Town Square

Post a New Topic

Romney and Mormonism

Original post made by Cindy Cross, Parkside, on Oct 11, 2011

Romney and Mormonism by Cindy Cross
Should a presidential candidate’s religion be an issue? Recently in the news, Rick Perry was endorsed by Baptist minister Robert Jeffress, who attacked GOP candidate Mitt Romney's faith, saying, "Mormonism is a cult." Romney was quick to acknowledge that his religion is part of the Christian community; the Mormon Church is a moniker for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.
Romney’s Mormonism has been in the media lately, with other GOP candidates dodging the issue.
John F. Kennedy, being the first Catholic president, faced similar scrutiny about his religion prior to the election. President Obama was labeled a Muslim after he publicly claimed to be a Christian. Obama was a member of the Trinity Church of Christ in Chicago where he and his wife Michelle were married, and where his two daughters were baptized. Even with his relationship to the Trinity Church, 20% of the American people thought Obama was a Muslim during (and after) the 2008 election.
With America in the throes of a recession, protesters camping outside Wall Street, should a candidate’s religion determine whether he or she is qualified to be president of the United States? Or should it be off limits?

Comments (14)

Like this comment
Posted by YellowRose
a resident of Golden Eagle
on Oct 11, 2011 at 8:28 am

Off Limits.

Like this comment
Posted by Curious
a resident of Del Prado
on Oct 11, 2011 at 9:25 am

Who gets to decide who is or isn't a Christian? Is there a secret organization charged with determining who gets to be part of the club? Is there a secret handshake? Is there a test to determine who gets to use the moniker "Christian"? If you pass the test, are you issued a certifcate or license or special decoder ring? How often do you need to renew your certification?

As a non-religious person, I've always been curious how people can simply claim they are Christian and dismiss others they feel are non-Christian. From the outside, all the flavors of Christianity seem to be pretty much the same, Lutherans, Presbytarians, Baptists, Christ Scientists, Jehovah Witnesses, Methodists, Mormons, etc. They all start with the same basic flavor, but add in a few fruits and nuts to distinguish their particular brand.

Who is say that Mormonism is not just the Chunky Monkey of Christianity?

Like this comment
Posted by GX
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 11, 2011 at 9:33 am

Curious - your comments made me chuckle - very funny and yet to the point.

Wasn't this country founded on the tenant of separation of church and state so that all would be free to pursue their religiious believes and no one religion would dominate government?

Seems pretty straight forward to me - Romney's religion is not relevant to the discussion.

Like this comment
Posted by Mike
a resident of Highland Oaks
on Oct 11, 2011 at 4:19 pm

I don't care where he comes from as long as he goes at the green lights.


Like this comment
Posted by JJ
a resident of Gatewood
on Oct 11, 2011 at 4:53 pm

The definition of a Christian is a person who believes in Jesus Christ and follow his teachings.

Mormons believe in Jesus and read the same Bible. How is there a question?

Like this comment
Posted by Candid Cam
a resident of Apperson Ridge
on Oct 11, 2011 at 9:27 pm

How is there a question? You might begin by recognizing that if it were not for state intervention, the Mormons would still be marrying their cousins' 9-year-olds. You really want to trust someone who must on a daily basis wear long-johns under his pants as an expression of religious faith? These people are nuts. Maybe that's why Romney is unable to say anything truthful about ANYthing. Give him an opportunity to lie, he'll take it. "Obama means well, but he's over his head ... I'm for reforming social security ... Obama is so incompetent ... I'll never touch social security because it's sacred ... Obama is out of his element ... I support women's right to choose ... Obama is clueless ... I've always been a supporter of human life ... "

Like this comment
Posted by lazzboy
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 12, 2011 at 11:37 pm

"should a candidate’s religion determine whether he or she is qualified to be president of the United States?"

Not in the legal sense (meaning that no matter what your religion you can run for office). But as a voting American I should be able to vote for whomever I see best fits my vision of the country and if that includes religious affiliation, then so be it.

Like this comment
Posted by Real Republican
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 13, 2011 at 4:21 pm

YellowRose, Curious, GX, you all started out so well, and then the thread degenerated. Our presidents have been so many different religions over the it is SUPPOSE to be ! ! ! Only truely dangerous zealots would say otherwise. In our beginning, most of our early presidents and revolutionaries were Deists...beliving in a God. period. Most recently, Nixon was a Quaker, as in earlier days.
Crusaders have become more vocal and more bigoted. Bigotry has no place in our country...and should be booed in public.
Funny, the fact that Romney's father was a Mormon in the 1960s didn't seem to matter, when he was reelected to THREE terms as a very popular Gov of Michigan ! Mitt was away from home, in his 20s at that time. Apparently people were more open minded then, not so today.
In recent decades crusaders decided to get involved in politics and have been screwing things up since then.
Iowa picked evangelical tent revivalist huckster Huckabee last time...impossible for him to ever win nationally..that's how we got Obama in the first place. If evangelicals hadn't screwed up early primaries with Huckabee, Romney would have been our nominee...McCain was broke at that point. They never learn, and are again messing with the they're picking a preacher. Obama will win again unless the most electable person is nominated,,,to carry independents (who left Rep party in last decade) who want to vote for a Republican this time...if a 'winner' is nominated !
History repeats itself, Perry started his campaign with a tent revival. Bigots got onboard too. Now Perry is playing the religion card, which shows just how desperate he is. No doubt Iowa will again botch things up, like when they nominated Rev Pat Robertson over PaPa Bush, who the nation shortly elected president! Iowans pick 'their kind', rather than choosing the one that can actually be elected by all 'the people' and actually make it to the White House.
It's still just one vote, no matter how LOUD you shout !
I am not a Mormon, and wish religion were never mentioned in makes politics dirtier, not better.

Like this comment
Posted by my 2 cents
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 20, 2011 at 10:08 am

I think religion should not be relevant to politics. That said, Romney will be influenced by his religion on issues like abortion, and that for some, will be a problem.

That being said, if Romney gets the nomination, I will vote for him because the thought of voting for Obama again is scary! I am pro-choice and do not like the pro-life movement or the candidates that try to mess with the right of a woman to choose, but right now the country needs true leadership, and we must pick the person that can help the country move forward and out of this economic mess we are in. Obama failed miserably and he is clueless, he smiles and goes on vacation and keeps blaming Bush.

Romney's religion should not be a concern, his plan to get us out of this mess should be what we look at.

Like this comment
Posted by GX
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 20, 2011 at 10:42 am

Isn't it interesting that Romney is getting hammered by the right for his flip-flopping on issues like abortion? It is his views on these social issues that make him attractive to non-Republicans like myself.

Isn't it also interesting that he supported a woman's right to choose even though this is counter to his religious principals? Might this be a good example of how he truly believes in the separation of church and state?

I agree with 2 cents that the most important thing we can do is elect someone with very strong economic/business leadership. If we don't get our economic engine back on track, none of the rest of the issues really matter.

I do hope the Republicans can find a way to nominate someone to is attractive the the center, otherwise you are just handing the election to Obama. Compromise is key here.

Like this comment
Posted by Real Republican
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 21, 2011 at 2:45 pm

GX, my 2 cents, Curious, your comments mean objectivity and common sense still live ! there is hope for a better tomorrow !!
However, Curious, you listed quite a number of assorted 'Christian' varieties, omitting Catholics. I know they believe they are superior and separate. I do agree they are a different kind of Christian, with a long list of rituals, idol worshiping, half-way to heaven beliefs and other beliefs I find mind me far more threatening than a Mormon in today's world. I am truly angry that 6 of our 9 Supremes are catholic. talk about influencing our lives! ! (not one protestant). Catholicism was an issue for Kennedy in 1960, since NO Catholic had held office in our FIRST 200 YEARS ! But, I'm not a religious bigot, so I don't campaign against them. There are religious bigots active in this primary, however.
Now that Catholics control our government, along with the invasion of the evangelicals in the last 2 decades, some activists can't find room for a Mormom...of course it passed without mention when it was MORMON DEMocrat HARRY REID !! One competant President is no threat, and most of all protected by our constitution !! Our founders said there are to be NO religious tests for Presidents.
In today's RELIGION section of our Times is an article about 'dominionism', entitled 'Some fear Perry aims to build theocracy'... Pentecostal branch embraces Texas Perry. Perry HELD a
pentecostal 'Revival' to get their support the week he announced he was running for President'. article written by Rachel Zoll, Associated Press..
As for myself, I'll choose Magna Cum Laude financially degreed Romney, over the 'Aggie' educated Perry, who even reads his staff- written notes wrong while speaking...not having indoor plumbing is not relevant in today's high tech, financially troubled world !(sorry I'm not going for the off-the-cuff pizza maker either).

Like this comment
Posted by Real Republican
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 23, 2011 at 2:14 pm

Perry is the really big flip-flopper ! He not only VOTED for the worst of all...Jimmy Carter, he then campaigned for and contributed to AL Gore in 2000, and immediately ran to replace Gov G W B as a Republican ! ! I think that falls under the category of HYPOCRITE ! ! Now he's in Iowa trying to sell his CORE if he has any.

Like this comment
Posted by Real Republican
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 25, 2011 at 1:41 pm

Romney's had a 59 point financial plan for ages (a subject he's comfortable with, since that was his major). We're still waiting for Perry's plan, which he's promised, but,....his STAFF doesn't have it written yet.. then he'll have to 'study' it, which may take awhile. Since the 'Aggie' major 'reads', rather than speak with conviction, he has to practice it enough to not stumble next time.

Posted by Name hidden
a resident of Ridgeview Commons

on Apr 26, 2017 at 9:37 pm

Due to repeated violations of our Terms of Use, comments from this poster are automatically removed. Why?

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

GE's re-organization reaches San Ramon digital headquarters
By Tim Hunt | 3 comments | 1,796 views

Sound and Fury over Vile and Slur-ry
By Tom Cushing | 60 comments | 972 views

New state housing requirements could affect Pleasanton
By Jeb Bing | 0 comments | 331 views