"Romney: No Religious Test for President"


YEAH!

However he promises there won't be a single Muslim in his administration!

Or in other words a he will employ a "Religious Test" to determine who can and can't serve our pluralist society!.

He claims he was never a 'cafeteria christian' picking and choosing different parts of his religion to follow, instead he followed every word.

Including the words that say black people could not get into heaven, but if they were exceptionally good, they might be allowed into heaven, but only as slaves to the mormons.

Now THAT might be a little tough to explain away, but this assbag will just dismiss it and say it's a smear job even when it's written for anyone to see.

So he didn't seek to explain his religion then, just that we should be OK with him?

He did say he believes in his faith, so I guess that means that not long ago he believed blacks could not server as ministers and all the other crazy things that Mormans thought and think in his lifetime.

Good to know.

It's a slippery slope. 50 years ago the first Catholic. 2008 the first Mormon. 2048 the first Scientologist. 2096 the first Atheist? Come on all you Fundies, gang up on Willard or it'll be a godless nation in less than 100 years!!!

He's playing up his Judeo/Christian "values" with one hand while trying to tell people his religion shouldn't matter to them with the other.

If you claim your religious values are going to affect your decision making, then your religion is an issue.

I though it was a very "meh" speech. It won't hurt him, but I sincerely doubt if anybody will change their mind, one way or the other.

I have to agree, very few if any will change their mind. As evidenced by the comments here.

Perhaps Romney's campaign song against the other GOPers could be REM's "Losing My Religion"


"That's me in the corner-- that's me in the spotlight losing my religion trying to keep up with you....

... and I don't know if I can do it."

perhaps Romney's campaign song against the other GOPers should be REM's "Losing My Religion"

"That's me in the corner-- that's me in the spotlight losing my religion trying to keep up with you...
and I don't know if I can do it..."

I have no problem with anyone beleiving in a higher power.

I do have a problem when the leader of the free world actually starts hearing voices in his head and takes orders from them.


"President Bush said to all of us: 'I am driven with a mission from God'. God would tell me, 'George go and fight these terrorists in Afghanistan'. And I did. And then God would tell me 'George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq'. And I did."
Mr Bush went on: "And now, again, I feel God's words coming to me, 'Go get the Palestinians their state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle East'. And, by God, I'm gonna do it.

From the article:

At the same time, he decried those who would remove from public life "any acknowledgment of God," and he said that "during the holiday season, nativity scenes and menorahs should be welcome in our public places."

I'm sure the Islamic people will love having they're Ramadan decorations up as well, and don't forget about the Hindus, I'm sure they'd love to have all of they're holidays represented.

Holi - festival of colors and spring (February-March)
Mahashivaratri (Shiva Ratri) - night sacred to Shiva (February-March)
Rama Navami - birthday of Lord Rama (April)
Krishna Jayanti - birthday of Lord Krishna (July-August)
Raksbandhana - renewing bonds between brothers and sisters (July-August)
Kumbh Mela - pilgrimage every 12 years to four cities in India (July-August; last one 2003)
Ganesha-Chaturthi (Ganesha Utsava) - festival of Ganesh (August-September)
Dassera - victory of Rama over demon king Ravana (September-October)
Navaratri - festival of Shakti (in Bengal) or Rama's victory over Ravana (South India) (September-October)
Diwali - festival of lights and Laksmi (September-October)


There won't be any problems, I'm sure.

"Losing My Religion"


I like the words and it has a nice beat, but I can't dance to it.

He's playing up his Judeo/Christian "values" with one hand while trying to tell people his religion shouldn't matter to them with the other.

If you claim your religious values are going to affect your decision making, then your religion is an issue.

Posted by Sully

I am not a Mit fan but, he is saying his values play a role but the church will not make his decisions.

"I'm sure the Islamic people will love having they're Ramadan decorations up as well, and don't forget about the Hindus, I'm sure they'd love to have all of they're holidays represented."

And we musn't forget the Festivus Pole. And this year the "airing of the grievances" can be held on the courthouse lawn! Yay!

Romney's not alone in thinking this, but I hate politicians who give a "all faiths are OK" speech without saying that "no faith" is OK too.

Best thing Mitt ever said:

"Why don't we just enforce the immigration laws we have"?

Worst thing Mitt ever said:

"I want to double Guantanamo".

I have cousins who are right wing evangelicals. I recall them caling Mormons 'Satanic' in years gone by.

The quandry they'll be in if he's the GOP nominee. Funny.

When does Romney give his 'I'm not really an arrogant and mean spirited rich guy trying to buy the presidency' speech?

Ahh, the many voices of tolerance that make up the Left

Is Romney going give his speech tonight wearing his magic Morman underwear?

(that one's for you, AU *grin*)

CC

He he he he he

VERNON

It was my right wing evangelical 'straight GOP' voting cousins who called the Mormons 'Satanic' not me dude. Take up 'tolerance' with them.

Oh, and I got a shitload of 'Kerry is working for Satan' emails during the 2004 campaign too.

So much for Baptist love and tolerance.

"He hoped the speech would allay concerns of Christian conservatives, some of whom have propelled former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee to join him atop the polls in Iowa. Its caucuses kick off presidential voting next month."
"Illustrating Romney's challenge, one of his own invited guests said he believes Mormons are not Christians."


YEAH!

Then comes Vern with this (mis)calculated beauty!

Ahh, the many voices of tolerance that make up the Left
Posted by vernon at 2007-12-06 02:28 PM


Too funny! Ignorant and delusional but still funny!

"Ahh, the many voices of tolerance that make up the Left"

If Mitt were an atheist....oh the right would be so PC I'm sure. I will guarantee you the left will tolerate Mitt and his religious beliefs better than some of the Christians would ever tolerate an atheist.

"Oh, and I got a shitload of 'Kerry is working for Satan' emails during the 2004 campaign too."

I remember they were going to confiscate all of our bibles.

The Left and the god problem (left lower-case on purpose). Has anyone here read deToqueville's Democracy in America? I would highly recommend it. The true liberal cares not one whit what you may believe, but he does care if it is brought into the public square - kinda like the "your fist my nose" and "your smoke my lungs" - and I don't mean creches or crosses, that's just recognizing historical held and to some cherished icons. Nothig wrong with it. What the Left hasn't been able to do coherntly or consistently is develop that theme, that science actually isn't a religion because it has no "sacred texts" and that the whole notion of theory is hypothesis, observation, and the ability to CHANGE. No religion allows change of their sacred texts based on further review, but that's the basic principle of science - review and change - but I have digressed. It shouldn't matter WHAT one believes, as long as their actions and character assert freedom and progress for all people. Words are just that, words. What has the man done, what does he profess as his vision for America, and do they connect? Dogging ANYONE for ANY belief is just not "liberating".

I will guarantee you the left will tolerate Mitt and his religious beliefs better than some of the Christians would ever tolerate an atheist.

Posted by danni at 2007-12-06 03:02 PM | Reply |

I'm not sure, Danni. The right has no idea what to do for this election. After all, Pat Robertson has already endorsed Giuliani. Who could ever have predicted that? Apparently, the right will tolerate some peculiar theology in exchange for power. It would not be much different if a Carter-type Democrat were a contender for that party's nomination. The left will put up with that kind of warm "What Would Jesus Do" piety -- even if they think it is hokey -- in exchange for power.

"Romney's not alone in thinking this, but I hate politicians who give a "all faiths are OK" speech without saying that "no faith" is OK too." POSTED BY RCADE

I actually heard a student call in to c-span this morning and say religion should be in he equation or otherwise how else would a candidate get his morals?

As if organized religion owns the rights to ethical behavior.

SPUD

My buddy's mom was from the Ukraine. I remember the elaborate eggs she used to paint, and the stories of her childhood there. She'd be 90 if she were alive today to give you a time reference of her days there.

I invented a new holiday greeting:

Happy Hannakwanzaramadanamas!!

The 'Mormon thing' is Romney's largest problem before and after this speech. Sure, most of the Republican leadership care less about theology than winning. But, there is a Nader-sized if not Perot-sized wedge of evangelical Christians that simply will not vote for someone who is not at least nominally a conventional Pauline Christian. And Romney isn't that.

This is a disaster for Romney. There may be 5% of Americans who'd never vote for a black guy. But, they aren't part of the vote Obama's counting on. There may be 5% of Americans who'd never vote for a woman. But, they aren't part of Clinton's demographic to begin with. There may have been 5% of Americans who wouldn't have voted for a Catholic in 1960, but they were pretty evenly divided in 'natural loyalty'. But, there are 5% of Americans who'd never vote for a Mormon, and these are mostly people who would have voted for Bushes/Dole/Reagan. Enough to lose.

If Mitt were an atheist....oh the right would be so PC I'm sure. I will guarantee you the left will tolerate Mitt and his religious beliefs better than some of the Christians would ever tolerate an atheist.

Posted by danni

I don't know if you know but....... many christians don't consider mormons as christians.

What does that leave you with?

"VERNON

It was my right wing evangelical 'straight GOP' voting cousins who called the Mormons 'Satanic' not me dude. Take up 'tolerance' with them.

Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2007-12-06 02:39 PM"

Can Vernon be any more consistently wrong when he posts here? Fuck, not everything requires a calculator to figure out. His problem is much deeper than that. Poor old man.

I suggest that whoever wins the GOPiggy nomination should give his acceptance speech wearing a blue connical hat decorated with silver and gold crescent moons and stars, matching gown, and glow-in-the-dark swizzle stick befitting the office of High Priest.

SPUD

Cool pic. Proof that eggs (and potatos?) can be bigger than we used to think LOL

Rick's mom told a lot of stories of life under Stalin. WOW. Well, another member of the 'greatest generation' who made a life out of thin air. Amazing people.

Someone should ask him if God talks to him too.

God hasn't been giving very good advice to W.

Ever read any Studs Terkel?

Sure have. Used to catch his radio show in Chicago too. His daughter (Anne?) was pretty hot too as I recall.

It was my right wing evangelical 'straight GOP' voting cousins who called the Mormons 'Satanic' not me dude. Take up 'tolerance' with them.

Posted by mOntecOre at 2007-12-06 04:48 PM | Reply

You think every post is about you? Do the voices in your head tell you that? Child sexual abuse has all sorts of tragic consequences. How's daddy?

Must have hit the nerve. You repeated it. So it's your words now.

"What the hell is Kwanzaa?"
--Krusty

-----

See Monty, when I use someone else's words, I make it clear.

"I have to agree, very few if any will change their mind. As evidenced by the comments here."

Ha!

Just "what" does this group represent?

I do not agree, I believe that Romney gave an incredibly powerful speech, having said that I thought he was full of shit, seeing as I am an agnostic (well actually I am a pagan but it is easier to say agnostic) besides that fact I think that the speech he gave was incredibly powerful and will hit home for an awful lot of christians.... watch his numbers skyrocket tomorrow!

During a 2004 presidential debate the moderator posed a question as to how much faith enters their decisions... and Bush jumped on it like stink on shit.

And Kerry of course had to pretend along with the fucking question.

Hard to tell that ours is a secular state, most of these pres wanabes violate that concept every chance they get.

As if organized religion owns the rights to ethical behavior.

Umm hmm.

Just curious, you goofy asshole....

What, exactly, informs your notions of "ethical behavior?

(P.S. - I know the answer already, but allow me my "Boyd" moment.)

Has his religion been a negative in governing an extremely liberal state? If not, why should it be a problem governing the country?

ps: I have not set foot in a church since serving in-country, RVN 70/71. I'm not religious, just curious as when young I remember the big 'to do' about Kennedy being a Roman Catholic. The more things change, the more they stay the same. Only difference is now the Dms are the ones attaching on religion as opposed to the Repubs back in the early 60s.

Guess this is a GOTCHA, but it is true.

Ref my post above, guess I forgot that back then the left was more conservative (Exp: JFK was for tax cuts for the people); yet also, back then the word liberal actually meant open-minded (go figure).

Good thing John is dead or he'd be kicking Teddy's ass big time!

Hard to tell that ours is a secular state

No its not.

We are a secular state.

Our state institutions are based upon secular concepts of how human beings should live with one another.

Unfortunately for people like yourself, we're a secular state comprised of a predominately religious electorate.

And have been for a couple of centuries now.

Go let your your mighty liberal intellect come to terms with that fucked up shit.

Then get back with us. :)

MSGT

Reagan raised taxes every year of his presidency but the first and last. Bush 41 raised taxes. Bill Clinton 0 tax increases.

Come again with your 'conservative' definition again. The charge Dems 'raise taxes' is ludicrous when you actually look at the record of presidents the last 40 years. In addition to Reagan's tax increases, which were done when he saw the record breaking deficits he was running up trying to beat the Soviets, he also cut the share of federal dollars that had been sent back to states - forcing states to raise their revenues.

Only difference is now the Dms are the ones attaching on religion as opposed to the Repubs back in the early 60s.

The "Repubs" in the early 1960s were attacking JFKs Catholicism because the USA was (and continues to be) a Protestant nation that, at that point, had never had a Catholic president.

The "Dems" today are simply attacking religion.

They don't give a fuck whether you're a Jew, Catholic, Protestant, Muslim, etc.

They believe that if they manage to use the power of the state to extort and redistribute enough of your wealth, their "vanguard elite" in government bureaucracy can provide you with all the trappings promised to you by your stupid, archaic belief in religion.

But without all the intolerance, "belief", and other icky stuff that keeps people from being as enlightened and smart as they.

Its hard werk for them.

FF for MAO's stupidity and blanket statements rooted in stardust.

I just watched Romney's speech on C-SPAN

It's not his religion or party affiliation that turn me off. He comes across as an intransigent and arrogant man.

I've had my share of that the last 7 years.

P.S. - I know the answer already...

Unintentional FF fer li'l Maoser!

You don't know shit from shinola, you wankstain of a human being.

You prove that with practically every post but go on wif yer bad self and keep on thinking that you do. It's funny as hell!

^_^

Be Well.

PS: And with that last bit of bravado the tiny tatyer o' doom runs a'shrieking away from the big bad Mao and his imposing intellect.

PPS: Maosy Tongue, ya might wanna catch up to Johnson and Bowa. Spud heard they're going bowling together. Sounds like fun, no?

Like he always do around this time, the tubernator, dethspud, has managed to find his way offa the blogstage here at the lefty leaning Drudge Retort, as ya do,
stage left.

As if organized religion owns the rights to ethical behavior.
Umm hmm.
Just curious, you goofy asshole....What, exactly, informs your notions of "ethical behavior?
POSTED BY PINCHE_MAO

What 'informs' my notions? My notions do the informing. It comes from the soul.

It sure isn't from organized religion. If you need the threat of eternal damnation to do the right thing, by all means, go to church.

If you cant comment on a statement without being abusive, you obviously need to go somewhere.

"The "Dems" today are simply attacking religion."

Riiiight.
I swear the righties just make shit up and throw it at the wall to see if it will stick.

Thats a good question Oohrah. And I don't know. In fact, I don't think a lot of people even know he's LDS. I don't recall Hatch being questioned much about it either.

I think this is due mostly to Romney's high profile and the fact we're talking the Presidency here.

Maybe someone knows how the Mormon issue played out in MA when he ran for governor. I don't remember, but then I didn't pay that much attention at the time.

I beleive this excerpt from David Brooks at the NYT is all you need from Mitt's Talk:

"In Romney's account, faith ends up as wishy-washy as the most New Age-y secularism. In arguing that the faithful are brothers in a common struggle, Romney insisted that all religions share an equal devotion to all good things. Really? Then why not choose the one with the prettiest buildings?

In order to build a voting majority of the faithful, Romney covered over different and difficult conceptions of the Almighty. When he spoke of God yesterday, he spoke of a bland, smiley-faced God who is the author of liberty and the founder of freedom. There was no hint of Lincoln's God or Reinhold Niebuhr's God or the religion most people know -- the religion that imposes restraints upon on the passions, appetites and sinfulness of human beings. He wants God in the public square, but then insists that theological differences are anodyne and politically irrelevant.

Romney's job yesterday was to unite social conservatives behind him. If he succeeded, he did it in two ways. He asked people to rally around the best traditions of America's civic religion. He also asked people to submerge their religious convictions for the sake of solidarity in a culture war without end. "



And with that he should have added quite a few voters from the liberal side of the aisle. No doubt. However, to those who listen and know, Huckabee is a much better choice from a faith based perspective. I will not vote for Mitt Romney, never was, never will. In fact I would vote for Rudy before I voted for him.

Wonder what God thinks about exiled posters not abiding by rules they agreed to when they signed up here?

Mitt Is So Full Of Shit I Don't Know Which Is Worse At Pandering And Calculation, He Or H.Clinton

-Sarge

Mitt is worstest.

I will guarantee you the left will tolerate Mitt and his religious beliefs better than some of the Christians would ever tolerate an atheist.

Posted by danni at 2007-12-06 03:02 PM | Reply |



I tolerate all atheist's. I just don't want them ramming their religion down my throat.

I've seen a couple of people die. IF the govt. wants to pay me (grant me some money) to observe some atheist deaths, I'm willing.

I've heard the expression, "there are no atheist's in fox holes".

We could start with spud but being a man of numbers I'll take ray first, He's older and still drives.

Has anyone asked Romney about war? He took a waiver during Vietnam. I was under the impression they do not serve in the military. What's his stand on our invading Iraq and what would his view be on the use of U.S. military force?

We know what the Shrub said in 2000, which was completely juxtiposed to his actual deeds.

Also, it's not like there's some mass outpouring of support for Romney. He's spent $60,000,000 of his own money to win the nomination. Not exactly indicative of public support in my view.