Does it bother any of you - cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board

YOhio · 11-16-2007, 07:29 PM

that Romney seems to distance himself from Mormonism?

If so, which of his statements are most offensive? Using a Protestant vocabulary to communicate his faith in Christ; denouncing polygamy; distancing himself from temple rituals; blurring the differences between Mormonism and mainstream Christianity; offering misleading statement about LDS second coming theology? This New Republic article discusses some LDS resentment of Romney.

http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.ht...9837a30815&p=1

As for me, I would love it if he stood up firmly for his faith, giving voters a take it or leave it option. If I were writing a speech for Romney similar to the Kennedy 1960 speech, I would frame it somewhat like this.

First, he outlines the religious struggles facing the early American settlers. They risked their lives, comfort and safety to come to a place where they could worship as they place. So important was the principle of religious freedom in this nation that it was included in the constitution, both guaranteeing the right to believe as we choose and ensuring that no religious test would be imposed upon the President of our nation.

After that intro, Romney declares that he is a Mormon. He loves his faith, believes in it's core doctrines and will not apologize for it. He understands that many people dislike his faith and may even distrust him for subscribing to it's principles. That's fine. He understands that is an important issue to them and he can do nothing about it. If getting their vote would require him to change his religion, he won't. At this point he will assert that he has spoken to the religion issue and will no longer address it. He has nothing else to say.

He then explains that he will speak to those who are open-minded about religious differences and are more concerned about the future of the US than their presidents' religion. He will then lay out his secular qualifications for president and make his pitch.

I don't think Romney will ever persuade those biased against Mormons. By engaging them he looks desperate and at times embarrassed to be LDS, making him look wishy-washy and a little slimy. I think people would respect the take it or leave it approach. I know I would.

JohnnyLingo · 11-16-2007, 07:35 PM

Glenn Beck interviewed Romney a couple nights ago. He said, "As soon as the media demands a speech from Orrin Hatch or Harry Reid on Mormonism, I'll demand one from you."

Why is Romney designated as the one who has to define Mormonism for American?

MikeWaters · 11-16-2007, 07:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnnyLingo

Glenn Beck interviewed Romney a couple nights ago. He said, "As soon as the media demands a speech from Orrin Hatch or Harry Reid on Mormonism, I'll demand one from you."

Why is Romney designated as the one who has to define Mormonism for American?

Because a different standard is applied to being President. What one might tolerate in a Mayor is what one tolerates in a President.

For example, many A&M fans would be ok with a Mormon being football coach, but they would be firmly against a Mormon being president.

JohnnyLingo · 11-16-2007, 07:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Because a different standard is applied to being President. What one might tolerate in a Mayor is what one tolerates in a President.

For example, many A&M fans would be ok with a Mormon being football coach, but they would be firmly against a Mormon being president.

So... Senate Majority leader is a much lower position than President?

YOhio · 11-16-2007, 08:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnnyLingo

So... Senate Majority leader is a much lower position than President?

Yes, in terms of visibility and constituency. The Senate majority leader only needs a majority of votes in his/her state and the majority support of his/her colleagues. I'd be surprised if 25% of Americans know who Harry Reid is, as opposed to about 80% who know who GWB is.

Goatnapper'96 · 11-16-2007, 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnnyLingo

So... Senate Majority leader is a much lower position than President?

Senate Majority leader is a senator and elected by his state. Romney is running for President and as such will respresent every state.

I doubt Harry Reid could get elected in Mississippi.

YOhio · 11-16-2007, 08:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goatnapper'96

I doubt Harry Reid could get elected in Mississippi.

Or Vermont for that matter.

BYU71 · 11-16-2007, 08:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnnyLingo

So... Senate Majority leader is a much lower position than President?

Well, would you say the girls volley ball coach at Weber State is a much lower position the head football coach of the New England Patriots. That is about the comparison in importance I would use.

jay santos · 11-16-2007, 07:44 PM

Romney's not the only Mormon that would describe his faith the way he does. If you're looking at a given doctrine and you feel like the LDS view is 98% in harmony with the Evangelical view, why not define it in terms the majority of the nation understands rather than focus on the small difference?

DJRoss · 11-16-2007, 08:00 PM

as to why it would not be a good idea for Romney to give the speech.

"So the question is: Does the recent manifestation of anti-Mormonism directed at Romney merit Romney's deliverance of some sort of religious address? In my opinion, the answer is still no. An a-religious media is incompetent in religious matters. Thus, Romney's message would be placed in the hands of an unreliable messenger. Nor would the media be satisfied that Romney has laid the issue to rest, continuously second-guessing the effect of the speech or speculating about the reason(s?) that Romney excluded certain doctrines and included others.

Schiffren acknowledges as much, understanding that behavior teaches us more than any speech can. The goal, then, should be to inquire about Romney's past in order to learn about the man and his beliefs. Indeed this is what Paul Weyrich describes in an Op/Ed in the Washington Times convinced him to endorse Romney:

The issue here is simply this: Is Mr. Romney competent to be president of this great country? Indeed he is. Mr. Romney has the experience, vision and values to be president. He has spent most of his career in the private sector turning around companies and the 2002 Winter Olympics. He has actually met payrolls. How many of the other candidates running can match that? And, he successfully ran a very liberal state for four years by governing as a conservative.

And while I very much disagree with the theology of the Mormon Church, its principles have given him the ethical standards needed for an American president. Can anyone point to scandals connected with the governor?"

11-16-2007, 07:29 PM	#1
YOhio AKA SeattleNewt Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 7,055	Does it bother any of you that Romney seems to distance himself from Mormonism? If so, which of his statements are most offensive? Using a Protestant vocabulary to communicate his faith in Christ; denouncing polygamy; distancing himself from temple rituals; blurring the differences between Mormonism and mainstream Christianity; offering misleading statement about LDS second coming theology? This New Republic article discusses some LDS resentment of Romney. http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.ht...9837a30815&p=1 As for me, I would love it if he stood up firmly for his faith, giving voters a take it or leave it option. If I were writing a speech for Romney similar to the Kennedy 1960 speech, I would frame it somewhat like this. First, he outlines the religious struggles facing the early American settlers. They risked their lives, comfort and safety to come to a place where they could worship as they place. So important was the principle of religious freedom in this nation that it was included in the constitution, both guaranteeing the right to believe as we choose and ensuring that no religious test would be imposed upon the President of our nation. After that intro, Romney declares that he is a Mormon. He loves his faith, believes in it's core doctrines and will not apologize for it. He understands that many people dislike his faith and may even distrust him for subscribing to it's principles. That's fine. He understands that is an important issue to them and he can do nothing about it. If getting their vote would require him to change his religion, he won't. At this point he will assert that he has spoken to the religion issue and will no longer address it. He has nothing else to say. He then explains that he will speak to those who are open-minded about religious differences and are more concerned about the future of the US than their presidents' religion. He will then lay out his secular qualifications for president and make his pitch. I don't think Romney will ever persuade those biased against Mormons. By engaging them he looks desperate and at times embarrassed to be LDS, making him look wishy-washy and a little slimy. I think people would respect the take it or leave it approach. I know I would.

11-16-2007, 08:00 PM	#10
DJRoss Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 340	Here is a quote on mymanmitt which is quoting other sources. Excellent reasoning... as to why it would not be a good idea for Romney to give the speech. "So the question is: Does the recent manifestation of anti-Mormonism directed at Romney merit Romney's deliverance of some sort of religious address? In my opinion, the answer is still no. An a-religious media is incompetent in religious matters. Thus, Romney's message would be placed in the hands of an unreliable messenger. Nor would the media be satisfied that Romney has laid the issue to rest, continuously second-guessing the effect of the speech or speculating about the reason(s?) that Romney excluded certain doctrines and included others. Schiffren acknowledges as much, understanding that behavior teaches us more than any speech can. The goal, then, should be to inquire about Romney's past in order to learn about the man and his beliefs. Indeed this is what Paul Weyrich describes in an Op/Ed in the Washington Times convinced him to endorse Romney: The issue here is simply this: Is Mr. Romney competent to be president of this great country? Indeed he is. Mr. Romney has the experience, vision and values to be president. He has spent most of his career in the private sector turning around companies and the 2002 Winter Olympics. He has actually met payrolls. How many of the other candidates running can match that? And, he successfully ran a very liberal state for four years by governing as a conservative. And while I very much disagree with the theology of the Mormon Church, its principles have given him the ethical standards needed for an American president. Can anyone point to scandals connected with the governor?" __________________ Click on image for my card and blog

11-16-2007, 07:35 PM	#2
JohnnyLingo Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 2,175	Glenn Beck interviewed Romney a couple nights ago. He said, "As soon as the media demands a speech from Orrin Hatch or Harry Reid on Mormonism, I'll demand one from you." Why is Romney designated as the one who has to define Mormonism for American?

11-16-2007, 07:44 PM	#9
jay santos Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 6,177	Romney's not the only Mormon that would describe his faith the way he does. If you're looking at a given doctrine and you feel like the LDS view is 98% in harmony with the Evangelical view, why not define it in terms the majority of the nation understands rather than focus on the small difference?