Page 1 of 3
Would a President Romney do what Salt Lake City told him to?
Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2007 9:14 pm
by _ozemc
I was talking with a friend of mine who is completely against Mitt Romney because he thinks that, as a full-fledged Mormon, Mitt would in essence be taking orders from the Prophet in SLC. We would basically have a Theocracy at that point.
So, for instance, if the Prophet said "God wants you to nuke England" (again, my friend's words, not mine), then Romney would have to do it. Otherwise, he's disobeying God.
No, I don't think that would happen, but it does show that others out there are having these sorts of discussions.
What do you think?
Re: Would a President Romney do what Salt Lake City told him
Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2007 9:21 pm
by _Doctor Steuss
ozemc wrote:I was talking with a friend of mine who is completely against Mitt Romney because he thinks that, as a full-fledged Mormon, Mitt would in essence be taking orders from the Prophet in SLC. We would basically have a Theocracy at that point.
So, for instance, if the Prophet said "God wants you to nuke England" (again, my friend's words, not mine), then Romney would have to do it. Otherwise, he's disobeying God.
No, I don't think that would happen, but it does show that others out there are having these sorts of discussions.
What do you think?
If Reid can vote against the gay marriage ban without ecclesiastical repercussions (other than kooky former stake pres. Howard's letter), I imagine Romney will be able to march to his own smarmy drum beat.
Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2007 10:23 pm
by _Coggins7
I was talking with a friend of mine who is completely against Mitt Romney because he thinks that, as a full-fledged Mormon, Mitt would in essence be taking orders from the Prophet in SLC. We would basically have a Theocracy at that point.
So, for instance, if the Prophet said "God wants you to nuke England" (again, my friend's words, not mine), then Romney would have to do it. Otherwise, he's disobeying God.
No, I don't think that would happen, but it does show that others out there are having these sorts of discussions.
What do you think?
I think we ought not to revisit the early sixties and the flap regarding JFK and Roman Catholicism.
Your friend is dumb.
Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2007 10:24 pm
by _Coggins7
And why, pray tell, would we want to nuke the U.K.?
Now France, on the other hand...
Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2007 10:29 pm
by _Yong Xi
No, Romney will not submit to LDS pressure if elected president. He will appeal to whomever can get him re-elected. Morminism has not helped him so far. Why would he willingly submit? He is a political opportunist first, Mormon second. I sense that Mormonism is an embarrassment for Romney.
Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2007 10:30 pm
by _Scottie
I honestly don't see the first presidency asking Mitt to do anything. I've been very impressed at how the presidency makes it a point to stay out of politics.
That being said, this country is run by the special interest groups. Shouldn't we be more concerned about something like, say, the big oil companies asking GWB to start a war in the middle east so they can profit from increased oil prices?? I think SLC should be the last of our worries when it comes to people telling the president what to do.
Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2007 10:33 pm
by _John Larsen
I think the Church is to savvy to try something like that. I also think the answer would be no, he wouldn't.
John
Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2007 10:35 pm
by _Zoidberg
Scottie wrote:I honestly don't see the first presidency asking Mitt to do anything. I've been very impressed at how the presidency makes it a point to stay out of politics.
Are you serious? They got very heavily involved with the Equal Rights Amendment, the Federal Marriage Amendment, etc. Benson was ranting and raving about the commies staging the Civil Rights movement and how half the people in the government are traitors in public speeches in his apostolic capacity. People were given assignments to write to their representatives about banning gay marriage. Total non-involvement.
Re: Would a President Romney do what Salt Lake City told him
Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2007 10:36 pm
by _the road to hana
ozemc wrote:What do you think?
It might depend on how he interprets certain oaths he's taken regarding consecration. Depending on how someone interpreted those, they might feel bound, or not.
A better question might be whether the church has any interest specifically in having a member in that position of leadership that would be beneficial to them, or whether a church state is something to be desired.
Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2007 10:42 pm
by _truth dancer
If one holds to the idea that in the last days the Constitution will be hanging by a thread and that the "priesthood" will come in to save the United States, then maybe this is all part of the plan and Mitt as president is just the beginning.
;-)
~dancer~