Is Romney's religion relevent to the presidential race?

[rox63]

I think it is, and it feels really strange and difficult to say that. Because I try not to judge people based on their religious beliefs. I just read the following story from earlier this year on Salon, and it seems to make it a fairly important factor to consider. Does this make me a religious bigot?

http://www.salon.com/2012/01/29/mitt_and_the_white_horse_prophecy/

~snip~
Romney avoids mentioning it, but Smith ran for president in 1844 as an independent commander in chief of an “army of God” advocating the overthrow of the U.S. government in favor of a Mormon-ruled theocracy. Challenging Democrat James Polk and Whig Henry Clay, Smith prophesied that if the U.S. Congress did not accede to his demands that “they shall be broken up as a government and God shall damn them.” Smith viewed capturing the presidency as part of the mission of the church. He had predicted the emergence of “the one Mighty and Strong” — a leader who would “set in order the house of God” — and became the first of many prominent Mormon men to claim the mantle.

Smith’s insertion of religion into politics and his call for a “theodemocracy where God and people hold the power to conduct the affairs of men in righteous matters” created a sensation and drew hostility from the outside world. But his candidacy was cut short when he was shot to death by an anti-Mormon vigilante mob. Out of Smith’s national political ambitions grew what would become known in Mormon circles as the “White Horse Prophecy” — a belief ingrained in Mormon culture and passed down through generations by church leaders that the day would come when the U.S. Constitution would “hang like a thread as fine as a silk fiber” and the Mormon priesthood would save it.
~snip~

[Politicalboi]

1. He's Mormon

Not Muzzlin. LOL! I myself haven't heard much talk about his religion. But for some reason, I bet if he were Muslim we would hear about it everyday. But the Christians scare me more than any other religion. And they scare me because so many of the crazy Christians hold office.

[immoderate]

2. I don't trust anybody who talks to god.

It's wack!

--imm

[bigdarryl]

3. HELL!!!!! yeah it's relevent they made a big deal about the President religion in 2008

[Cirque du So-What]

4. It is, to those for whom such things matter

Many protestant denominations consider Mormonism a 'Christian cult.'

[rox63]

6. When that religion's founder advocated a "theodemocracy"

it definitely seems relevant to me.

[NuclearTeabag]

5. Absolutely

Like scientology, the Mormon religion makes concrete claims about history and the universe that are patently ridiculous. Any adult who genuinely believes those things deserves to have their judgement called into question as a result.

[niyad]

7. any politician's religion IS important, if that person is planning to govern by the tenets of his/

her religious beliefs, and NOT the laws of the land.

. . . . .
The Agenda

The Mormon Church, through its political organization, the Kingdom of God, says John J. Stewart in Joseph Smith the Mormon Prophet, plans on gaining a political stronghold in the U.S. government. The goal is to “bring the United States Government under the rule of the priesthood.” (6)

This is reiterated by John Heinerman and Anson Shupe:

For them the prophecy [of Daniel 2:31-45] says that the Mormon people and the resources of their corporate empire will be the prime movers in a millennial overthrow of the United States government.” (7)

Eventually, their ultimate aim is to create an ecclesiastical, one-world government.” (8)

This means, as Brigham Young stated in the Journal of Discourses, “no more or less than the complete overthrow of the nation, and not only of this nation, but the nations of Europe". (9)

Believing this goal to materialize sooner, Brigham Young declared, according to historian Bancroft, that “he would himself become President of the United States, or dictate who should be President.” (10)

Further, Joseph Smith, as well as all succeeding Presidents of the Church, determined that this new government would be a theocracy, not a democracy.

. . . . .

http://www.janishutchinson.com/agenda.html

[EmeraldCityGrl]

32. This is what so sloppily tried to express further

down the tread. This is exactly the impression I've gotten from the Mormon's
I've known over the years. Of course not expressed as blatantly aggressive,
but the church always seemed more like a corporate, political parent organization
than a traditional christian church.

[longship]

8. Only to the fundie Christians

At least I hope it's not us here at DU who would demonize Rmoney for his beliefs.

Some here will know I am a somewhat activated atheist who does not like religions, and make no mistake, Mormonism is amongst the worst. But I do not hate religious people. Just as Kennedy correctly argued that a person's religion should not be a factor, I have to give ol' Mitt a pass on his Mormonism. His father was a pretty good dude, after all, who told the truth about Vietnam when such a thing was not a good idea.

Rather, the argument against Mitt is his policies. There is where he is most vulnerable against Obama. Let the fundie lunatic Christian Repukes take him down for being a Mormon. We're better than that.

[rox63]

9. I don't want to demonize him for his religious beliefs

That is why it feels kind of icky to bring it up. But when that religion has very clear goals of making this country into a theocracy, I worry.

I have plenty of other things to dislike Romney for, having lived under his governorship here in MA for 4 years, and having seen what a lying weasel he really is.

[niyad]

10. once again, a person's religion IS important if that person plans on governing in the name of

that religion, rather than the laws of the land--and I don't care WHICH religion (and most especially, the patriarchal, abrahamic ones)

[longship]

11. But I don't think Mitt has said a damned word about his religion

It may be that his Mormonism is a factor, but Dems cannot use it. That would be politically dangerous.

Here's the deal. The fundie Christians -- read that non-Mormons -- are already skitterish about Rmoney's religion. But when Dem's join in, that's a problem for us because the fundies are experts at the rope-a-dope. Know what I mean?

Niyad, they're already accusing us of religious intolerance and discrimination. We know that it's a sham, and we should be screaming the same from the rooftops. But to even bring up Mormonism would be a huge mistake, IMHO.

[rox63]

14. I don't recommend that the Dems say anything about it

But I think he is just as dangerous as the fundies are when it comes to running the country.

I don't want anyone imposing their religion on me.

[longship]

19. I wholeheartedly agree but

Dems can't be the ones who say it. Let the loony Christian Repugs say it to themselves (which they will do) in their non-smoke filled rooms and from their pulpits (which they also will do).

We didn't do this to them. They did to themselves, the intolerant ass hats.

Thx

[niyad]

16. he doesn't have to say a word about his religion--I know what that belief system stands for.

understand, too, that I was referring simply to my own way of looking at things. I am not suggesting that the dems actually take this on.

[quakerboy]

42. I am not sure I fully agree

I think that the details are important. Its not so simple as to say that ones religion does not matter

For instance, In the case of Santorum, his personal religion is terribly important. He has been clear that he will rule from his religious convictions, given the opportunity.

From Kennedy's speech:

"I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute--where no Catholic prelate would tell the President (should he be Catholic) how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote--where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference--and where no man is denied public office merely because his religion differs from the President who might appoint him or the people who might elect him."

Read more: http://www.beliefnet.com/News/Politics/2000/09/I-Believe-In-An-America-Where-The-Separation-Of-Church-And-State-Is-Absolute.aspx#ixzz1qgBsP88p

That's key. Its not just that religion is a personal matter, and you have no business judging a person by it. Thats true, as far as it goes. But when I look at Sanatorium, I am not judging him personally, but rather his fitness to serve in public office.

Getting back to Romney, It does trouble me. The Mormon church is one that I believe can be accurately described as willing to use deceit to gain or retain power. While Romney himself has not acted as a fundamentalist Mormon, I have trouble trusting that if handed the highest office, the LDS church would not attempt to make undue use of this potential source of power. Particularly in the absence of a statement the likes of JFK's:

"I believe in a President whose religious views are his own private affair, neither imposed by him upon the nation or imposed by the nation upon him as a condition to holding that office.(same source as above)"


That said, its not an issue I have had to give a lot of thought. There are more than enough policy and personal integrity issues with both Rmoney and Santorum, I don't even have to look at religion to be alarmed by the idea of either as president.

[Tom Ripley]

12. Particularly since Romney is a official of his church

JFK was a mere parishioner, not a fucking priest or something

[rox63]

13. I think that is what bothers me the most

Every president we've had has professed some religion. But have any been a high-ranking official in their religions?

[FreeState]

24. High ranking? He's never held a high ranking in the church

He was a bishop and a stake president - all of which are lay local positions. As a former member I can assure you neither are high ranking. People compair the stake president to the catholic positions, however they are not the same thing at all.


Edit to add:

Stakes may be compared to dioceses in other Christian denominations.[2] However, the more apt, if less familiar, comparable unit in hierarchical churches such as the Catholic Church would be a deanery, which, like an LDS stake often comprises ten to twenty parishes. LDS stakes generally have fewer than 5000 members, and Catholic dioceses average 250,000, but at times have over one million members.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stake_(Latter_Day_Saints)

[Alexander]

15. Would you say the same thing about Harry Reid or Tom Udall?

Not all Mormons are Republicans.

[grantcart]

17. Smith's 'Theodemocracy' wasn't aimed at legislators, or governors. and Smith didn't run for Congress

He did set up the Council of 50 to take over the Presidency, he did run for President, and he intended the Council of Fifty to carry on after he was gone to achieve his goal.

[Alexander]

20. Mo Udall ran for president in 1976. What about him?

Keep in mind he was far to the left of most Democrats, even back then.

[grantcart]

27. Udall was born a Mormon but broke with the Church and unlike Romney was never active as an adult

But even at that I think it would be fair to ask any Mormon where they stand on the clear political agenda of the Mormon Church to reach the Presidency.


http://mormonmatters.org/2008/02/05/9-mormons-who-ran-for-president/

The Mormon Question: Udall’s status as a lapsed Mormon had little effect on the campaign.

Udall biographers Donald W. Carson and James W. Johnson wrote that Udall responded by saying that "he had split with the Mormon Church over its policies toward blacks 30 years earlier.

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/politics/51795273-90/romney-church-mormon-president.html.csp

The Udall family wikipedia page had this fascinating excerpt

David took a second wife, Ida Hunt, in 1882. She was a granddaughter of Jefferson Hunt. David was prosecuted for, but not convicted of, bigamy in 1884. In 1885, he was indicted for perjury stemming from a sworn statement he made backing a land claim for Miles Romney (grandfather of George W. Romney). His bail was posted by Baron Goldwater (father of Barry Goldwater). The trial and its aftermath received heavy regional press coverage. David was convicted and sentenced to three years imprisonment at a federal penitentiary in Detroit, Michigan. Later, both the prosecutor and presiding judge at the trial wrote letters to President Grover Cleveland supporting a pardon, stating they believed that David had misunderstood the law and that he lacked any criminal intent.

You might be interested in this article

http://universe.byu.edu/index.php/2011/12/01/the_mormon_question/

[rox63]

22. Have either of them served as high-ranking church officials?

A few decades ago, MA had a congress-critter who was also a Catholic priest. He was a fairly progressive Democrat, Father Drinan. I was not of voting age when he served in Congress, and he didn't represent my district anyway. And he was anti-war and pro-choice in his votes, both positions that I wholeheartedly support. Despite this, I was not comfortable with a priest serving in Congress, because they ultimately serve the Church as their highest authority. Same goes for Romney. His position within the LDS church was equivalent to an arch-bishop or cardinal in the Catholic church. And I sure as heck would not want a Catholic bishop or cardinal serving as president.

[Alexander]

25. No, and Romney didn't either. See post #24.

Personally I wouldn't care if the Flying Spaghetti Monster Himself wanted to run for office. What I care about are the issues, not religions. To you, it seems like religion is an issue.

A lot of these DU posts about Romney's faith seem like thinly-veiled attacks on Mormons, despite the fact that many progressive Mormons have been prominent Democratic politicians. I would have no problem voting for Mark or Tom Udall (in fact I gave money to Mark in 2008), I think Mo Udall would've been a great president, and I would've had no problem voting for Father Robert Drinan if I was able to.

In Drinan's case, he acknowledged he was personally pro-life and served a church that was pro-life, yet he felt the issue of legality was different from the issue of morality as told by the church. He saw no conflict in his pro-choice voting record and was quite active when it came to church-state separation. And when his religion and his public office conflicted - when Pope John Paul II ordered all priests to quit politics - he quit politics.

To me, Father Drinan was the perfect example of a religious figure understanding the need to keep church and state separate. If you have a problem with voting for such a person, it says more about you than it does about them. I personally think we could use more people like Father Drinan in public office today, to combat the Religious Right.

[rox63]

28. It is at the very least the equivalent of being clergy

And I don't like the idea of a member of the clergy being president, because they serve two masters, religion and state. And the religious one usually wins when the two are in conflict.

[Alexander]

29. But it isn't "high ranking", and you were wrong to say that.

"And I don't like the idea of a member of the clergy being president, because they serve two masters, religion and state. And the religious one usually wins when the two are in conflict."

Father Drinan left office when the two were in conflict. JFK promised to if that ever happened. I don't see the problem as long as politicians follow those examples, whether they are members of the clergy or not. This is looking more and more like an anti-religious screed from you.

[rox63]

31. It's not a screed of any sort

It's just an admission that the openly political agenda of this candidate's religion makes me uncomfortable.

[Alexander]

41. You are now shifting gears and ignoring facts you don't like.

Romney was not a "high-ranking" member of the Mormon faith, as another DUer correctly pointed out. Your statement was factually inaccurate. I would appreciate it if you would admit this.

Earlier you said you wouldn't have voted for Father Drinan or anyone like him. I pointed out how he was the perfect example of a member of the clergy managing to keep church and state separate while still in public office. Again, he did the same thing that JFK promised to do in 1960; he chose not to stay in office once the two conflicted. I would also appreciate it if you addressed the discussion of Father Drinan as well.

You said in a prior post that "they serve two masters, religion and state", "they" referring to members of the clergy. I have news for you - every president and presidential candidate to date has served both their religion and their state. Since I know you're from Massachusetts, I'll use this example - John Kerry said he was personally pro-life, yet has a strong pro-choice record in office - taking essentially the same position as Father Drinan and John F. Kennedy. Did you support Kerry?

"It's just an admission that the openly political agenda of this candidate's religion makes me uncomfortable."

That's a lot different than what you have said previously. It even reads like you are trying to walk back earlier comments you made. I personally would not have a problem with Tom Udall's religion if he ran for president, and I think Mo Udall would've been a great president had he been elected. Do you feel the same way?

[rox63]

43. I did and do support Kerry - But he was not a priest, just a regular parishoner

He is not a member of the clergy, and never has been. Lots of Catholics support choice, against the teaching of the church. But members of the clergy are charged with supporting the teachings of their respective churches. That's in the job description. If they don't support that, they have no business being a member of that denomination's clergy.

As a bishop and stake president, Romney was an official representative of the LDS church, charged with supporting their teachings and political agenda.

I am not walking back on anything. Romney's history as an official representative of the LDS Church, combined with that church's political agenda, are legitimate factors to consider in deciding whether he should be president.

Aside from all of that, I also know Romney to be a lying weasel, as shown during his 4 years as governor of my state. So I would never vote for him anyway, no matter what his religious connections are.

[grantcart]

18. Mormons seemed to be rather sensitive to the question

three joined DU and flamed out here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002436216

[EmeraldCityGrl]

21. The LDS "church" has always seemed

more of a closed society with a focus on lifestyle, business and wealth.
The Mormons I have known while really nice people were workaholics
and enjoyed the benefits of networking within their own community to
both fund and succeed. Tithing is mandatory and almost a sort of investment
in the "parent corporation."

That is nothing I can document and is based on my own experience with
Mormon families over the years. That being said, I am personally suspicious
of the relationship Romney has with his church and how that relationship will
influence his presidency. It's not even the christian aspect that bothers me,
it's the power grab and appointments he will make along with the further
corporate takeover and privatisation that worries me. Romney is a corporate
animal. He's just wired differently than anyone else I've observed in politics
for some time.

[CBHagman]

23. No, he should be judged on the content of his character and his positions on the issues...

...and also where he gets his financial backing. In short, he should be judged like any other candidate.

[Odin2005]

26. Yes, the Mormons are a theocratic cult.

No Mormon should be anywhere near the White House.

[Arkana]

30. No, not unless he tells us we all have to be Mormons too.

[hamsterjill]

33. The Constitution

His religion is relevant to me if I feel that he'd follow his religious convictions OVER following the Constitution. While I believe that there are some capable of governing based on what the Constitution says, without imposing their own, personal religious views, I do not believe that Romney (or any Republican) can do that. The Republicans make religion too much of an issue for me to believe that any of them could or would put their beliefs secondary to the Constitution.

[MrSlayer]

34. Yes, because he is a bishop of his church.

I don't want a high ranking church official as President. I'd prefer the President not be religious at all.

[FreeState]

35. A Bishop is not high ranking in the LDS Churh n/t

[MrSlayer]

36. Ok but it is a rank above common worshipper, yes?

I find religious people the least appealing for office.

[FreeState]

37. Actually - no a bishop serves for 3-5 years - then they are done

He has the same priesthood that is given to nearly every male member that is active in the church (all males that are active in the church and above the age of 12 hold the priesthood, there are rankings in it, but up to 30-40% of the male in any one congregation (ward) have been ordained with the same priesthood ranking of any bishop (High Priest). Once the Bishop is "released" or done serving his 3-5 years in the volunteer non paid position he is still referred to as Bishop out of respect but has zero say or power over the previous ward he was Bishop over.)

Edit to add a list and typical ages that are in that segment of the priesthood:

Deacon (age 12-14)
Teacher (age 14-16)
Priest (age 16-18)
Elder (age 18+, these are the missionaries and young adult males)
High priest (usually about age 30+)
Bishop and Presiding Bishop (usually about age 30+ goes with High Priest - Bishop is a calling within it, same with a Stake President, Romney as been both but is not currently either)
Seventy (usually age 50+ these are Church leadership bigwigs - about 140 people total)
Patriarch and Presiding Patriarch (any age above 50 usually, not a lot of these, Presiding Patriarch is over all Patriarchs - one for each stake so a little less than 2900 total)
Apostle (the top leading 12 members of the church, mostly old men in their 60-80s)

[MrSlayer]

38. Damn, I'm 0-2 on this.

Thanks for the information. I'm still opposed to religious people in government. They tend to be the least like the deity they claim to follow.

[FreeState]

40. Thats okay its not like there is a reason to know LOL

Unless you are or were a member there is very little reason anyone would know or care how it all works.

I agree to an extent, I think anyone who believes their religious beliefs should dictate public policy should not be involved with politics.

Despite the temple oath some LDS members would make and have made fine politicians. One has to remember that in LDS theology choice is one of the main parts of it. Even with the oath it doesn't take away a very fundamental belief that its the Devil who wants others to be forced to behave one way or another.

[rox63]

44. I have no problem with religious people in government

As long as they don't let it interfere with their government duties. But I do have a problem with people who are official representatives of their church (like clergy) being president, because the roles are in conflict with separation of church and state.

[jmowreader]

46. Mormon bishops are what mainline Protestants would call "lay leaders"

Mormons don't have professional preachers as leaders of local churches. They pick one man who is a good leader and preaches well, name him the "bishop" of the church, and have him run the joint for a few years.

Oh yeah: not only do they not pay this bishop, they still bill him for his ten percent.

[polichick]

39. Only if he, like Santorum, wants to institute a theocracy...

...or if he doesn't understand and respect the separation of church and state.

[auburngrad82]

45. It's not an issue for me

But for the "base" of the GOP it probably is. The GOP has been working for years to win the hearts and minds of the religious right and now it's biting them in the ass. The Southern Baptists and hardcore Catholics who believe the GOP is going to ban abortion and outlaw gay marriage won't go for a Mormon.

[jmowreader]

47. Extremely

Because the teabagger base generally believes Mormons are hell-bound, the only way they are going to get enough of them to the polls to keep Obama from sweeping every state outside the Deep South and the Mormon Belt is to put an evangelical on the ticket as VP.

This will of course work as well as the last time they tried to "balance" the ticket with a Bible Beater, which was the election that put Obama in the White House in the first place.

[fujiyama]

48. It depends

Will his religion actually be a significant influence on policy making?

That's the real issue it boils down to - to what extent will his Mormon faith impact his decisions? Obviously it will to some extent. The Mormon church is incredibly conservative and inflexible in many regards - especially on gay rights and abortion - and most other social issues in general. The Church also has many cult like elements to it. I've heard the significance Mormonism plays in Utah - and how whether you're a member or not of the Mormon faith can affect your career and social life.

Now, we know he's not from Utah, but nevertheless, some faiths play a stronger life in its followers' lives than others. I'd also admit, I'd have to be very careful before voting for a Muslim, or an orthodox Jew as well. Or for that matter a Southern Baptist, Pentacostal or a RW Catholic (i.e. Rick Santorum style).

[2ndAmForComputers]

49. No, it's not relevent.

It's relevAnt.