I cannot stand people with double intentions. He states he does not know much about Mormonism yet he asks a typical question that most Anti-Mormons ask? Give me a break. His Church (Huckabee) believes all sort of things that a lot of people would consider ridiculous, what was his point really? I do not buy for a second he was genuinely interested in knowing the answer.
I think it's fascinating that Huckabee is not getting the same scrutiny about religion that Romney is, considering he's actually an ordained Southern Baptist minister. Doesn't anyone wonder if *his* religion will affect his ability to preside over the United States? Talk about the media being biased and manipulative!
More he says he does not wish to talk about his religion, I find that more often he does it. Anyways, he commented how he "wept" when he heard in 1978 that Blacks would be able to hold the Priesthood.
QUOTE |
WASHINGTON - Mitt Romney on Sunday said he pulled off to the side of the road and wept when he heard in 1978 that the elders at the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints had decided to let blacks participate in Church rites. "I can remember when I heard about the change being made. I was driving home from - I think it was law school, but I was driving home - going through the Fresh Pond rotary in Cambridge, Massachusetts. I heard it on the radio and I pulled over and literally wept," the Republican presidential candidate said. Romney said the matter still makes him emotional today. The former Massachusetts governor said that the Mormon church's decision to change its doctrine had no impact on his own views of race relations - he had long been brought up to believe that all people were created equal in God's eyes. "It's very deep and fundamental in my life and my most core beliefs that all people are children of God. My faith has always told me that. My faith has also always told me that in the eyes of God, every individual was merited the fullest degree of happiness in the hereafter and I had no question that African Americans and blacks generally would have every right and every benefit in the hereafter that anyone else had and that God is no respecter of persons... |
QUOTE |
tortdog "A person's religion is relevant. If a person espoused beliefs that put him at odds with the values of society, I would not want him in office. Let's say Romney belonged to a religion that taught that robbing from your neighbor is fine as long as they do not belong to your church?" |
QUOTE |
FarSeer Talk about the media being biased and manipulative! |
QUOTE |
bountifulsno Most presidents of the United States are left with the legacy of the prior president to deal with. Unfortunately people that run for president who have high ideals and are elected sadly find that their good intentions are buried by the pressures of the special interest groups that control the politics of Washington D.C. If they do not compromise at a minimum, they find that they cannot accomplish any of the necessary changes that they wish to make for the good of its citizens. I would vote for Mitt Romney but not just because he is LDS but because he could demonstrate his capablity of dealing with the Washington politics to get things that matter done. Past presidents that have not been willing or capable of some compromise to get things done to better the U.S. have only gotten one term and others have been assasinated. We must keep in mind that the president is only one part of the overall U.S. governmental system that has been manipulated to its present state over the history of this great and God given nation. I had a step father that served for many years in the U.S. State department. His comment to me a few years before his death was that it makes no difference who you vote for, the power behind the presidency remains the same relative to our economy, wars, poverty, ecology, energy etc. It is the wealthy groups in the world that indirectly control the Federal Reserve System. Unfortuntely today the majority of those wealthy groups are not composed of U.S. citizens and are only interested in one thing....growing their wealth. The biggest issue for the U.S. is globalization and unless the tide on this is stemmed it won't make any difference on any other issue because the U.S. will become a nation without a livelyhood to afford the products we enjoy but no longer capable of producing ourselves. Globalization is a good idea but not to the extent that it has been implemented in the U.S. |
QUOTE |
dbackers A: When I ran for the first time, I said I was personally pro-life but that I would protect a woman's right to choose as the law existed. Two years ago, as a result of the debate we had, the conclusion I reached was that cloning and creating new embryos was wrong, and that we should, therefore, allow our state to become a pro-life state. I believe states should have the right to make this decision, and that's a position I indicated in an op-ed in the Boston Globe 2 years ago. This is not an unreasonable stance. One can be against the law of abortion but support the enforcing of the laws on the books. It would also be better if individual states rather then the judiciary branch made the decision on abortion. QUOTE "On a personal basis, I don't favor abortion," he said. "However, as governor of the commonwealth, I will protect a woman's right to choose under the laws of the country and the commonwealth. That's the same position I've had for many years." As a member of the church and as a Governor it is Mitt Romney's responsibility to obey, honor, and sustain the law regardless of his opposition to it. Under the laws of the United States the Executive responsibility is to enforce the law while the Legislative branch makes the laws. Actions as Pro Life as governor Vetoed emergency contraception for rape victims Vetoed stem cell research bill Though the executive cannot make laws there are safeguards for them to Veto laws that they disagree with Actions that support the non interference of the federal government in state matters Said he would leave the matter of Medicaid funding for abortion to individual states. Romney wants to to move the decision for choosing abortions from the federal bench to the respective states. I believe this is the best way to fight out the abortion issue Actions as Pro-choice Endorsed legalization of RU-486, the abortion-inducing drug. I believe that Romney stance on abortion is well thought out. There are some things that I disagree with but I would support him as president if it was against the current democrats running. |
I have to wonder where Mitt get's his information from? What are your thoughts on this one?
QUOTE |
Romney's statement on prophets may contradict LDS doctrine In a lengthy interview with one of Boston's most prominent journalists, Mitt Romney was asked the following: "Should God speak to you and ask you to do something that might be in conflict with your duties as president or should he speak to your Prophet who would speak to you - how would you make that decision, how would you handle that?" To which Romney responded: "I don't recall God speaking to me. I don't know that he has spoken to anyone since Moses and the bush or perhaps some others." But this answer appears to contradict one of the foundations of the LDS church. Ref. https://www.abc4.com/news/local/story.aspx?...0b-ed018d03bf31 |
Mitt Romney is a politician, making politically correct public statements like a politician. What was he supposed to say to that question? "I'll do whatever God asks me to do!" "I'll do whatever my prophet asks me to do, especially when he says God says so...." ? He'd be a laughingstock in the political arena, and people would be dropping away from him in droves.
Romney can't answer that question - or lots of other personal questions - according to LDS doctrine without endangering his campaign. And it's very obvious that he really, really wants to be president.
No matter what his religion, he has to play the political game and be careful about what he says. Romney is just another political candidate. He just happens to also be LDS.
How can I vote for someone who will sacrifice his own religious integrity - in public - for the candidacy? On the other hand, how can I vote for any other candidate who has none to sacrifice? It's a very tough choice this time.
There is a difference between answering a question and adding things not asked. For instance he did not have to say:
QUOTE |
To which Romney responded: "I don't recall God speaking to me. I don't know that he has spoken to anyone since Moses and the bush or perhaps some others." |