As usual, I found Hitchens highly informative and entertaining. However, I thought he did not adequately develop what is the most important point. But I don't have time to carefully proofread this, or think it through. I offer it on a "for what it's worth" basis.
I would love to have him dig into the social psychological and cognitive bias riven ground around Mitt Romney's presidential bid. For that matter, if anyone who reads this has access to other people who have the kind of podium to which Hitchens has access, I invite you to send this to them for their consideration. There are, no doubt, others who can say what I'm trying to say better than I can, and who will be broadly listened to. Because I appreciate it when other people give me warning with regard to their biases, before saying anything else I should state mine.
Until my mids, I was a fully active, temple recommend carrying, Mormon. I served as a Mormon Bishop for the full five-year term, was in numerous other Mormon leadership capacities, and a short time before having my name removed from the Mormon membership record book, was the "Stake Mission President" the person responsible for finding converts to Mormonism in the Mormon community where I live. I am also a practicing tax attorney, have an intellectual bent, and read widely.
This latter set of traits created a slow-motion collision that occurred over the course of three decades between the two worlds in which I lived - the Mormon and the secular. I continue to have the deepest respect for most of my Mormon friends and family members, and believe that there are many good things about what Mormons believe and the way they live. I also recognize many profoundly dysfunctionaltraits that the Mormon belief system and community tend to inculcate.
Some of those are relevant to the potential US presidency of Mitt Romney. The short version of my views on this topic is set out below. For the long story as to why I hold these views, see two sets of notes that I made for myself as I was attempting to rewire my own Mormon cranium. They can be found at http: To answer my question, yes, Mitt Romney's Mormon beliefs should be of concern to anyone who is considering making him the most powerful person on Earth. This is in spite of the fact that Mitt is in most ways an admirable human being.
First of all, he has the single most important requirement for US presidential office -- a full head of hair. And not just any full head of hair. And as Mitt pointed out, he is the only Republican candidate for the US presidency to have only been married to and likely sexually intimate with only one woman, and this, ironically, in spite of Mormonism's polygamist roots. Mitt inherited a lot of money, and then made much more on his own. His contribution to salvaging the scandal plagued Salt Lake Olympics was immense. He has done a reasonable job as the-against-the-odds Republican Governor of liberal Massachusetts, courtesy in no small part to a remarkable ability to flip-flop his politics in order to satisfy the crowd to which he happens to be playing.
This chamaleonness is, by the way, a trait that one should expect in Mormons. They have traits also found in Asia in that regard, and due to the same strong group oriented social forces in which they are raised. In short, Mitt Romney has a proven track record as a good leader, and a capable politician. I don't know what that means, but I've always found it funny and it is apropos what I'm about to say about Mormons in general, and Mitt Romney in particular. So here's the rub.
Mitt Romney is a magical thinker. Some of the other presidential candidates are as well. So, what I have to say about Mitt applies to them too. There are degrees of magical thinking. Each candidate should be carefully questioned in this regard. In times of stress and when making decisions related to ambiguous phenomena, a tendency toward magical thinking will become more influential because in those situations, we tend to fall back upon our instincts. It is there that we find magical thinking if we are going to find it. And arguably, the president of the United States most important function is to act wisely in times of crisis and with regard to ambiguous phenomena.
What do I mean when I say that Mitt Romney is a magical thinker? Our reasoning proceeds from the most basic assumptions that we make with regard to reality. Mitt Romney's basic assumptions are, to an extent, magical. Having attracted a following as a religious leader, Smith exercised the typical alpha male prerogative and started to have sex with many of the females in his group, many of whom were young teenagers or married to other men.
When caught, he said God told him to do this and that other men should also do so, as long as God through Smith commanded them. This gave Smith control over much of the sexual activity in his community, which is a great way of keeping people in line. This is only the beginning of an amazing litany of bizarre facts Mitt Romney believes to be accurate, and that form the foundation for his belief in the authenticity and hence reliability of current Mormon authority.
And we have not mentioned the basic Christian beliefs which to non-Christians are as justifiably bizarre in some cases as Mormon beliefs are to non-Mormons. In many ways, Mitt Romney is merely if that is the right word typical of many extremely intelligent people Mormon and other I have met who will look you straight in the eye and tell you that the Earth is not much more than 6, years old. Some of these people have Ph. I've met many other similar people who accept that biological evolution occurred, but not with regard to human beings.
Other similarly intelligent people believe that aliens really do interact on a regular basis with human beings. Magical thinking, of course, occurs for the most part at the subconscious level, and is generally speaking only recognizable from outside the social group within which it occurs. For example, many hard-core evangelical Christians believe that their conclusions with regard to the age of the Earth are based in science. That is, science that includes assumptions such as that God placed appropriately aged dinosaur bones in the Earth in order to test our religious faith.
This, of course, is not science. It is magical thinking. But try to persuade a young recreationists of that. The same sort of analysis holds with regard to Jehovah's Witnesses and their beliefs with regard to blood transfusions. One of their basic assumptions, based on the Bible, is that our spirits are inextricably tied up with our blood.
Hence, a blood transfusion connotes a type of spiritual death. This kind of assumption is not provable, but neither is it disprovable. Religious beliefs tend to be like this. If they were disprovable to a high degree of probability they would eventually fade from consciousness and this would threaten the foundation of the religious group. Accordingly, over time the religious beliefs that persist tend not to be disprovable.
That is why, for the most part, the Christian religion no longer relies upon the idea that the Earth is at the center of the universe. The idea that the Earth is only 6, years old, more or less, persists that within a very small group. That idea is dying as a result of disproof. Ideas with regard to the nature of the human spirit and its connection to blood, however, cannot be disproven. Hence, this type of idea will probably persist.
There is a way to predict where magical thinking will interfere with our rational processes. Have a look at the "belief maps" founded pages 18 through 25 of http: There I attempt to illustrate the way in which scientific knowledge conflicts with various belief systems. Well-educated young earth creationists, for example, are forced into magical thinking mode only where the most important parts of their belief system conflict with science.
The same applies for the Jehovah's Witnesses, the alien abductionists, and every other odd religious or ideological group you can think of. One of the patterns that comes into focus as a result of this analysis is the powerful correlation between group based belief systems, and the magical thinking dysfunction. This probably has to do with our small group evolutionary history.
Until recently, status within the herd was the single best predictor of survival and reproductive opportunity. Accordingly, our instincts push us toward conformity with the strongest forces we perceive within our most important social group. These instincts are so strong that they suppress to a large degree the perception of evidence that would push us toward the fringes of, or out of, that social group.
They even more ferociously suppress information that threatens the existence of that social group. We are all subject to these perception foibles. One of the ideas that I think is most helpful in that regard is "bounded rationality". This is being applied to help us better understand many aspects of social psychology, and economics. The idea, in a nutshell, is that we are not rational in the ordinary sense. However, once our circumstances are understood, our behavior generally speaking makes sense within those circumstances.
For example, if I am a Mormon and I believe that what happens after death is much more important than what happens during this life, and I must obey certain rules in order to achieve crucially important rewards and avoid terrible punishment after death, then it makes sense that I would spend a great deal of time, money and energy doing things that appear to be irrational to people who do not share my beliefs. Precisely the same explanation applies for suicide bombers, who in some cases believe they are earning fabulous afterlife awards for themselves and their families, while in others they are driven by the same psychology that causes soldiers to charge out of the trenches into the face of virtually certain death.
So, what does this have to do with Mitt Romney and Mormonism? Well, as I indicated above, it is helpful to delineate the areas within which each belief system that conflict with what most of us would consider to be rational thought processes. And there is something odd, and particularly pernicious, about Mormonism in that regard. This can perhaps best be expressed by way of something that was told to me as a joke. It's not a very good joke, but it is a fine play on words.
It goes like this. Catholics and Mormons disbelieve the opposite dogmas. That is, Catholic dogma says that the Pope is infallible, but no Catholic believes that. On the other hand, Mormon dogma holds that the Mormon prophet is fallible, and no Mormon beliefs that. You might have to read that more than once to get the penny to drop. So there we have it.
To be fair to Mitt, we don't have to worry about a phone call from Salt Lake City telling him to invade Iran. In fact, we shouldn't worry about a phone call from Salt Lake City telling him to do anything, unless it comes from one of his Mormon relatives. I would say that it is extremely improbable that the Mormon prophet would attempt to overtly influence Mitt Romney's political decisions. The slightest whiff of that would be political suicide for Mitt and Mormonism. Here is, rather, how this process is far more likely to work.
It would not be surprising for a Mormon prophet to begin to speak out strongly against gay marriage, or equal rights for women, or the importance of preventing changes in educational standards that would encourage more understanding within each religious group of how other religious groups work. The same could be said of many other controversies over issues where the Mormon belief system is at odds with secular values.
Without making a conscious connection between what the Mormon prophet is saying and what he believes, Mitt Romney's head is wired so that it is extremely probable that whatever the Mormon prophet happens to say will ring true to Mitt. And, to the extent he has influence, which as the American president he would have in spades that influence will tend to be exercised in the direction indicated by the Mormon prophet.
Much has been made of the comparison between the Mormon Romney and the Catholic Kennedys. This doesn't work for me. Catholicism is a very old religion. A lot of its youthful arrogance has been beaten out of it. There is a good analogy between the way in which the social organism that is an aunt or beehive matures, and the way in which religious groups mature. Younger hives and religious groups tend to be more erratic and aggressive. Mormonism is still young religious group, which explains to a large degree of continuing aggressive proselytizing and isolationist tendencies.
Hence, the probability of the erratic behavior from a Mormon prophet is far higher than with regard to a Pope, and as I have already indicated in any event, the influence of the Pope over well-educated Catholics is minute compared to the influence of the Mormon prophet over Mormons like Mitt Romney. I should also note that I have profound concern with regard to the influence of Christian dogma, and the way in which that could in and of itself influence Mitt Romney, not to mention the fact that a Mormon prophet could amplify some aspect of Christian dogma that would also have an effect on Mitt Romney's decision-making.
It is probable that one of the significant influences on US foreign policy during the Bush administration and another crucial junctures in history, has been the belief that there is something special about the land around Jerusalem and the connection of the Jewish people to that land, in the context of the second coming of Christ and the Apocalypse predicted by the New Testament.
I believe that this influence should be rooted out of US foreign policy to the extent possible. Mitt Romney is probably a step in the wrong direction in that regard. Human history points to the crucial importance of democratic principle as a restraint on power. The Mormon Church and other similar religious institutions are non-democratic.
Power is systematically abused within those organizations, though generally speaking with the best of intent. In order to preserve that power, this type of religious institution tends to resist government involvement of most types. That is, the smaller the government influence, the larger the playing field for the religious institution and its undemocratically elected leadership. The greater that scope, the more opportunity the religious institution has two monopolize the time, money and other resources on its members.
The Mormon prophet and other leaders of the Mormon Church are products of the dysfunctional system I just described. As a group, they are very old, white males. No major policy decision can occur without unanimity within the group. This ensures the decision-making precedents developed long ago in different times are the default mechanism. The group appoints its own successors, thus cementing into place a glacial rate of change. And some of them have demonstrated the ability to be outspoken in their ignorance The idea that the pronouncements of men of this type, no matter how well intended, may have a significant influence on the President of the United States should be bone chilling.
The following is a point examination of Mormon presidential candidate Mitt Romney's religious beliefs--beliefs of the LDS Church to which, in his recent speech outlining his faith, Romney openly declared his personal commitment. It is, of course, up to individual voters to decide whether Romney is the kind of candidate they would like to see occupying the White House. In the meantime, the U.
Constituion, in Article 6, expressly prohibits any mandated religious test for the holding of public office. That constitutional prohibition against government-established religious testing of candidates for public office does not mean, however, that American voters are not free to assess for themselves a given candidate's religious beliefs and determine whether those beliefs would adversely affect the candidate who firmly adheres to them in the conduct of the affairs of state.
The analysis below of Romney's religious views is provided under the website title, "What Mitt Romney Believes: Exploring the religious beliefs of Mitt Romney and the Mormon Church," provided with the site's stated intent of "[h]elping Americans understand his faith, and the implications of making him President": His name is Gordon B. He was born in in Salt Lake City, Utah. Mitt Romney believes this man speaks for God. Hinckley is considered a "prophet, seer and revelator" by Mormons.
Before becoming President, Hinckley was considered one of the twelve apostles. It might seem rather benign given some of the other things on our countdown, whether clearly out of the main stream, like becoming a God, or spiritual polygamy. Or just a little odd, like temple garments, seer stones, or the Garden of Eden being in Missouri. However, it has the greatest implications for our country if Mitt Romney becomes President.
Hinckley has dangerous views about women, race, sexual diversity, science and scholarship. He does not believe in the equality of all Americans. He does not believe in the separation of church and state. In future posts I'll expose these beliefs. Mormons believe they can become Gods. They don't mean Jesus, who they regard as a completely different person. Rather, God once walked on a planet and became a God.
We can follow in his footsteps. I was also taught as a child, that as a God, my "seed" would continue. I would create planets and send my spirit children to live on them. Do you believe he should be President? They could be members, but could not participate fully. To understand the enormity of this discrimination, you need to understand the importance of the Priesthood in the Mormon belief system. Most males are ordained into the Priesthood at an early age around 12 and have an opportunity to progress through six levels of authority. Unlike many churches, where there are often a few professional clergy and perhaps a lay clergy serving a much larger congregation.
In Mormon churches nearly all the adult white men participate in the Priesthood. By excluding people based on their skin color, the church prohibited blacks from any meaningful leadership position and also from an institution that encompassed nearly all the white members. Black families could not be sealed for time and all eternity - another bed rock of the Mormon faith forbidden to them. The inability to hold the Priesthood created a lower class of membership in the church, which forbid blacks from participating in many of the sacred rites necessary for exaltation.
Other religious bodies have a history of racism. However, nearly all recognize that this dishonorable part of their histories was the result of a flawed understanding of God's will. In other words, although religious people wrongly discriminated in the past, God never did! Mormons continue to believe that God forbid the ordination of blacks into the Mormon Priesthood. God didn't want blacks in leadership positions. God didn't want blacks giving blessings or getting married for all eternity.
The gospel message of salvation is not carried affirmatively to them It is the Lord's doing, is based an his eternal laws of justice, and grows out of the lack of Spiritual valiance of those concerned in their first estate. Kimball, church prophet at the time, received a revelation reversing the policy. However, you won't find the church taking responsibility for its racist past. There has been no apology. No sincere attempt at reconciliation. How can there be? They believe that God was the bigot until , not them.
In fact they do read and use the Bible extensively. They view both the Old and New Testaments as important documents. However, they also believe that, "As the Bible was compiled, organized, translated, and transcribed, many errors entered the text" see the official LDS church web site. In this regard they have beliefs that are similar to most mainstream churches. Of course, this is not consistent with most evangelical and fundamentalist views of the Bible. Joseph Smith, who claimed to have translated the Book of Mormon from golden plates he found in New York state, said that the Book of Mormon was the most perfect book ever written.
And in the context of Mormon beliefs this makes very good sense. After all, he used divine seer stones, and had a direct connection to God while translating. It should be perfect. It claims to be a history of the Americas. One in which Israelites immigrated to South America, setting up a civilization based on ancient Biblical principles and beliefs. After being visited by Jesus after his resurrection, this society eventually decays and spreads north.
Unlike the Bible, which is often referenced by archaeologists in the Middle East, reputable scientists do not use the Book of Mormon. The genetic evidence does not support the claim now being de-emphasized by the church that American Indians are descendants of Middle Eastern peoples. Large portions of it are lifted from the King James Version of the Bible which didn't exist when the Book of Mormon was supposedly written.
It makes references to animals that did not co-exist with humans in the western hemisphere until after the arrival of Europeans in the s. The Mormon Church strains credibility when it claims that these are mostly typographical or transcription errors. You would think those would be fixed in the second or third printings. Yet, changes to the Book of Mormon continue to be made. It has special symbols woven into it at the breast and knee.
These symbols are believed to be derived and adapted from Free Mason rituals. They are removed only for bathing, some forms exercise, and sexual relations. Men and women are married sealed together for time and all eternity. However, if a woman dies, a man may marry again for time and all eternity. He will then have two perhaps more wives in the afterlife.
Women can't get married again unless they get a "temple divorce. It is very hard to get the church to admit this little secret. But it is discussed openly in LDS circles. Joseph Smith the founding Prophet of the LDS church claimed to have seen an alter somewhere in the woods of Missouri that was used by Adam. He called this Adam-ondi-Ahman, which means place where Adam dwelt. I find this remarkable. Is it any less extreme to believe that Adam lived in Missouri after leaving the Garden of Eden?
This isn't simply more Mormon folklore, this is a century and a half of belief, discussed widely in authoritative LDS published works, i. If you can't trust the leader of the Church, who can you trust? As described in Joseph Smith - History 1: He used these to receive revelation and translate languages. When translating, Joseph Smith would place the stones in a hat, place the hat over his face, and begin translating.
A piece of parchment would appear to him with an unknown character and the English translation of that character. Mormons baptize dead people.
- Cut-Off;
- Customers Also Bought Items By.
- Is Businessweek's Mormon cover art offensive? | Oliver Burkeman | Opinion | The Guardian.
- Similar authors to follow.
- EPUB Machine (Your EPUB Formatting Butler)!
Scholars from all major denominations dismiss any biblical foundation for baptizing dead people. In the Mesa AZ temple, the baptismal font for the dead is located on the lower levels of the building. After silently dressing in all white, we were lead into a room with an elevated round font sitting on top of several oxen. The oxen were sculpted of ceramic or marble I can't quite remember. One at time, we stepped into the font and were dunked into the water roughly 10 times.
Between each immersion we heard the name of the dead person for which we were being baptized. Boys were baptized for dead males. Girls for dead females. This has lead to some consternation among non-Mormons, especially people of Jewish faith. You can read the relevant passages on line. You should also see facsimile number two which appears on the same site.
However, Elder Bruce R. McConkie, a well respected teacher and scholar in the church, made it perfectly clear in Mormon Doctrine p. Read them and judge for yourself whether you want someone who believes these things to become President of the United States. Instead, it betrays some prejudices of its own against secular people , and seems to provoke others to bigoted statements.
When Tom Jefferson tried out an earlier version of it in Virginia, some of the members of the Virginia assembly actually complained that freedom of religion would allow the practice of Islam in the US. Jefferson's response to that kind of bigotry was that other people believing in other religions did not pick his pocket or break his leg, so why should he care how they worshipped?
And that's all Romney had to say. But he did not want to say that. Romney said the opposite. He implied that is is actively bad for a democracy if people are unbelievers or if there is a strict separation of religion and state. Organized religion has many virtues, but pushing for political liberty is seldom among them. Religion is about controlling people. No religiously based state has ever provided genuine democratic governance. You want religion in politics, go to Iran.
Where to find Stephen Paul West online
He just wants his religion to share in that privilege that he wants to install. Ironically, the very religious pluralism of the United States, which he appears to praise, will stand in the way of his project. Tuesday, Dec 11, , at I'm quite surprised to see the intense focus being placed on religion in the current election cycle. It's quite disturbing and fascinating at the same to watch Mitt Romney stand up in front of a nation of million people and utter his belief that "Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Savior of mankind.
What Mitt did and is doing is the complete opposite of what JFK did when he ran for President 47 years ago when Kennedy professed his firm belief that religion and politics should remain separate "I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute" and that he intended to do everything in his power to enforce the separation and uphold a secular not religious form of government.
No religious organization, including his own Catholic Church, which JFK mentioned specifically 19 times in his address, would ever be permitted to influence his decisions as President of the U. Keep in mind that the definition of secular is the state of being separate from religion. Secularism is not synonomous with atheism contrary to popular belief. Secularism about real world matters like science, math, physics, biology, medicine, law, finance, accounting, history, etc. To witness the impact and results emanating from a religious form of government, or a theocracy, one only needs to take a look at Islamic governments, Saudi Arabia being the most strict.
One can argue that communism is a form of theocracy, where citizens are forced to practice atheism by severely limiting access to religion and withdrawing state support of religion no special incentives are granted to religious organizations, such as tax breaks.
Both communism and Islam seem to work fairly well. Saudi Arabia has a booming economy based on their significant presence in the oil industry. China is growing, thriving and threatening to displace the other world powers in manufacturing, science and engineering. The biggest drawback is the lack of many freedoms we have traditionally cherishe and protected: Declaring Jesus as their personal savior and the savior for mankind Declaring Agnostics, Atheists and Humanists non-religious believers as less favorable and almost persona non grata.
Perhaps they would argue that this group of non-believers may not only be disrepected, but may be excluded from the same rights enjoyed by religious believers, and especially Christians. Declaring their support for ridiculous ideas such as creationism, eliminating a women's right to control her body and make personal medical decisions, including abortion, restricting or eliminating sex education, etc.
Belittling science when inconvenient or when the scientific evidence flys in the face of the conventionally held religious dogmas. Support for launching pre-emptive wars and threatening the use of force even when the evidence doesn't support this. Support for stupid economic theories like supply-based economics and trickle down theory one of the worst disasters from the Reagan era and eliminating labor protections and tariffs that allow working people to earn a fair living and put food on the table, buy homes, cars and maybe have some time off for rest and relaxation with family and friends.
Disastrous polities like protection of private property and inheritance laws and favorable tax laws for the wealthy who have largely received wealth through inheritance or pure luck. Don't you agree that buying a stock like Google early on is sheer pure luck? So is winning the lottery. Promoting and supporting disastrous policies that destroy the environment: The list could go on, but these are a few I thought of. I hate to imagine our once great country, if the U. The middle class is taking a terrible beating today and will soon be eliminated if we continue going down this path. There will be 2 classes: The personal freedoms we've long taken for granted will continue to slip away, since the state-established theocracy will be threatened by any dissention and all informaition and communication will need to be tightly controlled.
I think is was the Mitt's warning of the dangers of secularism that troubled me the most. As he attempted to chip away at the wall between religion and government he mixed metaphors and poor examples, such as the failure of religion in Europe due to the establishment of official state religion: And though you will find many people of strong faith there, the churches themselves seem to be withering away.
To establish Christianity as the "official" US brand of religion? The next year will be interesting. But I don't have a good feeling for the direction we are heading. The consequences could be disastrous: Were they scratching their heads? Were they terrified at the potential disaster we are headed for? Mutating Mitt Wednesday, Dec 12, , at Mitt Romney is pathetic. While running for Massachusetts senator in , and then for governor in , Mitt Romney repeatedly announced his firm conviction that abortion had to be kept "safe and legal" in the United States, and vowed to do everything he could to ensure that it did http: Romney even went so far as to reveal that " he became committed to legalized abortion after a relative died during an illegal abortion, and that the abortion made him see 'that regardless of one's beliefs about choice, you would hope it would be safe and legal '.
YES "Do you support state funding of abortion services through Medicaid for low-income women? Emergency contraception is a high dose combination of oral contraceptives that if taken within 72 hours of unprotected sex, can safely prevent a pregnancy from occurring. Do you support efforts to increase access to emergency contraception?
And believe me, there is a lot more where this all came from The truth is that Mitt Romney, from to , was a boldly pro-choice governor for another little clip, see http: In short, throughout his campaign for Massachusetts governor and well into his term, Mitt Romney sounded exactly like Barbara Boxer on abortion. As his term came to a close, however, and Romney began to prepare for his run at the GOP presidential nomination, he suddenly sounded exactly like Jerry Falwell on abortion; and today, at any Romney speech, with the kind of unblinking smile you can see on the face of anyone without a moral core, you will hear him announce that he is "firmly pro-life".
And you may also hear the story about how he changed his mind. According to Romney, he changed his mind about abortion rights upon hearing that stem cell research, of which he had been an enthusiastic public supporter for years "I am in favor of stem cell research. I will work and fight for stem cell research" , required the termination of 14 day old embryos. But how could a guy who'd given speeches supporting stem cell research and promised to lobby Bush about it, not have known the most basic thing about it?
Even nuttier is the idea that using a clump of 14 day old stem cells for research moved Romney, whereas 35 years of dismembering and scorching to death tens of millions of fetuses, almost all of whom were well on their way to full viability and some already beyond it , and then tossing their remains into the trash , never moved him at all. I mean, if that is true, Romney's an awfully weird guy.
And if it's not true - well, what am I saying? Of course it's not true. What IS true is that if Romney had decided in to run for a second term as governor of Massachusetts instead of for the GOP nomination for president, he would still be "firmly pro-choice", and no one would have ever heard his ridiculous conversion story, since there wouldn't have been a "conversion" to begin with. Indeed, the only thing that Romney's career indicates he is truly "converted" to is saying or doing whatever it takes to satisfy his desire for more wealth, status, and power.
Not even his own religion's longstanding official position against abortion induced him to convert to being pro-life. No - it took his desire for more political power to do that. Even more embarrassing is that Romney is still flip-flopping on this issue. Specifically, on his website clip and in at least one interview I know of, he says that he believes that states, not courts, should have jurisdiction over abortion.
And he specifically objects to a "one size fits all" abortion law for the whole country. Yet just a few days ago during the CNN Republican debate, Romney announced that his preferred solution would NOT be to allow states to handle the issue, but rather, to have Congress make a single law prohibiting abortion except for in extreme cases!
Massachusetts Congressman Barney Frank sums up Romney this way: He is the most intellectually dishonest human being in the history of politics. We consider homosexual relations, or any relation outside of marriage. My dad is a bishop. I have plenty of gay friends, each of which I love and respect, but when societal views interfere with our religious freedoms and retainment of morals, I feel a responsibility to object.
Aubrey, the same constitution that prevents your religion from dictating how people outside your church regard marriage also protects your religion from being forced into doing anything it does not believe in. So long as Church and State remain separate, no Mormon bishop will ever be forced to conduct a same sex marriage. So long as we ALL have the freedom of religion and freedom FROM it , no government or special interest group will ever be able to force same sex marriages within your temples. Ironically, legalization of same-sex marriages actually does more to protect your religion, in my view.
Mormonism is a minority religion, after all. If other denominations got together and decided to impose their political might on minority religions that they view as a threat , Mormons would be screwed. Lost respect for Oprah is the one who uncovers frauds of people needs to read: I think, so many people are so in tune on the Mormons, that they forgot, we are all Humans, there are so many religions out there! Because of Romney running for a president!
Well U think all the Mormons are for him? I myself not for him, and You all forgot! Jesus is our Saviour! Pray n ask for forGiveness, stop being ignorant toward the Mormons, a lot of us are very down to earth, caring, loving, respectful, concern, helping, spiritually, prayerfully, kindness, people you will ever get to know, and knowing..
Or what religion you are! We are all equal in the eye of Our Heavenly Father!.. And Who ever does in their Lives! Is their own doing and their own Action.. People Stop pointing fingers to Whomever they want to Discredited! Should never be Afraid toward the Mormons.
I have been looking for a comment like this, everything else is so negative! I just feel like I have to add some things. And one is as against them as they are to Mormons.
Are You an Author?
There are good and bad people out there no matter their religion. I personly think that judging people on their religion is dumb and that you should judge them on their actions and not judge the religion off of those actions. You should be afraid if youre not a member. Although men do hold priesthood powers in Mormonism, a family cant be had without women, and the family is central to Mormonism. So next time you go bashing on a religion you should study and learn about that religion. You are on of the people that this article was written for. I am currently enrolled at the Univ of Utah and i can tell you that there are plenty of polygamist colonies still around out here and I know several students who come from that life.
Matt- Yes, it is true that the Church in had to be coerced strongly into giving up polygamy. They were terrified of what that would mean for their families. At the time, many members were okay with the thought of no future polygamous marriages, but what did it mean for the existing ones? It had become illegal for a man to be in the same room as his wife.
How would you like being told that you could never see your wife or children again? Would you jump for joy and sign the dotted line? Marriage and family are central tenets of the LDS faith. They loved their wives. They adored their children. They wanted to be a part of their lives.
And somehow you see that as a negative and something to tar all current Mormons with? I think that was a very kind, compassionate, and entirely understandable position for them. However, I think you would be severely hard pressed to find a modern Mormon that was interested in bringing the practice back to the Church. In fact, we are asked in an interview by our congregational leaders every other year if we support polygamous groups.
It is not a supported opinion. Apparently all of u are not aware of the real beliefs of LDS. Latter Day Saint men respect and love their spouses. Would never degrade them the way you are talking about. Whether it be in UT or any other state. You want to know the truth, contact the missionaries. They can set you straight and maybe you might even feel the spirit tell you that what you are hearing is correct. Without knowing history of the church, you could easily be persuaded by others that have no factual information based on rumor, and partial facts.
Just like small children that pick up profanity, it being negative and easy to say. I feel as adults we do the same thing on different topics disagree. We tell people that only they can decide whether they believe in the church or not, which is true! And if they decide not, No hard feelings! Surveys have shown that an atheist candidate for U.
Is there some reason why an individual with a different, yet equally unacceptable idea about a god, or many gods, should not be scrutinized for unproven mysteries they choose to accept as a personal truth? By all means, go to mormon. To learn what any organization teaches or represents, you have to go to the source — the organization itself. Anything else would only be heresay and biased, personal opinion. I certainly hope no one in America is shallow enough to base their vote for President of the U. Mormons are biased in favor of Mormonism, main-stream Protestants are biased in favor of main-stream Protestantism.
Atheists are biased in favor of Atheism. It would be foolish for anyone to presume they are devoid of bias. However, since biased sources of information are all we have to work with, it is best to proceed by simply taking that bias into account and trying to collect the primary-source information. Furthermore, all organizations have unsavory elements E. Church congregants who gossip behind your back, political fraud in the white house, mounting student debt for BU students, etc… , but those organizations are unlikely to tell you about the unsavory elements upfront because they want to present themselves positively.
Of course those students will be biased by heaps of student loans and a potentially daunting future, but that does not make their case illegitimate. I am a Mormon cultural or middle-way , and I recommend mormonthink. There are many different belief levels of Mormons. Obviously, most ex-mormons will have a negative bias, and most actively practicing Mormons will have a positive bias.
Many Mormon fans of Mormonthink. Please, do not try to represent a biased anti-Mormon site as somehow unbiased. They clearly are not. For example David likes to breath heavily and thrust himself up and down upon children. But what if David is a life guard performing CPR on a child who is not breathing after nealry drowning? Well, if you want a simple direct answer, it calls into question the intelligence and gullability of that individual.
You should absolutely consult ex-Catholics and ex-Baptists about those religions. Plenty of crazy BS from all of them. I think then you would be implying that Ken Dahl is crazy. Mormons are good at deflecting information they choose not to deal with. The truth is Mr. No one responding could argue that, so they choose to divert your attention to what he was associated with, hoping they could convince, the reader he was misinformed. So argue facts if you going to give Mr. Dahl a hard time you have no idea what it takes to be an ex-Mormon.
To reinforce what others have said: And where they are not accurate, well, those are just pernicious lies masquerading as accuracies. And all his comments are aimed at hurting the LDS church. There is only one standard to really judge the LDS church — go and visit one yourself! See the people, ask them questions, hear the range of answers, and be prepared to challenge yourself in your assumptions. You control the pace of the research, and if you do not like it or get uncomfortable, you can leave at anytime. But at least you will know much more than you ever will just by reading the opinion of others.
Same goes for the Book of Mormon. Those answers may come as thoughts, words, or feelings, but when they do, you will recognize them for what they are: The belief system of an individual, however solid or absurd, speaks volumes about their character and value system. Ken, all religions read like nonsense to unbelievers. Is it reasonable to believe that salvation depends on whether or not one consumes certain animals or combines certain food products?
Christianity absolutely claims to be the only truth, to the exclusion of other religions. I was going to say something similar and then read your thoughtful response. Ken, I think you forget…we are 14 million strong and growing fast. Mormons will not be stopped by someone with small, demeaning, innaccurate, ugly thoughts like yours. You really sound like you have personal problems and hate yourself. I hope you find more worthwhile things to do in your life.
You think your snide remarks will change any of that? Even states have ordered our extermination…Hey! So Ken…in the end. Save yourself some study time by doing your homework instead of writing ignorant things on here. Do you really think at this point in time that a Hindu, Jew, Buddhist, Muslim, atheist, or anyone of any faith other than Christianity could be elected president of the US regardless of their qualifications?
This seems obviously hypocritical to me when these same churches not just LDS campaign for the banning of gay marriage, for example. I have the same problem with the Catholic Church or any church that spreads hate. The reason why my church got so involved is because prop 8 was a moral issue. We push for anything that betters the community morally. But what we do not get involved in is political parties.
The reason why we are against gay marriage and gay acts in general is because we believe that marriage is a very sacred covenant towards god and the between the spouses. And should only be done between a man and a woman. We also believe in a pre-mortal life and when were spirits we had a gender already with us. Thus a man acting like woman or woman acting like man is wrong and is a mockery to god.
I cannot over state how sacred marriage is to our religion. We do not hate gays we hate the sin not the person. For more information try this website. This would be true if the organization itself wanted to be identified as unique entity. Yes they are like a Chameleon changing colors based upon who they are talking to. If The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints please note the real name of the Mormon Church were to present itself as Christian, and not actually be Christian, how many converts do you think would stay in the Church, after finding out they were duped into thinking the Church is Christian?
I am a convert of many years, and I can guarantee any and all that this church is a Christian Church. If it were not, I simply would not be a member. Yes, you should absolutely talk to ex-catholics and ex-baptists. Your distorted representation of the faith I believe appears designed to discount the merits of the individual without considering their actual position on a given issue. You should know better. On this basis, honest people from any political persuasion should be anxious to see a Mormon candidate from their party elected.
Mormons are absolutely Christians. A Christian, by definition, is someone who believes in the gospel of Jesus Christ, believes that Christ is their Savior and the Redeemer of mankind. They stand with conviction to declare the Jesus is the Christ and give a lot of attention to spreading His gospel throughout the world. Furthermore, they provide humanitarian efforts throughout the world that are unparalleled by other large service organizations and non-profits. Service is a central concept of the Mormon belief system that stems from Christs teachings.
The church does nothing to hurt humanity or individuals. In other words, I am a Mormon. I have learned many things about Jesus Christ while attending meetings there, and one day after partaking the emblems of the Sacrament I wrote the following. I hope you like it, and that you and all others who read this will realize that Mormons are indeed Christians. Sacred are the things of Christ; so great the price he paid. Reverently I ponder how his life he freely gave.
I promise to remember him; my Savior ever more. Sacred are the things of Christ; I eat the broken bread. I recall his body bruised; to the cross how he was led. I promise to forsake my sins; I plead forgiveness now. I feel my burdens lift from me; I make this holy vow. Sacred are the things of Christ; I take and drink the cup. In Gethsemane he bled; On the cross they raised him up.
He is my Covenant Father now; Oh, praise his saving grace. Justin, the Bible calls Jesus the Son of God. The Bible also says that all humans are children of God, and therefore heirs and jonit heirs with Christ. That makes Jesus and all humans brothers and sisters, unless you want to add or take away from the words of the Bible. Furthermore, many of the early Christian fathers wrote that God became man to teach man how to become god. You are right that most western Christian sects do not believe these things. I understand that as LDS you want to take pieces of scripture and twist them to fit Josephs theology.
This is not Christian theology at all and is not a correct understanding of the passage if you study it. To be part of this family you have to be in Christ, associated and identified with even His sufferings that you may share in His glory. We are joint heirs if we are born again. We will inherit the kingdom of heaven. I do not respond to belittle you. In fact I have a great amount of love for you and I want you to find freedom in a world without legalism. Don take my word for it. I will name a few of your own.
Romney’s “Mormon” Draft Deferment Not Legal | Archives | Veterans Today
You also mention that many of the early christian fathers wrote that god became a man to teach… You are correct it was called Arianism and it was abolished and swept off the face off the earth because it was a heresy. Last, you are telling me that god almighty could not preserve the words of his prophets and Jesus so he had to have a court documented occult treasure hunter lead a restoration that still has only 10 million members 4 million active.
Please study and research your faith and its history. The Joseph Smith quote about God once being like us and we having the potential to become like him is being misused. God is perfected in his attributes and character. Jesus asks his disciples to be perfect like God is. Thus through Grace, we too will become perfect. Ok Ken, so you listed a bunch of weird things Mormons believe. Now put any one of those against this one: He hates when I do that stuff! Compare these standard mainstream Christian beliefs with any of the alleged Mormon beliefs on the list provided by Ken Dahl.
Romney and Mormons want to be considered Christian to gain the right wing Christian vote. They cannot do that if they are show for what they really are which is no different than the branch dividiens. Justin, you have missed the entire point. You are not a Christian. You do not live the Christian gospel. You repeat something you heard your two-bit pastor say. Thomas you may be right. I may not be a christian in your eyes. I am a Jesus follower and Jesus called a viper a viper. I also might add that we are commanded to defend the faith.
I have no anger with you or any other but will defend the faith. I am not sure what a two-bit pastor is, but please study the Bible and research any faith that takes away from the bible and you will see that they just dont hold any weight. The apostle Paul understood the importance of apologetics in his ministry to the Gentiles. Paul was not only ready to preach the gospel, but he was ready to defend the gospel as well Phil. In this context, Paul is in effect saying that he is ready to stand up for the true gospel amid some who were preaching Christ with selfish, insincere motives.
Like Paul, it is incumbent on us as Christians to be ready, willing, and able to defend the true gospel of Christ albeit many have embraced a distorted gospel of Christ that cannot save Gal. If you believe in Buddha, you are a Buddhist. If you believe in Vishnu, you are a Hindu. If you believe in the prophet Mohammed, you are a Muslim. If you believe in Jesus Christ, you are a Christian. Harry Reed is a Mormon. Should he be allowed to continue as Senate President? Does his religion allow him to think for himself. He is a Mormon. Nice red herring to keep bringing up…..
- Why Mormonism's moment has come.
- Stephen Paul West.
- Stephen Colbert jests about 'weird' Mormons; Bill Maher's Mormon opinion 'absurd'?
What is at mormon. But what you are talking about is extremely sacred and you are ruining how sacred such things are but I will address them. Garden of Eden in Independence, Missouri Independence, Missouri is probably the least understood topics in my church. Prophets have even said that it is one of the least understood topics. Right here are some very deep stuff that most members do not understand.
Temple complex at Independence Missouri: All god has done he has just specified place. Adam Ondi Ahmin is place that is kept ready at all times the missionaries that maintain this huge amounts of acreage report directly to the prophet. Here is the short answer. Long answer Your sealed to your first wife when she dies and you fall in love and get remarried and you die. According to what you believe to be right the man would have to choose between to do. If that happened to me I would have a hard time choosing because I would probably love them both.
But we do not pratice it on the earth today. No we do not believe that either. I do not know why blacks did not get the priesthood and other prophets before blacks got the priesthood did not understand either. It is just like in the bible with Jews being taught first then the gentiles. We do not know why the gentiles did not get the gospel only that they could not get the gospel. In fact Mormons when we were getting kicked out one of the main reason why we kicked out of Missouri was because we would unbalance the vote and support and abolitionist.
We respect Native Americans to one of the earliest missions of the church was mission to the Native Americans and to this day they are still able to receive the priesthood as long as they live worthy for it. Joseph Smith was 16 when he received the first vision and Book of Mormon: I mean what boy would lie about what at the time sounded absurd. I mean if he wanted more followers he could have told them that the trinity showed up. Why would a man die for a lie? Why would a man lead his pepole through some of the most horrible trials for a lie?
Why would a man suffer such adversity for a lie? A liar would realize it is not worth the trouble and try to worm himself out of the situation. But Joseph Smith stood tall and took on the adversities he was given. One time some men burst into his room took him from his wife and children. Left the door open and killed one of his babies through exposure.
He had hot tar painted all over him and feathers on him to further humiliate him. They also attempted to poison him when they tried to stuff it in his mouth he clenched his teeth and they broke the vial but no poison made it into his system. When he walked in his house his wife tried to remove the tar. But tar when it cools does not easily come off so while it came off it took painful chunks of flesh off of him. When morning came he walked outside and preached of Jesus recognizing the men who did this act to him in the audience.
Is Businessweek's Mormon cover art offensive?
A liar would not do that. A liar would not have walked out and preached knowing he and his family would suffer. How could a man who barely knew how to form a sentence let alone a book produce a book that has way more writing styles than any book ever written? How could a man who could only write his name write a book that added more words to the English language than Shakespeare. How could a man who had the education of a 5th grader write a dual history of two distinct cultures that the world did not even know about.
I mean if it is fake it is some pretty darn elaborate fiction way beyond the capacity of a 5th grader. How could a man who was alive at the time that medical science was so primitive that no one knew about germs and if you washed your hands after every patient you would be able to double their chances of living. Reveal a lifestyle which is now the suggested lifestyle by modern science. This man was not delusional or liar because a liar would have gave in a long time ago.
All that we know is in the pearl of great price. It is like the Quantum physics and very advanced science except this is religous quantum physics. The Masonic handshake is a very sacred part of the Endowment. The Endowment is to give pepole knowledge of the past i. The present Gods plan for us. The future Second coming. This stuff is so sacred that we do not mention this stuff outside the temple. It is not secret we urge every member to live worthy to receive a temple recommend and pull out their endowments.
And as God is Man will become. I mean does a lion cub turn into a zebra no it becomes into an adult lion. Prophets and Third Nephites: The Three Nephites were taken up because God wanted an apostasy for his children. Latter God decided it was time for prophets so thus came Joseph Smith. Either you are an ex-member who is trying to be Korihor like and trying to bring down the church if you are one of these people. Keep this quote in mind this quote.
The Lord Almighty so orders it. Also keep in mind that it is never to late to come back and any ward would welcome you back like family. If you showed up in my ward me and my ward would. If your a person who does not fully understand what your talking about or you do not know where to find the truth and you keep on running into hateful ex Mormon sites. Jonathan, I suspect you will one day better understand your religion. Many of your comments hold errors. For starters Joseph Smith, in his own words, says he was 16 years old when this supposed visitation occurred.
Perhaps you and others should brush up on early Mormon history: The Joseph Smith Papers would be a good place to start: Mormons were breaking the law, not honoring their agreement with the state and harboring fugitives. That is why they were expelled from Missouri. The Mormon church has put lipstick on a pig with their sanitized and rewritten history. Some are good and true. Some, however, are evil and filled with lies. There are quite a few people who think that to get both sides of the story they should go to Exmormon sites.
Heck even some of the things are hidden in lies. The Mountain Meadow Massacre. Everyone knows about this. One it was not organized by the top leadership and two not everyone was killed or so to say brutally murdered. It was actually caused by this said group passing through one of the Mormon towns in Utah.
They were so pissed with the mormons that they said when they made it to California they would bring back an army to make them trade and stuff like that. They spared them and eventually returned them to their families. This is just one of many examples I can choose from. And even though this is actually the true account of what happened I bet there will still be people who see this and will disagree with me. But if you are a religious person who writes the evil lies on this and other articles I only have one thing to say for you.
For every time you do you get that much closer to sring Satan rather then Jesus. As Ken Dahl noted in his comments, traditionally, Mormons excluded Black people because they were considered descendants of Ham and cursed with dark skin. In more recent times, Mormons, perhaps to increase their membership, began reaching out and recruiting Black people.
Most African Americans remain uncomfortable with this history. I thought the article was very good and a significant contribution even though this concern was omitted. Is this depiction fair? I gave some accurate info but that a lot of misleading info as well. The mix in false ino with some truth and those without knowledge of true LDS doctrine and practice are deceived. They lie in wait to deceive Eph. I like your post Ken. I see where everyone is coming from who has replied to your post.
So now I am going to give my opinion. I do not vote for a politician based on their religion preference, I vote for what they stand for in helping this country. I do not like Obama, never have and never will. I think this man has led America in to the depths of hell and if he is re-elected will just continue that journey. I feel he is the better candidate for presidency. We have had Christian presidents in our history and I am pretty sure not every American voting for them were thrilled about that, but they probably voted for that person because of the stand that person took for America; and that is what is important.
I wish people would quit focusing on a candidates religion and the negative media the opposite candidate puts out there on them. I want to know what a candidate is going to do to help this country, especially now. Read and Learn what The Mormon religion is all about! Before you all making any remarks about it…. Thank you for this remarkably perceptive analysis.
The basis for prejudice against Mormons is ignorance. Most people regard the Mormons as a blank slate on which they project their favorite fears about religious minorities. Liberals think that any dedicated religioys believers are mindless robots. Conservative Evangelicals think Mormons are faux Christians conducting a vast conspiracy to drag real Christians to hell. Neither group gives Mormons credit for individual intelligence or moral reflection, and assume Mormon animosity toward themselves.
The fact that Mormons are a bit betterneducated than average, that they are overrepresented in academia, that Mormons with more education tend to be even more loyal to their religion, that Mormons have a more positive view toward people of other faiths—that is, are less religioysly prejudiced—than any other denomination, are simple facts of which their critics are totally ignorant. The criticsnat both extremes of the religioys spectrum only know one or two things about Mormons, and then extrapolate an entire bogeyman out of that.
The most severe anti-Mormons at both ends are willing to invest vast amounts of time and rhetoric attacking Mormonism, but very little actually learning how Mormons themselves think. Their shared rationale is, this one thing I know about Mormons is so hateful to me, I do not want to waste any of my time gaining a sympathetic understanding of them. And the bottom line at both extremes is the determination to obliterate Mormons and their beliefs from society, to deny them the opportunity to participate in discussions about religion or public polucy in any forum controlled by the critics, and thus create a vicioys circle of prejudice reinforcing ignorance, which feeds prejudice.
I know very little about Mormonism but if people are discussing their beliefs and practices and how they have or have not evolved over time we would be remiss not to mention one of their recent practices that has lately emerged, namely that the Mormons have been obtaining lists of deceased Jews and posthumously baptising them. Specifically, the practice has been discouraged, condemned, and can even lead to negative consequences for the members involved. An official statement relative to the disallowed practice as well as a general description of what the real practice is and should be can be found here: Church officials also said the church would remove the names of Holocaust victims placed on the lists before Michel evidence that the Mormon lists still included the names of at least 20, Jews, many of them Holocaust victims and prominent figures like the philosopher Theodor Herzl and David Ben-Gurion, the first prime minister of Israel.
Radkey also provided Mr. Michel with evidence that many of these Jews had been baptized after the agreement. But Mormon officials say they remain in full compliance with the agreement. Ken, this is the first thing I thought of after reading this article. Regardless of the official policy, it seems to have still gone on after the agreement. Seems like Ken did check his facts Carl. In terms of history and religion, 17 years ago would still be recent. Are we supposed to discount an event just because it happened 15, 20, or 50 years ago? It still reflects on the organization.
Todd Christofferson, a church official involved with the negotiations. The church removed the names of Holocaust victims listed before and continues to instruct its members to avoid baptizing Jews who are not directly related to living Mormons or whose immediate family has not given written consent, Mr. And the official response to Mr. Sign in to subscribe to email alerts for Stephen Paul West.
Filtering Exclude erotica Include mainstream erotica Include all erotica. About Publish Join Sign In. Readers Benefits of registering Where are my ebooks? Describe your issue Have a question not already answered in the links at left or on our main FAQ page? His spectrum of best selling books include self-help for depression, global politics, young adult fiction, satires and paranormal thrillers. In addition to his writing, he is has a wonderful, esoteric adventure in photojournalism that you can view at his www. Political Satire of Lobbyist Grover Norquist.