.
Feedback

Does Religion Matter Anymore?

Why is Mitt Romney getting a pass on the matter of his religion?

Sooooooo, if nobody else is going to “go there” by all means allow me to be the first. Why is Mitt Romney getting a pass from everyone from the mainstream media to the evangelical right on the matter of his religion? While I certainly don't believe there should be a religious test for public office, religion has always been part of the vetting process for our Presidential candidates.

President Obama's religious affiliation was the topic of much discussion during the 2008 election and remains so to this day. As recently as just a few weeks ago mainstream religious figures like Franklin Graham were questioning our President's professed Christian faith so as Romney himself would say, “what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.”

In the interest of full disclosure, I do have a bit of a personal bone to pick with Mormonism. My ex-wife converted to the Mormon faith during our divorce and was convinced to move our two young children 1,800 miles west to Utah. Now in their 20s, I'm still dealing with the aftermath of my ex's conversion.

The first thing to understand is that Mormonism is not a Christian denomination. Mormons don't believe in the Holy Trinity or salvation through Christ alone as Christians do. Jesus Christ is a part of their beliefs, just as he is part of Islamic beliefs, but he is not the center of their faith. They also have a book, The Book of Mormon, that they believe holds the same authority as The Bible. Mormons believe that their church is the one true restored church which is why they go to such lengths to convert Christians to their religion.

This is where Romney comes in. All Mormon men are required to serve a 2-year religious “mission” once they turn 18. Incredibly, during the war in Vietnam young Mormon men were given a draft deferment to complete these “missions”. So while other young men Mitt's age were dying in the jungles of Southeast Asia on missions of their own, Romney was off bicycling through France battling that nation's Jesuits for the greater glory of the Mormon church.

Romney isn't just your average Mormon either. He was Bishop of his ward in Massachusetts for several years which is the LDS equivalent of pastor or minister. He later served as President of the Boston Stake which is made up of over a dozen wards in eastern Massachusetts.

While he serves in no current capacity with the church it goes without saying that he is one of our country's most prominent Mormons and is well connected to church hierarchy. Last year alone the Romney's gave over $3.5 million to the Mormon Church.

So the question is, and I think this is a pretty profound question, is America ready to elect it's first non-Christian President? Have we “progressed” to the point where religion is no longer an issue for those we choose to guide our nation? Would you feel different if Romney were a Buddhist? How about if he were Muslim? Honestly, I'm still trying to sort out my feelings on this. Help me out here.

Chris Long June 24, 2012 at 07:01 am
Back to your "last 30 years" claim. That would take us back 15 congressional sessions to the time of the 97th Congress (well, 15+ including this most current session…112). Here's how things break down over those 15 sessions. Both parties are even @ 2 sessions a piece where either party controlled both houses, as well as the presidency, but the democrats have held that distinction most recently (last session). Democrats have had complete control of both houses of Congress for 6 sessions (including the last 2) to the republican's 5, & Congress has been split 5 sessions. Democrats have held the House (where all the laws start) 9 sessions to the GOP's 7. Both parties are even in control of the Senate, but the democrats have held the Senate since 2007. As for the presidency, the republicans do hold the edge there 10 to 6. It would seem that the split of power over the last 30 years has been somewhat even, though slightly favored in the democrats direction. & if you go back any further the balance tilts HEAVILY toward the blue team. & you're positing that the "religious right", a minority w/in a minority, has been driving our politics? Riiiiiiiight. You may want to come up w/another argument.
Chris Long June 24, 2012 at 07:01 am
Over this 30 year timespan you may want to blame Reagan, but he had to deal w/a split congress, or a fully democrat congress, so they share any blame you may want to throw Reagan's way. You may want to praise Clinton, but he had to work w/a fully republican congress for most of his terms, so any praise you want to give Clinton, you must also give the GOP. & you may want to praise Obama, but he had complete control of Congress for his first 2 years & they couldn't even agree on, among other things, his signature "affordable" health care legislation. Even w/both houses of Congress & the presidency on lock, it took forever for them to pass what should have been a slam dunk. They were so ineffective that they had to blame the GOP…even though the GOP was powerless to stop anything the dems wanted to do @ the time. Now, you could, & probably will make an argument that "it's all Bush's fault", but you would be grossly oversimplifying the situation that caused the economy to tank, & ignoring previous democrat policies that helped the economy tank. There is enough blame to go around for everything to stain both parties. So, again, your "GOP messed everything up", & "democrats are the only people who can save us" message just doesn't work…not in the least.
Chris Long June 24, 2012 at 07:13 am
As for the "religious right" & them having to shut up for decades b/c they are silent on Romney, give us all a break. Those in the "religious right" that have a problem w/Romney's faith are on record, & they've never made it a secret. They had their say in the primaries. Of course, you're ignoring the fact that not all in the "religious right" shunned Romney…he did come away w/a portion of that vote in the primaries. Those who had a problem w/Romney's faith singlehandedly kept a nobody like Santorum in the lead group for the GOP nomination for a long time, but in the end they lost. Romney was chosen as the party's nominee, & now party members are coalescing behind Romney. This is nothing new, & there is nothing wrong w/it. Much the same way that Hilary voters bashed Obama, but ultimately voted for him in the general election.
I'm glad that this thread ultimately devolved from the guise of a thoughtful discussion on religious prejudices into the open GOP bashing party it was meant to be. I thought the whole thing extremedy transparent, & that ultimately proved true. Discussions are so much better when they're honest. On to other things now...
Brian Crawford June 24, 2012 at 10:28 am
Chris, thanks for that well thought out rebuttal. I will be the first to admit that sometimes I get a bit over zealous in my defense of Liberalism and disgust with the Republican agenda. Part of that stems from the fact that around these parts I'm a little drop of blue in a sea of red but much of it comes from the amount of misinformation that I'm bombarded with from my conservative friends and their constant portrayal of Liberals as Godless Socialists.. And I don't hate Republicans, just most of their policies. It's that whole "love the sinner, hate the sin" thing.
Racer X June 24, 2012 at 12:42 pm
Wow, all this because you are still pissed at your ex-wife? It takes two to tango big guy. I would like to hear her side of the story.
Jerry Fuchs June 24, 2012 at 01:30 pm
Grant, you hit the nail right on the head. Kudos!
Racer X June 24, 2012 at 02:02 pm
William, I am under the impression (correct me if I am wrong) that King James himself added and took away from the bible to create the 1611 KJV Bible. It seems to me that to say the 1611 KJV Bible is the word of God is like saying King James himself, was God or a tool of God. It's hard to buy into that. Who is to say that King James wasn't just another jackass? And who are you to say that the 1611 KJV is the end all to Christianity? It could be that the 1611 KJV Bible is just an exceptionally good history book.
Either way, I think saying Romney isn't a Christian is 100% Grade A BS and anyone who says so ought to be ashamed of themselves. I think it is more important for our President to be an actual American. At best, Obama is only half American and that just doesn't cut it for me.
Racer X June 24, 2012 at 02:12 pm
"So the question is, and I think this is a pretty profound question, is America ready to elect it's first non-Christian President?"
Profound question? Um, no. Self-serving question? Yes
William Miller June 24, 2012 at 06:05 pm
All who believe in and accept Christ are Christians regardless of denomination. Those who argue counter are false in their teachings representations and beliefs. Enough said.
Racer X June 24, 2012 at 07:12 pm
Amen Mr. Miller. I believe it's just that, pure and simple, like God's love, no strings.
C.J. June 24, 2012 at 09:22 pm
Chris L.,
Thanks for the correction on David Scott's position on the FairTax. I actually read the bill years ago and thought I had seen him listed among the co-sponsors. I apologize for the mistake. Again, the point is that there are real and important difference between the parties and within the parties. The notion that all politicians are the same and none benefit the country seems to imply that it doesn't matter who we vote for. It does matter, and again, those who feel that way should either get informed or stay home on election day. For the record, I'm not sure how the ability to identify Blue Dog Democrats, who actually exist (http://ross.house.gov/BlueDog/), but the inability to identify a moderate Republican in Congress (see article below) makes one extremist, but if you say so. "It is clear that the center of gravity in the Republican Party has shifted sharply to the right. Its once-legendary moderate and center-right legislators in the House and the Senate — think Bob Michel, Mickey Edwards, John Danforth, Chuck Hagel [, Dick Lugar] — are virtually extinct." http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/lets-just-say-it-the-republicans-are-the-problem/2012/04/27/gIQAxCVUlT_story.html?tid=pm_opinions_pop
Brian June 25, 2012 at 08:44 am
What we really need is a three-party system so that the extremes don't win out and polarity isn't used to control us. However, our current voting system doesn't support that. There are about a dozen other voting systems intentionally designed to support a three-party system. They are listed on Wikipedia.
Racer X June 25, 2012 at 10:56 am
The Koran dictates repeatedly that non-followers, infidels, must be exterminated. The Koran tells them to kill us. They take that shit seriously and we need to as well. Any orthodox Muslim, no matter how ensconced in the American way of life, has to do as his Mosque requires and killing Infidels is on the agenda. I have had American Muslims admit this to me.
I have no problem with Muslims except for their propensity to kill people of other religions. If we want to protect ourselves, we must withdraw our troops from all of the Middle East and tighten our borders to keep them out, all of them. The more we intrude on them, the more murderous they become. They have been killing each other for thousands of years, are nothing more than animals and need to be left to their own devices. As for Obama, there is no question he plays both sides of that fence. Someone who has Muslim faith cannot be a "brother in Christ". If Obama is re-elected, we can kiss our beloved country good-bye. Is that how we want to reward all of the brave men and women who have fought for and died for our country? Do we just give our country away to outsiders?
Grant June 25, 2012 at 12:05 pm
No you dont Bill . Brian says "Mormons don't follow the teachings of Christ." so obviously he knows more about your personal faith than you do .
He's special like that .
Ted Asher June 25, 2012 at 03:39 pm
This thread is a perfect example of our current intellectual and political back pedaling. Here we find approximately twenty-thousand words dealing with an "issue" that our founding document dealt with over two centuries ago. Yep, clearly and succinctly they say:
1. There shall be no religious test for office. (Article VI) 2. (No law shall be made) respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free excecise thereof (Amendment I) I’m just saying.
Steve June 25, 2012 at 04:49 pm
Mr. Crawford,
As a Georgia Mormon whose roots in Georgia go back to the Revolutionary War and my Mormon roots in Georgia go back to 1916, I am sorry that your ex-wife moved herself and your children to Utah which has caused you much resentment and animosity towards my faith. I am quite sure that her move was an individual choice and may have been to get away from such a cynical person. The Church encourages its members and converts to stay in the areas where they live and not to move to Utah, hence mine and my family's long tenure in the state of Georgia. It is evident that the cause of your vindictiveness is linked strongly to this event in your life where your ex got as far from you as possible. That said, for those reading this very biased blog, if you want the straight answers on what we members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believe, please go to www.mormon.org or www.lds.org.
Lynn July 10, 2012 at 09:38 pm
sounds like your not giving respect to those who don't believe the same as you! typical of the religious followers...i say think what you want but don't push it on others!! Are you trying to start yet another war?Read your history books and you'll find religion is almost always the root of the problems...and whether you believe in religion or not should not determine whether you can run the country...how ridiculous!!!!!
Marne M July 10, 2012 at 09:54 pm
Where did I say that I have no respect for atheists? I consider a great many things when I'm going to vote. Is the person a Conservative or a Liberal? What is their fiscal policy? Do they have a strong ethical history? Are they, for lack of a better term, a jerk? I look at the entirety of their platform and personality. If I feel that a person is going to be disrespectful and antagonistic to the 80% of people who are religious or spiritual in some manner or another, then that's going to be a red flag. It's a completely reasonable response -- people vote based on their conscience all the time, as is their right.
I might or might not vote for an atheist. I simply said I'd have to think about it, and be convinced that they were going to represent me (or my town, my region, my country, etc.) in a manner that I found appropriate. There is absolutely nothing "ridiculous" about it. I wouldn't vote for a liberal either, but that doesn't mean I don't respect the approximately half of the country who would.
Lynn July 11, 2012 at 04:40 am
you keep saying atheists! you sound like you are a labler! I doubt 80% of the people are religious in this day in age...many are followers or pretenders because they are scared to offend you!!! I was raised a catholic because my parents didn't want to offend there parents...I thought for myself and came to my own conclusions...i think more people should try thinking for themselves and stop following the crowd! We need a leader that knows business!! PS. I am by far a kinder person to my fellow human beings and animals than any religious person claims to be...I wish you well!
Marne M July 11, 2012 at 05:07 am
Yes, I can see that you're a regular bastion of tolerance, what with you insulting a large chunk of the population as being too afraid or too ignorant to think for themselves, as opposed to actually addressing the argument. And adding, "I wish you well" is a nice touch -- sort of like saying, "bless your heart" after you've finished trashing someone. You can keep your version of tolerance, thank you, as your words certainly don't bear out the actions that you claim. I will continue to vote my conscience, with or without regard to someone's religion, as I see fit.
Diana July 11, 2012 at 01:04 pm
Are you aware that you can love a person but not their actions? My point was Obama will say or do anything for a vote.
Grant you are aware that the Bible teaches homosexuality is wrong do you not? Or are you one of those Christians that believes as long as you don't have to face any confrontation? So no Grant I do not believe it is possible to be in favor for gay rights and be a child of God.
Grant July 11, 2012 at 02:25 pm
Diana,
I'm aware that there is an Old Testament verse in Leviticus (amongst a great many others that are summarily ignored) that seems to condemn homosexuality . Of course I'm told that the Old Testament laws were "lifted " by JC and do not apply any longer (though I can also find Scripture to dispute that "theory ). So that leaves with the "opinion" of a non divine individual named Paul , who , if he even actually existed was possibly a self loathing homosexual himself and some highly subject nonsense about "sexual immorality" so , even from a Biblical standpoint one could present a valid argument against your religious bigotry. Personally I dont believe a collection of ancient camel herder campfire stories are grounds for hatred, bigotry or judgement of anyone . For the record I'm not "one of those Christians", in fact I'm not a Christian at all . I dont believe in a god that would give us the most awesome "toys" in the world and expect us not to enjoy them and share them
Oscar G. July 11, 2012 at 03:14 pm
And well said at that.
Why is this even a discussion when trying to decide whom should be our POTUS? It has never made any sense to me.
Patty Burgess July 11, 2012 at 04:31 pm
Sharon, I'm afraid you have your hands full with this thread!
Oscar G. July 11, 2012 at 04:31 pm
Diana are you aware that Jesus in all the Gospels never had a thing to say about gays? Male or female? And that saying you "love the sinner, hate the sin" is nothing more than using a Get Out Of Jail Free card for bigots and hate mongers who misinterpret then hide behind Scripture?
The Christ was Pro Love. And anyone saying anything else, anything less, and I do mean anything other than, is speaking falsely of Christ and not a true follower of his teachings.
Gail Moore July 11, 2012 at 05:06 pm
I think we should now move on to Intelligent Design ... in school ... LOL!
Trish Gates July 11, 2012 at 05:38 pm
This will be the second then, non-Christian president. The one we have now is no way a Christian. Pretends to be. Let's get back to unemployment, CLOSING OUR BORDERS, bringing out troups home and feeding Americans. Let other countries deal with their own problems. Who cares if the President is catholic, jewish, mormon....whatever.....let's get a President who wants to lead the country = not rule it.
Oscar G. July 11, 2012 at 06:02 pm
And your proof of Obama's Non-Faith is what, exactly Trish?
I'm so sick of the hate mongers with nothing better to do than rant on and on about Obama's life..as if any one of us out here knows a bloody thing about it! We know about unemployment..let's get to job creation and returning the jobs overseas to American soil. That sounds like energy better spent. I agree that we should be taking care of our own backyard before we look to anyone else's. But if you think that MR is in anyway going to help with making America a better place..one that all Americans can be proud of, you're sadly mistaken. And that mistake could cost the rest of us the very things we hold dearly. I'm not willing to vote in Mr. Magic Underware just because you read on the internet or in the National Enquirer that Obama doesn't love the Baby Jesus. >>>The real Decline of Western Civilization: Politics and Religion! Together Again!
Lynn July 12, 2012 at 06:46 am
wow that was rather rude...you don't have to be religious to have a voice.
I guess you don't understand me. Sorry if you took offense. It was okay for you to say that 80% of the people belive as you do...maybe that is insulting those that dont. BTW, i really did mean that I wish you well. I don't say one thing and mean another. I wish everyone could just be happy! Unfortunately it seems that too many people are trying to find faults with everyone else. Its a shame!
Matthew K July 31, 2012 at 05:50 am
I'm not one for politics, but rather, for Truth. I couldn't read all the comments made during this conversation, but I saw people of multiple faiths, and each of them claimed to be a servant of Jesus Christ, the only true God. I read the determination for each of them to be right, and for the victory to go to "their side". And yet they weren't all on the same side... Saints of the Most High God, against one another? God has only one side. His own. Someone is always right (on God's side), and someone else has to be wrong (not on God's side). Let the Scriptures (the Bible, understood in it's most basic forms [it's original languages, and subsequent expert translations]) be the one plumb-line for each man of righteous faith. Let us be peace-makers, according to the Word of God.
James 3:17-18 ESV "But the wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy and good fruits, impartial and sincere. And a harvest of righteousness is sown in peace by those who make peace." May God empower His followers, by the power of Hs infinite grace, to do these things.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Dacula Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Kristi Reed (Editor) June 18, 2013 at 07:42 am
Indeed. I hope everyone will take some time to explore the site, check out the features and thenRead More look for the feedback button on the right side of the page. Click on that to let Patch know your thoughts on the new platform.
Dave June 18, 2013 at 08:46 am
It's pretty but I found lots of bugs. I'm sure these will be worked out over time. It's new soRead More we'll give it some time.
Kristi Reed (Editor) June 18, 2013 at 08:54 am
Yes, unfortunately I've found a lot too but the engineers are working on it and hopefully we'll haveRead More a much more stable site shortly. In the meantime, please report any issues using the feedback tab on the right side of the page. Thanks!
Robbi McCaig June 12, 2013 at 12:08 pm
"There are people in all levels of government office who would like nothing more than to beRead More able to conduct all the public business out of public view" The problem is, who's going to stop them? Certainly--no one from this justice department who is complicit in multiple overreaches and coverups.
Tammy Osier June 12, 2013 at 12:41 pm
I wrote this on another post but it so applies here and is worth repeating: James Madison wrote inRead More the federalist paper (no. 51) concerning the separation of powers and need for limited government , "“ It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government. But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government……” We need to have a "Madison moment"...
Tammy Osier June 12, 2013 at 12:41 pm
I remember when I opened up the news to see that Holder was going to investigate Holder. Ha! What'sRead More scary is that there are some who think that's just fine?