just 27% say they would consider voting for a Mormon.
It is possible, of course, that these perceptions might change as Romney becomes better known and his faith is considered in the context of his campaign. Currently, just 19% of Likely Voters are able to identify Romney as the Mormon candidate from a list of six potential Presidential candidates.
The response to a theoretical Mormon candidate is far less negative than the response to a Muslim candidate or an atheist. Sixty-one percent (61%) of Likely Voters say they would never consider voting for a Muslim Presidential candidate. Sixty percent (60%) say the same about an atheist.
The Rasmussen Reports survey found that 35% say that a candidate's faith and religious beliefs are very important in their voting decision. Another 27% say faith and religious beliefs are somewhat important. Ninety-two percent (92%) of Evangelical Christian voters consider a candidate's faith and beliefs important.
On the partisan front, 78% of Republicans say that a candidate's faith is an important consideration, a view shared by 55% of Democrats. However, there is also a significant divide on this topic within the Democratic Party. Among minority Democrats, 71% consider faith and religious beliefs an important consideration for voting. Just 44% of white Democrats agree.
The national telephone survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted by Rasmussen Reports November 16-17, 2006. The margin of sampling error for the survey is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.
Count me in! ;)
"So, anyone named Cohen is a Kohain?"
No, but it is an indication. Lots of German Jews changed their name to Cohen (or some similiar iteration) to avoid the German draft. (Priest were exempt.) You have to prove genelogy and that various events did not occur (e.g., grandma was not a convert, etc).
"Do all the historical restrictions and rights apply to all descendants of Aaron, or just the firstborn?"
Depends on what one means by "all the historical restrictions" as that varies by whom you talk to, but not marrying a divorcee, not marrying a convert, various restrictions related to being in a room with a dead body, etc. still apply.
Not sure about the firstborn thing, as I am the firstborn, and never asked about it! I don't think so.
"So are you what they call a Messianic Jew?"
Yeah, I guess so.
"Do you affiliate with any Christian denomination?"
Anglican, mainly because my local church has about 10 other Jewish coverts, although I have also attended a so-called Bible Church. The traditional Anglican service (Paschel, et al) are also reasonably similar in format to what I know, which was comforting to a convert. This particular local church is also very serious and biblically based, neither adding, nor subtracting.
Guiliani can handle any of the publicity which could be aired against him. He is very deft in such matters for more than anyone running against him. But I am not claiming he would win SC anyway though he certainly has as good a chance as any.
However, winning SC is in no way a prequisite to obtaining the nomination either. I would think that the bloom is off the rose for McCain in SC in any case.
An interesting tidbit from Fox News, in case anybody missed it yesterday:
"One of the GOP politicians mentioned in a crowded field for the White House, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, said he would not make a decision until September — a relatively late date in the campaign cycle..."
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,230601,00.html
heh...I think it's been off for over six years... ;-)
I don't see McCain going anywhere put down from here.
Paul mentions being baptized on behalf of the deadin in the first letter to the Corinthians (15.29).
I don't recall hearing about Joseph Smith having his followers massacre people who refused to accept him as the prophet.
"Religion is an issue - sort of. I wouldn't vote for an Atheist."
Christians are always whining about how "atheists" are trying to remove religion from society. Of course, it is only a small minority of atheists (mostly socialists) that are behind these moves to remove all traces of religion from school and other aspects of public life. The great majority of us respect the beliefs of others, even if we don't share them. I wouldn't rule out a candidate for being a Mormon any more than for being a member of any other mainstream religion. I would have doubts about a Muslim, Scientologist or Jehova's Witness, though, the Muslim because of what I know about the faith and its followers, and the latter two because they are cults.
In any case, just look at the things politicians who claim to be Christians have done - could atheists really be any worse? I've read that atheists are underrepresented in prison...
Oh hell, I could have told you all that. What am I chopped liver or something?
>>Give me a break.
Consider your self broken /Humor
>>The same KJV Bible LDS advertise on TV says that in the Great Commission
>>(Matthew 28:19-20) the church is to baptize folks in the Name (not names like LDS
>>theologically believe, but a singular Name) of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost/Holy
>>Spirit.
http://scriptures.lds.org/en/matt/28 Yup, The Father, and of the son, and of the Holy Ghost, three personages explicitly mentioned, not in the name of the “Trinity”
>>I'm sorry but this and multiple other passages all pre-date 325 AD. Try again.
I feel a little bad about you feeling sorry, but do you have any idea how many translations the KJV went through before it was “Set in stone” by King James? Even the Jewish Torah was translated from the Vulgate because they did not have the original documents. To try and pick a nit based on singular or plural in the KJV based on “It was written before 325 AD” is to display ignorance of your own religions origins that I quite frankly shocking. Please go read about the history of Christianity, Please! Go look at my links to New advent, do a little research, stop embarrassing educated Christians.
I am not argueing LDS doctorine, right or wrong. It is not mine, nor yours, to judge.
However many (if not all) of the same values that Christians have in the world Mormons also have. Just the method of how they worship Christ is different. Your biggest problem is that they are Mormon.
Not withstanding that however it doesn't change the fact that Mormons "devoutly, thoughtfully, seriously, and prayerfully regards themselves to be Christian" (source www.religioustolerance.org) so therefor must be Christian. Christ himself even said as much.
Again the only difference is that their details, and your details may not be the same. Who is right? Who is wrong? Does it matter?
They could be any other "Christian" religion and have the same values and that would be okay, but since they carry the label Mormon you have a problem with that.
No he simply mentions it as a practice. There is reason to believe he was making fun of it.
All I have to say about Atheists, Christians and prison is that hypocrisy is the tribute vice pays to virtue.
Good points, sort of what I was trying to get at. Heck, for that matter, how many of those who profess to be "Christians" in their day to day lives, are really just going through the motions?
>>I'll grant you this, Mormon doctrine is a moving target
You are the moving target; can you reference the “King Follett Discourse” on lds.org? No? Well that’s because it’s not church Cannon.
President Hinckley was asked specifically about this on a television interview and he said we don’t teach that. So who gets to say what gets taught in our church, you? I think you know the answer to that. I also think you couldn’t say a positive thing about a Mormon if he pulled you out of an avalanche and you were suffocating.
Stick with Cannon:
1 We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost...
Joseph Smith
O, pray tell. Why stop there. According to Joseph Smith himself, even the KJV doesn't set anything in stone. That's why he "translated" yet another version, w/out even knowing Hebrew or Greek!
So, why doesn't the LDS church advertise the "IV" (j.smith "inspired" version) on TV? Why do LDS constantly add the disclaimer, "in so far as correctly translated" when they have the supposed "correct translation" from J. smith himself?
>>LDS does not understand the verse correctly.
Let me guess you were valedictorian and lead the debate team in High School, right?
Next you will tell me that you are rubber and I am glue…
So, anybody could claim to be a "Mormon," develop a "tolerance" Web site, put it on the site, and it'd be so, eh?
Christ himself even said as much.
Yeah, good idea, let's go to Christ himself: "At that time if anyone says to you, 'Look, here is the Christ!' or 'There he is!' Do not believe it. For false Christs and false prophets will appear...See, I have told you ahead of time." (Matthrew 24:23-25)
You're saying anyone claiming to be a Christian is one makes as much sense as anyone claiming to be Christ is he.
No, Christ said just the opposite as what you claim: He said the "wheat" and "tares" (the genuine and the false weed) would be grouped together for HIM to separate (Matthew 13:24-30). He said "wide is the road that leads to destruction, narrow is the way that leads to life" indicating that hell is a mega-highway and heaven is a narrow bridge. He said that only half of those expecting to be spiritually intimate with Him for eternity won't be (Matthew 25:1-13).
I could "devoutly, thoughtfully, seriously, and prayerfully" call myself a Christian and simultaneously worship the tulips in my backyard. But somehow I don't think my self-label or what some tolerance Web site might label me is going to carry much eternal weight in God's eyes.
>>29 Else what shall they do which are baptized for the
>>dead, if the dead rise not at all? Why are they then
>>baptized for the dead?
>>1 Cor. 15:29
>>Key point: Who are "they"?
The Parasees taught that people would rise in the hereafter, and practiced baptisem for them, the Sadducees did not believe in life after death, by asking this question, jesus started a fight betwen these two opposing views.
JFR Diffrence between Pharisee and Sadduceehttp://www.bethanybible.org/askpastor/pharsad.htm
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.