Ouch! Gregory Prince: "Mitt NOT the face of Mormonism."

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_Blixa
_Emeritus
Posts: 8381
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2007 12:45 pm

Re: Ouch! Gregory Prince: "Mitt NOT the face of Mormonism."

Post by _Blixa »

angsty wrote:... I have always wanted to believe that the church is more like the best Mormons I've known (my mother, for example) than the worst. The longer I live, the more I realize that if the church really was filled with people like my mother or people who even wanted to be like her, it would be a far different organization than what it has become. There would be no "1,2,3 ... let's go shopping!" and far fewer hungry mouths and needy people in this world.



Eh, I think by and large the membership is made up of decent folk like your mother. The reason this isn't reflected in the current leadership has more to do with the particular organization of the Church as an institution: the stranglehold of gerontocracy and "royal Mormon families." If there was some avenue for bottom-up discussion and input, as opposed to the rigid top-down management, I think you would see a far different organization.

I don't know if this will ever change or when. On the one hand, there is the notion that only doctrinally controlled and controlling churches survive, on the other hand, I see much more of a broadening of "Mormon identity" on a grass roots level than I thought possible post-correlation. And the Church has re-invented itself several times over since Joseph Smith and always in response to development or pressures from outside. And undoubtedly it will continue to change.
From the Ernest L. Wilkinson Diaries: "ELW dreams he's spattered w/ grease. Hundreds steal his greasy pants."
_Fence Sitter
_Emeritus
Posts: 8862
Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2010 3:49 pm

Re: Ouch! Gregory Prince: "Mitt NOT the face of Mormonism."

Post by _Fence Sitter »

Blixa wrote:Eh, I think by and large the membership is made up of decent folk like your mother.


And mine.

By and large the active LDS people I have know are are sincere and well meaning people. I consider it a plus when I meet someone who is LDS. I am more comfortable with them and more trusting of them because they are members. They make great neighbors and co workers.

Of course when I lived in the Mormon corridor 30 years ago I felt a bit differently since too much of a good thing can be suffocating.
"Any over-ritualized religion since the dawn of time can make its priests say yes, we know, it is rotten, and hard luck, but just do as we say, keep at the ritual, stick it out, give us your money and you'll end up with the angels in heaven for evermore."
_bcspace
_Emeritus
Posts: 18534
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 6:48 pm

Re: Ouch! Gregory Prince: "Mitt NOT the face of Mormonism."

Post by _bcspace »

This would only be relevant to those who think Mormons are voting for Romney because he's Mormon.

Ergo, it is relevant to the 90%+ of Mormons who will vote for Mitt.


Because he's conservative, not Mormon. Perhaps you agree then that all (or 90% of) blacks who voted for Obama did so because he is black and therefore are racist?

Also, if by "stumble" you mean "tell the truth" then you hit upon the salient fact that Romney, by telling the truth about Obama and his supporters hasn't seemed to hurt himself in the polls.

I think Mitt was telling the truth about how he honestly feels about nearly half of the country.


I notice that Mother Jones agreed to release the entire video for the sake of context, at Romney's request, and then backed off saying that the camera was inadvertently turned off.........

The entire incident has been really good for Romney as he's been able to get free air time to explain his views which are quite mainstream America (work over welfare). The media realized this and is backing off on the issue to avoid helping Romney.
Machina Sublime
Satan's Plan Deconstructed.
Your Best Resource On Joseph Smith's Polygamy.
Conservatism is the Gospel of Christ and the Plan of Salvation in Action.
The Degeneracy Of Progressivism.
_Rollo Tomasi
_Emeritus
Posts: 4085
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 12:27 pm

Re: Ouch! Gregory Prince: "Mitt NOT the face of Mormonism."

Post by _Rollo Tomasi »

bcspace wrote:Because he's conservative, not Mormon. Perhaps you agree then that all (or 90% of) blacks who voted for Obama did so because he is black and therefore are racist?

Nope. But I do think that TBM's tend to vote as a bloc, particularly where a candidate is TBM like them.

I notice that Mother Jones agreed to release the entire video for the sake of context, at Romney's request, and then backed off saying that the camera was inadvertently turned off.........

Do you have some evidence that Mother Jones (rather than the bartender who filmed the event) had something to do with that? With the crap Mitt was spewing, the bartender probably did Mitt a favor by missing a couple of minutes.

The entire incident has been really good for Romney as he's been able to get free air time to explain his views which are quite mainstream America (work over welfare). The media realized this and is backing off on the issue to avoid helping Romney.

Are you high? This has only hurt Mitt (well, I'll concede a few lunatic right-wingers, such as yourself, might be happy about it), and if he loses the election, this notorious video will be the main reason, in my opinion.
"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)
_beastie
_Emeritus
Posts: 14216
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:26 am

Re: Ouch! Gregory Prince: "Mitt NOT the face of Mormonism."

Post by _beastie »

bcspace wrote:This would only be relevant to those who think Mormons are voting for Romney because he's Mormon. Also, if by "stumble" you mean "tell the truth" then you hit upon the salient fact that Romney, by telling the truth about Obama and his supporters hasn't seemed to hurt himself in the polls.


What Romney said about the 47% is simply untrue. His assertion is completely unsupported by the facts. You choose to ignore the facts, as usual. I expect that from you, but it's a bit more scary when a presidential candidate does it.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.

Penn & Teller

http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com
_why me
_Emeritus
Posts: 9589
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 8:19 pm

Re: Ouch! Gregory Prince: "Mitt NOT the face of Mormonism."

Post by _why me »

beastie wrote:
What Romney said about the 47% is simply untrue. His assertion is completely unsupported by the facts. You choose to ignore the facts, as usual. I expect that from you, but it's a bit more scary when a presidential candidate does it.


Under Obama, poverty has increased. Insecurity has increased. People are suffering. More people on food stamps. More homeless. And many more people on benefits. Plus, generations taking welfare. Not good.

Romney may have misspoke but then again don't we all? Is Obama any better?

Here is the deal. People are recording people when they believe they are having a private conversation. Look at Paris Hilton speaking to a friend in cab and being recorded by the cab driver. And it is here that the problem is. No more privacy. Gone. Now is that good for our society? I don't think so.

We had 4 people killed in Libya. And what did Obama do? Go on Letterman and had a good laugh. I would be fit to be tied if my relative was killed in Libya and the president did this before they were even buried. Disgusting. But hey, its America.
I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world.
Joseph Smith


We are “to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to provide for the widow, to dry up the tear of the orphan, to comfort the afflicted, whether in this church, or in any other, or in no church at all…”
Joseph Smith
_why me
_Emeritus
Posts: 9589
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 8:19 pm

Re: Ouch! Gregory Prince: "Mitt NOT the face of Mormonism."

Post by _why me »

Romney gave away 30 percent of his income to charity. Not bad. He could have kept it all. He could have given his ten percent. Not bad. He could have been bragging about it on the campaign trail. But...he kept it secret until he felt pressured to release his tax returns.
I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world.
Joseph Smith


We are “to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to provide for the widow, to dry up the tear of the orphan, to comfort the afflicted, whether in this church, or in any other, or in no church at all…”
Joseph Smith
_moksha
_Emeritus
Posts: 22508
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 8:42 pm

Re: Ouch! Gregory Prince: "Mitt NOT the face of Mormonism."

Post by _moksha »

Mitt has simply reaffirmed the position against social justice that Glenn Beck said is an essential true church value. Just because these men were extra valiant in the pre-existence, and have a strong testimony of social darwinism, is no reason to distance them now.

Personally, I choose David Bokovoy to the be face of Mormonism, but you have to admire the size of Mitt's tithing (not that I ever look at such things, being strictly hetero-political). Besides, I am still praying for President Monson.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
_why me
_Emeritus
Posts: 9589
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 8:19 pm

Re: Ouch! Gregory Prince: "Mitt NOT the face of Mormonism."

Post by _why me »

moksha wrote:Mitt has simply reaffirmed the position against social justice that Glenn Beck said is an essential true church value. Just because these men were extra valiant in the pre-existence, and have a strong testimony of social darwinism, is no reason to distance them now.
.


This is nonsense. Romney proved himself to be a good bishop and stake president because he cared about the people who he was in charge of caring about.

America is america. It is a capitalist country with strong individualistic roots. Did people care that John Kerry was rich? His wife is a billionaire. No one cared a fig. Or Kennedy? Or Reagan? Or Washington and Jefferson? They were all rich. America is full of rich presidents and politicians. The signers of the declaration of independence were not exactly poor...most if not all were property owners.

Romney gave 30 percent to charity. He didn't keep that money. He didn't buy a mansion in France with it. He gave it away. Now that signifies the face of Mormonism. And that is not a bad face at all. A person who gives freely our of the goodness of their heart.

Do you want to make America less social darwinistic. You will need to vote for the socialist party usa. Not a bad vote if they are on the ballot in your state. Both the democrats and republicans are social darwinistic. It is the american way and deep rooted in the value structure of the system. But then again, we also have the social gospel, founded by the salvation army and other christian groups so the effects of this system can be eased if only for a day.
I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world.
Joseph Smith


We are “to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to provide for the widow, to dry up the tear of the orphan, to comfort the afflicted, whether in this church, or in any other, or in no church at all…”
Joseph Smith
_Rollo Tomasi
_Emeritus
Posts: 4085
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 12:27 pm

Re: Ouch! Gregory Prince: "Mitt NOT the face of Mormonism."

Post by _Rollo Tomasi »

why me wrote:Romney proved himself to be a good bishop and stake president because he cared about the people who he was in charge of caring about.

Not all of those under his stewardship felt he "cared" that much (the Peggie Hayes story comes to mind).

America is america. It is a capitalist country with strong individualistic roots. Did people care that John Kerry was rich? His wife is a billionaire. No one cared a fig. Or Kennedy? Or Reagan? Or Washington and Jefferson? They were all rich. America is full of rich presidents and politicians. The signers of the declaration of independence were not exactly poor...most if not all were property owners.

The Founding Fathers pledged their lives and property to be free of the British -- they really stuck their necks out. Mitt hasn't, other than perhaps in the temple (which, of course, he'll never talk about).

Romney gave 30 percent to charity. He didn't keep that money.

He's to be commended for that, but, frankly, even though tithing qualifies as "charitable contributions" for tax purposes, it not truly charitable giving, in my opinion, because it's a commandment with serious repercussions for a TBM if the money is not forked over.

He didn't buy a mansion in France with it.

But he bought some elsewhere (New Hampshire and La Jolla (the one with the car elevator) come to mind).

He gave it away. Now that signifies the face of Mormonism.

C'mon, for a TBM tithing is not really 'charity,' it's keeping a commandment or lose your TR. It's not truly voluntary. Just because it's a tax deduction doesn't mean he really wants to pay. Even Mitt has joked that he sometimes 'cried' when writing out the tithing check.

And that is not a bad face at all. A person who gives freely our of the goodness of their heart.

Again, paying tithing is NOT merely giving "freely ou[t] of the goodness of their heart" -- it's a COMMANDMENT, and a TBM who fails to comply does so at his/her own peril.

Do you want to make America less social darwinistic.

That's what King Benjamin wanted to do -- read his speech sometime and learn something.
"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)
Post Reply