This is what we can expect for the entire Election period.  MSM bashing and discrediting the Republican candidates and promoting the Democrat candidate of their choice.  They learned in the 06 elections that they can influnce the outcome of a National election and this time their going for the top prize!  They will install a Democrat as President.  Black or Female is what they are shooting for this time.  Qualifications don't matter, except that they would have to be as Leftist as possible!  Watch and see.

mark --

Will ABC challenge Muslim guests with statements from Islamic experts?

Here's an easy one George can ask as it relates directly to the faith of another Presidential candidate. But I'm not holding my breathe.

Mr Obama... was your father a Sunni or a Shia Muslim?

And how do you think Christians may perceive the belief that for apostates who renounce Islam, the official punishment, sanctioned in the Koran, is death?"

"Our readers don't give a rat's ass about what you think. They want facts."

Elmore Leonard, 'The Hot Kid'.

I agree, Mark.. exactly what WAS George's point? Obviously Romney is relying on what the Bible says, and not someone else's stupid interpretation. In Missouri, eh? Maybe Branson? Sorry, couldn't help myself. I mean who the heck is this Mormon spokesman and what makes them such an expert on where and when Jesus will return?

Is it me or doesn't the left justify its focus on GWB's christianity because he's so open about it but I haven't seen Romney with a Mormon Sash on his arm?

Even as a non practicing Mormon, this infuriates me and will continue to do so until one, left of center, politico is asked a question comparable.

I'd like to offer up a bet to see how long it would take for someone in the nutroots commune to state that the LDS is as great a threat or more than islam... but then it may already have happened.

At least Mitt had the opportunity to respond.  Evangelical beliefs are routinely distorted by the MSM all the time by reporters who clearly have no idea what they're talking about.  It would be like me criticizing a brain surgeon's technique.

I was afraid this was going to happen, yet expected it at the same time: the media misrepresenting the church's beliefs because of Mitt Romney.

As a Mormon, I want to elaborate on this. Yes, we do believe that Jesus will appear at Jerusalem on the Mount of Olives at His Second Coming. This will be to save the Jews from their enemies and also at this time they will be forgiven for crucifying him, because Jerusalem will be nearly taken and the Jews are cornered. At the same time, a New Jerusalem (also known as Zion) will be established in the United States and Jesus will reign over the earth for 1,000 years prior to the last judgement with the Old Jerusalem as a spirital capital (religious) and New Jerusalem as a physical capital (law and order) as is mentioned in Isaiah 2:3.

These kinds of things drive me nuts because I'm always told, "You Mormons believe-" by people who aren't Mormons. I know what I believe and I learned these things for myself. And while some of these things may be "pearls before swine," I feel I have to clarify these things and help people better understand what we believe and why we believe it. Otherwise the ignorance that people have about the church and have had since its founding will only continue.

"I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is to try to please everyone." - Bill Cosby

Why does anyone non-lib continue to put themselves on the chopping block of the network news? It is as if the conservatives march right into their own guillotine everytime they agree to let one of these liberal network reporters and commentators put them on their show. Is it that bad-press is better than no press at all? Frustrating to see our political peers continually bashed by the "non-biased" moonbat press.

Pragmatism always prevails... even Winston was once a lib.

Speaking of religion, pro-choice, news media, and Muslims, who remembers reading anything about the Utah mall Muslim who went on a killing spree?

JDW

Wounded skier. Corrections have been causing time-outs so mistakes will be made.

New pro-adoption dems, what about replacing abortions?

I think it would be great if they challenged all of these people's faith-beliefs. Faith-beliefs are the very fiber of a person. Learn about someone's faith-beliefs and you will learn what type of person they really are. For example, do a search on what faith-belief Judge Greer is and you will learn why he would not so much as go see Terri Schiavo for himself--to see if she was really alive (which she was.)

Faith-beliefs do come into play in our lives and those lives around us, as well as those in office. God speaks about wickedness in high places being exactly what we are up against.

Another example, had people bothered to learn more about Sarah Weddington back in 1973 they may have learned that she was taken under the wing of a group of Unitarian Universalist 'Church' women, who formed "A loving supportive alliance" with her and the other lawyer involved, over the course of a year that "enabled" them to bring the famous 'Row vs. Wade' case to the Supreme Court. And, some may recall, that it was Sarah Weddington who was Jimmy Carter's Special Assistant. --If you would like to learn more about the Unitarian Universalist 'Church,' including its involvement with the ACLU, click here: http://www.debrajmsmith.com/acluuuc.html 

I say, let's hope this is a growing trend to get right down to the heart of who is in and or seeking an office in our nation. It is true that they cannot be forced to take a religious test, but we sure can ask questions before we vote and we can point things out to other voters as well.

Let's just hope that the media ask the same type of questions of Obama about his faith-beliefs, which started out as Muslim (he is now claiming to be a member of the UCC, which is just a sister 'church' of the Unitarian Universalists, and are both party to the UUA, which is heavily in with the one world order and the UN.--They are basically for everything from abortion to homosexuality.) 

Never expected that so many like-minded fellow conservatives would attack my Mormon religion. It really saddens me.

I wish this whole thread would simply go away.

Religion and proselytization have no real place on this Blog.   The only part of it I think is relevant here is the discussion of Mitt Romney's positions on those social issues where his church speaks and has doctrine.  To the extent that he does or does follow the doctrines of his denomination is an indication of his character and the strength of whatever convictions he professes to have.   These two factors are things I consider when voting for a candidate. 

In Romney's case, I would not trust him because he deviates from the convictions he professes.  This suggests to me he will bend and break on other matters of principle.  I'd rather not have such men in high elective office.

As some red meat for the rest of the conservatives here, I'd observe that the single weakest character in the 2008 Presidential race is Hillary Clinton.  She apears to have no moral or philosphical convictions of any kind.  As much as the left say they like her, I cannot help but believe her constant political triangulation must madden them. 

Its not George Stephanopoulos, its George Cantstuffenoughphallus! Geez!

A lot of interesting comments in this blog...

• this is not a site to discuss religion
  

• let's just get back to politics
  

• my religion is true, not yours or they are all right/all wrong
  

just to paraphrase a few.

First of all, check out Mark's "Categories"...one of them is religion.  Hmm, seems like we ought to be able to talk about it.

Second, religion and politics have been mixed throughout history, to fully discuss one you cannot avoid the other.  All countries have political boundaries, and many "double" as religious ones as well.  And where they don't there tends to be a lot of religious battles...Ireland, Iraq, former Yugoslavia to name just a few.

"What is truth?" Pilate asked... just before he let them take Jesus and crucify Him.  With all secular humanism aside, truth by definition is absolute.  Something is either true or it is not.  All religions claim to be the truth, all religions have different truths.  In truth, only one of them can be really the truth, or none of them.

I have chosen for my faith the only one I believe is true.  So the others cannot be true for me.  My faith is so important to me that I must measure all things in light of it.  That includes politics, politicians, and positions. 

Therefore, when a subject is about politics, we should be able to talk primarily about politics.  When the subject includes both politics and religion, we should be able to discuss both.  In either case one's religious beliefs(or lack of, or lack of conviction to) would most likely influence one's comments. 

When it comes to choosing candidates to represent you at any level, their positions on issues, their experience, their promises, and their integrity all should be considered.  And  all candidates have a belief system and I believe there are basically only three:

1. no real religious belief
   

2. a religious belief with no real conviction
   

3. a religious belief with conviction
   

Knowing which religion they claim and to what level (above 3 choices) they claim it, to me is extremely important when I choose who should represent me. 

face piles of trials with smiles

I have had extensive online debates with mainstream Mormons in the past (intense ones too, as I'm a staunch Monergist in my personal theology), and contrary to popular belief, they will freely admit that they are not the same faith as Orthodox Christianity, Evangelical-Fundamentalism, or even my brand of Christianity for that matter.

They preach a different Jesus, that's all we're saying. Get over it! We can back it up with reams of comparative (and contradictory) writings as well. These debates have been raging for a few years now and are nothing new.

To the LDS, they believe their gospel is the one that is truly reformed and thus truly and exclusively "Christian".

Therefore, this is the ultimate form of religious bias and exclusivism:  To sell yourself as one thing ("Good morning friend, we're just like all the other Jesus Freaks.") and in the end switch your doctrinal position with a nod and a wink.

My only problem with Romney is that if he's elected, who will take ultimate charge? The POTUS, or President Hinckley?

Nuff said!

-PJ