Why should he?
Kevin Graham wrote:To avoid looking like more of a hypocrite than he already does? Because it would be the most respectable thing to do? Take your pick.
Bull and bull. He talked about his faith in 2008 to some extent. He has alluded to is some now. You are being absolutely irrational in attacking him for not teaching the missionary discussions and bearing testimony to the public of his faith details. You would never expect that from anyone else. Never.
Did Obama give an expose of his view of over 20 years in a black liberation theology church?
An expose? You're not comparing apples and apples.
Really?
No one said he needed to "give an expose." But he should lie when asked specific questions, nor should he insult everyone's intelligence with these answers intended to deflect the truth.
That is not what you said above. You essentially said if he believed what his church teaches he is missing the best platform there is to talk it up. He should be bearing his testimony you said just like he would in church.
You of all people should see right through them, because as former Mormons, you know exactly what an honest answer would be.
Ok but I really don't care all that much about it. Unlike you and others I really don't worrry about Romney's Mormonism and I do not think it makes him unfit for high office even though there us much of it I do not believe personally. And I do not hold Romney accountable for the priesthood ban-he said in one interview he was so happy when that changed and was even teary about it. Nor do I hold him accountable for the idiots doing proxy work for holocaust victims.
So it is you who is acting as if Romney deserves special treatment, simply because he is a Mormon.
He dodges questions about his Church about like Obama did Jeremiah Wright. In fact Obama's responses were more stupid because he attended there for 20 years and said he never heard the things that were in the news about Wright taught. Oh you bet. When you criticize Barak for this maybe your attack on Romney will mean something to me.
I disagree with that mentality.
Obviously.
I say let the media have at him the same way they went after other religious politicians. The problem for Romney, however, is that his faith is too weird and provided way too much ammunition for his political enemies to use against him. The more he keeps obfuscating and dancing around these questions, the more he proves he is a very bad Mormon who is primarily interested in his own ambitions. I stand by that comment and I can defend it.
Hold Obama to the same standard for his radical religion and associations with other radicals and your position will then at least be constant.
Obama was called to the carpet and the Right Wing media was merciless in its quest to prove he was some religiously motivated nutjob. Most Right Wingers I know are LDS, in fact, and they strongly supported "bigoted" probes into Obama's Church and theology.
So to check into Obama's radical associations is bigoted but it is not bigoted to attack Romney's faith which oddly enough is coming more from the far left. I see...
By the way just for the record I did not worry all that much about Obama's issues in this area either and frankly tired of it when he was running.
But when pressed, Obama distanced himself from his Church's controversial teachings, stating he disagreed with them on those points. But can we expect Romney to be this open and honest? No, because people here think Mormons deserve special treatment. "Anti-Black Liberationist" just doesn't have that same ring to it as "anti-Mormon."
]
More Bull. Obama back peddled as much or more as you think Romney is.
Unlike Obama, Romney is talking out of both sides of his mouth
Oh Please. Obama talked out of every side of his mouth on this. What you are saying is really incredible.
He claims to be a believing Mormon and he waters down his testimony with this nonsense about the faith of his fathers. That's not how Mormons talk during fast and testimony meeting, it was a strategically scripted talk written by his speech writers.
I told you that I have heard members say this about their faith in church, in conference and in a hymn.
I remember it had Chris Matthews taking his side, saying things like, "Look, I can understand where he's coming from now that he puts it like that. He says this is just the faith of his fathers and he is respecting the family heritage, etc etc." This kind of rhetoric is intended to plant the seed into people's mind that maybe Romney isn't really a whacko Mormon who believes God talked to Joseph Smith. And his denial that God has talked to anyone since Moses was clearly another scripted comment designed to give people that false impression.
Really a whacko Mormon? I may not believe Joseph Smith was a prophet anymore but I do not classify those who do whacko.
I will give you the one on Moses though.
Romney also refuses to do what he was commanded to do by his own scriptures. As a former missionary, he knows perfectly well what he is expected according to the God of the Book of Mormon, but because he knows the world would laugh at him if he were to act accordingly, he doesn't behave like Mormons have always been commanded to behave with respect to expressing their testimony to every corner of the world.
Once again you demand from Romney something you would never expect of someone else. And why is that Kevin? Is it because you are biased against Mormons now?
If he were to suffer a fate of public humiliation by telling the journalists that he proudly upholds all LDS beliefs... that when asked, he believed God told Spencer Kimball to allow blacks to have the priesthood or that when asked, he believes Brigham Young was God's chosen prophet despite his racist remarks, or that when asked, he believes Joseph Smith was a chosen prophet, despite the fact that he lied publicly about polygamy, etc., he and the Church knows perfectly well he'd lose all credibility as a critical thinker.
He already addressed the priesthood revelation. And sure those other things could be embarrassing for him. Do you think if Rick Santorum or George Bush or Barak Obama were asked such things about some of the more peculiar beliefs about their faith it might hurt them? But nobody expected that out of them. Well other then I will give you the Obama did disavow Reverend Wright but I think he lied when he said he had never hears such things in 20 year attending the Church.
So they avoid it all for the same reasons the Church tries to keep all this stuff hidden from LDS investigators. I can understand not bringing this stuff up on his own, but what we're dealing with is an orchestrated deception campaign that is designed to obfuscate and derail whenever these issues are raised by the media. He does not provide honest answers.
I just don't think he needs to. The oddities of Mormonism's past are not his responsibility.
Obama's Church had one problem from what I remember, and it was his minister's remarks about how the USA is getting what it deserved for invading so many other countries it had no business invading. Obama respectfully disagreed, went on record with that disagreement, refrained from attending the Church, and then moved on. That was the extent of the "black liberation controversy."
There was much more than that but that was the main thing at the time that was brought out and that was all Obama addressed other than saying he had not heard all the horrible things Wright had taught in 20 years. And it was clear that Wright was not newly radical in his positions.
But would Romney ever dare disagree with LDS leaders on any of the problematic religious issues that riddle LDS history? No, he doesn't have that kind of integrity, and hence my point.
You right Kev, Romney is scum.
Happy now?
To give some scripted testimony by his speech writers is damn near blasphemy.
Lovely hyperbole.
To say he is a fully believing Mormon doesn't mean much to most Americans and he is taking full advantage of that fact as he hopes he can just neutralize all critical questions with some broad-stroked claim that he is a faithful believer of the LDS Church. To Mormons, it means something very specific and you of all people know this.
Yea so what? Should Harry Reid give the same expose, and yes it is clear you want him to sit down and do an interview about all the difficult odd issues in Mormonism. And the only reason you want him to do this is to embarrass him and the Church. You have a clear agenda on this one.
The LDS Church is very different from most other traditional Churches in that it demands obedience to a wide variety of commandments. It demands and requires a higher standard of spiritual living in order to maintain membership.
Yes so? There are other Churches that have high demands. I think it would be just as difficult to be a faithful down the road Catholic or EV.
It means, among other things, that you do not support abortion, ever.
Does it? I think you can be personally opposed to it but not for making it a political issue which if I recall was Romney's stance.
Did Kennedy have to explain all the oddities of Catholicism and bear personal testimony?
Whoever in the hell said Romney had to "explain all the oddities" of Mormonism?
You did above once again. You want him to proclaim a belief in Joseph Smith and address polygamy. You want him to talk about BYs racist comments that really don't mean diddly squat to today's Mormonism.
You're not really addressing my argument here at all, but bringing up red herrings such as this. I expect him to be honest when the issues are raised, but I don't expect him to bring them up on his own.
You just said in your post he should be proclaiming his Mormon beliefs like all good Mormons should. You want him to field questions about the oddities of Mormonism.
The fact is Romney's public behavior makes him a very bad Mormon by every standard lesson taught in Church and LDS scripture.
Well maybe he is a NOMer. That should please you.
You demand of Romney what you never would impose on someone else and the comments above are really over the top.
That's b***s***. As a former bishop, you know damn well that there is a huge difference between Baptist/Catholic and Mormon.
I did not say there were not differences but Catholics and Baptists have some damn strange beliefs as well. Can you say Rapture?
Baptists don't get excommunicated for denying basic truth claims of the Church.
Nor do Mormons unless the publically advocate it.
Protestant and Catholics regularly migrate from one denomination to another without repercussion. Catholics are an interesting lot. They sin, go repent, and then all is well.
Not a good Catholic.
That's part of Catholic culture. Baptists believe in salvation by grace, not obedience to a slew of commandments laid down by the Church. This is the deception I see going on here and I'm surprised that some of you are pretending there isn't a difference here.
Don't put words in my mouth Kevin. I never said there were not differences.
American voters also have the right to know whether or not Romney agrees with a doctrine that had racist view towards 20% of the nation.
He already addressed that one in 2008,
So contrary to your accusation, I am not the one expecting Romney to be held to a different standard. YOU ARE. You want to treat him as if he were some Catholic or Baptist, which is just RIDICULOUS. Can you imagine the political hell-storm if Kennedy had ever supported abortion??
No I just don't think ANY POLITICIAN needs to get into all the nitty gritty of their religions oddities. If I recall there is not a religious litmus test for office. I think you want to put one in place for Romney and Mormons.
Listen I understand some of your points and yes Romney could address some issues better. But I think you go way to far.
And at this point that is where I will leave it. I don't have time today to respond to a another lengthy Kevin post so continue on and we will have to mostly disagree on this one.
