Mitt Romney and the Mormon Question

Back in Old Testament times there were many prophets who lived and preached in Jerusalem. I presume that they had homes and neighbors. Was it “weird” that your next door neighbor was called of God to preach faith, repentance, etc?
I think Jesus said it best: A prophet hath no honor in his own country. (John 4:44)
It seems that universally people have had difficulty with the idea that someone they know personally might be a prophet called by God and that only the passage of centuries makes it easier to accept.
Weird beliefs? Nope.

Once again, I, as an atheist, find it a fascinating dichotomy that a Christian can dismiss a Mormon, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, pagan, for believing in nonsensical things and vis-versa. All religions believe in things that seem nonsensical to we atheists. Yet, it would be wrong to dismiss these religious people from holding higher office. I do not prostelitize or try to ban their beliefs. I do not push for my belief to be taught as “gospel”. Rather, I look for the issue of religion to be divorced from civic life. I look for people to respect other people’s rights to worship, regardless how I view the individual belief. I urge my friends to debate and discuss their beliefs but, in the end, to recognize that we all must make peace with our own spiritual and physical lives. It is a shame that this country would never elect an aetheist for one thing you could count on with an aetheist; they would be concerned with the here and now only!

From what I’ve seen of Mitt Romney, he definitely has my vote. I’ve been thirsty for a president who can articulate conservative values, govern successfully, and come up with elegant solutions to problems for too many years now. I like McCain, but he doesn’t have the chops compared to Romney.
As for the Mormon thing…I agree with the person who commented that it means the same as voting for a methodist president. We can all look at Romney’s record, and judge how he will govern based on that – and he has a good record.

I totally disagree with what has been said above–voting for a Mormon is NOT the same as voting for a Methodist.
(For those of you who want just the Cliff’s notes, look for simple math formulas after each point)
Mormons hold to a living, breathing leader who’s authority is considered 100% absolute.
~
To a Mormon…
What prophet dude says = What God says
Not doing what prophet says = I lose points with God
~
If he is a good, obedient Mormon, then the man you elect will not be the man who controls the nuke button. He will always bow the knee to the Mormon prophet. You will indirectly be electing the Mormon prophet as president. On the other hand, if he is a Mormon who is uncommitted and in rebellion against his own camp, then he is untrustworthy and unfit for the job.
~
IF elected Mormon = good trustworthy man of character, then…
Mormon prophet > President of the United States
~
The obvious retort is that a good Methodist holds to an absolute authority as well–the Bible.
This is true, but there is a key difference. The Bible is an ancient book that has been well studied, and we know what to expect from someone who holds to it. The foundation of the Bible-believing man is firm, secure, and predictable. (By the by, I would not classify Bush in this category since He is rather ignorant about the Bible.)
The only thing that is truly firm, secure, and predictable about the Mormon man is that his absolute authority figure is a man with a free will and a lot of power and money. His authority is even more absolute than the Bible because he can change church doctrines on a whim.
EXAMPLES
The Mormons taught that polygamy was required in order to get into the “best” heaven, but that didn’t stop the Mormon prophet from throwing polygamy out the window when Utah’s statehood was at stake. Polygamy went instantly from VIP to grounds for excommunication by his words alone. This has also been done with several key doctrines of the Mormon faith concerning the priesthood offices, weddings, blood oaths, and how to earn heaven. These changes pop up all the time throughout the entire history of the Mormon religion.
In other words…
a good METHODIST says, “I believe the Bible.”
a good MORMON says, “I believe whatever I am last told.”
All it takes is for the Mormon prophet to say, “God says nuke here,” and it will be done.
The Bible cannot do that. A power-grabbing prophet can.

I’m still waiting for someone to ask Romney for his thoughts about Helen Kimball, Nancy Winchester, and Joseph Smith’s other unfortunate underage “plural wives”. After Foleygate, the last thing the Republican party needs is a candidate linked to a man who abused his authority to seduce teenagers.

Would you want someone who is a member of a faith with borderline fanatical members to take an oath in a secret temple of which no non-member can enter into and then have that person pledge their existence to the church, THEN turn around and pledge that same existance to this great country?
Um… no
http://lds-mormon.com/veilworker/endowment.shtml

I find it ironic that the majority of people speaking on behalf of Mormonism in this thread are not themselves Mormon.
As a Mormon, the most troubling assertion I have heard is that the prophet dictates our political beliefs and that “good mormons” are required to blindly follow church leaders. This, quite simply, is false. Mormon conspiracy theorists are abundant and will be coming out of the woodwork during this presidential political season. I hope the main stream media will shed some light on their deceit and bigotry. (Looking forward to the piece Terry)
It should also be noted that I don’t intend to vote for Romney despite the fact that we share the same faith.
Voting for a candidate because of their religion is as ignorant as NOT voting for a candidate because of their religion.

Well if Romney is indeed a puppet of the LDS Church, then here is what he must accept…
LDS Church Proclimation
http://www.lds.org/newsroom/issues/answer/0,19491,6056-1-462-44-462,00.html
Question:
Does the Church support or endorse political parties or candidates?
Answer:
The Church’s mission is to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ, not to elect politicians. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is neutral in matters of party politics. This applies in all of the many nations in which it is established.
The Church does not:
* Endorse, promote or oppose political parties, candidates or platforms.
* Allow its church buildings, membership lists or other resources to be used for partisan political purposes.
* Attempt to direct its members as to which candidate or party they should give their votes to. This policy applies whether or not a candidate for office is a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
* Attempt to direct or dictate to a government leader.
The Church does:
* Encourage its members to play a role as responsible citizens in their communities, including becoming informed about issues and voting in elections.
* Expect its members to engage in the political process in an informed and civil manner, respecting the fact that members of the Church come from a variety of backgrounds and experiences and may have differences of opinion in partisan political matters.
* Request candidates for office not to imply that their candidacy or platforms are endorsed by the Church.
* Reserve the right as an institution to address, in a nonpartisan way, issues that it believes have significant community or moral consequences or that directly affect the interests of the Church.
In the United States, where nearly half of the world’s Latter-day Saints live, it is customary for the Church at each national election to issue a letter to be read to all congregations encouraging its members to vote, but emphasizing the Church’s neutrality in partisan political matters.
Relationships With Government
Elected officials who are Latter-day Saints make their own decisions and may not necessarily be in agreement with one another or even with a publicly stated Church position. While the Church may communicate its views to them, as it may to any other elected official, it recognizes that these officials still must make their own choices based on their best judgment and with consideration of the constituencies whom they were elected to represent.
Modern scriptural references to the role of government: Doctrine and Covenants, Section 134

It is very simple: If Mormon President Gordon B. Hinkley, or any prophet that is his predecesor is “told by God” that the end is coming and all must gather in Missouri for the second coming, a faithful Mormon, even if he is the President of The United States of America, will go. Who will be our leader then? I respect a man who can put God before country in his own life, but when the decision will affect the lives of an entire nation it is too much of a risk. A True Believing Mormon’s temple Oath will come before his oath that is taken as the President of our nation.

Separation of Church and State. Why can’t Americans get this in their head and leave religion out of it?
Also, Why can’t religion respect this either?
The day we follow through on a true separation of church and state, the better we will be.

I have been a life long Mormon and can safely say that no Mormon prophet will likely say anything more scary than has been said over the pulpit in the past 40 years. Mormon life is pretty dull.Most people pay their tithing,usually less than what is required and simply try to do the best they can. The church has distanced itself greatly from early pprophets teachings saving only the very basic doctrines.Mormons are however expected to obey their leaders without question. I am shocked that other Mormons would even say that we don’t follow blindly. Ask a nineteen year old male who dosen’t want to serve a mission how that goes over with the folks at home.

It is unbelievable that those not of the Mormon faith, can say such rubbish. If Mitt is qualified to take on the grueling office of President, then he should be elected. I would expect him to follow his faith, as each and every President that has been elected to follow their faith. If they turn their back on their faith, wouldn’t they turn their back on their country. Mormon, Methodist, Baptist, Catholic, Jewish, Muslim, etc. all have their religious leaders. Each President has turned toward their faith in times of crisis and difficult decisions. This man would be expected to do the same.
Besides we could use another person of decency in the White House. One that is not clouded with a past of charges as a lawyer, standing up for justice to turn her head, or finding loopholes to dodge the laws made in this country.
There has never been a President in the White House who did not have some mark on his life. Each person is not perfect, but it would be nice to have someone who is striving to be so.
I agree with Anna. We should vote for the person that would make the best candidate for President, and should not base their decision on race, color or creed including religion.

There are some pretty ignorant and amazingly stupid remarks being made on this website about the LDS faith like,
EXHIBIT #1:”What prophet dude says = What God says.
Not doing what prophet says = I lose points with God”. Wrong!!! Wrong!!! Wrong!!!
The Prophet gives the members guidance such as “stay away from pornography, don’t bring it in to your homes etc…” We are then free to listen or to reject what guidance he gives because we believe in free agency. Ever heard of natural consiquences? Generally it is believed that if we go to our meetings, study the scriptures, pray often, and live our lives according to the teachings/standards of the Church we have a pretty good chance of being happy in this life and our children will benefit from our example.
Where in the world are you from and where in the world do you get your information? It sounds like paranoia even hysteria.
Another uninformed person wrote…
EXHIBIT #2: “the Mormon church requires members in good standing – which Mitt Romney claims he is – to pay 10% of their income to the church without ever knowing where the money goes.”
Huh? The truth is we are told where our money goes because we fill out a receipt. The receipt has different things underwhich we can check off where we want the money to go. This is given to the Bishop of each ward who in turn does a Tithing settlement at the end of each year. In other words there is an accounting for every dollar and cent that is paid to the church. I understand though that millions of $$$ donated to victims of Hurricane Katrina were lost or unaccounted for.
A historical anecdote:
When Joseph Smith (the first Propet) was asked how he governed his people so well, he replied, “I teach them correct principles and they govern themselves.” Now does that sound like the Prophet was telling members of the Church what to do?
Before you point a finger at weird religious practices take a look at your own… My stepdaughter told me of a boy that told her she was going to go to Hell because she doesn’t go to church. Talk about weird. And of all the practices known to mankind I still can’t think of anything more bizarre that cutting of the foreskin of a penis and yet people have been doing it for millenia. Hello!
What I find as a member of the LDS faith is that non-members often get old, bad, or obsolete information about our faith. And this gets passed around and around until like an old rumor it just sticks.
I think the most idiotic thing of all is when people say that the Mormons aren’t Christians. Well, sorry people but nobody owns that name. Besides the name Jesus Christ is in our Church’s name. As for Mitt Romeny becoming president. I wish the guy well, in fact, I wish anybody well who takes on the office of Command and Chief. I wouldn’t want that job for all the gold in the world. What a nightmare.
~

As far as religious background is concerned I think all candidates attachment or not to a sect is concern if relevant while not required. If Romney is to be closely examined in this area, then so should Clinton, McCain, Obama, Giuliani, etc.
What is preached or taught from the pulpit or in class would most certainly influence the decision making process and thus the candidates conclusions. Why other would the candidate legitimately be there?
For some candidates it would not matter because they neglect attendance and thus the influence. But then, why would the candidate belong anywhere if he or she does not faithfully attend services as opportunity presents.
My strong advice is to not listen to just what a person says or writes. In any faith worth having there are not levels and there are not secrets held only by a spiritual elite. If that be the case then run from it as hard as possible. Like my mother says; “If it is good, then why are there secrets?”
A legitimate faith is open in their dealings, their belief system, and leadership system. Joining the organization is not required for Heaven. Going through rituals are not required for Heaven. Not joining will not mean you go to Hell. Not going through the rituals will not mean you go to Hell. Heaven’s blessing is not obtained by works. Hell is not the destiny for lack of works.
Heaven is obtained by a supernatural change in a person’s life beyond anything the person can do other than respond to a supernatural call realizing there is only one way to escape eternal Hell and be eternally blessed in Heaven. Children already have the promise of Heaven but at some particular state of understanding become responsible for the life that has become separated from God and like others must then respond to this supernatural call.

Listen, Mormonism is a weird religion. The mormons who have written on this blog that it is not, aren’t being honest. Mormons DO believe the prophet speaks to God. They DO believe what he says is the word of God. No non-mormon is allowed in the temple, and neither are mormons who aren’t good enough. Having said that, I would vote fo a mormon candidate if I supported his/her positions on important issue. Let the mormon faith stand on its own, don’t mislead people about what mormons believe.

Religion can be easily misunderstood and also misrepresented. The Christian faith is one of the best or worst examples depending how your look at it. The Old Testament is blunt not mincing words even as it relates to the greatest of the patriarchs, priests, and kings.
Genesis was written for an ancient culture whose literary rules are not the same as today. Related to Creation the message is simple. God (Yahweh) did it. They were totally incapable of understanding a modern scientific thesis on the origins of the universe and mankind. With all the science of today the same fact remains. God (Yahweh) did it.
There were a lot of laws created in the Old Testament that were essential for an ancient wandering society in a harsh wilderness with warring tribes that were not forgiving. This was a necessary theocracy designed for worship of Yahweh and simple survival.
The Christian Bible is progressive. The New Testament was written in a society that was not a Jewish or Christian theocracy and thus is understood in the Christian Bible. As a greater understanding of the universe and society became more common the religious thought progressed to accommodate this change.
It also provided almost overwhelming insight in the Old Testament.
Then there was an end of divine revelation when John of Revelation finished his work. Tradition sometimes represents John as living to a very old age, possible over 100. That would put the Book of Revelation as being written in the 1st or very early 2nd century A.D.
After that divine revelation ceased and it is within the context of the 66 books of the Christian Bible that we receive our divine guidance from Revelation to today.
Whatever disagrees with these Scripture in the Christian Bible, in context, is false. It is as simple as that.

Russ:
I totally respect your view point. It is entirely legitimate. Please read some of the earlier postings related to faith from Mormons.
For a person of faith, if Mr. Romney is that, the overriding factor in the logic he would use in making decisions is his faith.
Quite frankly I knew my last post would lose a lot of people. I was hoping to draw what in legal circles is called a “bright red line” separating traditional Christianity from splinter sects that claim to be Christian but are not. The “bright red line” is when the last verse of the Book of Revelation was penned as far as divine revelation is concerned. After that, there is no additional revelation.
I appreciate your post and comments very much.
Thanks

The most dangerous approach in religious theory is the failure to not “draw a bright red line” for eternity with blessing or torment is at stake.
Regarding the “bright red line”, that refers to the end of divine inspiration. I am not totally certain on this and don’t have the time to look it up but I don’t think it is likely Revelation was written on Patmos but later. Where it was written is not the issue here though. Certainly the Patmos experience influences the content.
There is a great gulf between pointing out exactly when inspiration ended and when the 66 books of the Christian Bible became canonized. Canonization came as a result of undeniable proof the books are inspired.
Scholars were certainly involved in this process, but they were not the determining factor. Books and the verses they contain are “God breathed”. The Christian Scripture is actually literally alive, able to impart eternal, and the congregations recognize this and thus also the scholars. The general laity’s determination was the determining factor.
The New International Translation records two principles as follows:
ALL SCRIPTURE IS GOD-BREATHED and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness. (II Timothy 3:16)
“The above Scripture is unique because it has dual translations. It can read “ALL-SCRIPTURE THAT IS GOD-BREATHED is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness.” This takes care of assertions of those who consider other writings as scripture carry the same weight and approval as Christian inspired.
“For the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.”(Hebrews 4:12)
The Christian Bible’s Scripture is alive and able to impart eternal life to those who believe. It is surgically sharp revealing who a person really is.
Dead writings and doctrine promoted during the 1st century to today lack the actual Breath of God and the living characteristic, thus the only outcome from these teachings are death in that the end result is eternal separation from God in torment.

Mormon faith springs from Joseph Smith and Brigham Young. Mormonism is not New Testament Christianity nor is their depiction of their christ the Christ of the New Testament. For certain, one is wrong.
Their history is well documented with empirical evidence even in court records prior to Smith’s moving west.
Belief in the Mormon faith goes to judgment. Is the judgment good or is it erroneous on the most important decision any individual can ever make?

We have had presidents who while they sought to in some form to attach to Christianity for the purpose of gaining approval and therefore the vote of the public it would be a hard case make their being Christian.
Quite frankly I have many friends who are not Christian and I would in their case trust their judgment in some areas. I also have Mormon friends who in certain areas of their lives are very intelligent. There would be areas in which I would trust them also.
For that matter a person can be right in all areas of his or her life except one; that one being their determination of eternity and in the end be the ultimate fool. For that matter such are always the greatest of fools because his or her responsibility to be right is greater.
All I am saying is this. Please do some legitimate research on Joseph Smith and Brigham Young because they are the foundation on which the Mormon faith rests.
I can easily get away from generalizations but I would prefer that at least someone else do a little research on where this movement started, and the character of Joseph Smith and Brigham Young. I do not see why that is so difficult.
And yes, this issue unquestionably does go to judgment.

I did not say my Mormon friends are fools. I said ALL that miss the mark on the most important decision, that of eternity are fools. It is all inclusive.
Yes Joseph Smith and Brigham Young are not running for office. Mr. Romney is running for office. I might end up voting for him myself depending on how the field plays out.
The fact remains religion, in particular for the devout, is a dominant force in decision making. The Mormon religion is founded by and can not be separated from Joseph Smith and Brigham Young who were overwhelmingly dominate in the early formation of the belief.
You can not separate a devout individual in any religious sect from the overriding influence of that religion. His or her faith unquestionable becomes the primary basis of the decision making process.
AGAIN, IT GOES TO JUDGMENT and I highly recommend doing an empirical evidentiary based research on the “Fathers” of the Mormon faith: Joseph Smith and Brigham Young.
DO YOU THINK A MAN OR WOMAN WHO IS RUNNING FOR OFFICE SHOULD WANT WHAT IS BEST FOR HIS OR HER MATE? THE ANSWER CERTAINLY IS YES. In the Mormon faith, for the devout, marriage enters into a dark strange world. Please do a little research.
It should be understood that I am much more critical in regards to many of the teachings that have been attached to traditional Christianity of which I am a part of.

This is so silly! I remember when Kennedy was trying to be elected. “A Catholic!” was the cry all around the nation. “He’ll listen to the Pope on important matters!” How stupid can a people be. As was said earlier, look at the past presidents. As an American I am embarrased to say that Clinton was our Commander in Chief. Do I believe that this kind of deplorable behavior will take place with Mr. Romney? No, I believe he has higher morals than that. A man that has high morals is important in that position. I believe that if a person is not concerned with deceiving a nation with his/her lack of morals isn’t fit for any government office.