HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Does Mitt Romney believe ...

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 02:33 PM

 

Does Mitt Romney believe in Polygamy? Does he have, or has he ever had, another Wife?

Releasing his tax returns might shed some light on these issues, magic underwear notwithstanding.

70 replies, 8718 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 70 replies Author Time Post
Reply Does Mitt Romney believe in Polygamy? Does he have, or has he ever had, another Wife? (Original post)
LaydeeBug Aug 2012 OP
LaydeeBug Aug 2012 #1
gordianot Aug 2012 #2
LaydeeBug Aug 2012 #3
gordianot Aug 2012 #10
GentryDixon Aug 2012 #4
BeeBee Aug 2012 #13
LaydeeBug Aug 2012 #21
GentryDixon Aug 2012 #34
Angry Dragon Aug 2012 #5
LaydeeBug Aug 2012 #22
RZM Aug 2012 #51
Quantess Aug 2012 #55
Angry Dragon Aug 2012 #57
RZM Aug 2012 #60
kestrel91316 Aug 2012 #6
LaydeeBug Aug 2012 #25
kestrel91316 Aug 2012 #44
Angry Dragon Aug 2012 #58
gollygee Aug 2012 #7
LaydeeBug Aug 2012 #8
Blue Idaho Aug 2012 #14
LaydeeBug Aug 2012 #16
white_wolf Aug 2012 #31
LaydeeBug Aug 2012 #38
white_wolf Aug 2012 #39
LaydeeBug Aug 2012 #63
FreeState Aug 2012 #42
FreeState Aug 2012 #41
jsr Aug 2012 #36
davidpdx Aug 2012 #54
FreeState Aug 2012 #15
LaydeeBug Aug 2012 #17
FreeState Aug 2012 #40
dimbear Aug 2012 #52
FreeState Aug 2012 #53
spanone Aug 2012 #9
LaydeeBug Aug 2012 #20
cali Aug 2012 #11
cbayer Aug 2012 #12
LaydeeBug Aug 2012 #19
cbayer Aug 2012 #23
LaydeeBug Aug 2012 #24
cbayer Aug 2012 #27
LaydeeBug Aug 2012 #32
cbayer Aug 2012 #35
LaydeeBug Aug 2012 #37
Ms. Toad Aug 2012 #56
FreeState Aug 2012 #43
kestrel91316 Aug 2012 #45
FreeState Aug 2012 #46
LaydeeBug Aug 2012 #47
FreeState Aug 2012 #48
LaydeeBug Aug 2012 #26
cbayer Aug 2012 #28
LaydeeBug Aug 2012 #29
unc70 Aug 2012 #30
LaydeeBug Aug 2012 #33
unc70 Aug 2012 #50
LaydeeBug Aug 2012 #64
unc70 Aug 2012 #65
LaydeeBug Aug 2012 #18
cali Aug 2012 #49
LaydeeBug Aug 2012 #61
cali Aug 2012 #68
Bucky Aug 2012 #59
LaydeeBug Aug 2012 #62
cali Aug 2012 #69
opihimoimoi Aug 2012 #66
flamingdem Aug 2012 #67
mfcorey1 Aug 2012 #70

Response to LaydeeBug (Original post)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 02:40 PM

1. where is his long form birth certificate too nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LaydeeBug (Original post)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 02:43 PM

2. Only one spouse deduction but he did say he does not pay any more tax than he has to pay.

Magic underwear seems to be working for him maybe he will be safe in Tampa if they get a hurricane.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gordianot (Reply #2)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 02:51 PM

3. I am almost *giddy* that they're actually going to nominate him...

 

In Union-towns, Joe SixPackville (my back yard) it eviscerates their tax argument.

And after they nominate him, I will be unending in reminding them of it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LaydeeBug (Reply #3)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 04:13 PM

10. She did file a joint return in 2010.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LaydeeBug (Original post)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 02:56 PM

4. Oh my Gosh! (inside Utah joke)

We can only speculate since he lies about everything. If enough people say it is so, then it may become so.

The biggest problem I have with Mittens campaign is his absolute flat out lying on every issue. If enough people believe his lies he may just skate into the White House.

I live in Utah and see the influence the Mormon Church has on the legislature, so anyone who thinks they won't be calling the shots when "The Chosen One" rides in on his white horse is in for a rude awakening. Remember Prop 8.

The Mormon Church has a great deal of money and influence, and Mittens has been chosen to "save" the Constitution. I am not a Mormon, but from the time I was a small child I was preached to by my friends about the White Horse Prophecy. These people truly believe this crap. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Horse_Prophecy



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GentryDixon (Reply #4)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 05:00 PM

13. Darn it to heck! n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GentryDixon (Reply #4)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 06:36 PM

21. Holy effing Hell. This can't be real.

 

This is satire, right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LaydeeBug (Reply #21)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 07:39 PM

34. No, sadly. It is not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LaydeeBug (Original post)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 02:56 PM

5. He has 3 wives in France

he got them during his 30 month vacation during the Vietnam war


His father was a product of polygamy, so he has it in his blood

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angry Dragon (Reply #5)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 06:37 PM

22. All I'm saying is *RELEASING HIS TAX RETURNS* might shed some light on this.

 

as for him and his starving chef in France, I honestly have no idea.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angry Dragon (Reply #5)

Thu Aug 23, 2012, 02:02 AM

51. George Romney's father had only one wife n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RZM (Reply #51)

Thu Aug 23, 2012, 03:40 AM

55. "Some people say" that George Romney had a couple extra wives in Mexico.

All these unanswered questions in people`s minds!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RZM (Reply #51)

Thu Aug 23, 2012, 08:17 AM

57. Some things skip a generation

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angry Dragon (Reply #57)

Thu Aug 23, 2012, 09:24 AM

60. I hope for the Michelle's sake they don't n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LaydeeBug (Original post)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 03:37 PM

6. I want to see his original long form temple recommend.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kestrel91316 (Reply #6)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 06:45 PM

25. You have to get recommended to a temple?

 

I don't understand...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LaydeeBug (Reply #25)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 09:43 PM

44. You can't set foot in an LDS temple unless you are a practicing member in

 

good standing. And you have to keep proving it over and over again to get your recommend renewed.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temple_(LDS_Church)#Types_of_recommends

Types of recommends
The standard Temple Recommend authorizes a member who has been baptized at least one year prior to take part in all temple ordinances and is good for two years.[10] A Recommend for Living Ordinances is given to individuals who are receiving their endowments for the first time, being sealed to a spouse, and anyone being married in the temple for time only. It may only be used in conjunction with a standard Temple Recommend.[10] A Limited-use Recommend is available to members who have not yet received their endowment and who have not been a member for one year. These may also be issued to a group for a single visit to the temple.[10] These can be issued to youth 12 and older who will take part in specific temple ordinances, to single members age 8-20 who are preparing to be sealed to their parents, or for individuals of the same age who want to observe specific ordinances. The church member must meet the same worthiness standards as a standard temple recommend in an interview with the member's bishop. Unlike the temple recommend, a limited-use recommend does not require a year's membership nor an interview with a stake president. A limited-use recommend is only valid for proxy baptisms and confirmation ordinances.

Images of recommends:

https://www.google.com/search?q=lds+temple+recommend&hl=en&prmd=imvns&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=H5g1UIj9BIXUiwKi3ICADw&ved=0CGkQsAQ&biw=888&bih=542

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kestrel91316 (Reply #44)

Thu Aug 23, 2012, 08:20 AM

58. Sounds like things a cult would have

I guess they have a different Jesus status

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LaydeeBug (Original post)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 03:38 PM

7. Mormons don't believe in having more than one wife anymore

because it is illegal. It's only sects that left the Latter Day Saints that still do that.

They do believe in having more than one wife in heaven I think though? Hmm not sure about that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gollygee (Reply #7)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 03:50 PM

8. what a relief! does Mitt believe he will be God one day? Or just *a* god? nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LaydeeBug (Reply #8)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 05:10 PM

14. A God...

Mormons believe in multiple gods. They believe our God has both a physical body and a wife. They also believe Jesus is separate from God and also has a physical body. They believe the Holy Ghost is separate from God and Jesus but lacks a physical body. Mormons believe their ultimate reward in heaven is to become a god over another world so - if Willard makes it to the Celestial Kingdom then he too can be a god and yes Ann gets to be his godly wife. That may explain why she's always looking down her nose at the rest of us...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blue Idaho (Reply #14)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 06:30 PM

16. so Mitt will "a god" of some *OTHER* celestial kingdom? *OTHER* than Earth? Will he be judged by God

 

once he *IS* a god, or will he be on equal par? with *GOD*

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LaydeeBug (Reply #16)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 07:32 PM

31. He will be judged by Jesus and Joseph Smith.

In Mormon theology, Smith gets to help Jesus with the passing of judgment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to white_wolf (Reply #31)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 08:34 PM

38. like St. Peter, only Joe Smith? and then they assign you a celestial kingdom? Can you pray someone

 

Mormon after they're dead, is that true?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LaydeeBug (Reply #38)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 08:50 PM

39. They do baptisms for the dead, yeah.

As I recall Peter doesn't help with judging that is left to God alone, at least in Catholic theology. Smith is actually right there passing judgement along with Christ.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to white_wolf (Reply #39)

Thu Aug 23, 2012, 05:27 PM

63. so Joe Smith is like "Co-Christ"? Are you serious?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LaydeeBug (Reply #38)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 09:10 PM

42. Just like Peter actually

Joseph Smith would be a judge over this dispensation*

From JOD 7:288-9. Good ol' Brother Brigham:

Joseph Smith holds the keys of this last dispensation, and is now engaged behind the vail in the great work of the last days. I can tell our beloved brother Christians who have slain the Prophets and butchered and otherwise caused the death of thousands of Latter-day Saints, the priests who have thanked God in their prayers and thanksgiving from the pulpit that we have been plundered, driven, and slain, and the deacons under the pulpit, and their brethren and sisters in their closets, who have thanked God, thinking that the Latter-day Saints were wasted away, something that no doubt will mortify them—something that, to say the least, is a matter of deep regret to them—namely, that no man or woman in this dispensation will ever enter into the celestial kingdom of God without the consent of Joseph Smith. From the day that the Priesthood was taken from the earth to the winding-up scene of all things, every man and woman must have the certificate of Joseph Smith, junior, as a passport to their entrance into the mansion where God and Christ are—I with you and you with me. I cannot go there without his consent. He holds the keys of that kingdom for the last dispensation—the keys to rule in the spirit-world; and he rules there triumphantly, for he gained full power and a glorious victory over the power of Satan while he was yet in the flesh, and was a martyr to his religion and to the name of Christ, which gives him a most perfect victory in the spirit-world. He reigns there as supreme a being in his sphere, capacity, and calling, as God does in heaven. Many will exclaim—"Oh, that is very disagreeable! It is preposterous! We cannot bear the thought!" But it is true.


http://www.lds.org/scriptures/gs/dispensation?lang=eng

A gospel dispensation is a period of time in which the Lord has at least one authorized servant on the earth who bears the keys of the holy priesthood.

Adam, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus Christ, Joseph Smith, and others have each started a new gospel dispensation. When the Lord organizes a dispensation, the gospel is revealed anew so that the people of that dispensation do not have to depend on past dispensations for knowledge of the plan of salvation. The dispensation begun by Joseph Smith is known as the “dispensation of the fulness of times.”

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LaydeeBug (Reply #16)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 09:06 PM

41. He would be a lesser god

to his creations he would be the equivalent of what he is to what LDS see as God the Father.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LaydeeBug (Reply #8)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 07:50 PM

36. Only if he makes the right turn:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LaydeeBug (Reply #8)

Thu Aug 23, 2012, 03:22 AM

54. Groundhog Day

Phil: I'm a god.
Rita: You're God?
Phil: I'm a god. I'm not *the* God... I don't think.

One of my favorite movie lines.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gollygee (Reply #7)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 05:39 PM

15. Actually thats not true - multiple wives is still believed and practiced

Actually thats not true - multiple wives is still believed and practiced. The Church still marries (referred to as sealing) men to more than one wife in the temple - its believed all the wives sealed to him will be his wives in the next life.

The church only allows you to sealed and civilly married to one person at a time. However if a wife dies or divorces her husband he can then be sealed to another woman - both of which will be his wives in the life here after.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreeState (Reply #15)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 06:31 PM

17. OMG! Are you serious? nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LaydeeBug (Reply #17)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 09:03 PM

40. Yes Im serious

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormonism_and_polygamy#Modern_plural_marriage_theory_within_the_LDS_Church

Although the LDS Church has abandoned the practice of plural marriage, it has not abandoned the underlying doctrines of polygamy in an eternal sense. According to the church's sacred texts and pronouncements by its leaders and theologians, the church leaves open the possibility that it may one day re-institute the practice. It is the practice of Mormons to seal themselves to their wives. Inasmuch as a man, unlike a woman, may be sealed to multiple, sequential wives on earth, it is possible for a man to have multiple wives in the Celestial Kingdom.

As early as the publication of the Book of Mormon in 1830, LDS doctrine maintained that polygamy was allowable so long as it was commanded by God. The Book of Jacob condemned polygamy as adultery,[48] but left open the proviso that "For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise, they shall hearken unto these things."[49] Thus, the LDS Church today teaches that plural marriage can only be practiced when specifically authorized by God. According to this view, the 1890 Manifesto and/or 1904 Manifesto rescinded God's prior authorization given to Joseph Smith.

However, Bruce R. McConkie stated in his controversial 1958 book, Mormon Doctrine, that God will "obviously" re-institute the practice of polygamy after the Second Coming of Jesus Christ.[50] This echoes earlier teachings by Brigham Young that the primary purpose of polygamy was to bring about the Millennium.[51] Current official church teaching materials do not make any mention of the future re-institution of plural marriage.

LDS scripture (Doctrine & Covenants section 132) teaches that marital sealings (only done in an LDS temple), between two spouses will continue in force in the afterlife.[52] Thus, LDS doctrine teaches that plural marriages which were valid at the time of the sealing, whether biblical or 19th-century Mormon, will continue in force in the afterlife. In addition, there are circumstances where members of the modern LDS Church may be sealed to more than one spouse when their spouse dies. The predominant view within the LDS Church is that these plural sealings may continue in force in the afterlife, resulting in a polygamous relationship.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreeState (Reply #40)

Thu Aug 23, 2012, 02:16 AM

52. This is a good summary of the situation. The Mormons traded away polygamy for statehood,

but they never lost the taste for it, and polygamous marriage is the spiritually preferred estate. Hence the spirit wives.

Not that many Mormons don't have actual multiple wives, they just don't register them. Yes, I mean LDS, not some rebel offshoot. LDS.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dimbear (Reply #52)

Thu Aug 23, 2012, 02:27 AM

53. Most mormon men have not been sealed to more than one woman

Not that many Mormons don't have actual multiple wives, they just don't register them. Yes, I mean LDS, not some rebel offshoot. LDS.


I was born and raised LDS and very very few men in the church have been sealed to more than one woman. It happens and they believe in it but its very rare. The only way for it to happen is to civilly divorce your wife who does not ask for a temple divorce or have her die.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LaydeeBug (Original post)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 03:54 PM

9. other than Obama being a muslim, the media has given romney a pass on religion

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spanone (Reply #9)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 06:34 PM

20. and Obama is a Christian, so ONE is NOT TRUE, and the other thinks he will be a god one day. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LaydeeBug (Original post)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 04:14 PM

11. Is Obama really a Muslim? I hate stupid, bigoted crap.

 

Where's the unrec when you need it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #11)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 04:17 PM

12. I find this and speculation about his having Alzheimer's or some other psychiatric disorder

objectionable.

We have plenty to go after Romney on. This just looks (and feels) bad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cbayer (Reply #12)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 06:33 PM

19. I also find the FACT that he believes he will be a god to be pertinent. You see Obama was NEVER a

 

Muslim. Mitt Romney's been a Mormon all his life, and there is a LOT I don't know about them.

This is a discussion board.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LaydeeBug (Reply #19)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 06:40 PM

23. Talking about his religion and how it might impact his ability to lead is

one thing. While the Obama campaign has decided to take the high road and not go there, I don't object to having this discussion at all.

However, to speculate that he is a polygamist, a practice rejected by the LDS church long ago, is just unnecessary and vulgar, imo.

We have plenty to go after Romney with.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cbayer (Reply #23)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 06:44 PM

24. You are certainly entitled to your OPINION, but you are not entitled to your own facts.

 

see post #15. I happen to disagree. I don't think there is anything at all wrong with dissecting the religious beliefs of someone seeking the highest office in the land.

And since there was just some reality TV show about "Sister Wives" or what not, it is NOT like this isn't going on today.

I have a question. I am going to ask it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LaydeeBug (Reply #24)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 06:52 PM

27. Of course you are entitled to your opinion, as I am mine.

The mainstream LDS church rejected polygamy long ago (1890). They do not permit it, let alone sanction it. While there are sects that continue the practice, they are shunned by the church.

Anyway, carry on, but I will voice my opinion that you are doing us no favors in doing so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cbayer (Reply #27)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 07:32 PM

32. There is no high road in politics, and the gloves are off

 

There's no high road in politics. It's winner take all. It's not little league soccer or even the Olympics where some impartial official steps up to the apparent winner and says, "Oh, I'm so sorry but it looks like you didn't play fair so...you're forfeited and the other team wins!"

more at the link: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/08/21/1122048/-That-s-it-All-bets-are-off

Not busting you either way, just letting you know where I'm coming from.

So, he is NOT a polygamist, but he DOES still believe he will be a god one day, of some other celestial kingdom, not here of this earth, right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LaydeeBug (Reply #32)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 07:46 PM

35. Well this is where we are going to definitely part ways ideologically.

I think there is most certainly a high road, and I think the Obama administration has taken it by saying religion is off the table. The Jeremiah Wright, secret Muslim tactics were despicable, imo, and came back to bite the Republicans in the butt.

The American public may be swayed by negative ads and politics, but once shown that they are based on lies or unfounded innuendo, will often turn against those that use them.

I see where you stand and simply disagree with you. Whether he thinks he will be a god one day makes no difference to me. What does make a difference is how his religious leanings might impact on his ability to govern. I share the same concerns, even more so, about Paul Ryan.

There is so much there to go after that unfounded speculation isn't even needed, imo.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cbayer (Reply #35)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 08:30 PM

37. unfounded speculation? Mitt Romney *IS* a Mormon. This is not in dispute. And of *COURSE* Obama is

 

taking the high road. Just like Mitt Romney is taking the high road when he won't address whether or not my President was born in Kenya.

Oh, and Mitt Romney RELEASING HIS TAX RETURNS certainly would reveal whether or not he is a polygamist. It would.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LaydeeBug (Reply #37)

Thu Aug 23, 2012, 03:47 AM

56. And how would they reveal that? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cbayer (Reply #27)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 09:15 PM

43. They did not reject it

They stopped practicing it in this life, for the time being - there is a difference. They still practice marrying men to multiple wives in the temple and believe in the practice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cbayer (Reply #27)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 09:49 PM

45. The mainstream LDS church PUBLICLY rejected polygamy in 1890.

 

I happen to believe that they continue to support it and tolerate it in private. But they have to keep up appearances. I suspect THIS is why they still remain so very secretive in their temple doings.

For the record: My dad came from a long line of Mormons and polygamists via both his parents.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kestrel91316 (Reply #45)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 09:53 PM

46. They did not reject it - they stopped practicing it

There is a big difference - they still believe in Polygamy and still seal men to multiple wives. They still believe Polygamy is godly and a commandment.

Just to be clear Im talking about the LDS Church in Salt Lake not the break offs that still practice it in this life. The RLDS Church (Church of Christ, in MO) is the only LDS sect that does not believe in polygamy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreeState (Reply #46)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 10:33 PM

47. Oh...so they *didn't* reject Polygamy, and Mitt believes he will be a god one day.

 

I don't want to be *nice*. I just want to be *accurate*. I'm not calling Tea Baggers "Tea Partiers" because *they* want me to be *nice*. They called THEMSELVES Tea Baggers. That's *accurate*.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LaydeeBug (Reply #47)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 10:38 PM

48. When it comes to polygamy and exaltation you never know

Exaltation is the LDS term for becoming Gods.

Most members if you ask them about either of these issues will say they are uncertain exactly what will happen, they take it in faith regardless of how uncomfortable these two issues make them. Its common to be told "it will all be worked out in the next life, why worry about it now".

So in short, even though those are LDS doctrines, it does not mean a member believes it on face value, many just follow along with faith.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cbayer (Reply #12)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 06:47 PM

26. wait a sec! There's speculation that he has a psychiatric disorder???

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LaydeeBug (Reply #26)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 06:54 PM

28. Of course there is. Some people will sink to anything to smear their enemies,

even when they have plenty of legitimate ammunition to work with.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cbayer (Reply #28)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 07:28 PM

29. well since the victor writes the story, I'll play the hand I'm dealt, not

 

the one I want.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LaydeeBug (Reply #26)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 07:31 PM

30. Others wonder about 1968 head trauma

In 1968 while in Remulak (the south of France), Mitt was driving a car involved in a headon collision that resulted in the death of one of his passengers. Mitt was reportedly unconscious for some time before awakening in the hospital. From reports, seems high probability of concussion. Head trauma.

Whole story of accident is a bit suspect. There is a tiny CT group looking at details. Looks like another case where his version is probably incorrect, but hard to tell dhat really happened.

I think the Coneheads version is about as valid. Meps. Meps.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to unc70 (Reply #30)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 07:33 PM

33. YOU MEAN HIS CAR KILLED AS MANY PEOPLE AS LAURA BUSH'S AND TED KENNEDY'S?

 

and in *FRANCE*

This stuff could not write itself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LaydeeBug (Reply #33)

Thu Aug 23, 2012, 01:57 AM

50. After coq au vin, Romney driver in fatal wreck

The women kind was the wife of a senior LDS official in France. Other car driven by a priest.

Here is a link to a blog that summarizes the "maigre" reporting on this "coq au vin" story. I make no claims about this story.

http://blogs.browardpalmbeach.com/pulp/2012/08/did_mitt_romney_kill_leola_anderson_conspiracy_theory.php

BTW Note my special use of the French word for meager in the religious context of food.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to unc70 (Reply #50)

Thu Aug 23, 2012, 05:42 PM

64. Noted. You're very clever. :)

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LaydeeBug (Reply #64)

Fri Aug 24, 2012, 02:03 AM

65. Too clever by half

True for so many DUers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #11)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 06:32 PM

18. I can tell by your breathless, desperate response that knee jerking is your forte.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LaydeeBug (Reply #18)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 10:41 PM

49. lol. that coming from the likes of you?

 

how amusing, sweetheart.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #49)

Thu Aug 23, 2012, 05:22 PM

61. Oh, you're just a *scream*

 

but the beat goes on, doesn't it? It's funny how you tout yourself to be above it, but really...

you're not, and we both know it. It's funny how you add so little, except desperate complaining and breathless moaning. Pity your upper-advantaged education didn't teach you any better.

It's very clear they didn't. Bless your heart.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LaydeeBug (Reply #61)

Fri Aug 24, 2012, 04:03 AM

68. funnier and funnier

 

you do cheer me up. I know it's too easy, but it is fun.

Of course, I don't tout myself up, as you put it.

Oh, and just a wee grammatical correction, LB, my friend:

You use the singular and then reference it with the plural. tsk, tsk.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LaydeeBug (Original post)

Thu Aug 23, 2012, 08:22 AM

59. This thread is a disgusting, illiberal, intolerant, crapload of bigotry and hate speech.

This entire thread is disgusting. I know, I know... it's not bigotry when we do it. It's not dragging religion into politics when you're attacking Mormons as a group.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bucky (Reply #59)

Thu Aug 23, 2012, 05:25 PM

62. I want to be clear: BULLSHIT

 

really. Mitt Romney *IS* Mormon. There is NOTHING intolerant about exploring his faith, its practices, how that might effect his time in office should he steal it, or be elected, and there SURE AS SHIT IS NOTHING WRONG with talking about it.

Take some cheese with that whine if you need to, but the best defense is a good offense, and I'm not showing up to a gun fight with 'the moral high ground'. The moral high ground doesn't win elections. Taking the fucking gloves off does.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LaydeeBug (Reply #62)

Fri Aug 24, 2012, 04:06 AM

69. except, of course, YOU are not "exploring" his faith.

 

You're spreading stupid rumors that hurt rather than help. You don't know how "to take the gloves off". Take a cue from the President and every other dem with two brain cells to rub together.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LaydeeBug (Original post)

Fri Aug 24, 2012, 02:29 AM

66. so far no one has come forth....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LaydeeBug (Original post)

Fri Aug 24, 2012, 03:56 AM

67. Now that would really blow up the interwebs and Twittuh

@mittromney did you really have seven wives #mormonmadness

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LaydeeBug (Original post)

Fri Aug 24, 2012, 05:54 AM

70. With the wall privacy that surrounds him, you will never know. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread