English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

He would probably have greater allegiance to the Mormon prophet than to the American people. He and his wives would probably try to round up all the black people and put them in concentration camps or something. Or make tithing to the Mormon church mandatory for all US citizens.

2007-02-14 23:59:11 · 13 answers · asked by na n 3 in Politics & Government Elections

Quit trying to sell me a line of BS, straightup!

Although if you don’t recognize the facetiousness in my question, you’re perhaps right to have a beef with it, you definitely need to do some research about Mormonism because you’re vastly undereducated. Both Joseph Smith and Brigham Young practiced polygamy and the only reason Mormons don’t now is because it’s not condoned by modern law. However, Mormonism still maintains that men can have multiple wives – in cases where couples are legally divorced but temple bonds are not broken, the man will be reunited with his wives in heaven. Mormons believe this – look it up.

2007-02-16 01:21:02 · update #1

And why would you even begin to say that Mormons are the farthest thing from being racist? Mormons harbored an ideology that was racist against blacks until the 1970s when the Mormon prophet suddenly received a “revelation” from God saying that blacks were magically able to receive the priesthood. I can tell history isn’t one of your fortes, but you might contemplate reading a book now and then, you know?

2007-02-16 01:21:34 · update #2

As for the whole thing of tithing not being mandatory, though, people who don’t pay tithing can’t get temple recommends from the church. So perhaps it isn’t mandatory, but considering that the dream of going to the temple is carefully cultivated in most every Mormon child, it certainly is a prerequisite of any sort of legitimate religious affiliation. Of course, I’m sure those who shirk their responsibility to pay tithing are first in line to enter the Celestial Kingdom, right? Is that what you were trying to say or did it just come out that way?

I’m sorry – you weren’t expecting someone who actually knows more about Mormonism than most Mormons, were you? Don’t feel bad, though. It’s mainly because Mormon culture suppresses any sort of rational understanding of the faith – and I’m not really inhibited by that culture, in case you haven’t noticed.

2007-02-16 01:22:23 · update #3

13 answers

I don't think his religion will have as much to do with it as his party affiliation, I think the Democrats would have to run Charley Manson not to win this one. Bush and his supporters have been the downfall of the repuglican party. Life is good.

2007-02-15 00:10:42 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

You obviously don't know any Mormons are know anything about their faith, because the representation you provide is completely contrary to Mormonism.

Mormons do not profess allegiance to a prophet, but only to God and Jesus Christ. Just like other Christians don't profess allegiance to Moses or David or Abraham, but to God, and the teachings He provided through His prophets.

Mormons don't practice polygamy, so no multiple wives, sorry. In fact, of McCain, Guilliani and Romney, he's the only one that's had only one wife.

Mormons are the furthest thing from racist. They have always been about treating all people equally and are about community. In fact, one of the reasons the Mormons were chased out of Missouri was because of there being against slavery. Joseph Smith always fought for the freedom of the slaves. Since the foundation of the church there have been members of all races in the church and there are currently more members outside of the U.S. then in the U.S.

Lastly, tithing isn't mandatory for all Mormon, so I don't know why it would be for all Americans if Romney were President. It is a choice, just like everything else in this life. As we read in the Bible, those who do pay a tithe will be blessed - the windows of heaven will open up and blessing will pour out. We all do have a choice though.

In the Mormon faith your freedoms are not taken away; you are given guidelines and there are blessings associated with them. Just like the Sermon on the Mount in the New Testament, you will be blessed for your obedience. The Mormon church doesn't tell it's members they must vote a particular way, but tells them to become educated, look at the issues, and vote according to your values. This is why there are many members on both sides of the political isle. The current Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid, is a Democrat and an active Mormon. I have also been more closely aligned with the Democrats (although I don't vote party line because I feel that is voting in ignorance - we should vote for the best candidate) most of my life. If Romney were elected he would work with both parties to get things done and wouldn't take direction from anyone, other then the people who elected him and who he represents. He worked well in Massachusetts and has been a stellar mind in the business world. If we let our ignorance of a religion affect the way we vote, when it should really only be acknowledges for its influence on his morals, then our country is going downhill.

2007-02-15 11:35:27 · answer #2 · answered by straightup 5 · 2 1

Originally: You're an idiot. And I'm pretty sure you know it.

Now: You're even MORE of an idiot, and you do know it. What's with asking a question just to try to lure people into an argument? I think YOU being president would be the end of civilization as we know it. Think of the wars we'd get into while you were trying to lure other nations into stupid arguments. "Why are people in the UK always talking in stupid accents? Why do people in Australia flush their toilets backwards?"

Plural marriage was dropped because the prophet claimed that God told him it was no longer necessary. Originally, plural marriage was done because many men died on the way to Utah...so that there was something like two women to every man, and without a man in her life, the women of the time basically would have died with their twenty children on their arms. Marriage actually helped save these women's lives, though I guess some of them may have chosen to just die.

I believe that the decision to stop the plural marriages was done primarily for political reasons (there would have been a war against Utah eventually, and Utah would not have been allowed into the Union unless it dropped it) but whether or not this was done for a specific reason or because God told them it was a good idea isn't something we can ever really know. But some LDS people split off of the group because they thought it wasn't really from God, and these people still live on the Arizona/Utah border in towns of plural marriage believers.

I can't say much about the idea that the men are still married to multiple wives in heaven. From what I understand, this is true. Women can only be linked to one man, though the link from an earlier man can be broken. Children are linked through the father, so if a woman remarries and has more children, her first children are linked to the first husband, and the second set are linked to the second husband. The wife is linked to only one man, which is either the first one, or if she had the bond broken (for his adultery, for example) then she is linked to the second husband. On this part, you actually said the right thing, though it has nothing to do with your question, so you adding it in, again, is just you being an idiot.

The person who said that tithing was not mandatory for the LDS so why would it be for the citizens of the US? made a good point. It wouldn't be required to be a member of the US, only to go to the temple, which your average US citizen doesn't really want to do, anyway. This did answer your question, you're just being a dork about it, and trying to get a rise out of people.

Since you claim to have read a book about Mormonism, and therefore know more about it than the Mormons, then can you say why the Mormons did not allow blacks into their priesthood? They actually had an interesting reason for it, and though I don't subscribe to the idea, at least they had a reason. The way I understand it, they weren't violently racist, just thought that people with "black skin" were cursed. They had a few Biblical passages that they believed backed it up. It had something to do with Ham being cursed (or his son Caanan) for seeing his dad naked (or perhaps other things, which is highly open to interpretation,) and he was told his descendants would never hold the priesthood. Caanan was marked, and the church believed that the "mark" was giving him dark skin. They also used to say that satan had black skin, but dropped that as well. But they never wanted to do anything specific to the blacks, just exclude them from holding the priesthood. So concentration camps are out of the question, and you're being stupid for saying it, considering that you've, you know, actually studied this question before asking it just so you can try to rub your knowledge in people's faces.

So, I can say, with even more justification than before, that you're an idiot, and you do, indeed, know it. Get a life, and after that, get a soul, and then shove the soul up your, well, whatever you like to shove things up.

2007-02-15 08:08:33 · answer #3 · answered by Mr. B 4 · 3 2

I think he actualy stands a decent chance. Despite the fact that all you hear in the media and anywhere is a bunch of liberals spouting off their mouths about how dissatisfied they are, the conservative republican base in this country is larger than you think. You all thought Bush didn't have a chance for the second term, and he got elected with the largest popular vote in the history of elections. Dont count out the republicans. They will always surprise you!

2007-02-15 08:08:14 · answer #4 · answered by dreamoutloud2 3 · 2 1

You're dead wrong. I doubt Romney will get into office, but the end of civilization as we know it will occur if Hillary Rodham Clinton becomes the leader of the free world. That would actually become an oxymoron -- leader of the free world -- because she would turn this country into the New Soviet Union.

2007-02-15 08:04:00 · answer #5 · answered by sarge927 7 · 5 1

Well, if he's a member of the modern day LDS church, all of that wouldn't happen. But they honor Joseph Smith more than God or Jesus. So in that case, I don't believe technically he would be considered a Christian.

2007-02-15 11:24:18 · answer #6 · answered by Big Bear 7 · 0 2

Romney will be subjected to the same discrimination as JFK was for this Catholicism. JFK overcame it. I don't think Romney will, even tho' it's his constitutional right to try.

2007-02-15 08:09:48 · answer #7 · answered by gone 6 · 3 0

i think he would probably make a great Preasent, how ever, the new world order gang will get in again, so look for the bush and Clinton thugs to continue to destroy America

2007-02-15 08:11:17 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

He would probably? LOL.....did he turn the state of Massachusetts into a Mormon state? He did not. You are throwing out unproven lies. Ohh.....you must be one of those liberals we see so much of. No facts, just talking from your ***.

2007-02-15 08:02:22 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4 1

He doesn't have a chance and making up lame joke about his religion is the most childish thing you can do.

2007-02-15 08:01:51 · answer #10 · answered by ropemancometh 5 · 2 1

fedest.com, questions and answers