Huckebee the baptist minister

[_Sethbag]

One addition to this. Guy Sajer's comments actually represented my own views pretty well on this, but I thought I'd be a little more explicit about this next thing.

If we were to zoom back to, say, 1965 or so, and have a Mormon run for President I could not possibly vote for him because of the black issue. Recall that at that time we still had apostles like Mark E. Petersen teaching openly that blacks had been less valiant in the pre-existence and were cursed by God with their skin color, and that they were reaping on Earth the just desserts of their behavior in the pre-existence and so forth. Recall he also taught that a black person could get into the Celestial Kingdom, but they would be a servant there.

What about women and the priesthood? Can you vote for someone who believes that women should be second class citizens in a spiritual community?

If not, then you are ready to exclude just about anyone who belongs to a religious group that does not open its leadership to women. That's a lot of people.

That's a very good question. Fortunately, the nature of the teaching is a little different, though perhaps the outcome in terms of church positions being held, priesthood, etc. is still the same. LDS don't teach that women are of lesser value because of their valiancy in the pre-existence. The attitude there is strictly one of a set of roles envisioned by the belief system for each gender. I see your point, though, and perhaps that ought not to be treated too differently than the black thing. I'll admit it's possible that I'm just not in tune enough on the female priesthood ban to see it in quite the same way, but perhaps I ought to.

[_Jason Bourne]

You toss around the term "religious bigotry" too freely.

Perhaps in past threads, but not on this one if you really understand my point.

A person's religious beliefs shape their world view, for better or worse, and thus are legitimate issues of concern

Ok. Then give them all a far shake. I am waiting for someone to ask Huckabee if he believes in a literal flood, that Adam and Eve were real people and if he thinks the Anti Christ of Revelation will be a real world political leader and does he believe that person is alive today.

IF, however, they demonstrate a tendency to let their religious beliefs excessively cloud the way they see issues; if they rely too heavily on God rather than reasonable considerations of the public good (or something like that) to make decisions; if they are inclined due to religious beliefs to withold civil rights or liberties from groups of people; if they inject religion into the public square in inappropriate ways; if they are captive to dogmatic religious interestes; etc. then YES, I do consider this relevant.

I have no problem with that.

As for ALiTD's comment, I hate neither Mormons or Baptists. I am on record stating that, given a choice, I'd much rather hang out with TBM Mormons than evangelicals/fundies any day of the week. The most obnoxious Mormon is nothing compared to an obnoxious evangelical/fundie.

So when the press starts grilling Huckabee like they do Romney I will assume that they are no longer biased and even bigoted against Mormons.

[_Jason Bourne]

Mike Huckabee seems to be catching up to Romney in the Iowa polls. Huckebee is a baptist minister. Will his religious beliefs be as scrutinized as Romeny's. Should they be? Or will he get a pass?

He is Mainstream, Romney is not. Its as simple as that. What if a Quaker ran for President? Oh yah...that happened.

So bigotry against a candidate of a non mainstream religion is A OK?

[_Jason Bourne]

I'm afraid Jason that I don't agree here, and it looks like in this case you were trolling for a reason to play the bigotry card.

I am afraid you are incorrect.

The fact is that the Religious Right is what's at stake here. Romney is pandering to it as an outsider.

While Mormons and EV do not agree theologically Mormons are religous and to the right, in general and are thus part of the religous right.

Huckebee is part of it. Nobody on the Religious Right is going to be suspicious about the views of a Baptist minister the way they are going to be about a Mormon. This isn't rocket science. Huckebee has home field advantage where faith is concerned, so of course you haven't heard much from the right about his views.

Since the pressure on answering all sorts of religious questions is not comeing only from the religious right your comment above is flawed as it relates to this topic. All I want is a fiar shake. You going to put the heat on Romney for being a Mormon then put it on Huckabee, as well as the other.

I, on the other hand, would be very suspicious of Huckebee because of his religious views. Probably even more so than I would be of Mitt. If Huckebee is a Biblical literalist, for example, or a young-earth creationist, anti-evolutionist, etc. that would concern me greatly. And I wouldn't consider that bigotry, either. A biblical literalist and young-earth creationist would clearly have surrendered his mind to a delusional worldview, and that it would worry me greatly to have someone with such a cloudy vision of reality with his finger on the nuclear button. Especially if that person believed that Armageddon had to happen before Jesus can come back, so he'd actually have some incentive.

If the playing field in religious questions is more even then fine. But it isn't and this is what is not rocket science. The Mormon boy is inordinately asked about his religion and an issue is made of it. Not so with Huckabee.

[_Jason Bourne]

It looks like Huckabee is benefiting from the EV nervousness about Mormons in Iowa.

Yep

I would be shocked if Mitt ever got the nomination. I live in the Bible Belt, I know how prejudiced many - if not most - EVs are against Mormons. But it does appear that the religious right's power may be diluted in this nomination cycle.

Interestingly a number of MAJOR EV leaders have endorsed Romney.

in my opinion, I don't think LDS leaders should desire a Romney candidacy. The scrutiny on Mormonism if he gets elected will be intense, much more than on JFK.

I think this is nonsense.

And one truth that may come out is that while catholics like JFK "say" the pope is infallible, they "act" as if he's fallible. While Mormons "say" the prophet is fallible, they "act" as if he's infallible.

Good point.

[_Sethbag]

The fact is that the Religious Right is what's at stake here. Romney is pandering to it as an outsider.

While Mormons and EV do not agree theologically Mormons are religous and to the right, in general and are thus part of the religous right.

Mormonism may be religious, and Mormons' politics may well be to the right, but the Religious Right is a specific term for a body of conservative religious people who really don't include Mormons in their ranks, for the purposes of political discussions like these. For example, Mormonism as a political force in this country is basically limited to maybe Utah, Arizona, and parts of Idaho. That's about it. Even the relatively large California population of Mormons is dwarfed by the numbers of non-Mormons in that state to the point where the Mormons aren't really a major power. Go down South in this country and tell me how much political power the Mormons hold. It's jack squat. That's why it's not Mormons Romney is having to pander to, but other, some might say traditional, Christians.

Huckebee is part of it. Nobody on the Religious Right is going to be suspicious about the views of a Baptist minister the way they are going to be about a Mormon. This isn't rocket science. Huckebee has home field advantage where faith is concerned, so of course you haven't heard much from the right about his views.

Since the pressure on answering all sorts of religious questions is not comeing only from the religious right your comment above is flawed as it relates to this topic. All I want is a fair shake. You going to put the heat on Romney for being a Mormon then put it on Huckabee, as well as the other.

Well I personally would put the heat on Huckabee. As I've said, I'd have serious problems voting for someone as President who was, for instance, a young-earth Creationist or a Biblical literalist. In my own book, Huckabee gets no more of a pass than Romney does, but in the Republican electorate in general he probably does, for the reasons I've stated, ie: Huckabee is part of the establishment of the Religious Right as I've defined it, and Romney isn't.

If the playing field in religious questions is more even then fine. But it isn't and this is what is not rocket science. The Mormon boy is inordinately asked about his religion and an issue is made of it. Not so with Huckabee.

Yeah, because the people doing the asking don't share Romney's religion, and by and large do share Huckabee's. This is what I've been saying.

[_Jason Bourne]

Seth

The problem with what you say above is it is not just people who are Huckabee's religion that are giving him a pass. It is everyone. Even liberal media types are beating up on Romney but not Huckabee.

[_guy sajer]

Seth

The problem with what you say above is it is not just people who are Huckabee's religion that are giving him a pass. It is everyone. Even liberal media types are beating up on Romney but not Huckabee.

I agree, ALL religous beliefs should be subjected to critical discussion.

As a sidenote, I'm guessing that an avowed atheist would have a harder time getting elected than a Mormon. Agree or disagree?

[_Trevor]

As a sidenote, I'm guessing that an avowed atheist would have a harder time getting elected than a Mormon. Agree or disagree?

I agree. Many monotheists hold atheism as being the worst possible state of incorrect belief.

[_beastie]

I agree. Many monotheists hold atheism as being the worst possible state of incorrect belief.

Yes, polls have demonstrated that atheists are the most discriminated against group in terms of "who would you elect for president."

It hasn't been that many years since Bush Sr. declared that he didn't think of atheists as real citizens or patriots.