Black Clergy Group to Demand Romney Renounce Mormonism

[pbrower2a]

As a liberal I have no problem with Mormonism even if it seems cranky and heretical to me. I have a problem with religion in politics when people shamelessly exploit it in an 'Believe it or burn' mode on politics.

Anyone who votes for President Obama because Mitt Romney is a Mormon or because Rick Santorum is a Catholic votes for the President for the wrong reasons. We need to ask what is good for America instead of what is comfortable for our view of the world. Now if someone votes for President Obama because either Mitt Romney or Rick Santorum offers no viable solutions, then one has a valid cause for voting for the President.

Of course I would never vote for a $cientologist (a fundamentally dishonest world-view), let alone a Satanist.

[pbrower2a]

As a liberal I have no problem with Mormonism even if it seems cranky and heretical to me. I have a problem with religion in politics when people shamelessly exploit it in an 'Believe it or burn' mode on politics.

Anyone who votes for President Obama because Mitt Romney is a Mormon or because Rick Santorum is a Catholic votes for the President for the wrong reasons. We need to ask what is good for America instead of what is comfortable for our view of the world. Now if someone votes for President Obama because either Mitt Romney or Rick Santorum offers no viable solutions, then one has a valid cause for voting for the President.

Of course I would never vote for a $cientologist (a fundamentally dishonest world-view), let alone a Satanist.

So if a Mormon were a nominee and you believed they were the best person and the most qualified to be President, you would vote for them even though you believed their faith to be cranky and heretical?

A suitable politician must show competence if an incumbent; a series of offices means nothing if one is a pathological liar, contradicts himself frequently,  has a history of corruption, or shows despotic tendencies, or otherwise shows himself unfit for the office  I wouldn't vote for any politician who puts the promotion of his religious views over all other matters of public policy. 

I'm not sure that anyone can quite say what makes the "better person" and that anything in particular makes one more qualified. A record of solid achievements for an incumbents Could I vote for Harry Reid? Sure. He is a Mormon. Character trumps creed, and someone who touts his creed had better live up to the benign parts of that creed.

For most of us it comes down to ideological concord with us -- right?

[pbrower2a]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That may be what they call themselves. Doesn't make them Christian.

I could found a church and call it the Church of Christ - would that make it so?

All depends on how are we going to define "Christianity".

Mormons are monotheists. They do believe in Jesus Christ as the literal firstborn Son of God and Messiah, etc.

They do reject things like Holy Trinity, but some Christian groups does as well.

Jews accept the ethical tenets of Christianity but reject Jesus as irrelevant or heretical -- let alone any compartmentalization of God in any Trinity. They are unambiguous monotheists.  But can I vote for a Jew? Sure. I have done so many times.

Muslims accept the validity of the Ministry of Jesus and that He was born of a virgin. But Jesus to them was definitely not the Son of God and did not die on the Cross. To Muslims Jesus is one of the greatest Prophets of God... but like Jews, Muslims are strict monotheists. I have never had a chance to vote for a Muslim. Maybe if I lived in Dearborn, Michigan...

Mormonism is a Christian heresy for adding the Book of Mormon to its canon. But that said, Christianity is a Jewish heresy and Islam is a Christian heresy.

  

[pbrower2a]

Mormonism is a Christian heresy for adding the Book of Mormon to its canon. But that said, Christianity is a Jewish heresy and Islam is a Christian heresy.

Islam is a Christian-Jewish heresy, if you want to go that way.

And if you really want to follow that line of reasoning, then every Christian group or movement is a heresy, except of an original group.

Jan Huss and Martin Luther both sought not so much to innovate as schismatics but instead to purify the Catholic Church of its then-pervasive corruption. The dirty little secret was that almost eve4rything about medieval Europe was terribly corrupt, including the Catholic Church which had to make peace with the horrible economic and political order characteristic of feudalism.  The Anglican Church originated to justify the deeds of the horrible Henry VIII. 

[pbrower2a]

Might as well move this whole topic there.

I concur.