Brackite wrote:I won’t be voting for Mitt Romney in the Republican primaries, however if it does come down between Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney in the General Election, then I will definitely be voting for Mitt Romney.
Agreed, Brackite. Personally, I'd like to see Mitt get the nomination (not that I think he has a snowball's chance in hell), because I'd like to see what the church does when the press does with a full-scale push on the LDS church. The resulting backpedaling (if Pres Hinckley is still alive), soft-pedaling (if Pres Monson has succeeded the throne), or in-your-face arrogance (if Packer is closer to the throne that he currently is) would definitely be worth the price of a ticket. Because if Mitt is nominated, the press is going to have a field day with Mormon history and beliefs.
Brackite wrote:I won’t be voting for Mitt Romney in the Republican primaries, however if it does come down between Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney in the General Election, then I will definitely be voting for Mitt Romney.
As I said in an earlier thread:
Me? If it came down to Hilary and Mitt, I would vote for Mitt and then go get drunk for 3 1/2 years. Then I'd wake up, see who was running for re-election, vote against them, find out the results, and possibly get drunk for another 3 1/2 years.
"Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded."-charity 3/7/07
Dick Cheney's obviously the AntiChrist. He shoots people and gets away with it. What the hell? When I do it I get 8-15 in cornhole prison. He does it and the victim of assault with a deadly weapon apologizes. What the hell?
"Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded."-charity 3/7/07
Dick Cheney's obviously the AntiChrist. He shoots people and gets away with it. What the hell? When I do it I get 8-15 in cornhole prison. He does it and the victim of assault with a deadly weapon apologizes. What the hell?
That is because Dick Cheney is the Vice President, and the guy he shot was a lawyer. If Dick Cheney was instead a Border Patrol agent, and if he shot instead an illegal drug smuggler , then Dick Cheney would've been sent into prison for over 11 years. Where is the Justice?
"And I've said it before, you want to know what Joseph Smith looked like in Nauvoo, just look at Trump." - Fence Sitter
Dick Cheney's obviously the AntiChrist. He shoots people and gets away with it. What the hell? When I do it I get 8-15 in cornhole prison. He does it and the victim of assault with a deadly weapon apologizes. What the hell?
That is because Dick Cheney is the Vice President, and the guy he shot was a lawyer. If Dick Cheney was instead a Border Patrol agent, and if he shot instead an illegal drug smuggler , then Dick Cheney would've been sent into prison for over 11 years. Where is the Justice?
Suprised he didn't get a medal for shooting a lawyer.
Justice doesn't matter for those who hold the power. That's the reality of our "democracy".
"Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded."-charity 3/7/07
Justice doesn't matter for those who hold the power. That's the reality of our "democracy".
That is the reality of reality. It has always been that way. Why do you think there is always such a struggle over power? The only ones who want justice are the ones who put some value on it. And the powerful know there is little to no value associated with justice. Justice is only important when its associated somehow with power.
Coggins7 wrote:All Christians, of whatever denomination or background are wedded to Plural Marriage whether or not they like that state of affairs becasue of the very real fact that a number of the most revered individuals in the text of the Old Testament practiced it, with the either clear or implied acceptance of God.
This would be a great response for Mitt to give to the press. I'm sure all the EV's would love it.
What Rollo is really therefore doing is disallowing both Christians and Jews per se any active participation in the political life of their country (precisely what liberals have been trying to acheive for decades).
Not at all. As I've said before, I have no problem with Mitt running for prez. What I do think is that full disclosure requires that the electorate know about other loyalty oaths Mitt has taken. And if Mitt feels he cannot do this, he should withdraw (or at least stop giving misleading statements to the press, like in the NY Times article).
Further, he has still provided not a single logical argument or cogent reason why such a theological concept would have anything to do with serving in public office.
It doesn't surprise me that you can't see any connection between Mitt's temple oaths and the presidential oath he wishes to make. For a history lesson of how they may possibly conflict, just look at the Church's polygamy days.
"Moving beyond apologist persuasion, LDS polemicists furiously (and often fraudulently) attack any non-traditional view of Mormonism. They don't mince words -- they mince the truth."
-- Mike Quinn, writing of the FARMSboys, in "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View," p. x (Rev. ed. 1998)