http://ldstalk.com/wp-content/images/mormon-jesus-christ/mormon-joseph-smith-jesus.jpg

Mitt Romney is now saying that if he is elected president, he will emphasize the role of God in American society and will not “take God out of the public square.” But that raises the question as to whose God will have a role in American society.

Although I am now a Realist I was raised Jewish in a society where most people were Christians. From a Christian perspective they looked at themselves as Judaism 2.0. While keeping the Old Testament they added a New Testament which superseded Judaism. The added Jesus and the Holy Spirit. From a Jewish perspective Christianity was an unauthorized sequel. These new Gods were not our Gods.

Mitt Romney however is a Mormon and the Mormons have a Third Testament to the Bible. Mormons see themselves as Christianity 2.0 and Judaism 3.0. It also has the advantage of being “Made in America”. Perhaps Christians can appreciate what it’s like when another religion writes an unauthorized sequel.

The Book of Mormon is very different than the New Testament just as the New Testament is very different than the Old Testament. It’s not the same religion. That’s why Mormons come to Christian homes to try to convert Christians to Mormons.

Mitt Romney isn’t just a Mormon, he’s a Bishop in the Mormon Church. During the Vietnam War era Romney spent years living in France as a missionary converting European Christians to Mormons.  So when Romney says that he will emphasize the role of God in American society, what does he really mean? If Romney is putting God on the table shouldn’t we at least ask Romney what God he’s talking about?



  1. RobertW says:

    Good points

    Maybe it would be enough if he could lead in toning down the anti-religion rhetoric.

    Of course I guess all those that make fun of religion are going to be arrested now. Looks like we need another Christopher Hitchens today.

  2. Jeroen says:

    I want a giant spaghetti strainer in the middle of my town square, to honor our God, the almighty FSM!

  3. What? says:

    Well said Mr. Perkel.

  4. Dallas says:

    Guys, Willard is a dangerous cult leader. As far as Ryan goes, you all saw The Munsters on TV. How many more indicators does God have to provide you?

  5. NewformatSux says:

    Better question is are Democrats Christian?

  6. Jason says:

    First, this reply is to answer the question. This posting should not turn into FSM vs. the religions of the world. Please.

    Fundamentally, and that is all that counts if you want a straight answer, NO.

    Christianity (And the NT) is the fulfilment of the OT prophesy. Including that the OT stated that the chosen people of God would reject him. Christians do NOT have other gods. God is the Godhead. It was clear that this is how it was in the OT and further clarified in the NT.

    Mormonism STRICTLY teaches that God, Jesus and the Holy Ghost are wholy and completely separate people. Jesus is the LITERAL child of God. God had REAL sex with Mary. God now is Adam as in Adam became the God that they worship.

    Furthermore, Mormons are not in any way asked or even hinted to consider accepting the gift of life from the sacrifice of Jesus as the purest lamb on the altar that could be had. They are actually taught that they are only allowed into heaven by way of Joseph Smith himself.

    Mormons are taught that they are the literal birthed spirit children of a god that was himself brought into existence the same way and so on and so on backwards in time. Each god is given a planet and is to populate it and rule over it.

    Because they are taught this, they are also taught that all people here on earth are from the spirit realm and are all brothers and sisters. This also has them teaching and not just ipso facto-ing that Jesus and Lucifer are brothers.

    And it does not end there. For all you conspiracy nuts out there that wonder what the deal is with the Mormons having the hugest database of people ever, here is the answer. Because ‘the plan’ is that all of the spirit children are to be birthed into the world with no knowledge of where they were from, if they are not born to Mormon parents or brought to Mormonism somehow, they must have a baptism for the dead done on their behalf. This is one of the major things that goes on in the restricted access temples that are located regionally across the planet. This baptism must be done so they can reach a higher level of exaltation.

    Yup, Mormons are taught that there are 4 levels of existence after death. The worst is hell but due to BftD, very few go there. The best is that you are made a god and go on to have your very own planet and wives to have as many spirit babies as you can.

    So. With all that we have a quick summary:

    Question — Christians — Mormons

    Believe in only one eternal everlasting God — YES — NO
    Must WILLINGLY accept Jesus as their saviour — YES — NO
    Believe that the OT and NT are the inspired word of God and is perfect — YES — NO (This is why they have THREE other books)
    Believe that you can BECOME a god — NO — YES
    Believe that there are other god ruling planets right now — NO — YES

    I could go on but hopefully the point is made VERY clear. Mormons are NOT Christians. (Sadly, many claimed Christians aren’t either but that is another issue)

    Note that I have not even scratched the surface of Mormonism such as the origins of LDS or the underwear or the close relationship with Freemasonry.

    For more and some of the most comprehensive information out there, see http://utlm.org/

    • So what says:

      “First, this reply is to answer the question. This posting should not turn into FSM vs. the religions of the world. Please.”

      You must be REALLY new here.

    • Nate says:

      Well put, and to the best of my knowledge, accurate and correct on every point.

    • Zed says:

      The answers you gave for your “test” are incorrect for Mormons. I am one, and I would answer:
      1) Believe in only one eternal everlasting God — YES
      2) Must WILLINGLY accept Jesus as their saviour — YES
      3) Believe that the OT and NT are the inspired word of God and is perfect — YES [as far as they are translated correctly. See http://www.lds.org/topic/bible/%5D
      4) Believe that you can BECOME a god — NO [we are all the children of God. The goal is not to equal Him or to achieve parity with Him but to imitate and someday acquire His perfect goodness, love and other divine attributes. Romans 8:16-17]
      5) Believe that there are other god ruling planets right now — NO [there is one God. As for life on other planets, the scriptures don’t say.]

      • Nate says:

        And Zed here has introduced another Mormon belief—> ‘Lying for the Lord’. He says all these things, stating that they are true in his belief system to undermine the guards that Christians have put up regarding false messages, yet what he doesn’t mention it that three added-on books of Mormonism; ‘Doctrine and Covenants’; ‘Pearl of Great Price’; and ‘The Book of Mormon’, negate all of the affirmations just asserted here.

  7. RobertW says:

    Jeroen, I guess I was thinking how the political interviewers always get on questions like God, creation, evolution, etc. to evaluate a person’s qualifications for being President. If you believe any of this you’re not qualified.

    With all the negative things I’m reading about Free Speech, I’m just wondering where this country is heading. Is it really possible that the first amendment might be changed or restricted?

    • Nate says:

      “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the governance of any other.” – John Adams

      • What? The moth is always drawn to the flame? says:

        That’s why there is a separation between church and state, mmmkay?

      • orchidcup says:

        The priesthood have, in all ancient nations, nearly monopolized learning…. And, even since the Reformation, when or where has existed a Protestant or dissenting sect who would tolerate A FREE INQUIRY? The blackest billingsgate, the most ungentlemanly insolence, the most yahooish brutality is patiently endured, countenanced, propagated, and applauded.

        But touch a solemn truth in collision with a dogma of a sect, though capable of the clearest proof, and you will soon find you have disturbed a nest, and the hornets will swarm about your legs and hands, and fly into your face and eyes.

        – John Adams

      • orchidcup says:

        The divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity.

        Nowhere in the Gospels do we find a precept for Creeds, Confessions, Oaths, Doctrines, and whole car-loads of other foolish trumpery that we find in Christianity.

        – John Adams

  8. Captain Obvious says:

    Obviously monotheism needs government support.

  9. noname says:

    Marc Perkel is a DU cold exploitative fish!!!

    He is the designated DU merchant of religion controversy. His last couple of Blogs have been a cynical exploitation of religious fervor!!!

    I am sure he sitting back, laughing at all the Counterproductive back-and-forth banter.

    Supposedly, dvorak mouths how he doesn’t like the all to common Counterproductive back-and-forth banter, but; all he does is creates it!!!!!

  10. denacron says:

    If the scope of government were much smaller it would have a smaller impact with what particular religion the president was. We are continually heading to arbitrary power and “Executive” decree.

    The “Rule of law” is becoming very malleable in the fist our dear leaders. The more latitude they are given the more their fever-dream-fantasy sky fairy plays a role in our day to day lives.

  11. bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

    The question is “which god?” //// I think RMoney will do what most people do: compartmentalize their beliefs/values and mostly go with the flow of whatever circumstance they find themselves in.

    I also agree that on this particular subject, RMoney does have a history that shows how he acted in the past which is always the best guide to what the future will bring…. except …. when one changes from a follower to a leader. Being the HMFIC often allows someone to grow into the “best” person they can be—the best changing as said person happens to be bent.

    It was outright stated and assumed several times above: without Christianity or some .OH version of it, what will people “believe” in? Lots of alternatives there. Just look around. Followers of Science, or the Church of Reality, is too non-SPIRITUAL. It would be nice if there could be a religion of mankind in general harmonizing with nature and mother Earth. No commands, no revealed truths, no requirements: just 5 minutes of quiet contemplation per day and doing what you can when you can to make the world a better place.

    For myself, I do love believing in and worshiping Science. It pretty close to the Spiritual Unity of Earth and Man. …. On rewrite—put in Church of the Discovery Channel somehow, and mention Alfie and his heretic hunting.

    Wouldn’t society be great, if it weren’t for people?

    • Nate says:

      Mr. Grocer: [Marty and Grocer are shooting at each other] Comrade! Comrade!
      Marty: What?
      Mr. Grocer: Why don’t you just join the union, we’ll go upstairs together and cap daddy!
      Marty: This union, there’s gonna be meetings?
      Mr. Grocer: Of course!
      Marty: No meetings. .

      • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

        Nate–I don’t grog how this relates to anything said above, but in my Spiritual Unity of Earth and Man guns are of course outlawed.

        But then only outlaws will have guns? ==== Exactly.

        • Nate says:

          “5 minutes of quiet contemplation per day”

          = meetings. Meetings are a deal breaker.

          NEXT!

    • noname says:

      What you want has already been tried. Your a very poor student of history not to know this.

      “For myself, I do love believing in and worshiping Science. It pretty close to the Spiritual Unity of Earth and Man. …. On rewrite—put in Church of the Discovery Channel somehow, and mention Alfie and his heretic hunting.”

      It’s called “communism”, ….

      And it failed, failed miserably and is estimated over 20,000,000 died last century from your type of intellectual thinking!

      • What? The moth is always drawn to the flame? says:

        Communism failed because it forced people to live in boxes that where not of their choosing.

        It had nothing to do with intellectualism, it had everything to do with power vested in those that said one thing but lived another.

        If anything, communism was anti-intelligentsia at the beginning. Any half ass student of history knows this, except you.

        You sir sound like a hell of a Leninist to me!!

        • noname says:

          There have been too many attempts over the years for people to start their own “religion of mankind in general harmonizing with nature and mother Earth” that you are calling for!

          Calling me a Leninist, “You sir sound like a hell of a Leninist to me!!” is rich, really really rich!

          And I wander what basis you have for that comment?? At least your good for freely giving us pigeon shit speak!

          The Nazi party started their own religion. The communist started their own religion. A religion is something you are expected to believe, profess, convert and obey. Like most groups based on someones idea (typically an intellectual, but not always), they become Anti-intellectualism to oppress dissenting ideas.

          The Nazi party’s populist rhetoric and Pol Pot Khmer Rouge featured anti-intellectual rants.

          In the first decade after the Russian Revolution of 1917, the Bolsheviks suspected the Tsarist intelligentsia as potentially traitorous of the proletariat, thereby, the initial Soviet government comprised men and women without much formal education.

          • What? The moth is always drawn to the flame? says:

            You haven’t explored your own ideas beyond the most superficial dabbling. Go home retarded boy.

          • noname says:

            I don’t claim to have “Ideas”!

            But if I did and when I do, I try to understand all the contingencies and not assume unrealistically ideas don’t have real-world failings and consequences.

            But because your so mean “Go home retarded boy”, I’ll obey and go home in tears, boo hoo boo hoo 🙂

          • What? The moth is always drawn to the flame? says:

            Dude, you can’t even write well.

            Your sentences have grammar problems, and your thoughts are a tangle of this and that – without direction and consistency.

            You are embarrassing yourself, but don’t realizes.

          • What? The moth is always drawn to the flame? says:

            My spelling mistakes make me flinch.

        • noname says:

          I was going to ask, if you would point out my “mistakes”; so, I could learn from your perfection, wisdom and education, until your last sentence.
          “You are embarrassing yourself, but don’t realizes.”

          I think your last sentence and last post is an excellent self-description; flinch “To recoil, as from something unpleasant or difficult; shrink”.
          Even with the aid of DU underlining and highlighting misspellings, you still misspelled, amazing!

          Like the good book says: “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?

          Ever the hypocrites aren’t we!

          I try not to be hypercritical, but; you do make it fun.

          It’s all good!

          • What? The moth is always drawn to the flame? says:

            It is your browser that assists with the misspelling identification, not DU. You are not very observant.

            The word was spelled correctly, but was not the word I wished to spell. Again, you are not very observant.

            You are so impressed with your intelligence, you are blind to your own ignorance.

            I’ve shown how you are not very smart, on the most basic level, and you still insist you are smart.

            Think about that for a moment.

            But of course you can’t because you’re not reflective, and are blind to your own stupidity.

          • What? The moth is always drawn to the flame? says:

            I think it funny that you had to look up the definition of “flinch”, as I expected anyone who had reached the ninth grade knew the definition of that word.

          • noname says:

            A simple challenge should prove you’re blinded by your own pigeon shit. Please point out to me and all others, as you say:

            “you still insist you are smart.”

            Where do I insist I am smart??

            You have repeatedly demonstrated an extremely moronic ability to read into something that is not there!!!

            I’ll continue to gladly to point out your demonstrated ignorance!!!

            Then there is your obvious schizophrenic moment(s), where it’s typical the afflicted don’t recall what they just said. In one blog your saying “My spelling mistakes make me flinch.” Then totally defiantly, in the subsequent blog your saying “The word was spelled correctly, but was not the word I wished to spell.”

            I guess you forgot to take your meds?

  12. msbpodcast says:

    What is this crap about the angel Moroni?

    Do you all know how fuckin’ stupid you sound having any kind of argument about some guy who lives up in the sky?

    Base yourselves on, I dont now, reality, yeah, reality.

    I base myself on the observable reality that people who wander in the desert for any length tend to get some kind of delusions or hallucinations.

    Yaweh, Allah, The flying spaghetti monster, Bob Dobbs, Shivah, it doesn’t matter…

    They’re all superstition and inadequate explanation to inaccurately observable phenomena.

    Find me ANY religious text that can even accurately and properly describe the night sky, the fuckin night sky, and I’ll eat my fuckin’ hat with HP Sauce and an arugula salad.

    I’m not even asking that they describe what was on the other side of the planet (all of south, central and north America or Antartica, or even mention anything beyond what could even been seen from the top of a mountain, like say Kilimanjaro, [which was also unknown to the desert dwelling scribes that copied and embellished their grandfather’s old bullshit.])

    Any time I hear god mentioned, I know that the next thing coming out of the speaker’s mouth is bullshit!

    • So what says:

      Pod while I don’t disagree with you ( I am an atheist) might I suggest decaf.

      • msbpodcast says:

        I don’t drink coffee. 🙂

        • orchidcup says:

          Damn shame. Several scientific studies indicate that coffee is good for the heart if taken in moderation.

          Almost everything is good for you if taken in moderation.

          Except religion. You need to go to church five times a week and pray every day to get right with God.

          I have that on good authority.

          • What? The moth is always drawn to the flame? says:

            I agree that caffeine is not helpful. The Coffee Institute might disagree.

  13. Gildersleeve says:

    Is Mitt a Christian? Only if he acts to repeal Sarbanes Oxley. The religious stuff? Nobody here is qualified to talk about it.

    • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

      What are the qualifications necessary or just appropriate one should have to talk about religion?

      • orchidcup says:

        You must believe in magic and supernatural causes for almost everything.

        • noname says:

          Most of the “things” you operate on a day by day basis, you have no idea how it works and you engage it in magical thinking.

          A large portion of the modern American mind is, I press the button, and magic it works!

          This bleeds into what we expect, how we plan and what we demand of others….it just works!!

          Little thought is given to, “is it possible based on how things work”. Because, we don’t know how things work, it just does; we expect everything we think of to always work!!

          We teach this type of thinking in schools when we say, kid don’t need to know math if they have calculators!

  14. George says:

    I’ll go with no on the Mormonism being Christian. The fact is that that the Book of Mormon is a complete work of fiction. There seems to be not a single supportable fact in the whole thing. It make believes that there was some sort of great civilization here in the Americas. There seem to be horses, cattle and other non-existent (until the Spanish conquest) creatures portrayed in this book, along with peoples who never showed up in any archeological record.

    Its been 30 years since a couple of Mormon Elders visited me and sold me a copy of their novel, so it’s been at least that long since I’ve read it, but my opinion is still the same. It’s pure hogwash.

    I think Christians can reasonably argue about different points of faith, and we all can discuss the historical evidence of Jesus’ life and times. But at least everyone can agree that there is evidence of the existence of many sites spoken of in the Bible. As far as I can tell, the Book of Mormon has nothing in it that has ever existed.

    In the present vernacular, I’d call the Book of Mormon a piece of fan fiction.

    • Marc Perkel says:

      All of the Bible is fiction. So who’s to say which fiction is better?

    • orchidcup says:

      How dare you say that. Joseph Smith translated much of the Book of Mormon directly from an ancient Egyptian papyrus and the Angel Moroni revealed the true origins of mankind and designated Joseph Smith as the leader of a new religion.

      You are a skeptic and a blasphemer.

      I would not want to be you on Judgment Day.

      God will punish you severely for doubting the word of a nineteenth century farmer with a fantastic story to tell.

    • Chrisbap says:

      “I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours”
      – Stephen Roberts

      This sums up my feelings pretty neatly.

  15. msbpodcast says:

    The fact is that that the Book of Mormon is a complete work of fiction.

    They’re all works of fiction.

    • What? The moth is always drawn to the flame? says:

      While this is likely true, that doesn’t exclude the possibility that some insightful secular philosophy may be contained in various “religious” books.

      The problem is: do what I say, not what I do, and I’ll be fat and happy while you are skinny and poor. That is the problem of all religious and secular doctrine and dogma.

      • orchidcup says:

        The Bible does say some nice things.

        Love your neighbor as yourself.

        Judge not, lest ye be judged.

        Give alms to the needy.

        Haste makes waste.

        Wait a minute…scratch the last one.

    • orchidcup says:

      Are you implying the prophet Isaiah was lying through his teeth when he pronounced the very words of God as recorded faithfully in the Holy Scriptures?

      Are you insinuating the prophet Jeremiah was hallucinating or delusional when he relayed the important information God communicated to His Chosen People?

      Do you expect me to believe that you refuse to take the word of an ancient nomadic tribesman as the Holy inspired Word of God?

      Are you saying the testimony and writings of a barely literate 24 year-old farmer born in Vermont named Joseph Smith was making it all up when he wrote the Book of Mormon?

      Yes or No.

      • What? The moth is always drawn to the flame? says:

        Obviously yes.

        They, those people, needed power. And “God” gave it to them.

        Why doesn’t God call me on the phone, surely he has my number?

  16. Shubee says:

    Not only are Mormons not the followers of Jesus Christ, neither are most that claim to be Christians.

    • What? The moth is always drawn to the flame? says:

      Define follower?

      • Shubee says:

        A follower of Jesus Christ lives his or her life by the words of Jesus Christ.

        • What? The moth is always drawn to the flame? says:

          How do you do that?

        • orchidcup says:

          Are these the words of Jesus that you reference?

          Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.

          For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.

          And a man’s foes shall be they of his own household.

          Matthew 10:34-36

    • orchidcup says:

      If Jesus were to appear today the last thing he would be is a Christian.

      He would probably end up dead if He went around claiming to be the Son of God and the King of Kings.

      But that is another story.

      • What? The moth is always drawn to the flame? says:

        History repeats, and he doesn’t want to end up dead again, even though he is dead now?

        • orchidcup says:

          Reincarnation is a possibility if you can take any religion seriously.

          There is a holy man in the Philippines that claims to be the reincarnation of Jesus Christ.

          But then mental institutions have many patients that claim to be Jesus Christ.

          Maybe one of them is telling the truth.

  17. kmfix says:

    Mistake Romney.

    • orchidcup says:

      Willard Romoney is a true believer and a kind, gentle, thoughtful, and wonderful man.

      Just ask his wife. She will tell you.

  18. orchidcup says:

    If Romney is putting God on the table shouldn’t we at least ask Romney what God he’s talking about?

    You can bet he is not talking about Zeus.

    Smith’s teachings were rooted in dispensational restorationism. He taught that the Church of Christ restored through him was a latter-day restoration of the early Christian faith, which had been lost in a great apostasy.

    At first, Smith’s church had little sense of hierarchy, Smith’s religious authority being derived from visions and revelations.

    Though Smith did not claim exclusive prophethood, an early revelation designated him as the only prophet allowed to issue commandments “as Moses”.

    This religious authority encompassed economic and political as well as spiritual matters. For instance, in the early 1830s, he temporarily instituted a form of religious communism, called the United Order, requiring Saints to consecrate all their property to the church.

    He also envisioned that theocratic institutions he established would have a role in the world-wide political organization of the Millennium.

    There is nothing strange about Joseph Smith and the Mormon God.

    No worries.

  19. orchidcup says:

    Wait a minute. I think I missed something there.

    He also envisioned that theocratic institutions he established would have a role in the world-wide political organization of the Millennium.

    That sounds a lot like the New World Order that Alex Jones screams about in his rants.

    Creepy.

    Don’t mind me. I am just thinking out loud.

    Carry on.

  20. observer says:

    Do Mormons consider themselves to be Christians?

  21. orchidcup says:

    Smith attracted thousands of devoted followers before his death in 1844 and millions within a century. Smith’s role in the Latter Day Saint religion was comparable to that of Muhammad in early Islam.

    He is regarded as a prophet and apostle on par with Moses, Elijah, Peter or Paul, second in importance within the faith only to Jesus.

    It is unlikely, though, that there will ever be consensus on Smith’s character and achievements.

    Mormons and Ex-Mormons have produced a large amount of scholarly work about Smith, and while Mormons tend to shield their prophet’s reputation, those who have broken away from the faith have to justify their decision to leave.

    Interpretations range from viewing Smith as a prophet who restored the true faith, to a “pious fraud” who believed he was called of God to preach repentance, and felt justified inventing visions in order to convert people, to a gifted “mythmaker” who was the product of his Yankee environment.

    Some argue that Smith was one of the most influential, charismatic, and innovative figures in American religious history.

    I would take a wild guess and say that Joseph Smith was a megolomaniac and narcissistic personality that desired attention and invented the Book of Mormon to scam the largely illiterate and disenfranchised population that were gullible enough to swallow his suspiciously convenient assertion that God chose him, of all people, to reveal the truth of all things.

    But that is my take of Joseph Smith and Mormonism.

    Everyone is free to draw their own conclusions about Joseph Smith.

    • What? The moth is always drawn to the flame? says:

      Agree.

    • The0ne says:

      That is pretty much what religion is imo. Someone somewhere in a certain period in the past decided to take advantage of the stupid and dimwitted. Those that are smart enough but still believe are fools and sheeps or zombies, however you take it. To be honest, I call them wimps. No will power, no guts, no courage…nada.

  22. jpfitz says:

    “he will emphasize the role of God in American society and will not “take God out of the public square.” But that raises the question as to whose God will have a role in American society.”

    I didn’t notice god at any public square I’ve been to. If your a believer in god I was under the perception god was everywhere.

    Romney is baiting the thumpers. The government is not a place for religion or god. A secular policy is needed today to bring people together in agreement, not dividing the population even further.
    Not to mention the message sent to the muslim world if the USA starts a dialogue of xtianity in our politics and foreign policy.

    • orchidcup says:

      Most importantly, we must remember not to criticize religion or analyze the origins of a religion or question the ministrations of the clergy.

      Critical thinking leads to doubts about the assertions of self-proclaimed prophets that inform us of the thoughts and intentions of God.

      Without the human intermediary, God cannot communicate with us. This is one of the mysterious limitations of the omniscient God.

      Nobody explains why God cannot talk to every human directly, but apparently all religious people are comfortable with the idea that Pat Robertson hears God and tells us what God says.

      But we must not question our religious leaders.

      God will deal with us severely if we question anything.

    • Captain Obvious says:

      “…he will emphasize the role of God in American society…”

      Obviously he will give God a cabinet level position. Maybe HUD. Bacchus will get Agriculture. And Toot, that little dickens from the Hercules cartoons, will be the Romney’s Special Assistant for looking under men’s togas.

  23. orchidcup says:

    Oh well, Willard Romoney will get a number of votes simply because he says he believes in God without revealing what that means in terms of economic policy, foreign policy, or social policy.

    The sheeple will stand in line and shake his hand and seek to touch the hem of his garment with the simple faith of the believer that expects miracles and wishes for atonement with the Creator of the Universe and the author of salvation and redemption.

    “I believe in God” is a powerful statement that captures the imagination and inflames the passions of the heart.

    George W. Bush used that statement to great effect. Many politicians have used a statement of faith (without any details) to capture that last 3% of the vote that will swing the election.

    It’s not like he is manipulating anyone to gain a vote.

    In God We Trust.

    Goodnight, all.

    • hmeyers says:

      Actually Romney needs to explain his fiscal, social and foreign policy, not avoid it.

      Few people have been elected president who people can’t name one or two things they know someone is going to do.

      This is why John Kerry and John McCain didn’t win elections, no one could say exactly what they would do if elected. It matters.

  24. Ah_Yea says:

    Wow, all this talk and no one has asked the only question that really matters.

    Will Romney do a better job than Obama at running the government.

    The obvious answer is yes. Do we need anything else?

    This thread is just a distraction.

    • Captain Obvious says:

      “The obvious answer is yes.”

      Watch it matey. Get your own meme.

    • hmeyers says:

      You have to be “for” something usually to beat an incumbent. Romney is close in the polls, but he can only get over the top if he adds some clarity.

      Sure Obama doesn’t seemed in doing all that stuff the president is supposed to do, but if you look at Obama (health care), Bush (tax cuts), Clinton (Healthcare, actually), HW Bush (“no new taxes” which he didn’t stick to).

      John McCain (err, I don’t have an economic plan and I but to talk on TV), John Kerry (wouldn’t commit to an Iraq withdraw), Gore (“social security lockbox … whatever that was supposed to be”) …

      No one really pays attention until October and the debates, to win Romney needs to be “for” something … John Kerry tried the “being against” thing and it typically comes up short.

    • What? The moth is always drawn to the flame? says:

      He will improve the economy for the outsources, yes.

  25. ECA says:

    The problem I had with this religion, was that they werent looking for the NEW/NEXT prophet from Any place EXCEPT in the religion and from the 1 family.

    But I will FAIL any church that has to change its doctrines, just to allow something, that THEY DIDNT SEE, in the original creation of the Church.
    like the admission of OTHER races and that women could have a SAY.

    This religion is leaning more toward Puritan, then anything.

    • hmeyers says:

      Religions are cultural reinforcement and self-validation.

      They won’t go away. They are used to define in-groups and out-groups and justify why “in-groupers are better” and why “out-groupers” are “bad”.

      Some of very religious people correctly do it from a values perspective (i.e. treat others well, healthy behaviors, honesty, etc.)

      But probably the other 40% are unhappy with their life or social status and use religion to self-validate why “their way is right” and everyone else is “wrong”.

      The whole sour grapes things, justifying disliking and possibly hating people who are not part of their peer group. Maybe even out of jealously (“What about thou shall not envy/covet”).

      And that percent is the portion that both uses religion maliciously and also doesn’t actually follow the rules of the religion (lying, cheating on spouse, envy, greed, etc.)

      Grouping together the higher tier and lower tier of the religious groups is not really the right lens to examine religion.

      • hmeyers says:

        Another way of stating this:

        Some people weaponize religion.

        And these people that weaponize religion tend to be the same ones that don’t actually follow their own religion.

        But that isn’t all religious people.

        It is hypocritical, should be condemned.

        But no worse than some of the atheists that “rally around science”, but don’t actually know a lick of science and wouldn’t be able to explain what the scientific method is or that skepticism (“I don’t know” is a central theme in science, it is the quest for the answer. ) is the backbone of science.

        • What? The moth is always drawn to the flame? says:

          I like this. Especially “Weaponized Religion”.

  26. hmeyers says:

    Your religion is a problem if spend your time watching shitty YouTube video insulting your religion and then go out in a mob and trash your own country, burning cars, riotings.

    Especially if all the cars you burned and buildings you trash had nothing to do with anyone who made the video.

    And especially if all the cars you burned were of the people of the same religion as yourself.

    And these people think it gets any better as they get more internet access and cell phones as time goes on?

    They’ll just have more access to YouTube videos and go out and burn their own cars and buildings more often. It doesn’t work!

  27. Anonymous says:

    I do wish someone could find and post the South Park episode about Mormons. It’s pretty scary just how accurate it is. But barring that please read on.

    Quite simply, Mormons were/are a fringe-element not a whole lot unlike the more recent “Christian” people who followed Jim Jones of the infamous 1978 Jonestown massacre in Guyana. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonestown)

    Mormons actually believe that Jesus Christ came to America. And the founder of the Mormon faith, Joseph Smith (also a rather anonymous name, if you ask me) claims to know this after his divine interactions with angels. Joe Smith claimed to have been visited by angels who told him how to translate more texts of the New Testament that were written on gold tablets that no one ever saw except him. And since Joe Smith was also a pretty good preacher he was actually successful in getting others to believe his line of bullshit! And number one in line of believers was another idiot by the name of Brigham Young. Maybe you’ve heard of a little university in Salt Lake called “BYU”?! (So don’t be surprised when the idiots start crawling out of the woodwork trying to say this is all blasphemy or what an idiot I am or something. But I will say BYU has done some amazingly good things in the world of education but NOT in all subjects sine it’s roots are still based in pure total bullshit!)

    Anyway, the first Mormons were exiled from what was then the United States. (Remember, at the time, most places west of the Mississippi had not yet been admitted to the Union which is why anyone going west was considered an “immigrant” – they were immigrating to a foreign land.) They, like other “immigrants” going to places like California eventually ended up in Salt Lake City, Utah. There is a famous historical event about this mass exodus that you might like to read more about too. I particularly found it amazing how so many pathetically stupid people bound by a common (false) faith could allow themselves to die dragging hand carts over rivers where only about mile or two up or down river they could have easily and safely crossed. However, they chose instead to die wherever their leaders told them to go.

    Mitt Romney is a Mormon. And this is NOT a good Oman!!!

    The Mormon religion is about the most disturbing of any wide spread and widely accepted of all religions. The fact that Mormons have existed for more than a hundred years somehow gives it credibility to certain people too. Even if you you are a Muslim (since they too accept the first 5 books of the Holy Bible as religious doctrine), then you may remember somewhere in your holly scriptures also mention of a “false prophet.” This Joe Smith guy may very well be him!

    And now we have Mitt Romney following what can only be described as a long established religious “cult”! Again, this can’t be a good thing since we almost always know where cults lead people.

    But given the alternative, I’m afraid I’ll have to vote for this idiot. And that’s because Barack Obama is WORSE!

  28. Sterling says:

    Mormons differ so much from Christianity that they can not be considered Christians, but they (the Mormons) call themselves so for convenience.

    • What? The moth is always drawn to the flame? says:

      It would be heretical for a new religion, started in the USA, not to be based on Christianity.

      And then along came Scientology.

      • orchidcup says:

        Scientology is defined as a set of beliefs written by founder L. Ron Hubbard. Scientology describes itself as the study and handling of the spirit in relationship to itself, others, and all of life.

        One purpose of Scientology, as stated by the Church of Scientology, is to become certain of one’s spiritual existence and one’s relationship to God, or the “Supreme Being.”

        One belief of Scientology is that a human is an immortal alien, i.e. extraterrestrial, spiritual being, termed a thetan, that is trapped on Earth in a physical body.

        Hubbard described these “thetans” in a “Space Opera” cosmogony. The thetan has had innumerable past lives and it is accepted in Scientology that lives preceding the thetan’s arrival on Earth lived in extraterrestrial cultures. Descriptions of these space opera incidents are seen as true events by Scientologists.

        Scientology is a religion and L. Ron Hubbard is the self-proclaimed prophet that revealed the truth of all things to us.

        Self-proclaimed prophets are famous for creating religions. No religion has ever existed that does not have a self-proclaimed prophet.

  29. What? The moth is always drawn to the flame? says:

    The problem is that: once ideas become religious dogma or doctrine, they can’t be discussed, and if found to be nonsensical through examination, can’t be discarded.

    Except by the anointed prophets.

    Will the anointed prophets work in a way that, while it enhances rationality, diminishes the power and influence of them personally -as well as – the religious machine that they are welded to?

    Of course not, the machine forces the anointed ones to maintain the status quo, and will crush anyone that may upset the apple cart.

    That is the problem. Those in power use fear and intimidation to squelch rational examination and discussion. Because it is in their best interest.

  30. Bill Occam says:

    Arguing over which one of these moneygrubbing corpowhores is going to win is like arguing over whose version of Invisible Sky Daddy is rational.

    • orchidcup says:

      My Sky Daddy is better than your Sky Daddy.

      If you don’t believe me, I will kill you.


1

Bad Behavior has blocked 3794 access attempts in the last 7 days.