Romney's Mormon Speech: The Highlights
Here's a highlight reel of Mitt Romney's speech this morning, in which he stood by both his Mormon religion and personal independence, and insisted that America is and should be a place that is tolerant of religious differences — while at the same time declaring that religion itself must have a key role in our public life, a message sure to please many conservative evangelicals:
Comments (40)
DTM wrote on December 6, 2007 2:38 PM:Shorter version:
Yes I am a Mormon, but at least I am not an atheist.
vena wrote on December 6, 2007 2:42 PM:"There are some who may feel that religion is not a matter to be seriously considered in the context of the weighty threats that face us. If so, they are at odds with the nation's founders," Romney said.
Don't you love how Romney puts the guilt on you by saying if you don't feel the same way about religion as he does, you're basically unpatriotic.
freaktown wrote on December 6, 2007 2:50 PM:yes. we must tolerate those with different beliefs than us.
Unless they are atheists or secularists. Then we must unite to destroy them.
Uncommonsense wrote on December 6, 2007 3:07 PM:DTM wrote:
Shorter version:Yes I am a Mormon, but at least I am not an atheist.
Ah, but Romney did not say anything about atheism. He attacked secularism.
This is actually a tactic of the religious right. They have spared no effort in conflating secularism with atheism. In the minds of many of their followers, there is no difference.
And of course, Romney's contempt for secular government is by extension contempt for our Constitution which establishes a secular, non-theocratic American government.
Well thank goodness. Now my Satanic friends can go out and celebrate their beliefs without prejudice.
Helter wrote on December 6, 2007 3:19 PM:I'm imagining what the convention of evangelicals will look like if Romney gets the nomination:
"Ladies and Gentlemen, the good news is that you have a candidate who wants to jam religion into the public square. The bad news is, he's a morman."
Seth H. wrote on December 6, 2007 3:33 PM:C-Span 3? How people are actually going to see more than the quick clips they show on CNN or the longer clip they show on Fox that'll inevitably paint Romney in a less balanced light (less favorable, they still seem to be pulling for Giuliani)? Romney's Mormonism won't be his issue in the primaries, I think. It'll only become a thing if he makes it to the general election and Republicans pull a "Wait, he's a Mormon?"
chuck h wrote on December 6, 2007 3:48 PM:Having been an LDS missionary, and served various other church roles, I can vouch...Mormonism isn't so big on tolerance of religious differences. I served my mission in a Catholic country. The whole POINT of Mormon missionary work is to to convert the world and most often that means Christians to, you guessed it, Mormonism. How's that for tolerance? Romney as a Bishop would also have had some members of his ward responsible for missionary work as well. And he didn't go on a mission to preach tolerance of religious differences but to preach change your religion. When Mormons give up their convert christians missions, then maybe this would have some credibility. But don't hold your breath. Oh wait, maybe that's the new meaning of religious tolerance...you join my church!
Powkat wrote on December 6, 2007 4:32 PM:I don't care that Romney is a Morman. I care that religion is taking up such a huge piece of the campaign. Romney is an opportunist; what Huckabee is doing is despicable: basically he is advocating for a religious test for office. Even the Dems are spending time talking about their religious beliefs.
This is just another distraction by the religious right, wing-nut Republican party. It used to be the fringe of the party, marching outside the convention hall. Now it's all of them, and they are taking the country down with their ignorance and intolerance.
Mormon Democrat wrote on December 6, 2007 4:34 PM:I'm not a Romney supporter, but I do feel the need to point out to chuck h that tolerance does not mean a person is not willing to share his or her beliefs with others.
Rather, it means
"1. a fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward those whose opinions, practices, race, religion, nationality, etc., differ from one's own; freedom from bigotry."
And, having served an LDS mission and also served in various other church roles, I can say that while there may be an occasional exception, by and large LDS missionaries and church members are quite tolerant towards those of other religions. I have seen few, if any, violations of the long-held LDS belief originally articulated as one of 13 central beliefs in 1844:
"We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may." (Article of Faith 11)
And the current church president, Gordon B. Hinckley, has carried on that tradition. Here is an excerpt of a speech he gave, not to the media or journalists, but to students at the LDS Church university, BYU:
"I hope that this university will give to you a great sense of tolerance and respect for others not of your faith. The true gospel of Jesus Christ never led to bigotry. It never led to self-righteousness. It never led to arrogance. The true gospel of Jesus Christ leads to brotherhood, to friendship, to appreciation of others, to respect and kindness and love.
Mr. Shimon Peres called on us last Wednesday in the Church Administration Building. He is one of the elder statesmen of the world, the former prime minister of Israel. He has seen much of conflict and trouble in his time. He is a wise and able man who speaks with the spirit of a sage.
I asked him whether there was any solution to the great problems that constantly seem to divide the people of Israel and the Palestinians. He replied that of course there is. He said an interesting thing. As I recall, he said, 'When we were Adam and Eve, we were all one. Is there any need for us to be divided into segments with hatred in our hearts one for another?'
He told a beautiful story that he said he got from a Muslim. The Muslim told of a Jewish rabbi who was conversing with two of his friends. The rabbi asked one of the men, 'How do you know when the night is over and the day has begun?'
His friend replied, 'When you look into the distance and can distinguish a sheep from a goat, then you know the night is over and the day has begun.'
The second was asked the same question. He replied, 'When you look into the distance and can distinguish an olive tree from a fig tree, that is how you know.'
They then asked the rabbi how he could tell when the night is over and the day has begun. He thought for a time and then said, 'When you look into the distance and see the face of a woman and you can say, 'She is my sister.' And when you look into the distance and see the face of a man and can say, 'He is my brother.' Then you will know the light has come.'
Think about that story for a minute. What a wonderful truth it tells.
Not long ago I was asked to speak at a convention of the Religion Newswriters of America. Following my talk I invited questions. I was asked, 'What are you going to do when 15,000 or 20,000 Baptists visit you in Salt Lake City next summer and try to proselytize you?'
I replied, 'We are going to welcome them. We are going to do everything we can to make them feel at home. These are our brethren and sisters. They accuse us of not being Christian. I hope that our people will try to show them, by the very manner in which they act, that we are truly disciples of the Lord.'
I said to these professional journalists, 'As all of you know, we carry on a vast missionary program in the Church. But it is not argumentative. We do not debate. We, in effect, simply say to others, 'Bring all the good that you have and let us see if we can add to it.'"
RandyR wrote on December 6, 2007 4:36 PM:
I suspect that the reason Romney doesn't mention his Morman religion too much is that he doesn't want Christians to know that Mormans believe some pretty weird stuff.
They believe
Jesus brother is Lucifer
There is many gods, our God is from another planet where there are many gods.
God is a man "of bone and flesh".
and it goes on and on.
The big question is will Mitt recognize the will of the American people or will he look to his Morman religious backround for guidance. My bet is that we would start to see the Morman phrase "for time and all eternity" in our Laws. The eighth tenent of the Morman faith is that the word of the Bible is true, if it is interpreted correctly. Corrrect interpretation must include the three Morman books plus many other interpretations.
How different is Mormanism? No major American Christian faith will recogmize a Morman baptism.
benjoya wrote on December 6, 2007 4:41 PM:i have a dream that one day, an avowed agnostic or, dare i say it, an atheist may be a credible contender for the nomination of a major party. not in my lifetime, certainly.
benjoya wrote on December 6, 2007 4:42 PM:why doesn't someone ask brother mutt if the bible is the last prophecy or has it been supplemented or displaced in its primacy?
Michael A wrote on December 6, 2007 4:43 PM:Mitt the flip is walking a tightrope on this one. He has to pander to the "christian" right of the republican party that wants to set up a "christian" theocracy. However, for some reason, which I have absolutely no clue about, the "christian" right doesn't think that mormons are christians. So he has a problem. What he is telegraphing by this speech and his flipping all over the place is that he is more than willing to set up that theocracy for them as long as they elect him. Seems like a tough sell, but if anyone can do it, mitt the flip can.
Mormon Democrat wrote on December 6, 2007 4:46 PM:Sigh.
RandyR,
I don't think this is necessarily a forum for a theological debate, but I would point out that to get a more accurate idea about what "Mormans" (sic) believe, a good source is the Encyclopedia of Mormonism, published by MacMillan.
The Wikipedia reference can be found here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopedia_of_Mormonism
That said, I'm with Powkat, at least in part. These side discussions about religion are distracting from the real problems our country is facing.
eric wrote on December 6, 2007 5:09 PM:Mormanism, like christianity and islam and everything else, is just a bunch of mythology. The problem that mormons have is that it is easier to discredit and/or "doubt" their mythology because it hasn't been around very long and its fabricators are known to modern history. It's the same crap, though.
Tim wrote on December 6, 2007 5:23 PM:Most any thoughtfull person realizes that to be a Mormon is to be in a cult.
I'm not saying it is a bad thing -
I'm saying it's simply the truth
Sigh redoubled
Instead of relating how the Morman religion ruined ten years of my brothers life I went to the site of the five dominant Christian religions in America.
Statement of the Lutheran Church, Missouri Synod
http://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=2239
Statement of the Presbyterian Church (USA
http://www.pcusa.org/interfaith/study/lds.htm
Statement of the Roman Catholic Church
Statement of the Southern Baptist Convention
http://www.namb.net/atf/cf/%7BCDA250E8-8866-4236-9A0C-C646DE153446%7D/BB_Mormons.pdf
Statement of the United Methodist Church
http://www.gc2000.org/pets/cal/TEXT/c0806.asp
Read these sitations and learn that none of these Christian religion recognize Mormans as Christians.
And, although I suspect that you are a well tolerant person I do not believe that of your religion. Mormans believe that they are the one true church and therefore all others must be false. By being false they mean the mainstream Christian doctrine is false, and that is not tolerant my friend.
chuck h wrote on December 6, 2007 5:50 PM:-given our recent national experience with end time apocalyptic dogmas and obscure doctrines driving international politics, and domestic policy any politician--needs to come clean on so called "obscure" points of theology if they hold them.
Michael A wrote on December 6, 2007 5:51 PM:Ok, tim I believe that I am thoughtful and I am fascinated by different religious practices. I hate to ask, but why do evangelical "christians" think mormanism is a cult?
RandyR, I am sorry about your brother; however, your conclusion kind of cuts against the professed evangelical "christians" as well. Alot of professed evangelical "christians" believe that their church is the true church and all others will "go to hell" unless they are "saved" and adhere lock step to their church's doctrine. How is that any different from mormanism?
Gnopple wrote on December 6, 2007 7:41 PM:Which candidate isnt' the baptist minister?
Could this be any more stilted? Terrible oration.
RandyR wrote on December 6, 2007 7:57 PM:MichaelA
I agree that alot of "professed evangelicals" believe that their's is the correct belief. I think it was Thomas Paine who said, "No man considers another the wittier or the wiser than himself" and it is probably still true.
But it is the official policy of Christian Churches to accept the baptism of other Christian Churches. Between Mormans and Christian Churches the Baptism is not interchangable either way. You cannot be a Baptist if baptised a Morman nor can you be a Morman if baptised a Luthern. But you can be a Luthern if baptised a Methodist. Understand?
Mormans my well believe in Jesus Christ but the theology is very different from mainstream Christian religions.
Please read the links I provided above and see what the Christian religions say.
DTM wrote on December 6, 2007 8:28 PM:Even though Mitt is doing his best to talk the theocratic talk, in reality I actually think his candidacy would be a major step towards realizing benjoya's dream, precisely because a good number of people do in fact believe Mormons aren't Christians.
By the way, I have absolutely no opinion on that subject, but I do think it is a bit silly to claim mainstream Christians are more tolerant than Mormons because they accept the Baptisms of other Christian Churches--that is probably not going to be all that comforting to non-Christians.
Beeza_guy Jeff wrote on December 6, 2007 9:24 PM:From 1971-76 I attended medical school at Libre Universite de Bruxelles, the Free Univertity of Brussels. Free of what, I asked, as I wrote my check for $880 for a year's tuition and fees. Religious influence, said the registrar. So quaint, I felt, as I began 6 years of study in a med school founded on the site of Vesalius's earliest dissections in 1528. As my french improved over that year I recognised the pride of the faculty's devotion to scientific in a nominally Catholic country. This was loudly punctuated in 1973 by the death of Prof. Albert Dalcq, an influential embryologist and anatomy professor who proclaimed himself a proud atheist. He was publicly dissected in the anatomy ampitheatre by the chief of surgery and his organs were put in jars of formalin in the university museum.
Now my country despises secular humanists and atheists, and our universities are no longer nearly so bold as my alma mater in Catholic Belgium. Rather than finding them quaint, I recognise we have much to learn from those who fought these battles on the bloody soil of Paris and Brussels. We need to read history. Our current fight with the resurgence of religious influence on government shows we have not read our history or our Constitution.
Another politician wrapping himself in religion, and blithely issuing contradictory statements so long as they pass muster with the focus groups.
Sorry, Mitt, you can't have it both ways:
If your religious beliefs will inform your presidency, then we have a right to evaluate what those beliefs are.
And voting evangelicals have every right to oppose you based on your faith just as they oppose secularists for theirs.
RandyR wrote on December 6, 2007 9:47 PM:Breeza_Guy Jeff
My family is Flemish and had emigrated from Antwerp. Last year I was able to visit for a short period and it felt wonderful, I hope you learn all they have to offer.
One thing that you seem to have learned is that if you have the conviction of your beliefs you need not be scared of others beliefs.
Mormon Democrat wrote on December 6, 2007 9:59 PM:School, DTM, and RandyR,
Your comments illustrate why the Republican party will never be a majority party again, at least until it reformulates itself as something other than a group based on the "in" group and "out" group.
If Mormons are so bad, why does the GOP (God's Own Party) always count on their votes? Wouldn't that contaminate the holy (political) alliance? Perhaps the leaders of the Christian right have become so arrogant they don't think they need the Mormon vote anymore.
Of course, Pat Robertson can endorse Rudy Giuliani, whose personal conduct does not even qualify him to be an active participant in his faith.
But Pat could never endorse a Mormon. Why? Because he would be exposed for the political hack that he is if he were to endorse someone from a religion he has falaciously labeled a cult. Better to endorse a serial adulterer who is pro gay rights, pro choice, and seems to enjoy the company of corrupt cronies. Endorsing a Mormon would ruin Pat's credibility. Ummm, yeah--mission accomplished.
This election is a change election, and one of the changes will be that Mormons are going to realize that they don't have an interest in supporting a party that takes their support for granted and then throws them under the bus when it's convenient. Mormons will remember more strongly that they were not allowed to participate in the national day of prayer following September 11th because some evangelical Christians didn't deem them worthy. They will remember that when asked if Mormons are Christians, Mike Huckabee punted rather than saying what he honestly thought.
Jimmy Carter left the Southern Baptist convention, in part, because he didn't think anyone but God had the right to decide who was Christian and who wasn't.
If I were a Democratic politician in the West, I'd be paying very close attention right now. This trend may only be trickle, but I predict that it will become a torrent and Mormons will realize they are better off somewhere besides the GOP, taking the intermountain west and every subsequent presidential election away from God's Own Party.
It's only natural for Mormons to feel this way--with friends like the "Christian" right, who needs enemies?
I'm a Democrat, so I fully welcome this change. It's morning in America.
JDinLA wrote on December 6, 2007 10:31 PM:Mitt Romney can't win this issue with the "Christian" Right. They want a candidate who will "restore" religion to the public square and make policy based upon faith. The problem for Mitt is, they want it to be THEIR faith, not his, that sets the national agenda.
RobbyLove wrote on December 6, 2007 11:20 PM:Christians of different sects killed each other by the truckload in Northern Ireland, and that was Protestants vs. Catholics.
Just goes to show you how tolerant they can really be. Once there are no more Mormons, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, atheists and other "non-Christians"....they'll be incited to go after each other (just like N Ireland).
Nothing against individuals who are religious, but *organized religion* has historically been shown to be dangerous. The founders of our country knew this. Wise men.
Evadt wrote on December 7, 2007 1:39 AM:Evangelical Christians: Ahh, yes — the true atheists of our time.
In testimony today, Romney attempted to brush-off Evangelical concerns that his Mormon doctrine “faith” may influence his Presidency; Romney attempted to mitigate those misgivings in context with JFK and Catholicism.
Prior to his election, JFK stated the separation of church and state is absolute, and his Catholic faith WOULD NOT inform his presidency.
Today, Romney stated exactly the opposite — that those who believe in absolute separation are wrong.
ELDERS of ISRAEL: “The Lord told the Prophet Joseph Smith there would be an attempt to overthrow the country by destroying the Constitution. Joseph Smith predicted that the time would come when the Constitution would hang, as it were, by a thread, and at that time ‘this people [Mormons] will step forth and save it from the threatened destruction’ (Journal of Discourses, 7:15). It is my [President/Prophet Benson] conviction that the elders of Israel, widely spread over the nation, will at that crucial time successfully rally the righteous of our country and provide the necessary balance of strength to save the institutions of constitutional government…. If the Gentiles on this land reject the word of God and conspire to overthrow liberty and the Constitution, their doom is fixed, and they ‘shall be cut off from among my people who are of the covenant’ (1Nephi 14:6; 3 Nephi 21:11, 14, 21; D&C 4:114-115, 117 [D&C are non-KJV Mormon-exclusive scriptures titled Doctrine & Covenants.] (God, Family, Country, p. 345.)…. “As we spread abroad in this land, bearers of this priesthood, men and women with high ideals and standards, our influence will spread as we take positions of leadership in the community, in the state, in the nation, in the world…. ‘And now,’ warns Moroni, ‘ we can behold the decrees of God concerning this land, that it is a land of promise; and whatsoever nation shall possess it shall serve God, or they shall be swept off when the fullness of his wrath shall come upon them…’”. (THE TEACHINGS OF EZRA TAFT BENSON – p. 619-621. Benson was the thirteenth President (“Prophet”) of the Mormon Church.)
Romney holds the calling of “Priest” in the Mormon Church. Thomas Jefferson wrote, “History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government.” In case you still believe Romney’s Mormon religion would not impinge upon his Presidency, read on.
“The sober preacher trained in the dialectics of the seminary was rare west of the Appalachians. One found instead faith healers and circuit rider evangelists, who stirred their audiences to paroxysms of religious frenzy…. The revivals by their very excesses deadened a normal antipathy toward religious eccentricity. And these Pentecostal years, which coincided with Joseph Smith’s adolescence and early manhood, were the most fertile in America’s history for sprouting of prophets.” (Fawn Brodie, No Man Knows My History).
The Mormon faith gave birth to itself on the coat tails of the Enlightenment period, back when scholarly research began pointing to the dubious character of Christianity through published proof-positive inaccuracies in the KJV bible, and a butt-ugly historical record of murder, torture, burning books: intolerance…. This was a time of ecclesiastical turmoil — the Second Great Awakening — orthodoxy had lost face, opening the gate to new and/or revised sectarianisms on earth.
Mormonism got legs with the apparition of an angle calling himself Moroni appearing in founder Joseph Smith’s bedroom, announcing he (Moroni) had been sent by God to resuscitate the broken connection between God and his children — which indicates everyone between the time of Christ and Moroni had been ignored, damned, and/or forgotten. After that, the Mormon story reads like the stuff of dreams, superstitions, and ritual — all spawned along with a number of other new religious movements at the time.
Smith first distinguished himself as an affable and talented charismatic flimflammer who began his mystical journey in black magic and crystal gazing artifice handed down from his dad; this early introduction into shamanism was enhanced by neighbor girl, Sally Chase, whose own magical rock, when dropped in a hat, led Smith to a buried “peep stone” providing him with special powers of divination. He advertised his gift in locating treasure using his sacred rock. After paying the boy fourteen dollars a month to find hidden silver, one disgruntled customer took Smith to court where he was convicted of fraud. Smith went on to found “…the one and only true church of God.”
That last is a question, Mitt – about ‘the one and only true church of God’… ‘cause I already know that’s what they teach in the Mormon Church… lemme put it on you this way, Mitt: Do you believe the Mormon Church is the one and only true church of God? And if so, do you believe that your God inspired the Constitution as proclaimed by Benson? And if so, when you make stupid statements, that the Constitutional separation of church and state is not absolute, are you really saying that as President you intend to continue with Bush reinterpretations of separation of church and state… that you and your buddy God will smite patriots who resist your errant ways?
“… it is true that some of the original colonists fled Europe for religious reasons; it is true that some of the first colonists were founded as religious communities; it is even true that most of the men who signed the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were practicing Christians of one denomination or another. Nevertheless this nation was NOT founded on Christian principles.” (MORAL MINORITY: Our Skeptical Founding Fathers — p. ix, by Brooke Allen)
Constitutional separation of church and state serves two masters: it protects people — freedom of religion; and of-the-people, by-the-people, and for-the people — freedom from religion.
Like Evangelical Christians, Mormons are world-ender dominionists — theocrats who like getting in on cleansing the earth of infidels. In truth, the future Kingdom Mormons and Evangelicals pray for ultimately has no truck with laws of men — including the Declaration of Independence and Constitution…. Simply, the basis for their fundamentalisms preclude secular law, Constitutional or otherwise. Both Evangelicals and Mormons have insinuated themselves into the neocon-lexicon boasting Good News that they and God claim the Constitution to be their own, and interpret it whenever it serves their mutual politik.
Just like Romney flipped on abortion when politics and faith dictated necessity, his brand of religious instruction shall require that he/they continue to sweep-off infidels and serve the authoritarian conservative cause by strangling separation of church and state — until it is dead and final ascendancy of prophesied Kingdom Come on earth as it is in Heaven. No matter what they say about personal conscience, free agency, and Constitutional loyalties, Mormons follow orders from their leaders, like Ezra Daft Benson.
Beneath the advertised sweet, soft, and loving exterior of God’s people, red state zealot Mormon’s have forever cast their lot with Evangelical Christian monotheists by voting in the holy Bush/Cheney regime: it has been the neoconfirmation of an abomination that has done more than any other administration to usurp and subvert the Constitution of the United States of America. The Constitution Mormons believe in, IS NOT the same as established by the Founders. And the God Mormons believe in, gives orders from Salt Lake.
Yes Mitt. You’re wrong. JFK is correct: separation of church and state is absolute — no matter how you try to spin it, or flip it. Tenets driving your faith will always come before Constitutional intent of the Founders: you cannot be a Mormon, and believe otherwise, because you’re a closet monarchist serving an invisible theocratic King.
Romney really doesn't stand much of a chance being a Mormon.
Chino Blanco wrote on December 7, 2007 2:20 AM:I'm Pepsi, you're Coke ... let all patriotic cola drinkers stand fast against the Pellegrino crowd.
Imbiber beware.
CLR wrote on December 7, 2007 2:23 AM:"Freedom requires religion, just as religion requires freedom."
I'd love to hear him explain how freedom requires religion. I know it's just a mindless platitude to mollify the born-again set, but really, that's a hoot.
Richard wrote on December 7, 2007 3:05 AM:Romney should have done what he does best. Say he was wrong in his upbringing, denounce Mormonism and flip... I mean declare himself a southern baptist.
Has anyone begun to realize just how creepy Romney is? The voters in Massachusetts did and thats why he backed out a run for a second term. He was well on his way to losing.
SueC wrote on December 7, 2007 6:26 AM:Willard Mitt Romney made it absolutely clear he's NO Jack Kennedy!
More importantly why was the flip-flopper given unprecedented public TV time for this pander to the Evangelicals?
Will every other candidate be granted EQUAL TV time?
Nancy Irving wrote on December 7, 2007 6:31 AM:Can we at least try to spell correctly. It's MORMON and MORMONISM.
Sheesh.
Michael A wrote on December 7, 2007 10:01 AM:I liked the post where mitt the flip should have become a "born again" "christian." That was funny.
On another note, I still don't understand why evangelical "christians" consider mormanism a cult. It seems offensive to me. I don't believe in mormanism and I don't believe in evangelical "christian" beliefs. I really am curious, why would mormanism be considered a cult by evangelicals?
CalD wrote on December 7, 2007 10:57 AM:Evadt,
Virtually every guy in the mormon church is a member of its priesthood. I personally was ordained into the lowest level at age 12 (about two years before I began to realize that I didn't actually believe in gods). It's nothing to get worked up about.
votenic wrote on December 8, 2007 6:13 PM:2008 Presidential Election Weekly Poll
The Only Poll That Matters.
Results Posted Every Tuesday Evening.
Ok....if you are going to talk about Mormons, which I am one, at least spell it correctly!!!! Jeez Louise. Almost ALL of you spelled it wrong!!!
