Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Time To Talk Mormon, Mitt
Slate ^

Posted on 11/29/2006 11:28:09 AM PST by Omega Man II

Time To Talk Mormon, Mitt

Romney needs to get past the faith issue, fast.

By John Dickerson

Posted Tuesday, Nov. 28, 2006, at 7:11 PM ET

Mitt Romney. Click image to expand.Mitt Romney Mitt Romney has said that if his Mormon faith becomes an issue in his race for the presidency, he will address it at length in a speech. Does he have space on his calendar tomorrow?

The press is writing about his religion. Pollsters are asking about it, and GOP voters inevitably bring it up in any discussion of the 2008 candidates. Will his faith affect how he governs? Will it hurt his chances at winning the nomination? A debate in the blogosphere rages over Andrew Sullivan's posting of a picture of the undergarment worn by some Mormons, an act that some of the faithful have found offensive.

When they're talking about your bloomers, it's time to clear a few things up. It's not that Romney should come clean about his clean laundry—he should please stay quiet about that—but now is the time to improve on his current approach, which has largely been to make fun of misconceptions about Mormonism. ("Take my wives, please" kinds of jokes.) If he doesn't define what his religion means to him, others will do it for him—focusing on the most loopy aspects. Constant questions and endless press coverage will get in the way of his larger task of pitching himself as the only "true conservative" in the GOP race.

(Excerpt) Read more at slate.com ...


TOPICS: Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: electionpresident
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-63 next last

1 posted on 11/29/2006 11:28:13 AM PST by Omega Man II
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Omega Man II

It ain't about his religion. It's about his politics. I don't like 'em.


2 posted on 11/29/2006 11:30:19 AM PST by The Ghost of FReepers Past (Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light..... Isaiah 5:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Omega Man II

"Andrew Sullivan's posting of a picture of the undergarment worn by some Mormons"

Oh I know he just did not go there. Those who live in Glass Freak Shows should not cast stones.


3 posted on 11/29/2006 11:32:14 AM PST by spikeytx86 (Pray for Democrats for they have been brainwashed by their fruity little club.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Omega Man II

My response is always the same: Mormons have more in common with the values of mainstream American Christian denominations than do Jews. Would we be having this same debate over a Jewish candidate? I really don't think so.


4 posted on 11/29/2006 11:32:28 AM PST by CheyennePress
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Omega Man II

To Mr. Dickerson - The First Amendment protects journalists. But Article VI of the Constitution protects candidates and elected officials from being subjected to a religious test.

So if I were Mitt, I would tell Dickerson to go to hell.


5 posted on 11/29/2006 11:35:27 AM PST by ConservativeDude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Omega Man II

Leave it to the liberals to help him try to get past the Mormon issue -- until he gets the nomination. Then, it will be the only things that matters.


6 posted on 11/29/2006 11:35:58 AM PST by carola
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Omega Man II
Whatever happened to 'no religious test?'

Didn't a mussie just get elected to congress? No one seems concerned about that. Who would you trust more?

7 posted on 11/29/2006 11:37:01 AM PST by Eastbound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eastbound

I posted same above...I guess liberal journalists (like all liberals) only think that the constitution applies to them.

Incidentally, objections to a Muslim candidate for President would not be about religion, but about whether he or she will fight terrorists. (Of course I think we all know the answer to that hypothetical).


8 posted on 11/29/2006 11:38:51 AM PST by ConservativeDude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Omega Man II
Since the majority of American are Christan's and have some form of a religious sect as a background for their beliefs, then according to the sick left, no American citizen who believes in God can run for office. What dorks.
9 posted on 11/29/2006 11:40:43 AM PST by Logical me (Oh, well!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: carola
Like it or not, he is going to have to address this. Allowing the press to frame the issue is not wise politically.

What is the obsession with one's religion though? Who cares what the guy's religion is? I certainly do not have a religious litmus test.

10 posted on 11/29/2006 11:41:20 AM PST by Trust but Verify
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Omega Man II
maybe it's just human nature................

people are just naturally fascinated with magical underpants.
11 posted on 11/29/2006 11:41:53 AM PST by WhiteGuy (GO BUCKS 12-0)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Omega Man II

What about Harry Reid and his Mormon beliefs?


12 posted on 11/29/2006 11:43:40 AM PST by AppyPappy (If you aren't part of the solution, there is good money to be made prolonging the problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eastbound

Yes a Muslim was elected to Congress.


BUT --- HE IS A DEMOCRAT.

Mitt Romney is a Republican. So Democrats and the MSM want to try to make an issue out of him being Mormon. The same people who said it didn't matter that Kennedy was Catholic, are the ones who are concerned about Romney and Mormonism.


There are different standards for Democrats and Republicans.


13 posted on 11/29/2006 11:44:46 AM PST by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeDude

Article. VI.

All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.





So if I were Mitt, I would tell Dickerson to go to hell.


Please don't work on any campaigns where we want the candidate to win. If you let your enemy define you, they'll sink your ship.

Romney should march the questions out, front and center, where he defines who he is, not some left wing attack, with a bunch of insinuations.
14 posted on 11/29/2006 11:45:25 AM PST by Issaquahking (Trust can't be bought)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy

"What about Harry Reid and his Mormon beliefs?"

Reid gets a pass, because as Democrat, everyone knows he thinks religion is just something you use to trick the rubes to vote for you.

It's kinda like Clinton's big, TV-ready, Bible. (The only part that was read in Clinton's Bible was Song of Soloman and those pages now stick together.)


15 posted on 11/29/2006 11:46:20 AM PST by MeanWestTexan (Kol Hakavod Lezahal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Eastbound

"Didn't a mussie just get elected to congress? No one seems concerned about that."

Yes, as a Democrat. Democrats share the Muzzie's hatred of America and desire for its destruction.


16 posted on 11/29/2006 11:47:40 AM PST by MeanWestTexan (Kol Hakavod Lezahal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Issaquahking
Yes, but have we not been told ad nauseam that the Constitution is a living document which must be reinterpreted in the light of social change? I'm sure that liberal activist judges will stand Article VI on its head by interpreting it to mean only that a religious test cannot be required, but that it may be permitted.
17 posted on 11/29/2006 11:51:45 AM PST by Loyalist (Social justice isn't; social studies aren't; social work doesn't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Omega Man II

How many people know Senator Dingy Harry is a Mormon?


18 posted on 11/29/2006 11:56:31 AM PST by Tarpon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Trust but Verify

I don't have a religious litmus test either, but I do worry what the media will do with the Mormon issue. I don't think it's something he can get past with a witticism. If the media decides it will be the single most important thing about his candidacy, then it will be.


19 posted on 11/29/2006 11:57:12 AM PST by carola
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Omega Man II

He sure wasn't aspousing his Mormonism when he was talking like a liberal. I don't trust him no matter what. What bothers me is that he was a BIG star at the Idaho Republican Covention this year because of his Mormonism.


20 posted on 11/29/2006 12:01:26 PM PST by Delphinium
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: carola

I don't think it would be that big of an issue. I heard Glenn Beck ask Jerry Falwell (during an interview on Beck's TV show) if he could vote for a Mormon for President.

Falwell's answer was excellent, and he said he would not impose any "religious" litmus test on a candidate, his stand on issues and morality would be what he judged a candidate by.


21 posted on 11/29/2006 12:02:31 PM PST by dawn53
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Trust but Verify

The issue is framed by the press, and by bashers everywhere. Here on the F.R. I have read many misinterpretations of the Mormon belief. I know something about it as I have relatives involved in the church. And they are very admirable, regard themselves as Christians, are more family, community and charity oriented than most, and have very high conservative values. They are amongst the best people we know.


22 posted on 11/29/2006 12:25:55 PM PST by BonnieJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Omega Man II

I wonder of Mormons are prepared for the deluge of Big Media stories about gold plates and talking animals is Romney became the candidate?


23 posted on 11/29/2006 12:49:24 PM PST by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: spikeytx86
I have always been amused by the number of people who obsess about our underwear. Fetish, perhaps?
24 posted on 11/29/2006 12:50:14 PM PST by Reaganesque
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: DManA
Talking animals? Like the donkey in the Old Testament?

25 And when the ass saw the angel of the LORD, she thrust herself unto the wall, and crushed Balaam's foot against the wall: and he smote her again.
26 And the angel of the LORD went further, and stood in a narrow place, where was no way to turn either to the right hand or to the left.
27 And when the ass saw the angel of the LORD, she fell down under Balaam: and Balaam's anger was kindled, and he smote the ass with a staff.
28 And the LORD opened the mouth of the ass, and she said unto Balaam, What have I done unto thee, that thou hast smitten me these three times?
29 And Balaam said unto the ass, Because thou hast mocked me: I would there were a sword in mine hand, for now would I kill thee.
30 And the ass said unto Balaam, Am not I thine ass, upon which thou hast ridden ever since I was thine unto this day? was I ever wont to do so unto thee? And he said, Nay.

Numbers 22:25-30

25 posted on 11/29/2006 12:56:24 PM PST by Reaganesque
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Omega Man II

He shouldn't waste time on this issue. He should lay out his political positions, loudly and boldly, and keep pounding away at them until he is either elected or defeated.

His enemies are trying to draw him into a cul-de-sac, forcing him to waste time proving he's not weird. Ignore them. His potential friends want to know where he stands politically, and if he has the grit to stick by his guns when it all hits the fan. I have my doubts on the latter, and his challenge is to prove he's tough enough to take the pounding. Letting the enemy define the battlespace will only work against him.


26 posted on 11/29/2006 1:05:55 PM PST by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Omega Man II
Leftists cannot win on ideas or policy, so they must vilify.

The beauty of Romney is they have nothing to vilify except his religion. They can't call a Harvard Law grad stupid. They can't say he is fat, bald, short or ugly. They can't call a MA Governor a right wing kook. Thay can't call him corrupt or a Bushbot. They can't call him mean. This must frighten them terribly.

So that only leaves his religion. The same as their Senate Majority Leader's, who is (?)4th in line for the Presidency. Should Reid resign?

27 posted on 11/29/2006 1:05:56 PM PST by Plutarch (To GWB: OBL >> GOP.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reaganesque

Because Mormons are so very very touchy, I think the press coverage of their religion would drive them right up the wall.


28 posted on 11/29/2006 1:09:23 PM PST by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Plutarch
Why not? They call a Harvard Business School grad stupid.

They can't call a Harvard Law grad stupid.

29 posted on 11/29/2006 1:10:32 PM PST by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Plutarch

"the only "true conservative" in the GOP race"

Is Mitt really a conservative? I would not vote for him. The Newt-ster yes, this guy, no.

But hey, that's what makes America great!


30 posted on 11/29/2006 1:14:15 PM PST by ASOC (The phrase "What if" or "If only" are for children.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: CheyennePress
One big difference, Judaism is not a cult.
31 posted on 11/29/2006 1:30:44 PM PST by fish hawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Trust but Verify

You do not have a religious litmus test yet your name is Trust and Verify??


32 posted on 11/29/2006 1:32:30 PM PST by fish hawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: MeanWestTexan

You mean the "blue dress Pages". LOL


33 posted on 11/29/2006 1:34:18 PM PST by fish hawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Plutarch

I doubt the left is hitting him on this. I believe they are hoping for his nomination because they know, as I suspect, he can't win the general.

Whether right or wrong, enough of the evangelical base will reject him to prevent him winning.

imho.


34 posted on 11/29/2006 1:49:58 PM PST by prov1813man (While the one you despise and ridicule works to protect you, those you embrace work to destroy you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Reaganesque

Probably jealosy. They're so sexy.

:)


(Like I can talk; I still frequently wear undergarmets with Tzitzis.)


35 posted on 11/29/2006 1:50:16 PM PST by MeanWestTexan (Kol Hakavod Lezahal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Trust but Verify

"I certainly do not have a religious litmus test."

Sure you do, just a broad one.

I strongly suspect you would not vote for a devout Shia muslim, for example.

Or a Satanist.

Or a Baal (or whomever) worshiper.

Religion tells a lot about a person.


36 posted on 11/29/2006 1:52:52 PM PST by MeanWestTexan (Kol Hakavod Lezahal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: DManA
Why not? They call a Harvard Business School grad stupid.

They get away with it, because Harvard Business School circa 1973 wasn't super selective. Law schools were much harder to get into than business schools. For example, Bush had applied unsuccessfully to University of Texas Law School.

Romney's academic record crushes any stupid charge to powder.

--Started at Stanford University.
--Graduated as valedictorian from Brigham Young University in 1971.
--In 1975 was awarded an MBA from Harvard Business School, where he was named a Baker Scholar (The top academic honor at Harvard Business School is the Baker Scholar designation (High Distinction), given to the top 5% of the graduating MBA class).
--JD cum laude from Harvard Law School.

Calling anyone with an academic bio like that stupid is like calling Ann Coulter fat.

37 posted on 11/29/2006 2:10:28 PM PST by Plutarch (To GWB: OBL >> GOP.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: MeanWestTexan

LOL.


38 posted on 11/29/2006 2:53:20 PM PST by Reaganesque
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: DManA
Some will be driven up a wall, that's true. But what really irritates most Mormons is the total ignorance and intellectual dishonesty of the majority of those who make the criticisms. Indeed, criticism can be very helpful. Honest criticism is welcome, from within and without the church. However, when people start spouting off about Mormons praying Hitler into Heaven three times or this whole "talking animals" bit or they wear funny underwear stuff, these "critics" veer into dishonesty.

You know, (here's a scoop for the media) Joseph Smith once said that the moon was made of green cheese. He was kidding, of course, but for generations after, opponents of the church used that statement to "prove" he was a false prophet. They knew it was a joke and yet they presented it as truth.

If you go to these "critics" websites, you will find quotations from church leaders. Some are footnoted, others are not. Some just have a name attributed and nothing else and we are left to believe that they were church leaders to. I looked up a number of those names and discovered that they were actually critics of the church not leaders. No wonder their credentials were left to inference.

Many quotes are judiciously edited to contain only the words and phrases the "critics" want their audience to read. The use of "..." is wide spread. Frequently, if you look up one of the "damning" quotes, you will find that if you read the surrounding paragraphs and the words that the "..." cut out, the quote has a totally different meaning than what the "critics" led the reader to believe.

So yes, there will be Mormons who cannot take the criticisms. Some do not have as strong a testimony as others. We are all at different maturity levels. But it must also be understood that much, if not the majority, of the criticism the church draws results from ignorance or willful misinterpretations and that wears on even those of us who don't normally respond to this junk.

39 posted on 11/29/2006 3:16:10 PM PST by Reaganesque
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: CheyennePress

Judaism is close to 4,000 years old, and is accepted as the pre-curser of Christianity by all Christians.

Mormonism is not quite 180 years old, and is seen as a very odd cult built on ridiculous fabricated evidence, by an oversexed fraud.

BIG DIFFERENCE!

Personally I would be highly suspect of anyone who really believes the tenents of the LDS--and I wouldn't want a President so gullible.


40 posted on 11/29/2006 3:19:04 PM PST by AnalogReigns
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: DManA
I think the press coverage of their religion would drive them right up the wall.

Yes and No.

"There's no such thing as bad publicity."

For example, the way the Press openly lies when it talks about consevatives angers me. When the press gets my religion wrong I get bothered too. But then I think of it in the bigger picture. When the Mainstream media states falsely, "Mormons believe XYZ", I can then take the opportunity to clarify, expound and blather on about what I really believe.

The rumor mill was ripe when Jesus walked the earth. A lot of lies were said about him and he was eventually killed on the cross for some of the lies. But just about anyone who was anyone had heard about "this Jesus" fellow. Most people have heard about Mormons today because of many of the media lies told about it over the years.

41 posted on 11/29/2006 3:31:41 PM PST by Rameumptom (Gen X= they killed 1 in 4 of us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: AnalogReigns

Actually in my belief system, The True church has been on the earth since the time of Adam predating Judaism. The Church of Jesus Christ has been present throughout history. IOW Adam was Christian, Moses, of the mosiac law, that Jews follow was Christian. Judaism really is Christianity, they just don't realize it. Some famous bible theologian (sorry I can't remember the reference) cites thousands of references and hidden meanings about Christ on the OT. The Bible says that when the Messiah returns the Jews will finally recognize him.

Do you claim Christianity is only 2000 years old or eternal, ie from before the earth was created?


42 posted on 11/29/2006 3:39:08 PM PST by Rameumptom (Gen X= they killed 1 in 4 of us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Eastbound
Didn't a mussie just get elected to congress? No one seems concerned about that. Who would you trust more?

A Mormon any day of course. The fact that a Muslim got elected in this country after 911 with very little debate is astounding to me.!

43 posted on 11/29/2006 3:52:56 PM PST by ladyinred (RIP my precious Lamb Chop)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Reaganesque

Any specifics?


44 posted on 11/29/2006 3:56:36 PM PST by A.J.Armitage (http://calvinist-libertarians.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego

Here ye Christians! Bring out your litmus tests for Mormons!

It will come back to haunt you. The secular progressives view any religion as cooky and cultish. Watch your future Christian candidate sunk because of his 'odd' faith, 'outdated' views on a 6,000 yr old earth, the second coming, homosexuality, tithing, and angels.


45 posted on 11/29/2006 4:05:16 PM PST by Swordfished
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Plutarch

I'm going off on a tangent here, but given the Mormon bashing going on....

Interestingly, if you look at the class composition of the nation's top law schools, you'll see that BYU outperforms a lot of Ivies in terms of the most represented undergraduate schools at a particular law school.

When I was at UVA Law, there were more BYU graduates than Columbia, Dartmouth, or Cornell graduates, for instance. They outnumbered all but UVA, Harvard, Duke, and Yale at the school.

And now that I switch directions, there are 4 BYU grads in my state medical school class--in a state not exactly known for its Mormon population.

I have absolutely nothing against Mormons. They're hardworking and family-oriented, and from my experience, some of the most sincere, kindest people I've met--almost universally.

It bothers me to see so many trashing them here on this site. Sure my beliefs are different than theirs, but I'd say their values are pretty much the same. And should be the same as most conservative posters on this site.


46 posted on 11/29/2006 4:32:22 PM PST by CheyennePress
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeDude
Of course I think we all know the answer to that hypothetical).p Well, at least half of us do anyway.


47 posted on 11/29/2006 6:20:15 PM PST by Eastbound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Eastbound
Correction:

" (Of course I think we all know the answer to that hypothetical)."

Well, at least half of us do, anyway.

48 posted on 11/29/2006 6:21:29 PM PST by Eastbound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego
"There are different standards for Democrats and Republicans."

Close, Dilbert. I'm convinced the dems, et al have no standards at all.

49 posted on 11/29/2006 6:24:28 PM PST by Eastbound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Rameumptom
" . . . he was eventually killed on the cross for some of the lies."

Interesting. I thought he was crucified as a result of blasphemy, which required the death penalty. The charge of blasphemy was true.

50 posted on 11/29/2006 6:40:00 PM PST by Eastbound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-63 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson