Must a candidate be Christian to be elected President.

McGentrix wrote:

flaja wrote:
au1929 wrote:
Romney takes independence vow
By Joseph Curl

Republican Mitt Romney, who would be the nation's first Mormon president, declared yesterday that he should not have to defend his faith but assured Americans wary of his religion that his church would not run the White House.

This is highly hypocritical on Romney's part. How can a man have faith in what he professes to believe if he is unwilling to conduct his life on the basis of that faith? Can he legitimately be a Mormon if he is not willing to act as a Mormon and promote Mormonism should he be elected president? Why should we trust a man who is willing to discount his most heartfelt beliefs for the sake of gaining votes?

How can any man say "my religion is right" if he unwilling to tell everyone else "your religion is wrong"?

He is not a mullah. He is able to separate his private religious views, from his position in public office. Is that such a hard concept to understand?

No, just a hard one to believe.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

re above posts...

As foofie notes, Romney contradicts himself. Of course, he wasn't attempting to be logical or even consistent in his speech...he was trying to placate evangelicals many of whom are dubious about whether a Mormon is a christian or not and he knows he needs their votes. So he's saying what he and his advisors deem the correct words to achieve those goals. On the other hand, he could have formulated this differently so as not to make such a transparent logical blunder but I suspect he/they didn't even realize the blunder. Further, the notion that a non-believer is unfit for the office, or that such a person is unAmerican, is a clear violation of the constitutional guarantee of freedom of faith. Either way, as regards logic or intellectual integrity or misrepresentation of the constitutional point, he gets the dim bulb award.

But there's no reason why a person of faith ought to be considered unfit for the office just as is the case with the converse of that. And I mean that past the constitutional guarantee. There are as many versions of faith, even christian faith, as there are people who possess faith. And it simply is not the case that we can draw some one to one correspondence between faith (or lack) and immorality or incompetence or nuttiness.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

He is able to separate his private religious views, from his position in public office. Is that such a hard concept to understand?

Precisely my point. He is an opportunist. His heartfelt beliefs cannot be all that heartfelt if he can put them aside so easily. He is either lying to his fellow Mormons because he doesn't take their shared faith seriously, or he is lying to us and will in fact let his Mormonism control his presidency.

0 Replies

flaja wrote:

McGentrix wrote:
He is able to separate his private religious views, from his position in public office. Is that such a hard concept to understand?

Precisely my point. He is an opportunist. His heartfelt beliefs cannot be all that heartfelt if he can put them aside so easily. He is either lying to his fellow Mormons because he doesn't take their shared faith seriously, or he is lying to us and will in fact let his Mormonism control his presidency.

So, let me ask you, what do you know about Mormon's? Are they a cult or something?

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

flaja wrote:
McGentrix wrote:
He is able to separate his private religious views, from his position in public office. Is that such a hard concept to understand?

Precisely my point. He is an opportunist. His heartfelt beliefs cannot be all that heartfelt if he can put them aside so easily. He is either lying to his fellow Mormons because he doesn't take their shared faith seriously, or he is lying to us and will in fact let his Mormonism control his presidency.

So, let me ask you, what do you know about Mormon's? Are they a cult or something?

I know for certain that they do not follow legitimate Christian doctrine and from I know of their lifestyles and church structure, they do resemble a cult.

Please bear in mind that my opinion of Huckabee is no higher than my opinion of Romney. What I have gathered from the news and the one debate that I have watched (in part) tells me that Huckabee isn't willing to take a firm stand on anything based on his supposed Christianity than Romney is based on his Mormonism. They both want to be all things to all people which means they have core beliefs.

0 Replies

Quote:

legitimate Christian doctrine

Really? There is such a thing? Who establishes what it is? Would that be the present Pope or previous Popes? Or the head of the Church of England? Or Pat Robertson? Or Irenaeus? Or Tertullian? Or Augustine? Or the Archbishop of Uganda? Elders of the Amish community in Pennsylvania? Pentacostals and other folks who speak in tongues? The Southern Baptist Federation? Joel Osteen? St. Francis? Biblical literalists? The Dominionist movement?

Please clarify and forward your rationale.

0 Replies

blatham wrote:

Quote:
legitimate Christian doctrine

Really? There is such a thing? Who establishes what it is? Would that be the present Pope or previous Popes? Or the head of the Church of England? Or Pat Robertson? Or Irenaeus? Or Tertullian? Or Augustine? Or the Archbishop of Uganda? Elders of the Amish community in Pennsylvania? Pentacostals and other folks who speak in tongues? The Southern Baptist Federation? Joel Osteen? St. Francis? Biblical literalists? The Dominionist movement?

Please clarify and forward your rationale.

The Holy Bible, Authorized King James translation 1611 as a matter of faith.

0 Replies

flaja wrote:

blatham wrote:
Quote:
legitimate Christian doctrine

Really? There is such a thing? Who establishes what it is? Would that be the present Pope or previous Popes? Or the head of the Church of England? Or Pat Robertson? Or Irenaeus? Or Tertullian? Or Augustine? Or the Archbishop of Uganda? Elders of the Amish community in Pennsylvania? Pentacostals and other folks who speak in tongues? The Southern Baptist Federation? Joel Osteen? St. Francis? Biblical literalists? The Dominionist movement?

Please clarify and forward your rationale.

The Holy Bible, Authorized King James translation 1611 as a matter of faith.

You've given just about the laziest and most superficial answer I've yet seen on this board.

0 Replies

If anyone follows the history of Miss America winners, Bess Myerson, a Jewish girl, won in 1945, the year that the Nazi atrocities were revealed to the world.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miss_America

My point is, I always wondered if there wasn't a message there for any Nazis dreaming of a resurgence of Nazism, "Hey we Americans don't live in your world, with your beliefs, don't mess with us."

My point continued is, a portion of the mature voting public understands that our President, as a representative of the nation, might just need to give the world an image that the world should tiptoe around us, since we really are not like a Europe that isn't too religious these days.

So, it is better if our President does have an image of a devout Christian, believing in things that much of Europe relegates to nice stories.

And, I believe if there was ever a Jewish President, it would be when the U.S. needs to let the rest of the world think, "we just might be crazy mf's."

So, based on the continued concerns about terrorism, I would guess the Republicans will win, or any Democratic candidate will have to stop the love-fest mentality with the rest of the world.

0 Replies

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the Mormon church to which Romney belongs, accepts Jesus Christ as their lord and savior.

As Wikipedia puts it, "they believe Jesus Christ is the Son of God, was born of a virgin, lived a perfect and sinless life, was crucified, and through his atoning sacrifice mankind can be forgiven of their sins. They believe Jesus was resurrected on the third day and currently sits on the right hand of God the Father."

These are basic Christian doctrine.

The thing about the Mormons that distinguishes them from the other Christian denominations is that they have additional books in their scriptural canon that incorporate the North American continent into their beliefs and faith. They believe that the location of the future New Jerusalem will be established by God in North America, specifically, the United States of America, and that Jesus, after his Second Coming will reign over the world from this country.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is a truly American Christian Church.

0 Replies

InfraBlue wrote:

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the Mormon church to which Romney belongs, accepts Jesus Christ as their lord and savior.

As Wikipedia puts it, "they believe Jesus Christ is the Son of God, was born of a virgin, lived a perfect and sinless life, was crucified, and through his atoning sacrifice mankind can be forgiven of their sins. They believe Jesus was resurrected on the third day and currently sits on the right hand of God the Father."

These are basic Christian doctrine.

The thing about the Mormons that distinguishes them from the other Christian denominations is that they have additional books in their scriptural canon that incorporate the North American continent into their beliefs and faith. They believe that the location of the future New Jerusalem will be established by God in North America, specifically, the United States of America, and that Jesus, after his Second Coming will reign over the world from this continent.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is a truly American Christian Church.

google mountain meadows massacre.

0 Replies

InfraBlue wrote:

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the Mormon church to which Romney belongs, accepts Jesus Christ as their lord and savior.

As Wikipedia puts it, "they believe Jesus Christ is the Son of God, was born of a virgin, lived a perfect and sinless life, was crucified, and through his atoning sacrifice mankind can be forgiven of their sins. They believe Jesus was resurrected on the third day and currently sits on the right hand of God the Father."

These are basic Christian doctrine.

The thing about the Mormons that distinguishes them from the other Christian denominations is that they have additional books in their scriptural canon that incorporate the North American continent into their beliefs and faith. They believe that the location of the future New Jerusalem will be established by God in North America, and that Jesus, after his Second Coming will reign over the world from this continent.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is a truly American Christian Church.

We shouldn't forget, I thought, that Jesus managed to come to the U.S. and interacted with the Native Americans. I also like the idea that they get married for eternity, and can eventually become gods. And, the Book of Mormon, found in Upstate New York, with golden pages really sounds factual. And, the shtick with converting the souls of one's ancestors to Mormon souls is just like any other faith I thought. All of these beliefs can be total canards, in effect all wrong. I am just itemizing the things I've heard about Mormons over the years. And, not from Mormons either, so they can be totally incorrect. If they are incorrect, it shows you that the Mormons have had people likely trying to question their beliefs for awhile. But, if they are correct, I believe, it does make for a different faith...

0 Replies

dyslexia wrote:

InfraBlue wrote:
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the Mormon church to which Romney belongs, accepts Jesus Christ as their lord and savior.

As Wikipedia puts it, "they believe Jesus Christ is the Son of God, was born of a virgin, lived a perfect and sinless life, was crucified, and through his atoning sacrifice mankind can be forgiven of their sins. They believe Jesus was resurrected on the third day and currently sits on the right hand of God the Father."

These are basic Christian doctrine.

The thing about the Mormons that distinguishes them from the other Christian denominations is that they have additional books in their scriptural canon that incorporate the North American continent into their beliefs and faith. They believe that the location of the future New Jerusalem will be established by God in North America, specifically, the United States of America, and that Jesus, after his Second Coming will reign over the world from this continent.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is a truly American Christian Church.
google mountain meadows massacre.

On a recent tv documentary about the Mormons this massacre was explained. If I understood it correctly, the victims were just regular families in a wagon train going west. On a secret signal the Mormon followers turned on the wagon train folk, and just killed them in cold blood. I think the scenario was more complicated, but I might have been dozing off during the program. I didn't understand what the motivation was for this act of murder?

Not that other religions haven't committed atrocities, but I think the Spanish Inquisition was about 500 years ago, and the deal with the Canaanites were a few thousand. This mountain meadows thing was in the 19th century. But, I guess religions mature quickly, beyond this type of blind devotion.

0 Replies

Dyslexia wrote:

google mountain meadows massacre.

Yeah, I'm familiar with some of their history.

What prompted me to look into that religion is that all of my half-sisters converted when I was very young. During a reunion some twenty years ago the topic of their religion came up, and they went on and on about how swell it was, that it incorporated this country and the North American Indians, etc.

The way I've come to regard that church is that it arose during the time of the great nationalist movements of the nineteenth century, and the Restorationist movements in the eastern Us and Canada. I think Joseph Smith was a particularly patriotic individual, not so much towards the state as towards the country, the land, and he was particulary religious and became caught up in the Resorationist movements of the day prompted by the Second Great Awakening.

0 Replies

Frontline had a very good documentary about the Mormons a few months back which is probably the one foofie is referring to. I think that's where I learned of the massacre also. I think what prompted Frontline to run the show was Romney's rise in the Republican race for the White House.

0 Replies

Chumly wrote:

Finn dAbuzz wrote:
What I find saddening is the notion that un-believing is a badge of rationality and that the cloddish dismissal of spirituality might be seen, by some, as the height of intellectual sophistication.
This is a Straw Man Logical Fallacy given I did not make the claim that "un-believing is a badge of rationality" thus your claim is misleading.

The above is also an Ad Hominem Logical Fallacy given your use of the word "cloddish" consists of replying by attacking the person, rather than by addressing the substance thus the process of proving or disproving the claim is thereby subverted, and the Argumentum Ad Hominem works to change the subject.

The above is also another Straw Man Logical Fallacy given I did not make the claim that "dismissal of spirituality might be seen, by some, as the height of intellectual sophistication" thus your claim is misleading.
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
Anyone who equates spirituality with a belief in ghosts is either quite ignorant or a deliberate provocateur.
This is Bare Assertion Logical Fallacy given you do not support your claim, thus I challenge you to support it.
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
Does the depth of your thoughts reach beyond a few inches?
This is another Ad Hominem Logical Fallacy but in rhetorical form; you attack the person rather than address the substance, thus the process of proving or disproving the claim is thereby subverted, and the Argumentum Ad Hominem works to change the subject.

BS

0 Replies

snood wrote:

Finn dAbuzz wrote:
Chumly wrote:
What I find most saddening about US politics is that religion is such a popular topic. What a massive waste of time and energy for a bunch of goobers believing in ghosts!

The whole politicization of religion has been blown way out of proportion. Many many people are now actually taking this whole thing seriously!

What should be happening is that any politician who even mentions spirituality be laughed right off the stage!

Ghosts...........suckers!

What I find saddening is the notion that un-believing is a badge of rationality, and that the cloddish dismissal of spirituality might be seen, by some, as the height of intellectual sophistication.

Anyone who equates spirituality with a belief in ghosts is either quite ignorant or a deliberate provocateur.

Does the depth of your thoughts reach beyond a few inches?

Bravo, Finn. I am very happy to find at least one post of yours with which I can wholeheartedly agree. It gives me great reassurance to know that, even with someone with whom I have great differences, I can find some common ground.

Our similarities are more powerful than our differences if we allow them.

0 Replies

Pandering we expect. But this is a bit like Mitt speaking at a white supremicist get-together.

Quote:

Romney's message, which boiled down to let's-all-be-religious-together, was certainly different from the John Kennedy version, which argued that a candidate's religion is irrelevant. But then Kennedy was speaking to the country, while Romney had his attention fixed on the approximately 35,000 Iowa religious conservatives who will tip the balance in the first-in-the-nation Republican caucus.

Can I pause here briefly to point out that in New York there are approximately 35,000 people living on some blocks? If my block got to decide the first presidential caucus, I guarantee you we would be as serious about our special role as the folks in Iowa are. And right now Mitt Romney would be evoking the large number of founding fathers who were agnostics.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/08/opinion/08collins.html?hp

0 Replies

blatham wrote:

flaja wrote:
blatham wrote:
Quote:
legitimate Christian doctrine

Really? There is such a thing? Who establishes what it is? Would that be the present Pope or previous Popes? Or the head of the Church of England? Or Pat Robertson? Or Irenaeus? Or Tertullian? Or Augustine? Or the Archbishop of Uganda? Elders of the Amish community in Pennsylvania? Pentacostals and other folks who speak in tongues? The Southern Baptist Federation? Joel Osteen? St. Francis? Biblical literalists? The Dominionist movement?

Please clarify and forward your rationale.

The Holy Bible, Authorized King James translation 1611 as a matter of faith.

You've given just about the laziest and most superficial answer I've yet seen on this board.

How so?

0 Replies

InfraBlue wrote:

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the Mormon church to which Romney belongs, accepts Jesus Christ as their lord and savior.

0 Replies

Must a candidate be Christian to be elected President.

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know