Drifting wrote:It is an irrefutable fact that once Romney swears the oath of the President he is in a no win situation.
By upholding one he will break the other.
There is a Hungarian saying: One can not sit on two horses with one ass.
by the way ass in not the asinus...
- Whenever a poet or preacher, chief or wizard spouts gibberish, the human race spends centuries deciphering the message. - Umberto Eco - To assert that the earth revolves around the sun is as erroneous as to claim that Jesus was not born of a virgin. - Cardinal Bellarmine at the trial of Galilei
Drifting wrote:It is an irrefutable fact that once Romney swears the oath of the President he is in a no win situation.
By upholding one he will break the other.
There is a Hungarian saying: One can not sit on two horses with one ass.
by the way ass in not the asinus...
He would become a Janus man...
“We look to not only the spiritual but also the temporal, and we believe that a person who is impoverished temporally cannot blossom spiritually.” Keith McMullin - Counsellor in Presiding Bishopric
"One, two, three...let's go shopping!" Thomas S Monson - Prophet, Seer, Revelator
Buffalo wrote:I seem to recall reading phone records of conversations Ezra Taft Benson had with church leadership while he was U.S. Secretary of Agriculture, reporting back to Salt Lake City and taking advice or even orders from them how to proceed on some issue.
I might be misremembering it, though. Has anyone seen what I'm referring to?
why me wrote:Maybe Mitt should be allowed to worship his religion freely. If we start to investigate just how people believe in god, we would be in trouble. Here is how it goes: if you don't believe in Mormonism, it really doesn't matter what Mormons believe. Likewise for any other faith. Let me put it this way: who cares.
I think it's only a real issue because Mitt is running for (with a strong possibility of winning, in my opinion) the U.S. presidency. If he were to win, then he will take the presidential oath that, I think, could conflict with his temple loyalty oath. American voters should know about this, and Mitt, in my opinion, would have to repudiate one or the other in order to ensure that no conflict could ever occur.
"Moving beyond apologist persuasion, LDS polemicists furiously (and often fraudulently) attack any non-traditional view of Mormonism. They don't mince words -- they mince the truth."
-- Mike Quinn, writing of the FARMSboys, in "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View," p. x (Rev. ed. 1998)
Drifting wrote:It is an irrefutable fact that once Romney swears the oath of the President he is in a no win situation.
By upholding one he will break the other.
Unless he sincerely believes that transforming the US into a Mormon theocracy is what is best for the US. Whew!!
My concern is that even if he is a decent, open-minded LDS (like Consig and Ben McGuire and others), that if the US would vote for Romney, this would constitute, among the radical LDS contingent, a license to transform the US into the image of what they want.
Huckelberry said: I see the order and harmony to be the very image of God which smiles upon us each morning as we awake.
The big trouble is that other religions don't claim to have a living Prophet. How can a faithful Mormon disregard the comments and commandments of God's voice on earth? It works if you are a believer, but for the rest of the country it's a little unsettling to think that Tom Monson might be calling the shots.
Maybe both Mitt Romney and Pres Monson know, and know each other knows, Pres. Monson does not talk to god. That the church leaders would like to quietly fold Mormonism into mainstream, and there will be no apocalyptic revelations coming from Salt Lake anytime soon
The big trouble is that other religions don't claim to have a living Prophet. How can a faithful Mormon disregard the comments and commandments of God's voice on earth? It works if you are a believer, but for the rest of the country it's a little unsettling to think that Tom Monson might be calling the shots.
Maybe both Mitt Romney and Pres Monson know, and know each other knows, Pres. Monson does not talk to god. That the church leaders would like to quietly fold Mormonism into mainstream, and there will be no apocalyptic revelations coming from Salt Lake anytime soon
Maybe, but that is still a problem. We can't know. If Romney is the believing Mormon that he says he is, he will have to defer to the Prophet's statements. It doesn't have to be "apocalyptic revelations". Monson's urging on domestic affairs and international affairs would have to be considered by a true Mormon.
Very scary if one is not Mormon.
This, or any other post that I have made or will make in the future, is strictly my own opinion and consequently of little or no value.
"Faith is believing something you know ain't true" Twain.
Remember Mattie and Nomad, who just happened to have the exact same grudges against the exact same people as William Schryver?
Radex wrote:Darth J. I advise you to distance yourself as much as possible from your very disturbed friend, who believes it is "satire" to declare that Elizabeth Smart wanted to be violently violated over the course of two years.
Radex wrote: Perhaps you believe Ms. Smart's attacker was only practising "satire" analogous to the many rapists and kidnappers who came before. I guess both he, and your friend The Mighty Builder, are off the hook.
Simon Belmont wrote: As I said, I do not hold the modern versions of any of these churches at fault for past hatred to a group of people. I pointed them out because some posters here choose to hate the LDS Church for the same reasons that would condemn whatever religion they belong to. It is a double standard, and it is wrong. It is mere parlor games -- sensationalism and shock value, but at what cost?
I do understand them, but I do not hold the modern religions accountable for past racism like The Mighty Builder does to Mormonism. It is the height of hypocrisy to do so, and I full-on rebuke The Mighty Builder for his hate postings. viewtopic.php?f=1&t=14413&p=354930&hilit=+mighty+builder+#p354930
Radex wrote: Antonyms to the word serious include: flippant, funny, humorous, or light. So, as readers can see, there was no mischaracterization. For the record, I don't think you're an immoral person at all. I think that condoning the words of your friend, The Mighty Builder, is quite ridiculous and in very bad taste. It appears that there are no lengths you won't go to in order to defend a friend. ......... I wonder what the probability is that more than one reasonable person could point out and call out your unreasonable approval of the words of your friend, The Mighty Builder. ......... Your friend, The Mighty Builder, said some very nasty things about an innocent child. You seem to support him and his words unhesitatingly. That is what I mean by "condone." ......... Instead of addressing why you called these good people "dumb" or why you think you're so much more intelligent than they are, evade and cover. It will serve you well in the future, Darth J.