|
Post by NYR on Aug 15, 2012 21:19:33 GMT -5
he definitely has baggage. he voted repeatedly to curtail a woman's right to abortions (even if it was a product of rape or incest) For that alone he shouldnt be elected, outrageous proposal! i forgot to mention that he also doesn't want women to have abortions even in life-threatening situations.
|
|
|
Post by masterplan200 on Aug 16, 2012 4:40:52 GMT -5
so this is the man you want to be the new president? nice one You do know that Ronald Reagan was once a Democrat, right? My point: People can change. Edit: And a similar video can be made regarding Obama criticizing Bush's policies, and then adopting them once he became president - along with the issues of gay marriage, raising taxes in a recession, and on Superpacs! You might want to check: www.factcheck.org/2012/06/obamas-spending-inferno-or-not/
|
|
|
Post by NYR on Aug 16, 2012 10:28:46 GMT -5
You do know that Ronald Reagan was once a Democrat, right? My point: People can change. you're right that people can change. ronald reagan left the democratic party because his points of view fundamentally changed over the years. here's the difference. mitt romney changes his points of view seemingly daily so he can pander to as many voters as possible.
|
|
|
Post by spaneli on Aug 16, 2012 17:22:52 GMT -5
You do know that Ronald Reagan was once a Democrat, right? My point: People can change. you're right that people can change. ronald reagan left the democratic party because his points of view fundamentally changed over the years. here's the difference. mitt romney changes his points of view seemingly daily so he can pander to as many voters as possible. Correct. One could argue that Regan's change from Democrat to Republican happened slowly over the course of his life. And even when he was a Republican, he was a moderate Republican at that. Romney's viewpoints literally change day by day, week by week, and month by month. What would impress me with Romney is if I actually saw him hold on to an issue and stand for it. Not relent. Fight for something that he actually believes in.
|
|
|
Post by David Spritz on Aug 16, 2012 17:29:03 GMT -5
on a side note: i'm still shocked a mormon is being considered for high office.
God bless.
|
|
|
Post by NYR on Aug 16, 2012 19:27:13 GMT -5
on a side note: i'm still shocked a mormon is being considered for high office. God bless. listen, man. mormons believe some crazy shit, but if you look at the bigger picture, their beliefs are no more crazy than what jews, christians, muslims, or any other religion believe. there are some inherent problems with mormonism: the church itself. joseph smith was a convicted con man, a pedophile, a polygamist and an outspoken racist and bigot. if mitt romney is a religious mormon, he believes that this man was not only a prophet, but the prophet. here's the big thing that gets me personally. the mormon church has had a lot of controversy regarding retroactively baptizing the dead to mormonism, especially holocaust victims. anne frank has been proxy baptized on nine separate occasions. the parents of holocaust survivor and nazi hunter simon wiesenthal were given posthumous baptisms without knowledge or approval. others who have been baptized after death: christopher columbus, the founding fathers of the united states, pope john paul ii (which makes no sense because he led the roman catholic church, for fuck's sake), adolf hitler (don't know why they'd want him among their ranks), albert einstein and barack obama's deceased mother (once again without family knowledge or permission). here's why i bring that up. five years ago, mitt romney admitted to newsweek that he partook in posthumous baptisms. what does that say about mitt romney? regardless of how meaningless these baptisms are and whom he posthumously baptized, his actions in doing them show his utter lack of respect for the dead, peoples' families, their personal lives and their choice of religion. it's unethical, despicable and dishonorable.
|
|
|
Post by David Spritz on Aug 16, 2012 19:44:53 GMT -5
again, i'm still shocked a mormon is being considered for higher office.
God bless.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 16, 2012 20:49:31 GMT -5
on a side note: i'm still shocked a mormon is being considered for high office. God bless. listen, man. mormons believe some crazy shit, but if you look at the bigger picture, their beliefs are no more crazy than what jews, christians, muslims, or any other religion believe. there are some inherent problems with mormonism: the church itself. joseph smith was a convicted con man, a pedophile, a polygamist and an outspoken racist and bigot. if mitt romney is a religious mormon, he believes that this man was not only a prophet, but the prophet. here's the big thing that gets me personally. the mormon church has had a lot of controversy regarding retroactively baptizing the dead to mormonism, especially holocaust victims. anne frank has been proxy baptized on nine separate occasions. the parents of holocaust survivor and nazi hunter simon wiesenthal were given posthumous baptisms without knowledge or approval. others who have been baptized after death: christopher columbus, the founding fathers of the united states, pope john paul ii (which makes no sense because he led the roman catholic church, for fuck's sake), adolf hitler (don't know why they'd want him among their ranks), albert einstein and barack obama's deceased mother (once again without family knowledge or permission). here's why i bring that up. five years ago, mitt romney admitted to newsweek that he partook in posthumous baptisms. what does that say about mitt romney? regardless of how meaningless these baptisms are and whom he posthumously baptized, his actions in doing them show his utter lack of respect for the dead, peoples' families, their personal lives and their choice of religion. it's unethical, despicable and dishonorable. I am not claiming to know every little thing about people who lived nearly 200 years ago, but I do know that the Mormon church is very open about their beliefs and are very willing to discuss it. From reading their own website and explanation of their beliefs, specifically on baptism for the dead, I think you are completely misunderstanding what that entails. You are free to read about it: www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/baptism-for-the-deadAdditionally, I don't know of any religion in the U.S. that gets so much hate thrown their way over the past 200 years. A quick read of their history and you'd see how they were driven by force of death from place to place for more than 20 years before arriving in a desert wasteland, only to build a wonderful city out of dirt in Utah. One of this country's foremost rights is that of free worship, and for some reason how people worship is reason to argue, fight, and even kill. Doesn't make sense to me? No religion believes that is okay. But for some reason, Protestant religions have decided that it is their right to exact some sort of inquisition. Ridiculous. As far as i am concerned, do what you want with regards to religion.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 16, 2012 20:50:10 GMT -5
again, i'm still shocked a mormon is being considered for higher office. God bless. Go to Utah, most of the higher offices are mormons.
|
|
|
Post by spaneli on Aug 16, 2012 21:33:43 GMT -5
When did this get on religion? I personally do not care what religion he practices. I don't think it has any real place in decided who the best candidate is.
|
|
|
Post by NYR on Aug 16, 2012 21:37:17 GMT -5
I am not claiming to know every little thing about people who lived nearly 200 years ago, but I do know that the Mormon church is very open about their beliefs and are very willing to discuss it. From reading their own website and explanation of their beliefs, specifically on baptism for the dead, I think you are completely misunderstanding what that entails. You are free to read about it: www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/baptism-for-the-deadAdditionally, I don't know of any religion in the U.S. that gets so much hate thrown their way over the past 200 years. A quick read of their history and you'd see how they were driven by force of death from place to place for more than 20 years before arriving in a desert wasteland, only to build a wonderful city out of dirt in Utah. One of this country's foremost rights is that of free worship, and for some reason how people worship is reason to argue, fight, and even kill. Doesn't make sense to me? No religion believes that is okay. But for some reason, Protestant religions have decided that it is their right to exact some sort of inquisition. Ridiculous. As far as i am concerned, do what you want with regards to religion. i totally agree with you about freedom of religion and having people believe whatever they want to believe, but wouldn't you agree that these dead people were not given a say in all of this? what do you think anne frank and the rest of the would say about this? their explanation is total bull. it doesn't matter what it says in the new testament… i don't see any other major religion doing this. the reason why this pisses me off is that they're violating someone's consent to be baptized into a religion they didn't ask to be a member of. dead or alive. and mitt romney played a part in that. consent for baptism is actually a big deal for mormons, which is why they think that baptizing babies is a horrible thing since the baby can't consent. yet they do this to holocaust victims? it's disgraceful. i repeat: i have no problems whatsoever with mormons. however, this practice is beyond offensive. six million jews were murdered just because they were jewish. and these people have the gall to say to these victims' families that they're mormon, just because? i don't care if they're the most popular or most persecuted religious group in america, it's inexcusable. When did this get on religion? I personally do not care what religion he practices. I don't think it has any real place in decided who the best candidate is. agreed 100%. however, one of the two presidential candidates admitted to taking part in a religious practice that i find abhorrent. it might be okay in his culture but it sure as shit isn't in mine.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2012 16:57:19 GMT -5
Mormonism in central to mitt romney so to discount it is stupid.
It's seperation of church and state not religion and person.
|
|
|
Post by spaneli on Aug 17, 2012 18:42:23 GMT -5
Mormonism in central to mitt romney so to discount it is stupid. It's seperation of church and state not religion and person. People said the same toward JFK and Catholicism. That somehow the church would control him and have America become a puppet state of the Catholic Church. Yeah.... If it's truly separation of church and state, then his religion shouldn't matter. America has something called freedom of religion. Freedom of religion gives anyone the right to practice whatever religion they may so choose. It does mean that you may practice whatever religion you so choose and then we'll penalize you later when you decide to run for President. America also has a balance of power with checks and balances. It's why it would be incredibly difficult for someone's religion to actually affect the everyday business of the United States. If it will not affect the method by which he governs the United States of America, then it should not matter. Clear and point. Unfortunately religion will always matter, though it shouldn't. That's why my theory is that we'll never have an atheist who becomes President. Because as a country we use the criteria of whether someone believes in angels as a basis for our politics far too much. Secondly, we also take into account someone's religion far too much. Unless I missed something and Mormonism advocates genocide, then I don't find it "stupid" to not care whether his religion is central to him as a person. If you want to dislike him and say he'll be a poor President, then do it on a basis of his policies and how they will affect the United States, do it on whether you believe that he will be able effectively lead, do it on the basis that you believe that he will/will not uphold this: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me god" But don't make the fact that he's a Mormon cloud whether he should be President. That's just is far too much of a slippery slope.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 18, 2012 4:58:56 GMT -5
look if i was american i would not vote romney regardless of his religion. However i would never vote for someone that is that prominent in a homophobic church. He is going to have to govern everyone and that includes gays.
As for religion not being considered, would you vote for a quaker knowing that their pacifism would restrict your foreign policy?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 18, 2012 17:46:21 GMT -5
When did this get on religion? I personally do not care what religion he practices. I don't think it has any real place in decided who the best candidate is. Agreed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 18, 2012 18:19:38 GMT -5
When did this get on religion? I personally do not care what religion he practices. I don't think it has any real place in decided who the best candidate is. Agreed. does this mean you think obama should have stayed at his church and it was none of the publics concern that he spent years being preached to by a dick?
|
|
|
Post by masterplan200 on Aug 19, 2012 4:58:05 GMT -5
does this mean you think obama should have stayed at his church and it was none of the publics concern that he spent years being preached to by a dick? Well according to Christians: OBAMA IS THE ANTICHRIST (He is not, Nero was.)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 19, 2012 9:36:38 GMT -5
does this mean you think obama should have stayed at his church and it was none of the publics concern that he spent years being preached to by a dick? Well, he showed little conviction in what he "believes", so to some degree I guess he could have handled the situation better. I'm not claiming that the religious beliefs of a man should not be open to use in a personal decision regarding which candidate to vote for, but people often times throw up barriers strictly based on religious affiliation, and that isn't right in my book. Let's face it, there are good people of all faiths and there are turds in all faiths. Ultimately, it comes down to much more than he was a member of "x" religion versus "y" religion.
|
|
|
Post by spaneli on Aug 19, 2012 10:52:29 GMT -5
look if i was american i would not vote romney regardless of his religion. However i would never vote for someone that is that prominent in a homophobic church. He is going to have to govern everyone and that includes gays. As for religion not being considered, would you vote for a quaker knowing that their pacifism would restrict your foreign policy? It would have no bearing on my decision. And for the record America has had 2 Presidents who were Quakers: Herbert Hoover and Richard Nixon (who obviously did engage in open military conflict). Unfortunately the Quakers don't have a good record as Presidents, but hopefully it goes better for them next time around.
|
|
|
Post by spaneli on Aug 19, 2012 10:59:09 GMT -5
does this mean you think obama should have stayed at his church and it was none of the publics concern that he spent years being preached to by a dick? It should have no bearing on anyone's vote. And for the record: the teachings of Rev. Wright by what we know has never affected Obama as President. I think that actually offers an argument for Romney/Mormon Church, rather than defend it. Because it shows that the religion does not always reflect the man. Especially when he holds millions of lives in hands in his own country and possibly billions when he becomes one of the most powerful men in world, who may also be under the threat of impeachment if he does fully execute the office of the Presidency. Also having a system of checks and balances which can monitor the Executive Branch also helps.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 19, 2012 14:35:12 GMT -5
does this mean you think obama should have stayed at his church and it was none of the publics concern that he spent years being preached to by a dick? Well, he showed little conviction in what he "believes", so to some degree I guess he could have handled the situation better. I'm not claiming that the religious beliefs of a man should not be open to use in a personal decision regarding which candidate to vote for, but people often times throw up barriers strictly based on religious affiliation, and that isn't right in my book. Let's face it, there are good people of all faiths and there are turds in all faiths. Ultimately, it comes down to much more than he was a member of "x" religion versus "y" religion. and romney sure is a turd.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 19, 2012 15:00:59 GMT -5
As a Brit who doesn't claim to know much about US politics, this Romney chap looks like bad news.
|
|
|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Aug 19, 2012 16:09:45 GMT -5
What are you lot on about?
By your anti-Mormon logic, you would never accept a Muslim president because his "religion" was "responsible" for 9/11.
Whether or not you like Mitt's policies is irrelevant here - he's clearly an upstanding citizen, a good father, who holds traditional family values. To denounce him because you don't like his religion is beyond shallow.
I'm atheist/agnostic, and someone running for president with those skeptical beliefs wouldn't stand a chance today. That, to me, is quite sad and pathetic, too.
It's quite unbelievable how some of you are denouncing him just solely on his religion - and it's ironic, too, considering there's separation of Church and State as well as the freedom of religion embedded in the founding of America!
Somewhere the founding fathers are turning in their graves based on these comments.....
|
|
|
Post by David Spritz on Aug 19, 2012 16:22:38 GMT -5
What are you lot on about? By your anti-Mormon logic, you would never accept a Muslim president because his "religion" was "responsible" for 9/11. Whether or not you like Mitt's policies is irrelevant here - he's clearly an upstanding citizen, a good father, who holds traditional family values. To denounce him because you don't like his religion is beyond shallow. I'm atheist/agnostic, and someone running for president with those skeptical beliefs wouldn't stand a chance today. That, to me, is quite sad and pathetic, too. It's quite unbelievable how some of you are denouncing him just solely on his religion - and it's ironic, too, considering there's separation of Church and State as well as the freedom of religion embedded in the founding of America! Somewhere the founding fathers are turning in their graves based on these comments..... Mormons are fucking weirdos. i'm sure if Obama or another democratic candidate were mormon it'd be a big deal amongst republicans. just like Obama's deal was with his affiliations were. i don't even know what that was all about but as this thread goes that shouldn't have even been brought up. also, Thomas Jefferson, a founding father wrote a version of the bible or revised it something like that, where he took out everything that would be in a science fiction movie today. i find that interesting. God bless.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 19, 2012 17:33:20 GMT -5
when you give millions to a religion that is homophobic i don't think it is wrong to bring it up, it is about time that we stop up to these homophobic bullies.
mitt romney does not happen to be a mormon it defines him.
|
|