61 - 70 of 136 Comments

1. Rob

   1 year ago

   I have always found it interesting the pictures this website chooses for their articles. You have glamor shot photo or Romney with that picture of the president? Honestly, I would expect more from a Catholic website. If you have to resort to that kind of nonsense maybe you need better writers?

2. mike

   1 year ago

   This from Michael Otterson, head of Public Affairs for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, "Mormons do not pretend that their understanding of Christ is identical to that of Christian orthodoxy. We embrace the New Testament and much of what the modern Christian world teaches about the Savior of the world, but we do not stop there. We have a lot more to add about the Son of God, and it is that additional revelation that causes the real rub with some orthodox Christians. To us, however, refusing to accept further enlightenment on the mission of Jesus Christ is like a math teacher telling his or her students they must stop at multiplication tables. No algebra or calculus allowed."
   
   See the whole article at http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/on-faith/post/how-do-mormons-answer-not-christian-claims/2011/10/11/gIQA9ii4eL_blog.html
   
   Some good thoughts on how Mormons consider themselves Christians despite obvious differences in doctrine.

3. mike

   1 year ago

   Here is an authoritative article expounding on the Church of Jesus Christ of LDS's doctrinal views of abortion by Elder Russel Nelson, a member of the quorum of the 12 Apostles. http://www.lds.org/ensign/2008/10/abortion-an-assault-on-the-defenseless?lang=eng
   
   Some snippets here:
   
   "This war called abortion is a war on the defenseless and the voiceless. It is a war on the unborn. This war is being waged globally. Ironically, civilized societies that have generally placed safeguards on human life have now passed laws that sanction this practice."
   
   "Elective abortion has been legalized in many countries on the premise that a woman is free to choose what she does with her own body. To an extent this is true for each of us, male or female. We are free to think. We are free to plan. And we are free to do. But once an action has been taken, we are never free from its consequences.
   
   To understand this concept more clearly, we can learn from the astronaut. Anytime during selection or preparation, he or she is free to withdraw from the program. But once the spacecraft has lifted off, the astronaut is bound to the consequences of the previous choice to make the journey.
   
   So it is with people who choose to embark on a journey that leads to parenthood. They have freedom of choice—to begin or not to begin that course. When conception does occur, that choice has already been made.
   
   Yes, a woman is free to choose what she will do with her body. Whether her choice leads to an astronaut’s mission or to a baby, her choice to begin the journey binds her to the consequences of that choice. She cannot “unchoose.”"
   
   "
   Nearly all legislation pertaining to abortion considers the duration of gestation. The human mind has presumed to determine when “meaningful life” begins. In the course of my studies as a medical doctor, I learned that a new life begins when two special cells unite to become one cell, bringing together 23 chromosomes from the father and 23 from the mother. These chromosomes contain thousands of genes. In a marvelous process involving a combination of genetic coding by which all the basic human characteristics of the unborn person are established, a new DNA complex is formed. A continuum of growth results in a new human being. Approximately 22 days after the two cells have united, a little heart begins to beat. At 26 days the circulation of blood begins.10 To legislate when a developing life is considered “meaningful” is presumptive and quite arbitrary, in my opinion."

4. Michael Walker

   1 year ago

   Hmmmm..
   All this rhetoric simply divides the flock! Our nation was founded under God. YES or no?
   One would cogitate that this should influence and nurture a fervent faith in Him who created Heaven and Earth.
   Thomas Merton said to point out the negative, is theology of the Devil.
   Vote according to conscience!
   Brothers and sisters....keep your eYe on the prize!!!
   Bless GOD! ...Praise HIM! All will work unto good, this I believe!
   Blessings of love and peace in America and unto the whole world!....

5. Amy Seymour

   1 year ago

   It's a little late to be trying to evaluate Romney on the basis of his religion. Barring an extraordinary event, he WILL be the Republican candidate come November. Is he the best possible Republican candidate? I personally don't think so, but that's water under the bridge at this point. These are our only options at this point: (1) voting for Obama, who *claims* to be Christian but whose documented actions seem to undermine that claim, (3) abstaining from voting altogether (or voting for a write-in candidate, which is essentially the same as abstaining from voting since there is no chance that your vote will count for anything), or (3) voting for Romney, a seemingly sincere and devout Mormon, which is arguably not a Christian religion according to the most basic definition of Trinitarian Christianity, but nonetheless, a religion whose sincere followers try to be good disciples of Christ and hold strong pro-family and pro-life moral convictions.
   
   (1) 1f you vote for Obama, you would be voting for the staunchist, most pro-abortion president this country has ever known, a fact well-documented by his voting record. Perhaps Romney is "weak" on the issue of life, but he's NOT radically pro-abortion as is Obama. You would also be voting for someone who *claims* to respect "freedom of worship" (notice how he tries to re-define the Constitution's "freedom of religion"!) while doing everything in his power to shut down a person's right to *practice* their religion outside the confines of their church walls.
   
   (2) If you abstain from voting altogether, you would be abdicating your responsibility to help this country become the best it can be, and it would end up helping Obama to get re-elected. Perhaps you think that neither candidate can make this country better; in that case, you have a responsiblity to vote for the candidate that will do the least amount of harm to the pro-life cause and to the country's moral and economic health in general. (Fr. Frank Pavone from Priests for Life has an excellent article about our responsibility to vote for the "lesser of two evils" if it comes down to that.)
   
   (3) If you vote for Romney, you will vote for a person who at least *claims* to be pro-life and who obviously has strong pro-family convictions, who seems to be a very devout follower of a religion that is much more pro-life than many if not most Protestant religions (most Mormons are certainly more pro-life than most Catholic Democratic politicians are! I've known many, many Mormons, but I've never known a single one of them to be "pro-choice" -- I wish I could say that about all the Catholics I've known!)
   
   So, in my opinion. there really is only one choice a conscientious, devout Catholic can make at this point: to vote for Romney. Six months ago the discussion would have been different, but now we're down to voting only for Romney or for Obama, or else abstaining, which would help elect Obama.

6. Yousif Elias

   1 year ago

   Mr. Jones, the four points you listed at the end of your article all apply to he current president. He set out to divide and conquree the Catholic Church from day one of his presidency. By saying that Romney is not a "Christian" I hope you're not impling that Obama is one! he's absolutly NOT! he's a Muslim but he denies it, instead he pretends to be a Christian he's he's not one.
   
   Allowing Oabama to be re-elected means open war on all fronts and a blank check to do what ever he wishes to detroy the moral standards of the U.S.
   
   

7. Pete Bartlett

   1 year ago

   I salute David Jones on his thoughtful and thorough analysis of the facts. People who accuse Mr. Jones of being a bigot are trying to cloud the fact that the LDS faith is a very theocratic system (much more even than the Catholic church) and that "mormonism" has created its own subculture and way of life. Should these facts be used to deny Romney a fair shot at the Presidency? Absolutely not. But they should also not be concealed under a false shroud of political correctness. Just as Romney deserves a chance to become POTUS, the voters deserve to know what is in his being, and what makes him tick. Let's look at some of the simple and (rather) obvious facts:
   
   1. Because of its ultratheocratic nature, LDS requires absolute obedience from its members to the Prophet/President of the church. It is a fair question to any LDS member (perhaps more so than it would be to any other denomination) to assure the voters that they will NOT be beholden to their religious leaders. Let me be also very clear that I believe that the current leadership of LDS is utterly modern and forward looking and that I do not believe that they would do anything to jeopardize the position of potentially the first LDS POTUS, but the fact remains that they theoretically could and it should be discussed! The fact that LDS considers the US Constitution as divinely inspired is no consolation, in fact it makes this point even more pressing.
   
   2. Above and beyond point 1, Mitt Romney is a former Bishop and a Stake President of LDS. This makes his obligations in point 1 even more immediate and necessary. Put another way, if a Catholic Archbishop of Philadelphia or Boston ran for POTUS, do we seriously believe that there would be no religious questions or even a public uproar? Would not the person's prior religious behavior come under intense scrutiny in that case? Why should Romney not be treated equally?
   
   3. Over and above both of the above points, Romney is someone who has throughout his life been inconsistent on many issues (abortion, gay rights, healthcare, etc.), even more so than an average politician. The only two consistent things in his life have been his devotion to his family and to LDS. While this is commendable in itself, it would also imply that nothing is too sacred for him except these two, and thus makes the first two points even more relevant.
   
   4. Finally to the many LDS commenters on this site, LDS position is not necessarily pro-life. If it were, I would actually feel much easier knowing that Romney did not follow LDS lead on abortion in Massachussetts. However Mr. Jones correctly identified the LDS view on abortion and Romney was well within LDS guidelines supporting abortion in MA and opposing it now. LDS is also a religion where prophecies can change prior theological rules, something that has happened numerous times (polygamy, Black priesthood), and abortion would be no different. And no, the fact that you or your family is pro life and you are LDS does not mean that LDS is pro-life.

8. Central Texan

   1 year ago

   According to Mr. Jones, Romney's religion DOES matter but the fact that Barak Obama, fully supports abortion-on-demand and even supported the idea of letting infants die who happen to be born alive after a botched abortion attempt -- that DOESN'T matter?
   
   Mr. Jones claims to know a lot about Mormonism, but misstates several facts about the church and mischaracterizes the Mormon Church's doctrines or positions on issues. He tries to say that voting for Gov. Romney would be a vote for a non-Christian but makes no comparative reference to Pres. Obama's religious affiliations or lack thereof.
   
   Mr. Jones cites nebulous references to Gov. Romney in relation to Catholic Hospitals in Massachusetts, but again makes no comparative reference to Pres. Obama's relationship to Catholic issues.
   
   With full knowledge of the type of Supreme Court Justice or court appointees Pres. Obama has made and would make, Jones only tries to cast aspersions on what Mitt Romney might of might not do as President. Anyone with any sense of objective discernment knows Gov. Romney would appoint more conservative judges than Pres. Obama.
   
   And Mr. Jones thinks we should vote against Gov. Romney?
   
   This article is either religious bigotry in full display or else the height of political ineptness to suggest the good Catholic thing to do is to return Pres. Obama to the White House for four more years.

9. Jacqueline Stutmann

   1 year ago

   The Lord our God is ONE God in three Divine persons. Much like the three forms of water, ice, liquid and steam. They are in different forms, but all of the same substance, which makes the Trinity ONE. Mormons believe that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are three SEPARATE GODS, independent of one another. This is the fundamental difference between Mormons and Catholics and other Christians. Also, Catholic teaching states that ABORTION IS INTRINSICALLY EVIL, which means that it is ALWAYS WRONG IN EVERY CIRCUMSTANCE. We Catholics make NO EXCEPTIONS in cases of rape or incest or that a baby has extreme defects or disabilities. The Mormon faith allows for those exceptions. We believe that only God is the decision-maker in such cases and we must not be the ones to act as if WE are. Although Mormons believe in the teachings of Jesus Christ, that does not make them Christian. Baptism is VERY IMPORTANT, and to be Christian, one MUST be baptized in the formula of the TRINITY as ONE GOD, not separate Gods. The Mormons would, according to the dictionary meaning of believeing in many GODS, see link at dictionary.com, (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/paganism?s=t)
   This would mean that they would be polythiestic, or believeing in many gods or the better known definition of PAGAN. The ancient, pre-Christian Romans were pagans, worshipping not ONE GOD but many GODS. The Church has spoken. She speaks with the wisdom of the Holy Spirit, and I believe everything the Church puts forth as Truth because Jesus said the Gates of Hell would not prevail against HIS CHURCH, not Joseph Smith's Church.
   
   As far as my being Catholic and voting for Mitt Romney, I WILL vote for him because he is the presumptive nominee for the Republican Party and he is NOT Obama. Would I have rather Rick Santorum or Newt Gingrich have gotten the nomination? You bet! But we must band together to support the candidate that is or be defeated! NOT to vote is not to exercise our God-given duty as Catholic citizens of the United States of America and participate in the political process of our society. If we do not, we are derelict in our duty and will be responsible for Obama winning re-election, which is the greater evil by far!

10. Joe

    1 year ago

    Mormons have several websites telling what they believe, LDS.org etc, and we should check Mitt's website on what he thinks about abortion, and where he stands.
    BUT, since Santorum is Catholic, perhaps David could tell us why Santorum would say something like:
    
    
    Santorum in ’95: “I Was Basically Pro-Choice All My Life, Until I Ran For Congress”
    
    (From evangelicals for Mitt)

Leave a Comment