DiscussMormonism.com

With the recent political debate, I thought a poll was in order.

Note: This is assuming that Romney would win the Presidency. Personally I think his chances are slim.

I also vote for Presidential oaths. Realistically Romney has to realize that he has to take his presidential oaths first. People (the vast vast majority of which are not Mormon) are voting for a President, not a preacher. I think at the end of the campaign he'll realize his constituency are all the Americans, not just the Mormons.

Note: This is assuming that Romney would win the Presidency. Personally I think his chances are slim.

I also vote for Presidential oaths. Realistically Romney has to realize that he has to take his presidential oaths first. People (the vast vast majority of which are not Mormon) are voting for a President, not a preacher. I think at the end of the campaign he'll realize his constituency are all the Americans, not just the Mormons.

I find it absolutely incredible that Romney is going to go through the same three ring circus JFK went through forty years ago because of his Catholicism. What is not at all shocking is that almost all of this tempest in a teapot is coming from the secular Left, as is most of the renewed anti-semitism here and in Europe.

When will some of us start to grow up?

Coggins7 wrote:

Note: This is assuming that Romney would win the Presidency. Personally I think his chances are slim.

I also vote for Presidential oaths. Realistically Romney has to realize that he has to take his presidential oaths first. People (the vast vast majority of which are not Mormon) are voting for a President, not a preacher. I think at the end of the campaign he'll realize his constituency are all the Americans, not just the Mormons.

I find it absolutely incredible that Romney is going to go through the same three ring circus JFK went through forty years ago because of his Catholicism. What is not at all shocking is that almost all of this tempest in a teapot is coming from the secular Left, as is most of the renewed anti-semitism here and in Europe.

When will some of us start to grow up?

When people realize that separation of church and state means separating state and church. However I don't think it's possible to separate a person's religious identity with their decison making identity on some issues. So it will be a continual issue.

When people realize that separation of church and state means separating state and church. However I don't think it's possible to separate a person's religious identity with their decison making identity on some issues. So it will be a continual issue.

Well, since there is no such principle as "separation of church and state" in the constitution, then the origin of the principles upon which a politician makes judgements and critiques political ideologies and policies has no relevance to his fitness to serve in public office.

The separation of a person's religious identity, or lack of it, from political descision making is not a relevant issue at all, which is why the founders made no mention of it in the constitution nor made any law regarding it. If you would do some study of the writings of the founders of this country, especially those who had a direct hand in the conceiving and writing of the constitution, you will find that the majority, if not all of them, felt that religious belief and committment was, in point of fact, indispensable to the qualites of an office holding politician.

Where did you get this idea of "separation of church and state" from? Oh, I know. The Supreme Court...

Silly me. And I thought the constitution was the supreme law of the land.

My view of Romney is that he is very politically savvy and would cater more to the evangelical religious right of his party than the LDS Church. That said, he still has the wrong politics for me.

Coggins7 wrote:

When people realize that separation of church and state means separating state and church. However I don't think it's possible to separate a person's religious identity with their decison making identity on some issues. So it will be a continual issue.

Well, since there is no such principle as "separation of church and state" in the constitution, then the origin of the principles upon which a politician makes judgements and critiques political ideologies and policies has no relevance to his fitness to serve in public office.

The separation of a person's religious identity, or lack of it, from political descision making is not a relevant issue at all, which is why the founders made no mention of it in the constitution nor made any law regarding it. If you would do some study of the writings of the founders of this country, especially those who had a direct hand in the conceiving and writing of the constitution, you will find that the majority, if not all of them, felt that religious belief and committment was, in point of fact, indispensable to the qualites of an office holding politician.

Where did you get this idea of "separation of church and state" from? Oh, I know. The Supreme Court...

Silly me. And I thought the constitution was the supreme law of the land.

I'm assuming you're a very strict Constructionist ;)

No "separation of church and state" isn't in the Constitution, it was in a letter from Jefferson to somebody. But the 1st Amendment to the Constitution provides freedom of religion and freedom of speech. It also provides the Establishment Clause, saying that the govt cannot favor a religion over others, create a specific state religion, or discriminate against a religion. I think those rules help fill in the idea of separating the state from any church (at least officially). Of course the people that run govt have usually been religious people so....there we are.

Bond...James Bond wrote:Realistically Romney has to realize that he has to take his presidential oaths first. . . I think at the end of the campaign he'll realize his constituency are all the Americans, not just the Mormons.

Don't you think Romney already realizes both these things?

Dr. Shades wrote:

Bond...James Bond wrote:Realistically Romney has to realize that he has to take his presidential oaths first. . . I think at the end of the campaign he'll realize his constituency are all the Americans, not just the Mormons.

Don't you think Romney already realizes both these things?

What I think is interesting is where he went to get his war chest started: LDS church leaders.

Bond...James Bond wrote:With the recent political debate, I thought a poll was in order.

Note: This is assuming that Romney would win the Presidency. Personally I think his chances are slim.

I also vote for Presidential oaths. Realistically Romney has to realize that he has to take his presidential oaths first. People (the vast vast majority of which are not Mormon) are voting for a President, not a preacher. I think at the end of the campaign he'll realize his constituency are all the Americans, not just the Mormons.

Of course this presumes the fallacious assumption that the two will ever or even do conflict. The covenant of consecration as I think through it does not cause any case for anyone to choose between the two.

Coggins7 wrote:

Note: This is assuming that Romney would win the Presidency. Personally I think his chances are slim.

I also vote for Presidential oaths. Realistically Romney has to realize that he has to take his presidential oaths first. People (the vast vast majority of which are not Mormon) are voting for a President, not a preacher. I think at the end of the campaign he'll realize his constituency are all the Americans, not just the Mormons.

I find it absolutely incredible that Romney is going to go through the same three ring circus JFK went through forty years ago because of his Catholicism. What is not at all shocking is that almost all of this tempest in a teapot is coming from the secular Left, as is most of the renewed anti-semitism here and in Europe.

When will some of us start to grow up?

I have to agree with Coggins. The amzing thing that was pointed out on FOX news tonight that is seem that it is not the conservatives who are so upset about his religion, but the left. I do not recall the publication referred to but it was a left wing rag that railed on Romney for being a Mormon and how awful that is as well as how it should prohibit his election. The left really is not tolerant at all though they like to pretent to be.