What do you think of Mitt Romney?
What do you think of a Mormon becoming President?
What are the analogies to John F. Kennedy's presidency, when people were concerned about his Catholic faith?
Will the concerns about Mitt Romney answering to the LDS church prophet be as baseless as the concerns about JFK answering to the Pope?
What about Al Sharpton's comment that "those of us who believe in God" will defeat Romney?
Has Al Sharpton stuck his foot in his mouth?
What do you think?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
I’ve heard many people saying the same thing about Mitt Romney. They question his decision-making based upon his LDS beliefs. Is that really how we should decide who should be President?
I heard a news consultant the other night mention that it’s a shame how religion of any sorts is a big part of an election, as it didn’t used to be an issue. I agree.
JFK only had to vouch that his religious leader, the Pope, wouldn’t rule his political decisions. But now we fervently (I almost said religiously) examine each potential leader for their belief system and I’m really unhappy that we as a country feel it is necessary.
If we judged anyone on their religious beliefs it would make for poor decision making on voters parts. Yet, it does happen. However, it seems to me that if you look at the “Mormon” politicians running cities in Idaho and Utah it is not like they run a theocracy or anything. In fact, some might argue that they do a pretty good job running governments….more so than say some liberals in Detroit or Philadelphia where crime reins supreme on a daily basis, education delivery is poor, and morals are so lax that drugs, sex, and other deviant behaviors are tolerated out of a belief that it is wrong to question anyone elses belief systems.
Going back to Romney, he has demonstrated some pretty good decision making skills based on business principles that work. It’s not like he saved the Olympics with some Mormon ideology…..he exercised good command and control principles and time tested business acumen to make the Olympics a success financially and aestetically (especially right after 9/11 happened). I think certain people are making more out of his religion than he has ever brought to the table with his decision making. It’s too bad that more people don’t look at Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama’s lack of experience in the private sector as much as they put stock in Romney’s religious experience in a personal arena.
Mike,
You argue that Mormon politicians are doing a better job running things in those states that have a predominant LDS political influence than those that don’t. If that is the case then why, in a recent poll, was Utah rated as having the most depressed citizenry in the union, with Idaho just five or six points off? And why do we have such high suicide rates? The pharmaceutical industry is doing very well with Utah. Our neighbors to the South lead the nation in per capita consumption of anti-depressants. Does this sound like a healthy population?
You seem to feel that we secularists (remember, there are Christian secularists too) lack the moral fiber to want what’s best for our country. When Romney states, “My faith is the faith of my fathers – I will be true to them and to my beliefs”, I shudder. His fathers believed in something a bit more radical than what the current presidential hopeful espouses. On his mission to France (in the 60’s) Romney was selling the notion that Blacks were an inferior race (that’s assuming he was preaching the company line). Should not an informed electorate know of such things? Should we not question whether or not an oath, taken by Romney (swearing allegiance to church hierarchy) could take precedent over an oath to defend the Constitution?
I suppose that, for a secularist like myself, seeing Huckabee elected would be even worse than Romney in that Huckabee considers the presidency an “extension of his ministry”. Strange how we fight a war in Afghanistan to free that nation of the theocratic Taliban rule, yet so many of our own countrymen seem so eager to see a Christian counterpart of same in this country.
If we Secularists have doubled our numbers in the last decade, it at least shows a legitimate concern for the separation of church and state in this country. Thomas Jefferson rolled over in his grave when Romney gushed – “Freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom.” That leaves a sick feeling in my gut when I think of all the sectarian, agnostic or atheist soldiers who gave their lives defending that First Amendment, you know, the one that disallows the establishment of a state religion.
Mike, we secularists will fight right along side you religionists to protect this great nation… just don’t disenfranchise us when we question those political office seekers, like Romney who states, “The notion of the separation of church and state has been taken by some well beyond its original meaning. They seek to remove from the public domain any acknowledgment of God.”
No, Mike, we are just a group of people who shudder at the thought of a Christian Taliban running this nation.
Thanks Joe, for reminding me why I left Idaho Falls all these many moons ago.
I was actually getting a little misty when I thought back to my days of growing up in IF as a non-LDS syncophant.
Get out while you still can!
;-)
Meso, I don't think you can blame government for people being depressed and suiciding.
And if whether or not a politician is LDS bears on whether we could trust them, why aren't we concerned about the disproportionate numbers of LDS in the FBI? At least I've heard that that is the case.
Go Obama!
When I was very young, as an active Catholic, I did not understand why JFK and religion was an issue. Now I am active LDS and I understand it is to detract from the issues.
Sorry but I wouldn't vote for an LDS leader. Growing up in Southern California I might not have thought much of it, but after living in Idaho, there is no way. I've yet to see more discrimination than I have with LDS and non-whatevers. They take the phrase "take care of our own" to an obnoxious, immoral, indecent and unethical level.
Post a Comment