Skip to comments.Can I vote for a Mormon? By Ken Starr
Posted on 01/09/2012 8:13:59 AM PST by reformjoy
Tuesdays New Hampshire primary looms large on the political horizon. In the midst of lively public debates over taxes, jobs, the national debt and similarly important questions related to the future vitality of our nation, a different kind of question continues to privately occupy the minds of some prospective voters: Can I vote for a Mormon?
... If an unbeliever such as Jefferson or non-churchman like Lincoln can serve brilliantly as president, then America should stand in an intolerant world characterized all too frequently by religious persecution as a stirring example of welcoming hospitality for highly qualified men and women of good will seeking the nations highest office. ...
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Pretty amazing that just 13 years later, we now struggle with electing a Candidate with Character when a man of low character nearly destroyed us.
Now if he were a Muslim then....no way.
The real question is, “Can I vote for a Liberal?”
The answer is not just no but HELL NO! Mitt Romney and everyone supporting him can go fornicate themselves with a cactus!
I’m a a bit uncomfortable with Mormonism, but it wouldn’t be an issue to me like his liberal, flip-flopping record is........
Candidates with character do not favor murdering babies.
Jefferson and Lincoln at least had the brains to not join some wierd magic underwear cult.
If Romney’s the nominee, you can believe the pre-1978 doctorine of his church will be a campaign issue.
—Now if he were a Muslim then....no way.—
My feelings about Mormonism and Islam are not all that different. There is one huge difference, of course - one flies planes into buildings. But the rest is eerily similar.
I would vote for an agnostic before I would vote for a Mormon. At least he would be “unaffiliated”.
I’m pretty sure you can vote for anyone you want to vote for.
—Im a a bit uncomfortable with Mormonism, but it wouldnt be an issue to me like his liberal, flip-flopping record is...—
My feelings, exactly. The problem with Romney is that what he actually says is completely irrelevant.
Mormonism is a faith of works, not grace, meaning Romney is compelled to “do things” to become a god (like Romneycare). You can’t separate faith from politics. Won’t be voting for Romney.
And no I don’t want to validate wacky Mormon religious beliefs either, any more than I’d vote for a Muslim, a satanist, a Rastafaran, a scientologist, etc. for president.
Can I? Yes, but not without violating my conscience.
Will I? NEVER.
I know way too much about them to ever trust one in office. I used to be one.
I'm not sure how this got started, in Jefferson's own day this was an accusation that made during an election cycle that has never gone away. Jefferson was a member of a Presbyterian church near Monticello. He supported that church with substantial yearly donations. In his own words he was a follower of Jesus Christ. His personal views of who Jesus Christ differed from the theologies of the day but he never wavered from believing Christ was the greatest being to ever live on this earth.
In this day when our presidents have moral failings they reach out and do the best they can to find faults in our heroes, especially our founding fathers, they shouldn't. These were great men and Thomas Jefferson was one of the greatest.
Martin Luther is supposed to have said that he would rather be ruled by a competent Turk than an incompetent Christian. The word ‘Turk’ would better be described as ‘Muslim’ in our time as that is what he is referring to.
Given that an incompetent ‘Turk’ may well be what we have in the White House right now, although I expect that instead of genuine Islam, Obama’s religious persuasion is something more on the order of “all religions are ok except for white American Christianity. Regardless, incompetence is the word that best characterizes Obama.
So would I vote for Romney against the incompetent currently occupying the job? Youbetcha! Wouldn’t be happy about it, but given that to do otherwise would be essentially the same as casting a vote for Obama, I’ll take a wishy-washy Mormon over him any day.
A very good point.
So, how devout is Romney in his beliefs?
Does he tithe?
Does he hold a temple recommend?
Does he wear the "garments"?
I won’t vote for Mitt Romney not because he is a Mormon, but because as he demonstrated when he was destroying the Republican Party in Massachusetts, he is only five sixths of a Mormon. That is he is a Mor_on.
The ONLY good thing I can see about Mittens “winning” the GOP(RINO) “nomination” is that the LDS “Church” will get the ANAL Exam that it so RICHLY DESERVES!
Jefferson most definitely believed that Jesus was not God and that he had not risen from the dead. He believed whole-heartedly in what he thought were the teachings of Jesus (as edited by himself), but as moral philosophy, not what most of us would call religion.
A very great many of the posters on this site would agree that this meant he was not a Christian.
While he financially supported a Presbyterian Church, there is ample evidence he did not believe in the doctrines taught by that Church.
Like I tell everybody, “I’m going to vote for somebody other than Mitt Romney because he’s a moron...Not Because he’s a Mormon.”
I don’t support Romney in the primaries but, you are just plain disgusting.
Does he tithe? Yes, or he wouldn't have had those church jobs or a Temple recommend.
Does he hold a temple recommend?Yes.
Does he wear the "garments"? Yes.
Alot of people accuse Mitt of being Mormon in name only but that is far from the case. He is what is referred to as a TBM (True Blue Mormon).
The LDS cult has a variety of politicians, but I can’t think of a single one who is a conservative. LDS pretends to be conservative, but where’s the evidence?
the left WANTS romney to be the nominee. why? they know for a FACT the far right won’t come out to vote. why won’t they? strictly because he’s a mormon. don’t believe me? wonder on over to the religious forums and take a gander at the daily bigot posts bashing mormons right here on FR
if he gets the nod, the media will go into overdrive to ‘investigate’ mormonism, the history, impacts, personal behaviors, etc
in presidential politics, the game requires you to pull your WHOLE base... and a greater percentage of the independents then the other guy.
romney can’t get his whole base out... so he loses
the left knows this... which is the reason he’s the one they’re pushing (with ron paul being a close second to split the vote as insurance)
Many of the criticisms of the Romney are fair. But all I can say is that if you crazies here, should it come down to Obama v Romney, vote for Obama, or 3rd party, or don’t vote—THEN YOU WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR HIS INSTALLATION OF THE NEXT 2 OR 3 WILDLY LEFT SC JUSTICES. Sorry for shouting, but not as sorry as you will have to be if you do something so foolish.
One might also add to the list:
Does he stay faithful to his marriage?
Perhaps Earth is the planet upon which Romney is supposed to achieve Mormon "God" status. There are many similarities between Mormon doctrine and Scientology, especially in the theological "End Game."
But, I am more interested in Romney's Program, Plan, and Leadership. So far, I have seen no specifics put out by his campaign and a whole lot of negative attack,especially against Newt, whom I like, but is really just as shy on hard ideas.
So,where is the meat in the Republican campaigns, anyway? Where are the specifics on ending the Education and EPA fiefdoms? Where is the tax strategy? Where are the Foreign Affairs initiatives? The Border Lock down? The Social Security Program?
I love Mom, The Flag, Apple Pie, and the Red White and Blue. Can I be President? Please?
I would vote for a Mormon but I absolutely will not vote for Romney.
I dunno can you? How should I know?
The Mormon thing is running pretty thin. A lib who went to BYU for his Masters 40 years ago [in library science but never got a job in that field]made that comment to me--I said but you love Harry Reid--as usual he stops and "a pull back blank look into his brain" appears, with no come back. I add Kennedy as a Catholic for good measure. Oh I threw in the 5 year "predominant"[Obama's words Snopes] Muslim schooling some Catholic, when living with his stepfather .....with of course no media collected schoolboy photos with classmates perhaps because they were all in Jakata? I said that never bothered you...........still no answer.[Then we move on..]
Chris Christie is giving Romney quite a media profile boost; and then the Mormon comments turn to Fat Guy comments and I picture Sr Winston Churchill rolling his eyes-- "been there done that" with Chamberlain..and we could turn to Obama's closeted "smoking"..so just have to laugh at desperation tactics from both parties.
We know who will get the nomination. Just ask Ann Coulter. ;)
Can I Vote for aThe answer is: yes, you can. But please don't. We've got enough of 'em in DC already.
Sure i can vote for a Mormon. But Romney is another question entirely.
BTW, his article was pure tripe. Same recycled talking points that Rove and Coulter have been using.
While he financially supported a Presbyterian Church, there is ample evidence he did not believe in the doctrines taught by that Church. . . .
Yes there is plenty of evidence, nearly all of it published by his detractors during a vicious election campaign.
I have read all the letters he wrote that are still available. It is enlightening reading. In those letters he is mortified that people have accused him of being non-Christian. He wondered in his writings about the physical resurrection of the body of Christ but never denied his divinity.
Well, put 2 & 2 together (the headline with the above graph by the writer)
What a crock!
Who is calling for a "religious test" that makes you eligible to get on the POTUS ballot? Who? Is that some frothy issue under debate somewhere that we just have missed somehow?
I'm not exactly sure why I even need to repeat the following...but for those isolationists like Ken Starr who somehow thinks this is some hotly contested issue...I can at least repeat it for the brainless who somehow think he's wading in on some key point:
Point 1- RELIGION: Religion IS NOT a qualification or disqualification for public office; but it's certainly one quality of voter discernment among many others...namely, voting record, present position statements & rampant inconsistency of past position statements, social issues' stances, character, viability, scandal-free past, etc. Article VI, section 3 of the Constitution is aimed at the candidate (must be of a certain age and must have resided in our country for a certain number of years) and the government so that religion does not become a disqualification to keep somebody otherwise eligible for running for public office. Article VI, section 3, is NOT aimed at the voter. Otherwise, voters would have to 100% disregard character, beliefs, other-dimensionly commitments, and spiritual discernment in weighing candidates.
POINT 2 - ELIGIBILITY: Newsflash!! Every person on the ballot, & even most write-in candidates, have proper "qualifications" to not be excluded from office consideration (at least based upon religious grounds). Of course, millions of us have the "qualifications" to be considered a potential POTUS & shouldn't be excluded outright from a ballot because of the religion we hold! Nobody has a "Religious Ineligibility" tattoo on their forehead!
POINT 3- BOTTOM LINE: Too many, including Mr. Starr, confuse "qualifications" (language within the Constitution) with "qualities." (language thats NOT in the Constitution). I focus on what voters base their votes on in the "real world": Qualities
Otherwise, Article VI says absolutely nothing...nada...zero...about how voters must weigh--or not weigh--the "qualities" of a candidate...So, nowhere does Article VI say that voters MUST 100% disregard character, beliefs, other-dimensionly commitments, and spiritual discernment in weighing candidates!
"Qualifications" have to do with what gets a man on a ballot. "Qualities" has to do with who gets elected.
And, unlike Mitt Romney, I hardly doubt that either Thomas Jefferson or Abraham Lincoln thought of themselves as "gods-in-embryo" on their way to being grown-up gods.
Ken Starr isn't going to start chastising people for a refusal to vote for somebody who thinks he's divine now, is he? These writers need to stop falsely presenting what the Constitution says!
"You see some classes of the human family that are black, uncouth, uncomely, disagreeable and low in their habits, wild, and seemingly deprived of nearly all the blessings of the intelligence that is generally bestowed upon mankind.
The first man that committed the odious crime of killing one of his brethren will be cursed the longest of any one of the children of Adam. Cain slew his brother. Cain might have been killed, and that would have put a termination to that line of human beings.
This was not to be, and the Lord put a mark upon him, which is the flat nose and black skin. Trace mankind down to after the flood, and then another curse is pronounced upon the same race--that they should be the 'servant of servants', and they will be, until that curse is removed."
Brigham Young-President and second 'Prophet' of the Mormon Church, 1844-1877- Extract from Journal of Discourses.
Here are two examples from their 'other testament', the Book of Mormon.
2 Nephi 5: 21 'And he had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore cursing, because of their iniquity. For behold, they had hardened their hearts against him, that they had become like unto a flint; wherefore, as they were white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people, the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them.'
Alma 3: 6 'And the skins of the Lamanites were dark, according to the mark which was set upon their fathers, which was a curse upon them because of their transgression and their rebellion against their brethren, who consisted of Nephi, Jacob and Joseph, and Sam, who were just and holy men.'
August 27, 1954 in an address at Brigham Young University (BYU), Mormon Elder, Mark E Peterson, in speaking to a convention of teachers of religion at the college level, said:
(Rosa Parks would have probably told Petersen under which wheel of the bus he should go sit.)
1967, (then) Mormon President Ezra Taft Benson said,
"The Communist program for revolution in America has been in progress for many years and is far advanced. First of all, we must not place the blame upon Negroes. They are merely the unfortunate group that has been selected by professional Communist agitators to be used as the primary source of cannon fodder."
We are told that on June 8, 1978, it was 'revealed' to the then president, Spencer Kimball, that people of color could now gain entry into the priesthood.
According to the church, Kimball spent many long hours petitioning God, begging him to give worthy black people the priesthood. God finally relented.
Sometime before the 'revelation' came to chief 'Prophet' Spencer Kimball in June 1978, General Authority, Bruce R McConkie had said:
"The Blacks are denied the Priesthood; under no circumstances can they hold this delegation of authority from the Almighty.
The Negroes are not equal with other races where the receipt of certain blessings are concerned, particularly the priesthood and the temple blessings that flow there from, but this inequality is not of man's origin, it is the Lord's doings."
(Mormon Doctrine, pp. 526-527).
When Mormon 'Apostle' Mark E Petersen spoke on 'Race Problems- As they affect the Church' at the BYU campus in 1954, the following was also said:
"...if the negro accepts the gospel with real, sincere faith, and is really converted, to give him the blessings of baptism and the gift of the Holy Ghost, he can and will enter the celestial kingdom. He will go there as a servant, but he will get celestial glory."
When Mormon 'Prophet' and second President of the Church, Brigham Young, spoke in 1863 the following was also said:
"Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God is death on the spot. This will always be so."
(Journal of Discourses, Vo. 10, p. 110)
Yeah; Native Americans are althroughout the Book of MORMON; too.
I saw a striking contrast in the progress of the Indian people today ... they are fast becoming a white and delightsome people.... For years they have been growing delightsome, and they are now becoming white and delightsome, as they were promised.... The children in the home placement program in Utah are often lighter than their brothers and sisters in the hogans on the reservation.
At one meeting a father and mother and their sixteen-year-old daughter were present, the little member girl-sixteen-sitting between the dark father and mother, and it was evident she was several shades lighter than her parentson the same reservation, in the same hogan, subject to the same sun and wind and weather.... These young members of the Church are changing to whiteness and to delightsomeness.
One white elder jokingly said that he and his companion were donating blood regularly to the hospital in the hope that the process might be accelerated.
(Improvement Era, December 1960, pp.922-23). (p. 209)
The other just kills lots of men, women and children in a wagon train: the FIRST 9/11 disaster in America!
I am not looking for a president that I can go to church with or one that we can pretend is oh so holy. I want a strong leader, with a proven record of accomplishments and a clear vision of the future. I am not looking for a Reverend, Priest or Rabi. I want a president that will turn this country around intelligently, quickly and consistent with our constitution.
I would proudly cast my vote for Jefferson and perhaps Lincoln.
I don’t like Romney as a man, let alone his mormonism. I see his religious beliefs as silly, spooky and weird.... but being a mormon is his choice. I loath those that support the killing of babies and liars. Frankly, I will not vote for Romney, because he is Romney.
I will continue to support the one man that I believe in my heart and head can turn this country around and set the course for my children and grandchildren to have a better future........ that man is Newt Gingrich.
GO NEWT GO.........
Mitt was temple-married to his wife...obstensibly forever.
But do you know what happens if Mitt's wife dies first (Ann was diagnosed in 1998 with MS, after all)...
...and Mitt remarries...
...and say, he was to marry a second wife in the temple...ALSO obstensibly forever?
Well...per Mormon doctrine...Mitt upon death becomes an eternal polygamist.
"A" could be for "Wife A" -- Ann
"B" could be for "Wife B" -- Betty
If "Betty" died, Mitt...as such a would-be widower... could marry again...Say, "Wife C" for "Cathy"...
And if Mitt is "sealed" to "Betty" and "Cathy" (to join Ann), so much for your "faithful" to Mitt's marriage stuff...
That is...if Mormon doctrine is "correct," after all.
And if Mormon doctrine is correct, who said Mormon polygamy is past tense?
And then why are Mormon believers so deceitful about such a practice? (Claiming that it only applies to yesteryear)
Perhaps he never read the complete works of Thomas Jefferson which document Jefferson's intense study and devotion to understanding of religious beliefs and faith. Although he refused to flaunt his religious beliefs as some have done, in his privately recorded moments, as well his letters, the story clearly is not as Starr and others who claim to be scholars often assert. A good example of the discrepancies in their claims about Jefferson can be found in "The Works of Thomas Jefferson," Federal Edition, Vol. 2, Editor, Paul Leicester Ford. Jefferson's "Notes on Religion" reflect his deep devotion to study and learning, and his own words are revealing.
For instance, at one point Jefferson observes, "Our Savior chose not to propagate his religion by temporal punmts (sic) or civil incapacitation, if he had, it was in his almighty power. But he chose to extend it by its influence on reason, there by shewing to others how they should proceed." And, at another point, "Christ has said wheresoever 2 or 3 are gatherd. togeth in his name he will be in the midst of them. This is his definition of a society. He does not make it essential that a bishop or presbyter govern them. Without them it suffices for the salvation of souls."
Now, there is much, much more in his "Notes" about the numerous historical sects; but who of us, today, had at Age 33 (his Notes are dated 1776) have written so extensively on this subject?
And, who, here has read this quotation from Jefferson's 1824 letter to Martin Van Buren? This is one Jefferson statement that "progressives," and few conservatives attribute to the man they describe as "deist" only:
"Our Saviour... has taught us to judge the tree by its fruit, and to leave motives to Him who can alone see into them." --Thomas Jefferson to Martin Van Buren, 1824. ME 16:55
There are many, many more quotations from Jefferson which arose from his reading, reflection, and lifelong search and recorded musings on religious belief and on his conviction that civil government had no role in matters of conscience.
One last thought on the misrepresentations of Jefferson must include the misuse of his phrase in the letter to the Baptists as a reason to exclude from the so-called "public square" any expressions of uses related to religious belief and practice. The "progressives" never cite this letter:
To Doctor Thomas Cooper, 2 November 1822 (Ford 12: 270-1):
" In our annual report to the legislature, after stating the constitutional reasons against a public establishment of any religious instruction, we suggest the expediency of encouraging the different religious sects to establish, each for itself, a professorship of their own tenets, on the confines of the university, so near as that their students may attend the lectures there, and have the free use of our library, and every other accommodation we can give them; preserving, however, their independence of us and of each other. This fills the chasm objected to ours, as a defect in an institution professing to give instruction in all useful sciences. I think the invitation will be accepted, by some sects from candid intentions, and by others from jealousy and rivalship. And by bringing the sects together, and mixing them with the mass of other students, we shall soften their asperities, liberalize and neutralize their prejudices, and make the general religion a religion of peace, reason, and morality."- Thomas Jefferson
Might some think it strange that the whole fabric of the progressives' "separation of church and state" interference in freedom of religion might begin to unravel were "the People" informed of Jefferson's true beliefs about the desirability of "mixing" religious sects with the "other students" on college campuses?
This, combined with his pride in stating that in "our little village of Charlottesville" the various sects took turns meeting and "hymning" in the local courthouse, might shock those who have so solidly believed that Jefferson and the other Founders would shut off all "public" places from citizen use, if that use involved religious practice.
Current Mormon leader Dalllin Oaks falls into your scenario, but I don’t think it’s any sort of secret.
Ummm. You might not want to count on Mitt Romney for that whole conservative SC Justices thing.
Yes, I could vote for a Mormon. No, I couldn't vote for Mitt Romney. No, I couldn't vote for LDS Apostle Dallin H. Oaks. He gave the "Lying for the Lord" speech that some misguided Mormons have used to justify things like that MormonVoices.org site telling the press that there are "zero" references in all of LDS.org of teaching 'gods over planets.' I don't want to argue theology with you, but don't pour lemonade on my head and tell me it's raining. That's like when then-prophet Gordon B. Hinckley told Larry King ("when it started they allowed it?") about polygamy that "when our people came west they permitted it on a restricted scale." Hello? Nauvoo? Kirkland? Joseph Smith?
This letter is from Josey Wales' lawyer; and I'd like a word with you...
October 14, 1838.
They elected 5/6ths of a Mormon in 2008.
“THEN YOU WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR HIS INSTALLATION OF THE NEXT 2 OR 3 WILDLY LEFT SC JUSTICES”
Sorry, if the nominated R candidate doesn’t represent the interests of the base, it is the party’s fault
they ran a lemon.
Dole was chosen to run against a wounded opponent and lost.
McLaim was chosen to run against a nobody with no history and lost.
RINOmney, if chosen, will run against Zero and likely lose.
Try to blame the base... it doesn’t wash. Most of us gave $ and worked for Dole and McLaim. Some of us don’t want to go through that again.
RINOmney could be running as a Democrat this year...
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.