Replies

It is American that we have the freedom to question a candidate based on his religion, and I wouldn’t have it any other way. If the religion is a force for good, however, it is entirely un-American to exercise that right.

You beg the question by jumping to the assumption that the religion you cite is indeed "a force for good."

If you go to this ex-Mormon's snapshot of the fruits of Mormonism in Utah, http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1940378/posts (post #165), you'll see it's not the "force for good" you make it out to be -- even on a social level...(an eternal spiritual level is another discussion).

I've also made the argument on several threads that a political leader who has seen his respected religious leaders shift gears on key theological tenets (polygamy; blacks as priests; Adam as God; blood atonement; exceptions granted for abortions; etc.) is more likely to feel free to swing free & loose with his own positions--especially on social positions. I mean, hey, if I think my God is at times free & loose on the number of partners, they what's the difference if I embrace gay civil unions (as Romney does) or tax-funded domestic partnership benefits (as Romney does)?