Romney ready to address Mormon religion head-on

[Pookie]

Aha! I knew he'd have to do this eventually. Think this will help him or hurt him? I don't think religion has been an issue since JFK, right?
I want to see this, though. Hopefully he won't be spouting a lot of church rhetoric and all that, but after seeing him in the debate, I thought he did quite well for himself. Maybe we'll see that presence on Thursday -- I hope so.
Read the article:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/

Purrs,
Pookie

[K-D-K-D-K]

Aha! I knew he'd have to do this eventually. Think this will help him or hurt him? I don't think religion has been an issue since JFK, right?
I want to see this, though. Hopefully he won't be spouting a lot of church rhetoric and all that, but after seeing him in the debate, I thought he did quite well for himself. Maybe we'll see that presence on Thursday -- I hope so.
Read the article:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/

Purrs,
Pookie
I don't know about having a Mormon in office. To me it the religion kind of reminds me of a large cult. Kind of like Pagans you know and other types. I am afraid it would interfere with his decision making and would effect the office of President.

[ECW]

I did notice a few things worth commenting on from Romney's speech.

1) Romney glossed over the vast differences between the Mormon faith and typical protestant-catholic faiths. The addition of the Book of Mormon to the Holy texts by Mormons wasn't broached and neither was the ongoing "biblical" interpretations offered by the Latter Day Saints that essentially govern how Mormons run their lives. These two things play a major role in the lives of everyday Mormons and not a peep from Romney about them.

2)"They seek to remove from the public domain any acknowledgment of God. Religion is seen as merely a private affair, with no place in public life. It is as if they are intent on establishing a new religion in America — the religion of secularism. They are wrong."

I guess that old church-state separation thing that so many of us believe in is out the window in a Romney administration. Secularism is a big part of the glue that keeps this country together and removing that glue or weakening it as Romney would by emphasizing a more prominent role for religion in our lives will cause untold and numerous schisms that may take generations to repair. The tolerance of many religions, or no religion at all, is what makes this country a stronger nation than many others.

3)"Freedom requires religion, just as religion requires freedom."

I have a problem with this statement on many levels but the main one could be answered with a snarky expression: Who died and made you God? If religion is a personal choice, not a mandated one, one can worship God by themselves in the solitude of a prison cell, if one so desires, so freedom isn't a requirement for religion and conversely it also proves that religion does not require freedom to be practiced. This is merely a devious underhanded way of trying to declare that this is a Christian nation and, by God, I, Mitt Romney will prove it.

All in all he did not reassure me that he wouldn't follow the prescripts of the Mormon faith and the teachings of the church elders if he were elected president. He claimed in one sentence that he would not but turned around in a bunch of other sentences and implied that he would. Typical Romney flip-flopping and pandering if you ask me.

[Elrathin]

I personally think it will hurt him. I don't think there are enough of them to justify a push in this direction from him and he risks alienating non-Mormons because of it.

I think a candidate should focus on policies at hand and previous experience, not bring religion into it. Or for that matter they shouldn't bring race or gender into it either.

[AlanC]

I watched the speech and came away with a different view. But to me the most effective of his remarks were these:

When John F. Kennedy addressed the issue of his Roman Catholic faith in a similar speech in 1960, he took hostile questions hurled at him by the ministers, while Mr. Romney’s was a friendly crowd that included, in the front row, four of his five sons and his wife, Ann, as well as many affiliated with the campaign. And Kennedy and Mr. Romney were reaching for different goals: Kennedy was trying to convince the ministers that his faith would not guide his governance, while Mr. Romney was highlighting how the values he derived from his faith — and shared with religious conservatives — would inform his leadership.

To that end, he recalled the early days of the First Continental Congress in Philadelphia in the fall of 1774, when Boston was occupied by British troops and war loomed.

Someone suggested the members pray, he said, but some there voiced objections, because there were too many divisions among various churches.

“Then Sam Adams rose, and said he would hear a prayer from anyone of piety and good character, as long as they were a patriot,” Mr. Romney said. “And so together they prayed, and, together, they fought, and together, by the grace of God, they founded this great nation.”

The New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/07/us/politics/06cnd-romney.html?ei=5065&en=b0d6c2051e96826f&ex=1197608400&adxnnl=1&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print&adxnnlx=1197039951-gfJ704NripFtgAMo+wuSMg)

Differences in faith do not prevent striving in a common cause. There is no religous litmus test for the office of president and there never should be. When a man has a firm record holding both public and private office, there is more that enough reason to vote for or against him without worrying about his faith.

"There are some for whom these commitments are not enough," said Romney. "They would prefer it if I would simply distance myself from my religion, say that it is more a tradition than my personal conviction, or disavow one or another of its precepts. That I will not do. I believe in my Mormon faith, and I endeavor to live by it. My faith is the faith of my fathers. I will be true to them and to my beliefs."

Wrold Net Daily (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/staticarticles/article59079.html)

I think there is a feeling by many in this country to say they would not vote for a Mormon as president. I find that to be a most uncomfortable and biggoted statement. But this statement by Romney would show, to me, a man of principle and conviction. It seems that if it is true that he modifies his positions merely for political purpose, he would not have made this statement.

He went on to say that if these beliefs cost him the presidency, so be it.

To me, it lends credibility to his other statements of position.

Now let me make something clear before anyone wants to inform me about Mormons. I have a sister in law who is a Mormon. I don't like the Mormon Church and I would be hard pressed to accept their definition of themselves as Christians.

But that said, I felt in the 60's that anyone who stated they would not vote for Kennedy JUST because he was a Catholic was both a bigot and ignorant. I feel the same way about anyone who would not vote for Romney JUST because he is a Mormon.

Find an instance in his professional life where being a Mormon caused him to make a poor decision in and of itself and I will say you have found a valid reason to not vote for him. Listen to his positions and if you don't agree with what he stands for and intends to do in office, then, by all means, don't vote for him. But please, do not use someone's personal faith as a reason to not vote for them.

[Truth_and_Power]

The biggots are really hard-pressed to find a candidate they can vote for this time. I mean obviously women, blacks, and "cultists" are out.. who does that leave?

[Labrocca]

We have yet to elect an atheist as President. I don't see the problem with Romney being a Mormon.