Evangelicals for Mitt?
Thursday October 12, 2006
Here's a website for Evangelicals who support the presidential candidacy of Mitt Romney. Who's a Mormon. Would you vote for a Mormon for president? I honestly don't see what the problem is. I'd vote for an atheist if I thought...
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Advertisement
Advertisement
Search This Blog
Recent Posts
About Crunchy Con
Rod Dreher is an editorial columnist for the Dallas Morning News, and author of "Crunchy Cons" (Crown Forum), a nonfiction book about conservatives, most of them religious, whose faith and political convictions sometimes put them at odds with mainstream conservatives. The views expressed in this blog are his own.
Subscribe
Archives
Blogs Worth Reading
- Front Porch Republic
- The American Conservative
- Patrick Deneen
- Conventional Folly
- The American Scene
- First Things
- Andrew Sullivan
- The Plank
- Eunomia
- Get Religion
- Postmodern Conservative
- Alex Massie
- The Corner
- Contentions
- Sharon Astyk
- Barry Ritholtz
- The Oil Drum
- Mere Comments
- First Principles (ISI)
- Brian Kaller
He's running for President, not Pope. Of course I'd vote for a Mormon, if he appeared to be a man of integrity and supported the issues that I believed to be important.>
No, I don't think I could vote for a Mormon. LDS theology is so uh, odd, I'd have serious reservations about that person's mental makeup.>
Oh, Bob, you're mean.
The way I see it, I don't mind the religion of the person per se; like Rod said, I would vote for an atheist, in theory. But the thing is, an atheist isn't really likely to agree with me about abortion, gay marriage, and other cultural issues; if an atheist I liked existed, though, I wouldn't have a problem.
As for Mormon...well, as I understand, they would agree with conservatives on most issues at least. I'd have to check Romney out, but from what I know he could be a possibility. His religion will probably be made into a big deal, though; even people who don't know what Mormons believe, seem to distrust it immediately.
God bless.>
Bob is only a little mean. I would never vote for a Scientologist, precisely because I think their religion is kooky, and thus they must be a little off mentally. Mormons aren't as bad, but they are close. I might vote for Romney, but I would want reassurance to feel good about him.>
Fr. Neuhaus wrote about Mormonism a while back. He said that they tend to agree with conservative Christians on social issues such as denying rights to gays, but that Mormons are nonetheless not Christian.
">http://www.irr.org/mit/neuhaus.html>
I haven't written anything on Mitt myself, though I suppose I probably will as the 2008 election unfolds. In the meantime, if you're interested, look here for what one Mormon thinks of what evangelicals think of Mitt.>
I could vote for one, with one hand holding my nose. But then I've done that many times already. Joe Conder>
I ponder this point myself from time to time. I know I'd have no problem voting for a Jewish candidate. Much of that is because I know where the Jewish position is relative to my own Christian one. The Jew doesn't claim he's Christian.
The Mormons on the other hand, have a long, storied history of presenting themselves as Christians, even to the point of redefining Christian words to mean something other than the accepted meaning. I have always found this duplicitous. They have the legal right to believe whatever they want, but it seems odd indeed to turn around and proclaim that what they in fact proclaim is Christian.
This tendency to falsehood within Mormonism really makes me leery of voting for them.>
I'd vote for a Mormon if I thought the other candidate was worse. But that's how I make all my voting decisions: pulling the lever for the person I think will do the least damage, and hoping I'm getting it right. But voting literally "for" someone? As in "I believe in this person, I'm on this person's team, I have good feelings and hopes here"? I've never done it. Can't imagine doing it. Hey, I've met a few politicians. But I've also always been constitutionally averse to investing hope/faith/whatever in politics generally.
Nice side benefit of this kind of cynicism is that if anyone actually does do something worthwhile or competent, you get to enjoy a moment of pleasant surprise.>
Which commentator was it who noted, with some amusement, that the only current Republican contender with just one wife is the Mormon?>
Father Neuhaus later retracted and decided to classify Mormons as 'marginal Christians' or 'heretical Christians,' which sounds about right to me.>
I just want to note that the 'Bob' above is not me. I'm the only 'bob' who I've seen posting around here regularly, and I COULD vote for Mitt (but won't, because he has no chance of getting nominated).>
I'm an evangelical and I'd be willing to vote for a Mormon. Not for Romney, but for a politically-good Mormon. I'd be willing to vote for a Jew, Muslim, New Ager, or atheist. For me, the accuracy of the candidate's theological views is not the issue when choosing a secular leader in a pluralistic society. I wouldn't support having a Mormon, Catholic, or apostate Protestant as a leader of my church but that's not what the Presidency is all about.
Focusing on God and our understanding of his Kingdom is important at times on a personal level, but in a political sense it s mostly a distraction...unless we think that our political party must be grounded on religious or irreligious truth. I don t. Populists should be reaching out beyond our comfort zone if we re interested in a majoritarian political coalition. People of every stripe should feel welcome. Litmus tests on religion should be avoided. For me, I would also avoid litmus tests on controversial secondary issues because the primary issue in politics is always WHO RULES? (=democracy? majority rule or minority rule?)
I won't support Romney not because of his Mormonism but because he's just another phony politician who will do the bidding of imperial warmongers and corporate exploiters. I say he's a phony because I don't buy his "conversion" to anti-abortionism any more than I think Steve Forbes was sincere when he flip-flopped...or George W. Bush, for that matter.
By the way, there are no genuine conservatives in a traditional Taft-Goldwater-Helms sense running for the GOP nomination in 2008 with the possible exception of Tom Tancredo. So it's hard for me to get excited about any of the Republican possibilities. Senator Feingold is closer to Goldwater than Senator Allen will ever be. That's the wonder of Jefferson-descended populism!>
Those of you who say Mormons are not Christians have no idea what you're talking about. You obviously don't know what Mormons believe. You might think you do, but you don't. There is no objective test for Christianity you can apply from the New Testament that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints cannot pass with flying colors.
There is no "tendency for falsehood" among Mormons. We're perfectly open and honest about our beliefs. The only dishonest ones are anti-Mormon bigots.
For all those who say they can't vote for a Mormon, or a Scientologist for that matter, because of his religion, I refer you to Article VI of the United States Constitution.>
Markus: Sorry, dude. People can apply whatever test they want to decide who they vote for.>
Sure, I guess I could vote for the candidate who wears boxers and not briefs.>
One of the things I look for in a candidate is a sense of humor -- a sense of perspective, a willingness to take constructive criticism, and a willingness to laugh at oneself. Mitt Romney had me when he joked sometime ago, with regard to gay marriage, that as a Mormon he believes that marriage is between a man and a woman and a woman and a woman. Sure, that by itself won't make me vote for him, but it will make me give him at least a serious look.>
If your definition for being a Christian is someone who believes in Christ as the Son of God and Savior and Redeemer of mankind, then Mormons pass with flying colors.
If your definition for being a Chrisian is someone who subscribes to specific creeds, then no they aren't.
They hold the creeds to be statements of belief formulated by men many decades, even centuries after Christ and his apostles left the earth. The Mormons feel that the sure word of God always trumps the philosophies of men, no matter how sincere the men might be.>
The London Bookies keep upgrading Mitt's chances for the Republican nomination. In fact, I'd never heard of him until I checked the English Book on the American Presidential Race.
Anyhow, with Allen in "PC Media Trouble," Mitt may be the most conservative Repiublican candidate with a shot. So, on the basis alone, he gets my vote. Surely, Mitts religion (which I understand is very conservative on soical issues) cannot cause anymore harm than King George II's whacko dispensationalism has in the Middle East.
Just early impressions.
XP>
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.