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.
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.
LLS
LLS
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?
Ditto!
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.
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.