Next US President a Mormon?

I think your question got a bit garbled in the typing ... cannot be sure what you asked.

It may be a little naive on the part of the interviewer to say that the Mormon church does not involve itself in politics. Perhaps not to the extent that some evangelical groups do on the right, or, for that matter, some mainstream churches on the left -- but it reinforces a social posture among its members. I would guess that there are relatively few Mormon Democrats.

Aside from the bent toward social conservatism, the part that would frighten me a bit about a Mormon president is that these folks do hold some "theological eccentricities", as the reporter puts it, and that these are so peculiar as to make one wonder about the credulity of such a statesman. But I suppose we can look at the record of various Mormon public officials and see whether we can detect adverse influence from their doctrines. Romney and a good many other Mormon officials have left a track record that can be analyzed. It wouldn't be the first time that someone has bifurcated his faith from his politics, though I don't know that that is necessarily a good thing!

 

Senator Orrin Hatch (a Mormon) has been involved in politics for years as a Senator. He even writes songs, one of them being "Heal Our Land."

 

Colloquial speech often looses its punch in a translation.

I do not believe that using Government to enforce 'values' is wrong or harmful. I do, however, believe that we have been fighting the 'wrong' battle.

The battle we need to be fighting has as its battle cry the 'Great Commission'. Until we are converting the lost to Christ, they will not care what the laws of the land are. They will not be made better by any law outside of the laws written upon their hearts by the Holy Spirit.

We need a revival - a yuletide revival would be ok with me.

 

It is pretty obvious that there are people on the right and on the left - religious and non-religious - who attempt to use the government to enforce their values on the rest of the country.

George Will commented this morning on "This Week" on ABC-TV that when Mitt Romney's father was the governor of Michigan in the 1960s and ran for the GOP presidential nomination in 1968 that his being a Mormon was not a issue. And that when Congressman Mo Udall gave Jimmy Carter a very strong run for his money for the Democratic presidential nomination in 1976 that Udall being a Mormon was not an issue.

Now, leading up to 2008, Mitt being a Mormon is an issue for some people, at least enough to have news stories about him being a Mormon.

Yet, no one can provide one scintilla of evidence that being a Mormon had an adverse affect on any governmental policy pursued by any of these three men I have mentioned in this post.

It makes me wonder just how far we have really come in overcoming prejudice and bigotry in the United States.

 

It wouldn't make any difference to me if we had a Mormon president.
We have had a Catholic president and many people seem to think he was ok. (JFK)

We have long ago lost our country's spiritual moorings for this issue to make any difference.

Dem or Rep: makes no difference in this country. I take that back. It does make a difference, but only if you get your info from the liberal news media and believe their blather. But overall, it will make little difference. Until and unless we return to the God of the Bible this country is doomed.

I know many folks have a problem with this and decry statements like mine as doom saying, but thems the facts...ma'am.

This country will not long survive. You had better get busy for the Master in the mean time.

 

Could be a Muslin the way this country is going.

 

Actually this is correct. There is no difference between the two parties. The choices either in the running or going to announce from both parties are pathetic, including Mitt Romney. It is time we elected someone who knows how to govern with common sense.

 

I understood the question

I don't think it has been a "own goal." I could support a Mormon president if he were pro-family, morally upright, and in favour of small government.

 

Amen, Brother C4K -- Preach on! :thumbs:

 

Because religion is a bigger issue now than it was in the past, even in JFK's day.

Voters will think Romney wants to establish a theocracy, because the Mormon church is highly structured like the RCC, and he won't even be able to point to the Vatican.

Mormons are still classified as cult members. They don't believe in the trinity, and think Jesus was a man. Then there's Joseph Smith as a prophet.

 

Whatever, I prefer a moral Morman to a Southern Baptist liberal (Carter)
or a Baptist rake (Clinton).

 

There are two reasons at the moment for not voting for Romney.
1. He has no moral compass.
2. It is impossible to be a true conservative and be elected in Massachussetts.

Aside from that, there is no way I am going to vote for POTUS a person who gives Jesus Christ less status than the full divinity of God, Christ being God.

During the 1960 election, the same talk went around about Kennedy. It was quite the topic of conversation at our house. Looking back on it, the Catholic church did not enter into the decisions. However, there is a vast difference between the way the Catholic church views Jesus and the way the Mormons view Jesus.

Addressing another thread, it is possible for a person , any person to have a change of heart say about abortion by the transforming power of Jesus Christ. There is no doubt about that. The transforming power is NOT a deadline date to run for office to get votes from Christians.

Mormons are free to worship as they please in America. They can do anything with Jesus Christ they please. However, when it comes to my vote, do I want someone who is a member of a cult that assigns Jesus Christ to some limbo status between total divinity and mortal man? It seems for someone to be in that office with that mindset would have affects we cannot even understand. There is enough problems for Christians in relation to government without someone at the helm that thinks Jesus is some super angel.

It is my prayer that both parties come to their senses and give us two good choices. That would mean nominating someone not running now.

 

There are two reasons at the moment for not voting for Romney.
1. He has no moral compass.
2. It is impossible to be a true conservative and be elected in Massachussetts.

Aside from that, there is no way I am going to vote for POTUS a person who gives Jesus Christ less status than the full divinity of God, Christ being God.

During the 1960 election, the same talk went around about Kennedy. It was quite the topic of conversation at our house. Looking back on it, the Catholic church did not enter into the decisions. However, there is a vast difference between the way the Catholic church views Jesus and the way the Mormons view Jesus.

Addressing another thread, it is possible for a person , any person to have a change of heart say about abortion by the transforming power of Jesus Christ. There is no doubt about that. The transforming power is NOT a deadline date to run for office to get votes from Christians.

Mormons are free to worship as they please in America. They can do anything with Jesus Christ they please. However, when it comes to my vote, do I want someone who is a member of a cult that assigns Jesus Christ to some limbo status between total divinity and mortal man? It seems for someone to be in that office with that mindset would have affects we cannot even understand. There is enough problems for Christians in relation to government without someone at the helm that thinks Jesus is some super angel.

It is my prayer that both parties come to their senses and give us two good choices. That would mean nominating someone not running now.

 

Unless you have some proof to present that Mitt has committed adultery or some other sexual sin then your statement is false and as a Christian you should repent and retract it.

It is my prayer that the Republican Party will nominate Mitt to be its presidential candidate in 2008 and that he will be sworn in as president of the United States on January 20, 2009.

 

Amen, brother Ed. Preach it!

 

Mitt had to deal with the abortion issue when as governor the related issue of embyronic stem cell research came up. When he decided that embryonic stem cell research is just flat out wrong, then siding with those of us who are pro-life was a simple step to take.

And I welcome Mitt to our side of the abortion issue. I am convinced that as president he will be as sound on the subject as President George W. Bush has been.

 

Lacking a moral compass isn't just about adultery or sexual sins. When you flip flop on the issues, and in my opinion, do it just to get votes, that shows lack of morals.


Why and where did you get the idea that moral compass = adultery or sexual sin?

Merry Christmas Ken to you and yours!

Jamie