Skip to comments.Dallas pastor who called Mormonism a ‘cult’: Romney is ‘lesser of two evils’ (*BARF*)
Posted on 04/18/2012 2:12:52 AM PDT by markomalley
The influential Dallas pastor who called Mormonism a theological cult last fall told News Radio 1080 KRLD Tuesday that theres a good biblical case for voting for Mitt Romney.
Sometimes voting for a candidate is voting for the lesser of two evils, Dr. Robert Jeffress said in an interview with KRLD. Its like my friend Janet Marshall says, Jesus isnt on the ballot this year, so we have to make choices.
After introducing Texas Gov. Rick Perry at the Values Voter Summit last October, Jeffress told reporters that Christians should not vote for a Mormon like former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney because the religion is a cult. He later clarified in a television interview that he meant to call it a theological cult, and said his view is consistent with historic Christian beliefs.
Given the choice between a Christian like Barack Obama who embraces very unbiblical principles like abortion, and a Mormon like Mitt Romney who supports biblical values like the sanctity of life and marriage, I think theres a good biblical case for voting for Mitt Romney, Jeffress told the radio host on Tuesday.
Jeffress, who is the senior pastor of First Baptist Church Dallas, backed Perry until the Texas governor dropped out just before the South Carolina primary in January.
As a Christian, I want to compare a candidates positions to biblical positions and I believe the sanctity of life and the sanctity of marriage and religious liberty are key issues in this election cycle, Jeffress explained. Thats why I think Mitt Romney is preferable to Barack Obama.
Pro-life Profiles predicted with the publication of this profile that even though Romney enjoyed support in 2008 from many pro-family groups, hopefully that with his recent and aggressive pro-abortion record now fully documented, he will not regain their endorsements. For if God's people lead, the leaders will follow.
Change of Heart? Preparing to begin his bid for the Republican presidential nomination in 2005, Mitt Romney orchestrated a demonstrably false 2004 pro-life conversion. Romney must have expected that leading conservative media outlets, groups, authors, and talk show hosts (like Sean Hannity and Hugh Hewitt) would ignore, deny, or even defend his subsequent pro-abortion efforts that prove his "conversion" is a political deceive to steal pro-life votes. So putting Planned Parenthood on the state board that he created which authorized even late-term tax-funded abortion on demand, a crime against humanity far beyond anything the Clintons or Barack Obama have been able to accomplish, is brushed aside by untrustworthy "pro-life" conservative leaders.
Authorizing Tax-Funded Abortion: On April 12, 2006 Romney signed Massachusetts' government health care plan that from the start has provided taxpayer funds even for what are called "elective" abortions, killing unborn children without even the facade of the typical though invalid medical excuses common in tax-funded abortion laws. Romney's government-run health care plan5 predated Barack Obama's health care reform and according to the government of Massachusetts, "All Commonwealth Care health plans include abortion."
Tax-Payers Forced to Fund Abortion: Unlike the countless "liberals" and moderates who are "pro-choice" but oppose tax-funded abortion, "RomneyCare" goes beyond being merely "pro-choice" and is radically pro-abortion by overtly paying abortionists to perform any and all types of abortions with tax dollars.
When is the next primary?
I pray Newt comes out on top and surprises the crap out of these people.
If we were like Facebook, I would give you a “like” for your comment.
Jeffress is right on this. I don’t like Romney any more than anyone else but it’s pretty clear he is gooing to be the Republican nominee. Given the choice between a Mormon and an Islamic jihadist, I’ll hold my nose and take the Mormon.
Newt is just a smoother con man than Romney.
does he realize that the TX primary is upcoming?
Is he dense?
Oh goody! So we get to choose between Ba'al and Molech.
The main question: WHY THE F%$K we must SETTLE FOR EVIL, period?
Where’s the outrage?
Haven’t you heard? Lesser evil is the new good.
theres a good biblical case for voting for Mitt Romney.
And what and where would I find that in the Bible ???
If we had any gumption at all (or a hair on our collective asses), we’d boycott the whole kit and kaboodle then, take to the street demanding our voiced be heard.
[seems to work for the race mongers]
The lesser of two evils is just the nature of the political beast, the story of the scorpion and the frog is continuously repeating itself in the political realm.
This will always be the case until Christ returns and sorts things out.
Im not going to argue that its not a cult, But when was the last time a group of Mormons hijacked airplanes and flew them into buildings? One of the candidates running befriends the people with the ideology that sees America as the great Satan and desires to see Israel wiped out. The other, I take it, supports how the Bush administration handled them. I think this is how this pastor is viewing the choices. Would we rather have him send the message to his congregation that Obama is the better choice? Would that make us feel better?
All that’s left to do at this point is hold the delegate count line and prepare to show up en mass at the convention site to show our displeasure at being strong armed (again). It’s quite revealing to witness a number of long time FReepers slipping away to socialist Romneyville though, merely out of an irrational fear of Obama. So much for principled conservatism.
About 15 years or more ago the sign in front of one Cincinnati church read: “Of two evils,choose neither.”
THAT is Biblical advice.
History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government,
Thomas Jefferson; Letter to Alexander von Humboldt, December 6, 1813
In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own.
Thomas Jefferson; Letter to Horatio G. Spafford, March 17, 1814
And precisely why American faith was intended to be a denomination of ONE.
A mind created free by one's Creator is of little use when the McSheeple allow themselves to be mesmerized by who's winning American Idol and Dancing with the Starz in between commercials for Viagra and sleeping pills... and sermons on Sun-day in New Romania.
>>Newt is just a smoother con man than Romney.<<
Both are better than BO and Newt is more than a Ken Doll.
If Romney is the lesser of two evils,then that makes Obama the evil of two lessers.
I curse the political class in this country that has brought us to this point.
Meanwhile in reality land...
Romney and the donors who funded the gay marriage fight
>>If Romney is the lesser of two evils,then that makes Obama the evil of two lessers.<<
They both deny the word of God. They both enable abortion and homosexual "rights" and "marriage". I won't support either, because I don't want to stand in front of the Lord and try to justify myself. I know He won't be buying it.
Next Tuesday, April 24th, five states vote: CT, DE, NY, PA, RI.
To say that this day will be an uphill battle for Newt is an understatement.
Inside every preacher is a politician fighting to get out. . .or is it the other way around?
I agree. And if Romney can’t pull out a victory. where does that leave us?
Same here. See tagline.
>>The main question: WHY THE F%$K we must SETTLE FOR EVIL, period?
Wheres the outrage?<<
So what’s your plan, Mr. Dole?
>>About 15 years or more ago the sign in front of one Cincinnati church read: Of two evils,choose neither.<<
If you sit home and we get Obama, well, he is the greater of two evils.
Anyone with an ounce of sense knows that.
So, if a candidate the equivalent of Stalin were running against one the equivalent of Hitler and the Stalin were running as the Republican and was less evil than Hitler, you'd vote for Stalin? Or is there a line you won't cross and would refuse to vote for either evil candidate?
You'd think that line would have already been crossed if you're a Christian and forced to choose between Obama and a man that was the father of gay marriage and gave Massachusetts $50 abortions in his healthcare legislation.
Your mentality is one of the reasons why we continue to decline morally in the nation.
That isn't the choice, though. The choice is between a Republican socialist and Democratic one. For some reason, you think having the Republican one (and/or another Democratic one) for eight years is better than the present Democratic one for four more years.
Yes I do.
If Obama were re-elected, he would take that as an incentive to do pretty much everything that annoys conservatives, and amp it up pretty hard. Does anyone want more of the Trayvon Martin sympathy statements from Obama, or how about Obama whining about how insurance isn’t covered where he wants it and then whining more to call it all a war on women. I am sick of Obama’s outright racially and religiously divisive rhetoric, and as a matter of fact, I really don’t want him in office for it, because I don’t like the thought of where it’s taking the U.S..
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.