"Hi, I'm Mitt Romney, and I'm a Mormon."

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by NorCal Cat

Are you really that dense? Maybe he was trying to clarify and refute the misconceptions people have about Mormonism. Geez..don't be such a douche.

When did he say we shouldn't be tolerant to atheists? When did he say they are ruining the nation?

Try not to be such a freaking idiot, will ya? What are you, trying to give Seattle Ute a run for his money?

Why refute misconceptions if the brand doesn't matter at all? People could have any misconception they wanted to and, according to Mitt, it wouldn't matter because it would be just another brand of faith.

He is trying to have his cake and eat it too. He is clearly going after the evangelicals with the speech. As a result, he wants to tell them not to pay attention to his particular brand of faith (or any other faith) because it doesn't matter.

Then he realizes that it DOES matter to many people, so he tries to sell them on his faith.

He is wanting it both ways.

Are you trying to give Ecuaboy a run for his money?

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

Wrong. He was highlighting a point of common ground. That was the purpose of saying he believes in Jesus. As for the rest ... "These are not bases for criticism but rather a test of our tolerance. Religious tolerance would be a shallow principle indeed if it were reserved only for faiths with which we agree."



Don't be an idiot, Cali. There's no way Romney's speech could be construed to advocate or condone intolerance of atheists, except by braindead California lawyers who must find SOMETHING wrong with the speech.

What's next? Whining about how Romney hired illegals to work on his yard? Oh, wait.

A point of common ground, which would be that he is a Christian, in a speech directed to other Christians who don't believe Romney to be a Christian, causing them to support someone else, which he says they shouldn't do because all faiths are good- particularly Christianity (which Romney notes he is).


As for your atheists argument, show me a single statement in the entire speech that urges tolerance for non-religious Americans. Instead you will find: freedom requires religion, be tolerant of all religions, those who promote a secular America are wrong and are ruining the country, etc.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

A point of common ground, which would be that he is a Christian, in a speech directed to other Christians who don't believe Romney to be a Christian, causing them to support someone else, which he says they shouldn't do because all faiths are good- particularly Christianity (which Romney notes he is).

Is there a complete thought/sentence in there?

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

As for your atheists argument, show me a single statement in the entire speech that urges tolerance for non-religious Americans. Instead you will find: freedom requires religion, be tolerant of all religions, those who promote a secular America are wrong and are ruining the country, etc.

I think most normal people read his plea for religious tolerance to be of a general application to ALL people, regardless.

[creekster]

Originally Posted by Tex

I think most normal people read his plea for religious tolerance to be of a general application to ALL people, regardless.

Several of the non-denominational commentators on CNN INtl. yesterday morning immediately noted the lack of reference to or inclusion of atheiosts and a-religious viewpoints. THey still liked the pseech, but that omission was readily apparent to them.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by creekster

Several of the non-denominational commentators on CNN INtl. yesterday morning immediately noted the lack of reference to or inclusion of atheiosts and a-religious viewpoints. THey still liked the pseech, but that omission was readily apparent to them.

Yes I know. Even a few conservative commentators who were otherwise quite receptive to the speech made that notation.

I still think it is reaching. And begging your pardon, but Cali's not exactly known for his balanced approach.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by DJRoss

Would it be beyond logic to assume that Mitt like many others including me believe that Atheism is a religion and thus included in the protections of what our forefathers wrote?

The link below is a well written article on why Atheism is a religion...

Life and Doctrine at Atheism

Haven't read the blog, and don't intend to. The guy procaims his avocation is apologetics. Great. Someone who admits his avocation is lying. Apologetics is lying.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

Yes I know. Even a few conservative commentators who were otherwise quite receptive to the speech made that notation.

I still think it is reaching. And begging your pardon, but Cali's not exactly known for his balanced approach.

Again focusing on the messenger and not the message.

If you agree that conservative commentators made the same point I made, and if you agree that other commentators, like on CNN, made the same point I made, then are you going to say that each of those commentators as well are just "being an idiot?"

And what happened to your position that "There's no way Romney's speech could be construed to advocate or condone intolerance of atheists, except by braindead California lawyers who must find SOMETHING wrong with the speech." Are the conservative commentators also brain-dead California lawyers? That just doesn't make sense!

[creekster]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Are the . . .commentators also brain-dead California lawyers?

This would exaplin a lot of the commentary we see on TV.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Again focusing on the messenger and not the message.

If you agree that conservative commentators made the same point I made, and if you agree that other commentators, like on CNN, made the same point I made, then are you going to say that each of those commentators as well are just "being an idiot?"

Yes.

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

And what happened to your position that "There's no way Romney's speech could be construed to advocate or condone intolerance of atheists, except by braindead California lawyers who must find SOMETHING wrong with the speech." Are the conservative commentators also brain-dead California lawyers? That just doesn't make sense!

No, that was just a thinly-veiled swipe meant just for you.

[Insensitive PAP]

Cali, you are retarded and I throw poo in your general direction.