About 30 years ago Ezra Taft Benson, then leader of the Mormon church, declared that it was all but impossible for a good Mormon to be a Democrat. Ever pragmatic in adapting beliefs and practices to preserve its best interests, the church hierarchy has since relaxed this stance and has in recent years issued official statements acknowledging “Principles compatible with the gospel may be found in the platforms of all major political parties” and continuing its encouragement of members to participate in the political process.
Why not be concerned about any of the Mormons in Congress (5 senators and about a dozen representatives) of which four are Democrats? Each is just one voice and one vote out of, respectively, 100 and 435 and still a small minority (though a sizable delegation that is proportionately greater than the 2% of the US population that is LDS). Though Reid has a fair amount of clout as Senate Majority Leader, he is still just one senator. Congressional Mormons in both parties don't vote in lock-step and don't all always vote in accordance with commonly advocated positions of the LDS church, and not all of them are supporting Romney's campaign.
According to one count, there are currently 155 Catholics, 1 Muslim, 2 Buddhists, 67 Baptists, 62 Methodists, 43 Jews, 43 Presbyterians, 37 Episcopalians, 17 Lutherans and 17 Mormons in Congress with the rest listing themselves as other or with no religious affiliation. What singles out Mormons is that a great many of them have a stronger allegiance to the fact of being a Mormon and to church itself than to the doctrine or faith. Combine that with the long-standing suspicions of a Mormon church conspiracy to take over the government of the US and rule as a theocracy, and the picture begins to come together as to why biblical Christians (and many Americans in general) are leery of having a Mormon president (in fairness, it should be noted that in the past, Protestants have been suspicious of having a Catholic president whose first loyalty may lie with the Vatican rather than the US). At very least it would be anticipated that he will heavily load his administration with Mormon appointees (in addition to agencies such as the FBI, CIA, and FCC that have been disproportionately LDS for years). While Americans as a whole are tolerant of differing beliefs and accepting of a degree of pluralism in society, it is unthinkable to many Christians and those with a generally Christian upbringing/worldview to consider having a President, leader of the nation, Commander In Chief, who doesn't even believe in the same understanding of God.
2007-10-04 20:20:15
·
answer #1
·
answered by Heather D 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I've been to Salt Lake, it's a pretty city. I found it a little creepy that everyone makes eye contact and smiles, just because that's abnormal for a large city, and more disconcerting than it sounds. The beehive imagery all over the place was a little weird too, because it made me think of drones. I kept expecting to fall through a manhole, and find myself talking to Mr. Tumnus in Mormia. Oh, and the watered-down beer was lame. Aside from that, I had a pretty good time.
I wouldn't mind so much if I beleived it was Salt Lake City that would be controlling Mr. Romney, but I'm not convinced that's what drives him.
2007-10-04 04:20:13
·
answer #2
·
answered by Beardog 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
No, Reid is nowhere near as powerful as a president. He can't set foreign policy or start wars. He doesn't hold a veto pen over the ultimate enactment of any law.. And lastly, because he is only elected by the people of one state, most US voters have no say on whether he keeps his seat.
2007-10-03 21:38:33
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Not to Mention the 60 or so other Mormons in DC in national politics.
2007-10-09 08:51:28
·
answer #4
·
answered by Ender 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
It would be strange not having a christian in the white house. If Romney becomes president, how many wives do I get to have?
2007-10-03 19:24:03
·
answer #5
·
answered by Zardoz 7
·
0⤊
2⤋
I am afraid of this Christian Coalition or whatever they're calling themselves. The one where whatever candidate they are endorsing is in their hip pocket, and pretty soon, we have no more freedom of religion, or we have it as long as it's Christian, and Christian as THEY define it.
It's funny watching Pat Robertson et.al. talking about Romney as a possible presidential candidate; they can't talk the trash about him that they want because he has the same values they do, and if he gets nominated, they HAVE to endorse him!!!
2007-10-03 19:29:39
·
answer #6
·
answered by mormon_4_jesus 7
·
2⤊
2⤋
Yes. Insincere democrats. I'll alert the media..... oh, that's right. They won't report it unless it's a lie about republicans.
2007-10-03 19:25:52
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋