Skip to main content

Derrick Shore, a Mormon columnist, thinks so.

But here's why Mr. Romney's religion is relevant: For Mormons, there really is no such thing as separation of church and state.

From as early as I can remember, I was taught in church that the framers of our Constitution were directly influenced by God to create a nation where Jesus Christ could come to Earth and his true gospel could be restored. Essentially, Mormons believe that the United States was chosen and created specifically by God as the Promised Land where Earth's one true religion -- Mormonism -- could finally be discovered and then flourish.

He then goes on to describe in detail how easy it is to mobilize the 'Mormon army' to action, using as an example the heinous anti-gay California measure, Prop 8.

I read Krakauer's book "Under the Banner of Heaven". It is not a religion that considers women equal to men. I asked my gay friend (who is from a strict Mormon family) if its as bad as the book says. He said yes, absolutely.

In some respects, maybe we are lucky because the guy is soooo awful in so many other ways, we don't have to get into the liberal grey area of his religion.

However, I would like to know what the community thinks:

Fair game? Or not? Why or why not?

Poll

Is religion a fair concern in a presidential candidate

53%88 votes
24%40 votes
22%37 votes
0%1 votes

| 166 votes | Vote | Results

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  No (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    xsonogall, coigue, crose, Gator Keyfitz

    Similar arguments were made about JFK in regards his Catholicism - that he would not be able to separate church and state, that he would be controlled by the Vatican.

    The Catholic Church, as a body, doesn't consider women equal to men either. Does that disqualify Joe Biden? Is his religion an issue.

    Don't honestly think much of the Mormon church, but I think this is a nasty quagmire we don't need to lower ourselves into.

  •  Put it this way... (5+ / 0-)

    If this were an issue being brought up now, that means Obama was the one who was desperate.

    "If these Republicans can't stand up to Rush, how can they stand up to the Iranians?" - Redmond Barry

    by xsonogall on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:08:31 PM PDT

    •  agreed. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      xsonogall

      So does that mean that it's fine to keep it in our back pocket in case we need it?

      Isn't that the same as saying it's OK?

      (Of course, it may not be politically sound, these kinds of attacks can backfire)

      •  Not his "religion" but his beliefs (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        coigue

        An early part of the vetting process should be to ask about his (or anyones) beliefs... religious and otherwise.

        "Do what you can with what you have where you are." - Teddy Roosevelt

        by Andrew C White on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:22:30 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I do agree that these types of attacks could... (2+ / 0-)

        ...backfire, but when you're desperate you don't care anymore and you're just seeing what sticks (see: GOP right now).

        As for keeping this in our back pocket, nah. Aren't our back pockets already full, courtesy of the Romney campaign? With only seven weeks left, I don't see us ever going this route at this point. Hell, the Obama campaign hasn't mentioned seeing Mitt's tax returns for a while now.

        "If these Republicans can't stand up to Rush, how can they stand up to the Iranians?" - Redmond Barry

        by xsonogall on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:23:49 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  About this: (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        coigue
        keep it in our back pocket in case we need it?
        Who is the "we" and what occassions are being discussed for using it?

        It's too late for Obama to run anything on it and his strategy now has to be to continue to take the high road.  Note that this does not mean throwing hard punches based on fair and true assessments of Romney/Ryan are out.

        But I'm personally open to speaking of Romney's religion within certain circles and I do.

        Religion is fair game but if you care about the effectiveness of you're political party you approach it carefully and with thoughtful consideration to timing.

        I'm not liberal. I'm actually just anti-evil, OK? - Elon James White

        by Satya1 on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:33:35 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  All of Romney's beliefs--and all of (10+ / 0-)

    Obama's--are fair game. I'm not sure why we act as if religious beliefs can't be discussed. If my mother ran for President, asking her why she covers the kitchen in tin foil for eight days a year would be perfectly appropriate. That's shit that people should know.

    This isn't fair to those of us who are members of minority religions. If Obama thinks that the son of God came to earth to act out some  death script his Dad wrote, nobody finds that odd. If Ryan believes he's eating the flesh and drinking the blood of Jesus, everyone yawns.

    But just because it's not fair doesn't mean it's not appropriate. Romney calls himself a man of faith; asking what that means, exactly, is more respectful than being afraid to know what his Scary Other Religion says. Presumably he's proud of his beliefs. My mother is.

    "Gussie, a glutton for punishment, stared at himself in the mirror."

    by GussieFN on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:08:52 PM PDT

    •  The narrative of American Exceptionalism cast (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      coigue, dinazina, milkbone

      in terms of Mormon views should be explored with Romney and Ryan.  

      Do Mitt & Ann buy into all the teachings about the US being established as the New Promised Land as the precursor to Mormonism becoming the One True Religion for the whole world?  Are Mormons interpreting any prophecies as applying to the Romney/Ryan ticket or to Obama/Biden?

      When life gives you wingnuts, make wingnut butter!

      by antirove on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:29:00 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Well, I don't really care what 'Mormons' (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        coigue, merrywidow, dinazina, gramofsam1

        are interpreting. That's their business. I just care what the actual presidential candidate believes. This whole question strikes me as bizarre. If a candidate spends years running around saying "I'm a committed Hegelian," why the hell wouldn't we ask what that means to him, exactly?

        "Gussie, a glutton for punishment, stared at himself in the mirror."

        by GussieFN on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:33:28 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Um, (0+ / 0-)

      does your mother really cover the kitchen in tinfoil 8 days a year? If not, well, I guess that saves in tinfoil. If so, why?

  •  Only if he belonged to the FLDS (3+ / 0-)

    Then, I'd have a problem with a group that has a great deal of allegations of Organized Crime, human trafficking, child abuse, and welfare fraud.

    Because of the Criminal aspect.

    Oh wait, he's a bank criminal and nobody seems to care there...  

    never mind.

    I don't blame Christians. I blame Stupid. Which sadly is a much more popular religion these days.

    by detroitmechworks on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:10:58 PM PDT

  •  We Don't Need the Distraction From his Campaign (7+ / 0-)

    suicide.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:12:44 PM PDT

  •  The Victim Card (6+ / 0-)

    If we play the religion card, Mittens will play the victim card.

    It's much better to play the "Mittens is an asshole" card.  Both sides agree on that.

  •  Should Mitt's religion be an issue? (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    coigue, dougymi, UnionMade, skrekk, crose

    Of course not.

    He's a Republican!

    Obama's Islamism is an issue, and he's not even Islamic! But that's different because he's not only a Democrat, he's also bla- er, from Kenya.

    (Just watch how fast Mormonism becomes an issue if the Democrats ever nominate a Mormon for president.)

    America: It's a good IDEA for a country ...

    by Tony Seybert on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:15:43 PM PDT

    •  that's the only thing that makes this (0+ / 0-)

      even worth talking about.  If so many weren't making the President's religion an issue, it wouldn't make a ripple.

      Of course, it's not something anyone wants to take up now anyway, since it would make mitten a victim and things are going in a positive direction.   Let mitten continue to self-immolate.

      A learning experience is one of those things that says, 'You know that thing you just did? Don't do that.' Douglas Adams

      by dougymi on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:27:00 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  there are many anchors in this world to toss (3+ / 0-)

    this is not one of them.

    Have you hugged your Boeuf Bourguignon today?

    by wretchedhive on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:15:55 PM PDT

  •  It shouldn't be an issue... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    coigue

    ...but  you better believe it would be if the Democrats put forth a Mormon candidate.

  •  Religion affects your life, so is fair game. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    coigue, Andrew C White, Catesby

    Religion is completely voluntary, and which one you pick says a lot about you. Though many people stay in the one they were raised in through sheer inertia, it's still a choice - and when you consider that some religions do not place women or people of color as equals to white men, it bears scrutiny. I wish someone would ask Mitt about how he felt about the decision to allow people of African descent to the ministry, one made after he had been teaching for years that they were inferior to whites. To change your worldview based on news of a "revelation" by someone you had never met seems strange to me... I'd like to know what it's like to be that theologically flexible.

  •  No... and... Yes... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    coigue

    The fact that he is a Mormon and that Mormons are different and is some minds therefore bad makes the answer No. Judging one religion or another right or wrong, good or bad, or whatever and therefore disqualifies (or qualifies) a candidate is not appropriate and leads to a strong and emphatic NO!

    But...

    At the same time it is important to understand a candidates beliefs at a fundamental level. For the truly religious their religious beliefs inform and structure their beliefs about the world, how things should be, and how they go about the decision making process. As such then we need to understand just how his mormon beliefs effect his world view and would effect his decision making process.

    Someone above mentioned Kennedy. The question with him was whether as a Roman Catholic he would answer to the Pope before the American people. He answered that question directly and clearly.

    What about Romney? What does being a Mormon mean to him? How will adherence to his church elders effect him? And so on and so forth....

    "Do what you can with what you have where you are." - Teddy Roosevelt

    by Andrew C White on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:18:11 PM PDT

  •  I think the topic is being discussed, quietly... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    coigue, Clem Yeobright

    in various fundamentalist churches around the country.

    At this point, with Willard imploding all on his own, his faith doesn't need to be made an overt issue by the Obama campaign, or frankly, progressives in general.

    •  I think we probably never would (0+ / 0-)

      overtly.

      That is the point of the columnist. He is asking ... why not?
      Because his impression is that the lack of separation of church and state is a central tenet of Mormon culture.

      •  It's not a central tenet, exactly (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        coigue

        Because the union of church and state power caused Mormons no end of trouble in the 19th century. Joseph Smith created the secretive "Council of Fifty" to help him wield political power in Nauvoo and that ended very badly -- for both the Saints and Smith.  Later on, territorial government in Utah under Governor/Church President/Prophet Brigham Young also functioned more or less as a theocracy -- until Buchanan dispatched a federal army to Utah to quell the supposed rebellion and depose Young.

        Point is, the concept of separation of church and state is a real problem for Mormons, as anyone who has lived in Utah and under the thumb of the Mormon-dominated legislature and state government can attest.  But because of their collective past, Mormons are very sensitive on this issue and either hide or deny the reality of it.

        I agree that it would be very bad politics to make an issue of this now, but if Romney should defy all odds and somehow win, you can bet that he would be "consulting" with the brethren in Salt Lake City on a regular basis.

  •  Doesn't matter what we think (6+ / 0-)

    My fundie cousins in NC announced they are voting for Obama because they cannot vote for the cultist Romney and they ALWAYS vote.

    I actually tried to persuade them to use different criteria for making an essentially wise decision but when they started in on Planet Kolob ... hell, I just let it go.

    Am I right, or am I right? - The Singing Detective

    by Clem Yeobright on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:21:35 PM PDT

    •  I Agree (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      coigue, Clem Yeobright

      I have Evangelical relatives back in West Virginia and Pennsylvania.  Believe me, Romney's Mormonism is already an issue with them.  They were firmly 'Anybody But Mitt' during the Republican Primaries.  It won't surprise me a bit if they vote 3rd Party or leave the presidential portion of the ballot blank come November.

      The Obama Campaign doesn't need go there and neither do we.

  •  Other people's religion always looks odd. NT (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    GussieFN
  •  We are winning, don't screw things up (2+ / 0-)

    You're playing with dynamite.

    This could make people sorry for Romney and change the race.

    STOP !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  •  Must ask. Just what is this diarist fishing for? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    it really is that important
  •  I think all religion is a farce but that is just (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    coigue

    my opinion.

    Put I like the fact that my President has his beliefs and as far as I can tell, he has never forced them on the country or me. I wish more politicians would learn from his example.

    My apologies if my opening has offended anyone.

    Cheers

    "Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room." - President Merkin Muffley

    by Farkletoo on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:43:29 PM PDT

  •  Unnecessary really (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    coigue, merrywidow, milkbone

    In fact, I am surprised the Mormon's haven't disowned him at this point - he is soooo creepy.

  •  Kennedy's Speech (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    coigue, skrekk

    JFK said this in September of 1960:

    Whatever issue may come before me as president — on birth control, divorce, censorship, gambling or any other subject — I will make my decision in accordance with these views, in accordance with what my conscience tells me to be the national interest, and without regard to outside religious pressures or dictates. And no power or threat of punishment could cause me to decide otherwise.

     But if the time should ever come — and I do not concede any conflict to be even remotely possible — when my office would require me to either violate my conscience or violate the national interest, then I would resign the office; and I hope any conscientious public servant would do the same.

    Rick Santorum disagreed, and I think it would be fair to ask Romney the same thing, not that we would probably believe his answer.  
  •  Religion should be an issue when a person makes (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    coigue

    religion a centerpiece of their campaign or their life.

    Mitt Romney is a former church leader. You'd never know it, though, because he ran away from it - which pretty much takes it off the table, but I'd note how hard he ran away from it.

  •  Mitt's religion should only be an issue (0+ / 0-)

    as to the extent he does not follow its teachings.

    The same can be said of many right wingers who invoke their "religion."

    Guns don't kill people; physics kills people. At least when chemistry doesn't get there first.

    by Pale Jenova on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:54:12 PM PDT

  •  it's an issue for me... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Catesby

    ...but it would not be wise for the president nor the Democratic Party to start casting aspersions on religions, no matter how ludicrous they may seen (they are all ludicrous to me).

  •  Of course it is a legitimate topic of (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    merrywidow

    discussion.  The Mormon church has interfered in politics before, he is know as an important member of the church, and I want to know how much of the church teachings would come into his policies as President.

    And, let's be honest, the right has been bringing Obama's religion, and the religion they have accused him of being, from day one.

    It's not out of bounds.

  •  It's not his beliefs; it's his being a Bishop (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    coigue, merrywidow, milkbone, blue91

    (or the equivalent) in a religious group that

    (1) appears to have an authoritative, top-down, international, fiscally-powerful, patriarchal structure;

    (2) is vigorously recruiting new members internationally; and

    (3) holds itself as "chosen" (and, as a corollary, receiving Divine favoritism or guidance).

    I've posted a similar comment before, but it seems relevant here.  And I've pointed out that LDS is not the only religous group to which all three characteristics apply. But we've never considered electing a Chief Executive from among the hierarchy of such a religious group.

    The equivalent to Romney's position in the LDS is not Joe Biden or JFK, however strong their Roman Catholic beliefs might or might not be. The equivalent would be nominating a Roman Catholic Bishop or Cardinal--someone who operates in a clerical chain of command whose orders might directly conflict with the requirements of civil law.

    •  Good points. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      UnionMade, coigue, blue91

      Mitt was a bishop, and he definitely is in the inner circles of LDS power in Salt Lake City. He is not just your average guy who goes to church on Sunday.

      I am religious and a clergywoman. I could never serve in a political office (not that I want to anyway!) without taking my faith into account. It would be foolish for anybody to think that I could, or would.

    •  Good points. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      blue91, UnionMade

      I am religious and a clergywoman. I am not the average goes-to-church-once-a-week believer, and neither is Mitt, having served as a bishop and enjoyed a prominent place among the LDS elite in Salt Lake City.

      I, however, am an Episcopalian, so while I serve a hierarchical church, we do not proselytize aggressively, we do not hold ourselves as chosen, and we do not believe that we have been singled out by God to bring true religion to the earth. Nor do we advocate discrimination against women or gay people.

      I could serve in public office without consulting my church about the positions I would take. (Not that I have any interest in so doing....) Mitt cannot. He is always accountable to the current President and other authorities.

      My former-LDS friends say Mitt is driven by his religion to be the President of the USA because somebody prophesied that he would be, and that he would use that position to make the Mormon Church the religion of the land.

      Now there's a scary thought.

  •  Well... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Gator Keyfitz

    If it's an issue for you, then by all means consider it when voting. Nothing is stopping you. But should it be an issue for Democrats and Obama? Absolutely not. We don't need to stoop to that level.

    Also, one of my good friends is a practicing Mormon. She believes in the separation of church and state and supports marriage equality. Harry Reid is also a practicing Mormon who believes in the separation of church and state. Yes, the  beliefs of the Mormon Church on many issues are troubling, but so are those of the Catholic Church, among other churches.

    Homosexuality is found in over 450 species. Homophobia is found in only one. Which one seems unnatural now?

    by Chrislove on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 06:59:26 PM PDT

    •  The only Mormon I know (0+ / 0-)

      Is my gay married neighbor.

      He would definitely look at Mitt's religious beliefs.

      The columnist who I cite is also Mormon and thinks it's relevant. That is why I posted here.

      •  Well I'm saying, (0+ / 0-)

        if you think it's relevant, then consider it. The "no religious test" clause does not mean you can't personally consider religion when voting. But is it smart campaign strategy for the Obama campaign? No...not at all...

        I guess I'm confused as to your point. Do you think Obama should run ads on Romney's Mormonism?

        Homosexuality is found in over 450 species. Homophobia is found in only one. Which one seems unnatural now?

        by Chrislove on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 07:08:48 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Oh God no. (0+ / 0-)

          The columnist is saying that the Mormon religion is a valid concern because there is no separation between church and state.

          My personal views are that I would like to know how he makes decisions....will his leadership be about what is best for America or what his church says.

          I would want to know that about any leader.

          Should Obama make an issue of it...no. Would he if he thought it was a good idea? I bet he would.

  •  Seems like a bad idea. (0+ / 0-)

    Mitt Romney has so  many other problems that trying to hit him on religion, even if it would color his behavior in office, would seem likely to only help him by giving him the mantle of martyrdom.  Better to focus on the problems he has that don't cast him as sympathetic in any way.

  •  He should talk about how his (0+ / 0-)

    religion specifically influences his decision making and THAT should be fair game, not Mormonism in general... whatever I may actually think about it... as I have known some pretty liberal Mormons (and Christians and Jews and Muslims and atheists and...) The religion (or lack of) per se does not make someone an asshole, it just justifies it in their eyes when they are.

  •  According to the many religious (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cany

    people on this site, their religious beliefs are central to their being.

    So, as a voter, I think we should examine the beliefs of those we are voting for.

    Either their beliefs are important, or they are not.

  •  The constitution says there is no religious test (0+ / 0-)

    for any civil office in the United States.  That's it.  Period.  For me, this is the end of the discussion.

    Republicans are like alligators. All mouth and no ears.

    by Ohiodem1 on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 09:02:37 PM PDT

  •  If I hear Romney utter one syllable about (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    milkbone

    ...Reverend Wright, Bill Ayers, or the legitimacy of Obama's Birth Certificate, then YES, it's time to start talking about Planet Kolob.  

    "Americans are 'on our knees in front of China for credit,' DeMint told the mostly conservative attendees feasting on fried rice and fortune cookies at Tony Chang's restaurant in the Chinatown section of D.C."

    by littlenomad on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 09:31:50 PM PDT

  •  It is entirely possible that Mitt's (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    milkbone

    patriarchal blessing is involved with his running for the presidency.

    We won't ever know that, unless he states it--which he would NEVER do--but it is a possibility.

    As far as his religion being game, you bet it is. He will base decisions on what he believes and without understanding thoroughly what he believes, those unfamiliar with the church really don't know what limitations are involved.

    The WOW in the LDS belief is EXTREMELY important. Extended, the church does not "allow" tattoos, advises against more than one set of very conservative earrings, dress length (modesty) etc. I pretty much guarantee that you won't see a LDS Missionary with a pink Mohawk, a nose stud and a frog tattoo... or ANY one of these things.

    If you think, for instance, civil rights would come before church thought on ANY issue, you are DEAD WRONG. Until church thought allows gays, for instance, to marry, you would NEVER have a Mitt willing to support those equal rights. Mitt could not have possibly supported a black in the Priesthood, for instance, prior to 1978. As a Bishop and Stake President, he DID administer the prejudice of the church on a regular basis.

    So yes, it DOES f'n matter.  

    202-224-3121 to Congress in D.C. USE it! You can tell how big a person is by what it takes to discourage them. "We're not perfect, but they're nuts."--Barney Frank 01/02/2012

    by cany on Wed Sep 19, 2012 at 10:03:20 PM PDT

  •  The Constitution says.... (0+ / 0-)

    ... there is NO religious test to hold office.

    The First Amendment gives us freedom OF religion and freedom FROM religion in that one brief phrase.

    That used to be good enough for everyone.  People used to have the good sense not to mix religion and politics.  I'm old enough to remember a time when that was so.  I'm also old enough to remember when the phrase 'under god' was inserted into the Pledge of Allegiance in 1954.  I was in third grade that fall and we had to learn to insert those two words in it, and it always sounded alien to my ears.  It still does, so I don't say 'under god' if I'm in public and have to say the pledge.

    NOW, within the last 30-40 years the fanatic reichwingnut branch of Xtianity has taken over most of the Republican't party..., and religion HAS become an issue for two reasons:

    1- The Repuke legislators in a lot of states within the last year alone have stepped up their drive to eliminate bunches of civil rights and gay rights and women's rights (most especially reproductive rights and access to birth control and abortion) - and worse!  Many legislatures have passed those restrictive laws taking us backward!  [What's next?  Taking the vote away from women again?]

    2- Dumbya signed an executive order to create the office of faith-based initiatives to be run out of the White House.  This is totally unconstitutional since it gives these "religious advisers" a foot in the door to introduce a government-mandated religion AND (most especially) take women's reproductive rights away again.  Those who don't know how murderously dangerous it is to have a government mandate religious belief have never studied history.  Worse..., Obama retained that office!  The constitutional scholar should have known better!  Three days after Obama voted for the unconstitutional FISA fiasco '08, he announced that if he was elected president he would keep the office of faith-based initiatives, and expand it and increase funding for it.  That's pandering to the fanatic religious reichwingnuts!  Obama SHOULD have, instead, issued a countermanding executive order to disband that horrid and unconstitutional office!

    If the fanatical religious reichwingnuts had not moved to pass laws according to THEIR religious belief (no taking anyone else's beliefs or non-belief into consideration), and had obeyed the separation of church and state and had not blindly and loudly insisted on making religion in politics and government and laws an issue, then religion would not be an issue and we would be following the constitutional mandates.

    BUT..., fanatic religious reichwingnuts who insist on keeping themselves uneducated and refuse to study history made religion an issue (knowledge would make them "educated elites!"), so the religious nut jobs must be fought on all sides if we want to retain our separation of church and state, and keep civil rights for women, gays, minorities, and everyone in general.

    I am one who favors keeping a strict separation of church and state (per Jefferson, so history's disastrous and murderous past because of religion doesn't become a common every-day problem worse than it already is), and I totally favor keeping a secular government run by the rules of our secular constitution with the secular office holders.

    Throughout history, more people have been killed in everyday events and wars in the name of religion than for any other cause.  I think it's time we caught up with the civilized world, grew up and stopped fighting over some invisible sky god and what people are told what to think by psychopathic and manipulative fanatic "religious leaders" who are uneducated and don't know what the hell they're talking about.  There are real problems in the world..., and we don't need religious wars mucking up the process of solving real problems - or retaining all of our civil rights for ALL of our people.

    I'm tired of bending over backwards to try to be considerate of someone's beliefs when all it gets us reasonable people who only want to follow the constitution regarding religion is run over with a steam roller and we're told to lay down and take the cruelty and the repeal of civil and other rights because they have god on their side.  If religious fanatics can't respect other people's beliefs or non-beliefs by keeping their beliefs out of civil and criminal laws, then they don't need to be shown any consideration or respect either.

    I'm sick of attempts to steer this nation from principles evolved in The Age of Reason to hallucinations derived from illiterate herdsmen. ~ Crashing Vor

    by NonnyO on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 02:59:01 AM PDT

  •  Mitt is not just a Mormon (0+ / 0-)

    He is the equivalent of a Senior VP at LDS, Inc. He is in the upper echelons of their hierarchy. While I wouldn't want the Democratic Party to use this in ads, I think it's a perfectly reasonable person-to-person talking point.

    Hige sceal þe heardra, heorte þe cenre, mod sceal þe mare, þe ure mægen lytlað

    by milkbone on Thu Sep 20, 2012 at 04:28:31 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site