Skip to comments.Should an Evangelical Vote for a Mormon for President? [Popular Theologian Opines]
Posted on 06/21/2012 9:36:35 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper
According to the US Constitution (Article VI), "No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." So, given the way the Supreme Court has interpreted the Constitution, Mormons are not eliminated from the presidency. Of course, there are no Constitutional prohibitions forbidding a citizen from voting for or against someone because of their religious (or irreligious) beliefs.
So, what should an evangelical Christian do in the coming presidential election between Barak Obama and Mitt Romney? I cannot speak for others, let alone for all evangelicals, but I can tell you what one evangelical voter is going to do and why. Here are some of the main principles that come into play in my decision.
Second, we do not live in a black-and-white world. There is a lot of grey. So, on the question of good, we dont have a purely good or evil choice in this election. There is both good and evil in each choice. In such a world, even if one were faced with a dilemma between voting for a known Devil or for a suspected witch, he should not despair. He should vote for the suspected witch! To restate the old adage, even a quarter of a loaf is better than almost no loaf at all. Whenever both options appear to have significant evil, we ought to vote for the one which has the greater good. For me, Romney wins on this criterion.
Three, Martin Luther once said that he would rather be ruled by a competent Turk than an incompetent Christian. Likewise, on the issue of life, it would be better to vote for a Pro-Life Mormon than for a Pro-Abortion Liberal Christian. After all, the right to life is a basic constitutional right. In fact, the right to life is the right to all other rights. The dead dont have any rights. Abortion has already taken some 50 million American lives and Romney is certainly a better bet to stop this continuing holocaust than Obama who favors even partial birth abortions.
Fourth, there are other issues that are importantcharacter counts. In the character contest, from what I know of the two candidates, Romney wins on personal moral character. Both his individual and political integrity appears to be much better than that of his rival who, contrary to expectations, has turned out to be an all-too-typical Chicago politician, as is evidenced by his leftist leaning appointees and his questionable political tactics.
Fifth, another matter on which we can judge candidates is the economy. Which candidate do I believe would be best for the economy, that is, to reduce the gigantic national debt and produce more jobs? Both candidates have considerable public records to review on these matters. Having done that, I believe hands down that Romney would fit the presidential bill best.
Sixth, when it comes to the issue of the Supreme Court, we have a very important choice in the coming presidential election. On economic, religious, and moral matters, the Supreme Court is split. There are four votes for most conservative issues and four votes for most liberal issues. The next president can easily tip the scales by one appointment! This may be one of the most crucial things the next president of the United States does. If applied to the Roe v. Wade abortion issue, it could turn the tide! We know what kind of people Obama has and will appoint, namely, left-wing liberals. Romney will almost certainly do better than this. I am counting on and voting for him to give the highest court in the land a conservative majority. This alone with be worth voting for him.
Seventh, there is the issue of Americanism. If there is any office in the country that demands being a good American, it is the presidency of the United States of America. No, I am not speaking of blind patriotism. But when I think of an American president, I think of someone who is 100% American. I think of someone who makes me want to rise and sing, I am proud to be an American! I would be less than honest if I said that I get this feeling when Barak Obama speaks for our country. I get it much more when Romney speaks.
Of course, there are to be sure other qualifications for president such as experience, knowledge of foreign policy, health-care, immigration policy, the environment, education, size of government, the military, the right to bear arms, private enterprise, etc. Although a case can be made for Obama in some of these areas, in my book the decided advantage goes to Romney in most of these areas. And so far as I can see, Obama does not have a significant advantage in any of these areas.
As for the seven criteria listed above, the first one is a washout, and Romney is the unanimous winner of the other six. So, despite my disappointment on the religious issue expressed in previous posts, and given the circumstances and the choice of either Romney or Obama, I have decided that a vote for Romney is the best thing I can do for the future of America.
If for Romney in 2012, yes, but if for Harry Reid in 2016, no.
I love the Martin Luther quote. Here is more about Geisler: http://www.normgeisler.com/about/default.htm
That has nothing to do with the individual - zip zero nada nothing
The individual may use ANY criteria they chose as to who they will vote for or not vote for.
The Bible tells us that we will have to stand for our words spoken in life... I think our votes will be tallied also.
Better to vote for someone who has a religious belief and practices it than to vote for someone that has no belief in God and no moral compass at all except for self aggrandizement.
Romney's problem is that he's Obama’s ideological twin — or at least first cousin....
Too bad there's no Pro-Life Mormon running this year.
Under no circumstances will I ever stand before my Maker and explain that because he was the lesser of two evils, I supported a baby-killing cultist who directly or through his organization proclaimed that:
In my case, if asked to uphold one cultist or the other, I will always support neither no matter what the cost or penalty.
I don’t see how Romney’s religion is really all that important. It’s his ideology, which is firmly progressive, that I can’t stand.
That being said, I’m not sure where the notion that Mormon = hard-core conservative comes from. At least as far as elected officials are concerned, the Mormon ones seem to be overwhelmingly centrists/leftist.
If we vote in Romney this time and let the GOPe win then I really fear who they will put up next time. We constantly vote for who they put up and each time they are less and less conservative. Next time, Mayor Bloomberg could be the candidate and you will be preaching the same exact thing. Vote for Bloomberg....I can see it now.
You be sure to let me know when we finally get one to run for President.
We’re voting for the government office of President of the United States not the spiritual position of Pope, President, Bishop or what have you. Ideally, I’d like a president who openly expresses his fidelity to the Yahweh God of the Bible and prays to seek His will in America’s affairs.
However, more important is to find the most competent government executive to face the enormous challenges our country faces. In that regard, we see that the preent chief executive is incompetent and needs to be removed. If that means replacing him with a RINO with questionable spiritual views, that’s still better than the status quo.
back at ya.
It goes hand in hand with Luther 2 kingdom theology, theology of the right and left hand.
Should a Christian do everything possible within a Republic’s electoral system to deny the Presidency to an adherent of Black Liberation Theology - that thinks they need to “kill” any God who is not “for us” (Blacks) and will “accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy.”?
A nice question. One that seems, on the surface, to be a valid one.
Let's take the SAME premise and turn it around:
Should a CHRISTIAN Vote for a Member of a FALSE religion (as defined by christianity) for President?
Too strong? Then how about, "Should an CHRISTIAN Vote to place a known heresy believer into the Highest Office of the Nation, the freest on Earth, that has In GOD we trust on it's coinage?
I would hope that WHAT they 'believe' in ain't...
5. (You get the idea...)
I would hope that a MORMON would NOT adhere to the VOWS he has taken in those arcane, secret Temple rituals!
No, they should shun both men as evil... evil is evil and that is the bottom line.
Moslems are good and mean us no harm.
Sure sure. Evil is the bottom line.
So by “shunning” evil Christians should turn away from electoral politics and fail to vote?
Or throw their vote away to a vanity candidate?
Nixon was evil. He may have been a bastard; but he was OUR bastard - and I would have voted for him in a heartbeat.
The number #1 problem with a Republican candidate who is not Christian, is that it suppresses the Christian vote. The Pub e’s and those on this site who are pushing for Romney, are playing a part in the suppression of Christian, especially Evangelical voters.
Ronald Reagan worked hard to invigorate the Evangelical base. These voters had never been energized the way they were for Reagan. In just one generation, the pubbies have succeeded in making the Evangelicals disenfranchised voters again.
Good job pub es and those who support Romney - way.to.go.
(and I’ll add, “I told you so!)
Politically; you're probably right.
But eternally, losing your soul to the yawning maw of MORMONism makes a really BIG difference!
However, religion aside, I do NOT want a man in the postion of Leader of the Free World to be either
1. A decieved MORMON or...
2. a decieving MORMON.
The quite evident lack of discernment SHOULD be a red flag to a serious voter's list of qualities in the person that THEY would place in charge.
Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.
-- John Quincy Adams
"Let each citizen remember at the moment he is offering his vote that he is not making a present or a compliment to please an individual--or at least that he ought not so to do; but that he is executing one of the most solemn trusts in human society for which he is accountable to God and his country."
-- Samuel Adams
Talking Point # ??
Office of First President & Living Prophet®:
November 1st, 2011
The message for this month is -
A person stupid enough to ask themselves this won't make love standing up either.
If the neighbors see you, they might think you're dancing.
How about an Adventist?
How about a Unitarian?
How about a Deist?
I would like to see what they would say if you brought them to 2012.
That’s right. Bury your talent in the ground. God rewards those who waste what has been given to them.
Pogroms are directly associated with the mass killings of Jews and the German move even in 1920 pre--Nazi times to kill off what the Germans referenced as "life unworthy of life." So you're calling people who oppose Mormonism the equivalent of Nazis -- and the pre-Nazi killers in 1920 Germany???
To see the "proof" of what Luke is labeling FREEPERs as, see: life unworthy of life -- especially the phrase, According to Hoch, some living people who were brain damaged, mentally retarded, psychiatrically ill were "mentally dead", "human ballast" and "empty shells of human beings". The fact that Luke uses "deceived and deceiving idiots" makes it quite clear of the association he is attempting to make.
Do you realize, Luke, that FREEPERS have been zotted for labeling others as "Nazis"???
That's getting personal to the nth degree...
Why not prove your claim?
You keep making the charge yet never provide or back up your bogus claims.
Exposing mormonism is not hate.
However, you do demonstrate anti-Christian rantings, even in your post here.
When you read about nazi Germany, did read the parts where the mormons cooperated with hitler and his posse?
No, the Bible does not but the BofM does.
So, was it absolutely necessary to start a whole new thread to pimp Mitt Romney?
Well, Norm, FIRST ya gotta prove Romney is "pro-life." When Romney talked of pre-born offspring in Dec of 07 to Katie couric, he talked of tossing them under the bus in the name of "choice." He talked of PARENTS (yes, Mitt used the word "parents" and also talked about how these "parents" could give up their pre-born offspring via adoption) also having the choice of giving them over to research.
Any of you Romney supporters -- including Geisler -- willing to give over your pre-born children and pre-born grandchildren over to "research?" No???
Then you're damn hypocrites for supporting a pro-abort like Romney.
Oh, and Norm Geisler? The man has done a LOT of fine work...but when it comes to pro-life matters, he once compared someone trying to peacefully pre-empt the "sin" of abortion as similar to trying to stop somebody from smoking [making the comparison that lung cancer also kills].
#1, Norm...smoking is slow suicide...abortion = homicide...just in case ya didn't know the difference...#2...and just when, Norm, do even journalists go around referencing murder as simply a "sin"?????
Some of these great thinkers need to occasionally get out of their ivory towers and get into the trenches where the lives for the pre-born have been waged.
So...SoFloFreeper...were you aware of these things about Romney & Geisler?
Based upon what track record does Geisler conclude "Romney will almost certainly do better than this."???
This, my friends, is what we call an "argument from silence." And Geisler, an expert on apologetics, should know better from retreating into something that can't even qualify as "primary" (as in primary school) apologetics.
In MA, Romney appointed only 9 out of 36 judges who were Republicans. Of these 9, I can't even guess how many of those Rs were RINOs; but it wouldn't surprise me to learn that less than 10% of his appointed judges were pro-life.
On my first-time thru of reviewing Geisler's criteria, he has now flunked TWO of the SIX he gave.
Would an evangelical expect to get the Mormon vote for being Christian?
So...we have Geisler commending Romney's "Political integrity???"
This is the man that pioneered socialist healthcare?
This is the man who failed to vigorously defend one-man, one-woman marriage in MA?
This is the man who gave us $50 taxpayer funded abortions that are now -- in some cases -- FREE for the woman to abort her babies?
This is the man who's swung back so many times on abortion -- and who his wife told Parade Mag last November that Mitt's "always been pro-life." ???
This is the man who appeared @ Planned Parenthood fundraisers in '94, who had his wife give $ to Planned Parenthood in '94, who took the initiative to answer two abortion industry voters guides in 2002, who ensured a Planned Parenthood permanent rep of MA Commonwealth healtchare would always be there, and who was on the board of the Marriott when it decided to begin giving $ to Planned Parenthood -- and then became boycotted by Life Decisions Intl as a result!!! This is "political integrity," Norm???
This is the man who's changed his mind three times on whether embryos are worthy of protection -- with his last word on this (Dec 07)...no they shouldn't be...
This is the man who's changed his mind three times on whether "sexual orientation" in the workplace should be accorded minority class status???
And Geisler endorses all of his as "integrity???"
If that's the case, I question Geisler's very integrity!!!
Continue in this vein your account goes *poof*.
By the way, FReep U McRomney!!
I guess this kind of sums up how Geisler's "discernment" has flown the coop.
Geisler is telling us that if you have a choice, say 'tween voting for THE Anti-Christ -- and a reincarnated Hitler...ya vote for the reincarnated Hitler.
Since he gave us a hypothetical here, likewise, I believe he is also telling you that if Obama loses in 2012...switches party to the (R)...and runs against a future more liberal (D)...that you should vote for Obama.
Imagine...all you former conservatives who are anti-Obama...preaching to us in some future election that we "have to vote for the lesser of 2 evils" -- and elect Obama...or choose 'tween the "real world" and the "ideal world" and elect Obama...and choose 'tween who would make less of a dent upon our bank accounts and elect Obama...
But that's exactly what happens when you build a sandy foundation upon pragmatic utilitarian political relativism.
Ah...such "sage" counsel from the "master" preaching pragmatic utilitarian political relativism.
Gee, that's a shocker. I'd hazard to guess you'd question Jesus' integrity if it suits your purpose.
And take a chill pill.
Better yet, make a mad dash back to DU. I'm stepping aside in advance of an incoming zot.
Please tell me you are kidding....
If it’s to get Obama out of the White House? Emphatically yes!
And I have read about it in Nazi Germany.
Im sure then you already know that Hitler let youir mormon proslytizing continue in Nazi Germany because you mormons agreed with him on killing the Jews and putting them in concentration camps...
Mormons were the only foreign religious groups allowed to stay in Nazi Germany...
The Christians were killed, imprisoned or expelled..
The mormons had that white supremist thingy going for them...
Plus they liked Hitler and told him so...
“Good job Adolf...”
Romney is a Baal and Jupiter worshiping cult leader. Romney as president will move us nationally out of the frying pan and into the fire, inasmuch as it will be God who will destroy the country, with no one to pray to for help.
A vote for Romney mocks God.
"You shall have no other gods before Me"