Posted on 08/20/2007 9:18:44 AM PDT by mojito
you forgot the word HATERS!!! Use the word HATERS!!! that's the ticket. They are all HATERRS!!!!
Hmmm. Looks like you are one of the type of whom I spoke in # 17.
We don’t have “disdain” for non-Mormons. There are two things that, in my opinion, make us seem cliquish, or invisible, or whatever you want to call it.
First, we don’t drink. That means we don’t hang out and socialize in the same way that most people do. In my experience, our non-drinking is probably the biggest obstacle. There have been several instances when I have found myself in bars for business reasons, drinking something non-alcoholic and enjoying the company of my colleagues. Someone invariably brings up religion, and it isn’t me. It seems to make people uncomfortable in social situations, being in the company of a non-imbiber — at least one that doesn’t drink for religious reasons.
The second reason is that we are a lay church, meaning that we run our local wards, and everyone who is active spends a lot of time taking care of their responsibilities. That means we are socializing with each other a lot, but not non-members.
All other things being equal, you tend to do business with those you know the best, and we know each other the best.
Romney is smart not to go into detail about his Mormon faith. Why spend 90% of your television/radio interview time discussing Mormon theology when you could be talking about the issues. It’s not like if he gives detailed answers, he won’t have to answer the same questions over and over again. Better to be brief and move the discussion to issues that matter. It may be that Americans will never elect a Mormon, but Mitt’s not going to change that by talking about theological questions on the campaign trail. The best he can do is convince people he is the best candidate based on the issues and his record.
I agree that Romney would not be my first choice. But considering others in the race that promote agendas that are at best orthogonal to Christian beliefs, if not, directly opposed......
I find all this questioning of Romney's religion to be dirty, mean, underhanded, spiteful and small-minded.
I agree.
I am a Christian Conservative and don't care about Romney's Mormonism. I don't care about Rudy's Catholicism either.
What I care about is their positions on the issues and how they have behaved in the past to prove they actually hold the positions they claim to hold.
RE: # 21
You sid that — I didn’t.
Mormons aren't the only ones who do this. Why would this be an issue for you? Do you have the same problem with every other group of people who prefer to do business with their own when they can?
By the way, Mark, the dearth of geological evidence supporting the Genesis account of creation is much more lacking than the dearth of evidence supporting golden chariots in pre-Columbus America.
“As a 100% committed supporter of Fred Thompson (and I am that, I’m not just saying that I am), I find all this questioning of Romney’s religion to be dirty, mean, underhanded, spiteful and small-minded.”
Your post exposes your complete lack of understanding regarding this issue and I doubt you’ll ever “get it”. That’s not to inflame it’s just an observation.
I don’t think it’s fair. No one ever asked Kennedy to defend arcane points of Catholic dogma. He gave “the speech,” and that was pretty much the end of it. And “the speech” was simply an assurance that Kennedy wouldn’t let the Pope run the country.
But, having said that, I’m not sure it would do Romney any good to give “the speech.” In the first place, Romney has pretty much given the substance of “the speech” several times. In the second place, “the speech” ended the issue with Kennedy because he was a Democrat and the MSM wanted it to end. Just the opposite is true with Romney. Nothing will change. Instead, people like this fellow will keep bringing up points of doctrine and asking Romney to defend them. Romney shouldn’t have to do that.
I think I’m capable of understanding anything you undertake to explain. Doesn’t mean I’ll agree with it, but I’m pretty darn sure I’ll UNDERSTAND it. But as it is, you’ve explained NOTHING. Just made a blanket statement about how it’s all beyond my understanding.
Care to elaborate, or do you just want to back down and leave it at that?
“the speech” ended the issue with Kennedy because he was a Democrat and the MSM wanted it to end. Just the opposite is true with Romney. Nothing will change. Instead, people like this fellow will keep bringing up points of doctrine and asking Romney to defend them. Romney shouldn’t have to do that.Very well said.
He was a Bishop and a Stake President (which is similar to Bishop in the Catholic Church - someone who is over many congregations) in the LDS Church. He can't say that.
lady lawyer, I respect your posts and your candidate (though he’s not my candidate) and it’s because I respect you, and take you at your word that you are a lawyer (and thus educated), that I put the question to you that was mentioned in this article: what about the archaeological evidence? Where did all those chariots and Judeo-Christian societies in pre-Columbus America go? YOU aren’t running for president. If feel comfortable asking you that question. (Just curious.)
“Care to elaborate, or do you just want to back down and leave it at that?”
I’ll give a try. Christians believe Jesus Christ is God. Mormon doctrine “perverts” this message in such a radical way that voting for a Mormon is traitorous to Jesus Christ. It has little to do with being “mean”.
The mormons don’t have seminaries, and bishops aren’t necessarily theologians in any denomination.
In any case, a bishop in the mormon church (from my experience) was similar to the pastor of a local church. He wasn’t necessarily over a large region with dozens to hundreds of churches. But, even those regional bishops aren’t necessarily theologians.
I know of one current bishop, for example, who was a successful Christian Camp leader.
He had draft number 300. Care to call other FReepers with high lottery numbers draft dodgers as well?
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.