1. Peep stones. In translating the Book of Mormon, were they used or not?
2. The Kinderhook Plates. Did Joseph's Myth buy them, as sacred relics, or not?
3. Mark Hoffman. Did he, by clever forgeries, successfully dupe the top inspired leaders of the church or not?
4. Has LDS Temple work been done for the Nazi leaders, or not?
5. Will the LDS church abide by ALL government requirements in the future, or not? (Chip implants, DNA swabs, fingerprinting of all family members for the 2010 Census?)
2007-12-03 14:53:25 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
All he had to do was say he was mormon and he lost my vote. Ron Paul all the way!!!
2007-12-03 14:58:59 · answer #1 · answered by Todd P 4 · 2⤊ 11⤋
Of all these questions, only number 5 comes closest to being something that would be asked of a PRESIDENTIAL candidate.
Romney had nothing to do with peep stones (niether did Joseph Smith, for that matter), he had nothing to do with Kinderhook plates (again, neither did Joseph Smith), he had nothing to do with Hoffmann. Hoffmann duped even the most learned experts. And he certainly can;t speak for the church on any subject.
2007-12-03 21:13:32 · answer #2 · answered by mormon_4_jesus 7 · 6⤊ 1⤋
1 Used, however they're seer stones not peep stones.
2 Joseph never said the plates were genuine, never translated them, and never bought them. It's Joseph Smith...am I supposed to applaud your attempt at wordplay?
3 Yes he did. But he also did this to others, not just the LDS church. But look at him now, serving life for murder...
4 Yes they have, anyone can receive forgiveness...even Nazis
5 I didn't know those things were going to be done...but I for sure am not getting a chip, willingly anyway. DNA swabs and fingerprinting, in my opinion is great because then we will have DNA for everyone, so if it's found at a crime scene we'll know who was there.
2007-12-03 15:07:44 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 10⤊ 2⤋
Honestly, When it comes to religion that is a private thing. I am an atheist and I do not believe that there should be a religious litmus test to hold office. There should also not be a test to see if you do not have religion.
Frankly the Constitution agrees.
What does bother me is when politicians wear religion on their sleeve and make it an issue for their campaign. As if their faith were part of a requirement and in essence endorse a form of litmus test that is not formal and is un-constitutional.
Now - Was he one of the ones that doesn't "believe in evolution" that does bother me and that is not a religious test. That is a science test.
Also he is pro war and promises more of the same. Another bush in the white house, only thing is he can pronounce words with more than one syllable.
He does not share the values of the founding fathers, that is the problem with Romney. He is also a flip-flopper and plays to the crowd rather than stand by his convictions. he is a sell out and can't be trusted.
2007-12-03 15:07:05 · answer #4 · answered by Atrum Animus AM 4 · 2⤊ 3⤋
I have no idea what this has to do with the Republican nomination for the President. I remember Kennedy's Catholicism was attacked with much of the same bigoted hatred when he ran in 1960. Anyway, your answers:
1. Seer (not peep) stones - Who debates that they were used? Seeing and scrying objects were used by prophets of God in the Bible, you know...
2. Were they bought? Yes. Were they treated as sacred? No. Translated? No. They were thrown out.
3. Yes, as well as many top secular historians.
4. Probably. It's meant to be done for all mankind, and they were people, no matter how horribly they may have lived.
5. The church doesn't oppose the government. See LDS Article of Faith #12
2007-12-03 15:06:22 · answer #5 · answered by Sir Network 6 · 12⤊ 3⤋
1st of all, whether or not the LDS Church is true is irrelevant to Romney's candidacy for president.
Secondly he, or any other candidate for that matter, shouldn't have to defend their religious beliefs to the nation or try to convince the public that those beliefs are true.
3rd, your perceived "skeletons" only trouble you because you insist on believing them to be what they're not and refuse to understand the truth.
2007-12-04 07:15:28 · answer #6 · answered by atomzer0 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If you have listened to Mitt Romney, he NEVER talks about the LDS church, preferring to leave religion out of it. And that's the way it should be, don't you think?
2007-12-04 04:28:51 · answer #7 · answered by Fotomama 5 · 5⤊ 0⤋
Why should he, the LDS church is not running for president, and to my knowledge Mitt Romney is not an officer of the church, so........what's the point?
2007-12-04 04:00:33 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 0⤋
My honest opinion is that the conference is not being held to defend his beliefs at all. He doesn't need to do that. All he will do is explain what he believes, and he might mention how that will/ or will not impact what he does as president. That is all he will address about this in his speech. Everything you mentioned is irrelevant to his campaign (not to mention the truth of what you have mentioned can be disputed), plus where the heck are you getting number 5 from?
2007-12-03 16:04:01 · answer #9 · answered by moonman 6 · 7⤊ 1⤋
Seer Stones were used.
I don't know about #2. Joseph's Myth? Very adult.
Same with #3.
Hitler has had his work done, so it could have been done for the rest.
I hope that we don't find out. (Personally, when it comes to the chip implants, I wouldn't get it unless God told me to and He would have to stand in front of me and tell me face to face to get it.)
2007-12-04 03:14:08 · answer #10 · answered by Dublin Ducky 5 · 5⤊ 1⤋
A lot of those have been addressed already. Look at the church's website for answers.
I personally don't think the chip thing or fingerprint thing are going to go into effect, but if they do, the church will address them when the time comes.
2007-12-03 15:01:41 · answer #11 · answered by odd duck 6 · 12⤊ 2⤋