Jump to content

Perry Stands His Ground, Mitt Makes An Excellent Point


Zakuska

Recommended Posts

Vegas debate: Perry defends pastor who called Mormonism a cult

By Michael A. Memoli

October 18, 2011, 6:54 p.m.

More than a week after the issue of Mitt Romney's faith became an open conversation in the Republican race for president, Rick Perry said the pastor who called Mormonism a cult simply "expressed an opinion," one that he did not agree with.

Dallas pastor Robert Jeffress endorsed Perry and introduced the Texas governor at the Values Voter Summit in Washington, calling him "a true conservative" and "a genuine follower of Jesus Christ."

Speaking later with reporters, Jeffress said he agreed with the belief widely held among evangelicals that Mormonism was a cult, and that in a contest between Perry and Romney, "we ought to prefer a born-again follower of Christ."

Speaking before last week's economic-themed debate, Romney called on Perry to repudiate those remarks. It was only tonight that the subject came up when the two stood side by side at the CNN debate.

Perry immediately said that he "didn't agree with that individual's statement."

"Our founding fathers truly understood and had an understanding of freedom of religion," Perry said. "We also are a country that is free to express our opinions. That individual expressed an opinion. I didn't agree with it, Mitt, and I said so. But the fact is, Americans understand faith. And what they've lost faith in is the current resident of the White House."

Romney downplayed Jeffress' reference to Mormonism as a cult, saying, "I've heard worse, so I'm not going to lose sleep over that." What was more troubling, he said, was the notion that voters ought to choose one candidate over another simply because of his or her faith.

"I don't suggest you distance yourself from your faith any more than I would. But the concept that we select people based on the church or the synagogue they go to, I think, is a very dangerous and enormous departure from the principles of our Constitution," Romney said.

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-perry-romney-mormon-20111018,0,2278946.story?track=rss&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+latimes%2Fnews%2Fpolitics+%28L.A.+Times+-+Politics%29&utm_content=Google+Feedfetcher

I wish Mitt would have asked him if he agreed with his Pastor buddies that First Amandment only applied to Christians?

Link to comment

Doesn't matter, regardless of the national outcome, Rick Perry will lose the GOP primaries in states with very sizable LDS populations, and will come in last place in the Utah GOP primary... That is, if he doesn't drop out before then.

Link to comment

Hopefully we can put this behind us now!

shouldn't this have been "behind us" when the day after the comment from the pastor, Perry's camp issued a statement about the comment?

Though what I am torn on about the issue is whether we LDS, which are taught to seek guidance from on High in almost all things, should ask another religious person not to do the same? The LDS Church statement about politicians is very neutral essentially "pick the one who upholds this or that" so why is it not ok for non-LDS Religious leaders to instruct their followers to do the same?

As for Romney's comment in the debate/video posted, he is incorrect and has made the same incorrect statement more than once, the Government can not use religious tests for political office, there is nothing in the US Constitution that prohibits a US Citizen from using religion as a basis for who to vote for; and given that the quasi religious test for voting put forth by the LDS Church I can hardly understand the object of a LDS person to another person using religion.

And while my issue raises and interesting quandary, I can see a difference between LDS in a missionary/conversion type setting in asking another person to set aside or reconsider their religious beliefs, but in a political setting that is devoid of the Spirit I do not think we should apply pressure to others to set aside their religious beliefs, which we LDS acknowledge under the AoF and the Doctrine and Covenants.

Link to comment

shouldn't this have been "behind us" when the day after the comment from the pastor, Perry's camp issued a statement about the comment?

Amen to that. So then why did Perrys preachers continue making it an issue? Continue appearing on TV and pushing the envelope.

The LDS Church statement about politicians is very neutral essentially "pick the one who upholds this or that" so why is it not ok for non-LDS Religious leaders to instruct their followers to do the same?

Perhaps you can point to where the church says any such thing?

http://newsroom.lds....ical-neutrality

As for Romney's comment in the debate/video posted, he is incorrect and has made the same incorrect statement more than once, the Government can not use religious tests for political office, there is nothing in the US Constitution that prohibits a US Citizen from using religion as a basis for who to vote for; and given that the quasi religious test for voting put forth by the LDS Church I can hardly understand the object of a LDS person to another person using religion.

And while my issue raises and interesting quandary, I can see a difference between LDS in a missionary/conversion type setting in asking another person to set aside or reconsider their religious beliefs, but in a political setting that is devoid of the Spirit I do not think we should apply pressure to others to set aside their religious beliefs, which we LDS acknowledge under the AoF and the Doctrine and Covenants.

You must not have listened to what Romney said. He specifically said he wasn't asking Perry to set asside his religious beleifs. A little cognitive disonance on your part?

Link to comment

Amen to that. So then why did Perrys preachers continue making it an issue? Continue appearing on TV and pushing the envelope.

why does it matter what the preacher says? Perry, within a day or two stated he did not agree; given that, you should have put this behind you, the same day Perry's camp issued a statement on the matter.

You must not have listened to what Romney said. He specifically said he wasn't asking Perry to set asside his religious beleifs. A little cognitive disonance on your part?

Romney: With regards to the disparaging comments about my faith, I've heard worse. I am not going to loose sleep over it. What I found most troubling was what the Reverend said in the introduction in choosing our nominee we should inspect his religion and someone who is a good moral person is not someone we should select instead we should choose someone who subscribes to our religious beliefs that that idea that we should choose people based upon their religion for public office is what i find to be most troubling because the founder of this country went to great lenght to make sure and even put it in the constitution that we would not choose people who represent us in government based upon their religion [this is not in the Constitution and I dare say the Founding fathers did no such thing concerning individual rights, voting and religion] that this would be a nation that recognized and respected other faiths where there's a plurality of faiths where there's tolerance for other people and faiths that's bedrock principle it was that principle Governor that I wanted you to be able to say no no that's wrong reverend jeffers boy that introduction knocked the ball out of the park i wish you would have said reverend jeffers you've got that wrong we should select people not based upon their faith even though I don't suggest you distance yourself from your faith anymore than i would but the concept that we select people based on the church or the synagogue they go to I think is a very dangerous and uh and uh an enormous departure from the principles of out constitution [red text is the input and statement of frankenstein]

anderson: would you still like to say him to say that

Romeny: I'm sorry

Anderson: would you still like him to say that

Romney: I'll let him ... its his choice

Anderson: Do you want to respond to that governor perry?

Perry: I have, I said I did not agree with uh pastor jeffers remarks I don't agree with them I I cant apologize anymore than that

Romney: yeah that's fine

there is the transcript, where does Romney "specifically" state he " wasn't asking Perry to set a side his religious beleifs." speaking of cognitive dissonance.

The gist of Romney statement has no basis in fact in the Constitution. In choose "we" the term collectively used to speak to the individual is most certainly entitled to use religion, and there is no prohibition in fact or theory that would, could, or should prevent a US voter from using religion as a deciding factor.

That Romney states that using religion is prohibited, he misrepresents the Constitution, but he is also telling those religious people whose religious beliefs indicate they should use religion, that there religious beliefs are wrong, violate the Constitution and that they should set aside their religious beliefs for Romneys benefit. Given his misrepresentation of the Constitution, the whole "hanging by thread" comes to mind.

Link to comment

Romney: With regards to the disparaging comments about my faith, I've heard worse. I am not going to loose sleep over it. What I found most troubling was what the Reverend said in the introduction in choosing our nominee we should inspect his religion and someone who is a good moral person is not someone we should select instead we should choose someone who subscribes to our religious beliefs that that idea that we should choose people based upon their religion for public office is what i find to be most troubling because the founder of this country went to great lenght to make sure and even put it in the constitution that we would not choose people who represent us in government based upon their religion [this is not in the Constitution and I dare say the Founding fathers did no such thing concerning individual rights, voting and religion] that this would be a nation that recognized and respected other faiths where there's a plurality of faiths where there's tolerance for other people and faiths that's bedrock principle it was that principle Governor that I wanted you to be able to say no no that's wrong reverend jeffers boy that introduction knocked the ball out of the park i wish you would have said reverend jeffers you've got that wrong we should select people not based upon their faith even though I don't suggest you distance yourself from your faith anymore than i would but the concept that we select people based on the church or the synagogue they go to I think is a very dangerous and uh and uh an enormous departure from the principles of out constitution [red text is the input and statement of frankenstein]

<snip>

The gist of Romney statement has no basis in fact in the Constitution. In choose "we" the term collectively used to speak to the individual is most certainly entitled to use religion, and there is no prohibition in fact or theory that would, could, or should prevent a US voter from using religion as a deciding factor.

That Romney states that using religion is prohibited, he misrepresents the Constitution, but he is also telling those religious people whose religious beliefs indicate they should use religion, that there religious beliefs are wrong, violate the Constitution and that they should set aside their religious beliefs for Romneys benefit. Given his misrepresentation of the Constitution, the whole "hanging by thread" comes to mind.

Sounds to me like someone needs to go study up on the original Constitution.

Here is Article 6 of the Constituion:

Article 6 - Debts, Supremacy, Oaths

All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

You were saying something about the Constitution not saying anything about a Religious test?

Seems that Romney is a better fact checker than you or the Perry camp and you owe the board at least an acknowledgment and repudiation of your smeer campaign.

Threads indeed. :rolleyes:

Link to comment

Sounds to me like someone needs to go study up on the original Constitution.

Here is Article 6 of the Constituion:

You were saying something about the Constitution not saying anything about a Religious test?

Seems that Romney is a better fact checker than you or the Perry camp and you owe the board at least an acknowledgment and repudiation of your smeer campaign.

Threads indeed. :rolleyes:

yes, you need to study up on the US Constitution, which originally applied to the Federal Gov. later via case law, and I believe the 14th Amendment was expanded to also apply to the individual States.

As for the Article 6 Religious test, show some integrity and stop moving the goal post, I commented directly to Romney's statement. Romney's statement is that the individual voter is forbidden by the US Constitution from applying a religious test in the voting booth. Article 6 does not uphold that, neither does the law, neither does case law. You are more than welcome to prove that the Founding Fathers intended Article 6 to apply to the individual citizen in the voting booth. But remember, the US Constitution was originally intended to apply to the Federal Government.

have fun trying to prove that.

and speaking of smeer campaign how many "anti perry" threads have you started in the last week or two?

Link to comment

yes, you need to study up on the US Constitution, which originally applied to the Federal Gov. later via case law, and I believe the 14th Amendment was expanded to also apply to the individual States.

As for the Article 6 Religious test, show some integrity and stop moving the goal post, I commented directly to Romney's statement. Romney's statement is that the individual voter is forbidden by the US Constitution from applying a religious test in the voting booth. Article 6 does not uphold that, neither does the law, neither does case law. You are more than welcome to prove that the Founding Fathers intended Article 6 to apply to the individual citizen in the voting booth. But remember, the US Constitution was originally intended to apply to the Federal Government.

have fun trying to prove that.

and speaking of smeer campaign how many "anti perry" threads have you started in the last week or two?

People can vote anyway they see fit.

The problem is getting out there on public television infront of the nation and advocating unconstitutional bigotry as Rev. Jeffress did, trying to sway the public by using a mans religion against him.

Thats equivalent in going out there and saying...

"Vote for Newt because because he's a white man just like us."

Or...

"Vote for Bachman because she's a woman."

Link to comment

People can vote anyway they see fit.

The problem is getting out there on public television infront of the nation and advocating unconstitutional bigotry as Rev. Jeffress did, trying to sway the public by using a mans religion against him.

Thats equivalent in going out there and saying...

"Vote for Newt because because he's a white man just like us."

Or...

"Vote for Bachman because she's a woman."

Once again, where and how, does the US Constitution prohibit an individual from applying a religious test to voting? The US Constitution applies primarily to the Federal Government, and to the State Governments, and on in limited circumstances to individuals.

What part of the Constitution did the pastor violate? If you are going to throw out claims of Constitutional violations surely you can show the violation?

(You have sound position with your tax code thread, but that is not the Constitution, and I believe the IRS has a means by which individuals can report alleged violations, hopefully you took screen shots of what you felt was a violation.)

Link to comment

Once again, where and how, does the US Constitution prohibit an individual from applying a religious test to voting? The US Constitution applies primarily to the Federal Government, and to the State Governments, and on in limited circumstances to individuals.

What part of the Constitution did the pastor violate? If you are going to throw out claims of Constitutional violations surely you can show the violation?

(You have sound position with your tax code thread, but that is not the Constitution, and I believe the IRS has a means by which individuals can report alleged violations, hopefully you took screen shots of what you felt was a violation.)

If Mitt were Jewish instead of Mormon, you bet the out cry would have been 10 times as loud.

PS. I didn't take screen shots because I prefered to talk with them first to try and resolve the situation without involving the Government.

Link to comment

If Mitt were Jewish instead of Mormon, you bet the out cry would have been 10 times as loud.

I agree that would be the case if the pastor had made the statement about a Jewish candidate. In affect, meaning and principle he has. He has stated that christians should only vote for christians. But I agree with you, that many more would speak out if he had called out the Hebrew faith by name.

Link to comment
As for the Article 6 Religious test, show some integrity and stop moving the goal post, I commented directly to Romney's statement. Romney's statement is that the individual voter is forbidden by the US Constitution from applying a religious test in the voting booth. Article 6 does not uphold that, neither does the law, neither does case law. You are more than welcome to prove that the Founding Fathers intended Article 6 to apply to the individual citizen in the voting booth. But remember, the US Constitution was originally intended to apply to the Federal Government.

frankenstein,

Go back an listen to what Romney actually said. He nowhere said that individuals cannot apply a religious test. He nowhere said the constitution "forbids" that sort of behavior.

It is you who are moving the goalposts. Rather, Romney said that such behavior goes against constitutional principles, which it does.

Link to comment

Either or, when watching last night's debate, its obvious that Perry is desperate now and will throw any kind of petty monkey wrench into Mitt's momentum. Though to me, and plenty of other voters out there, his behavior only makes him look like a seriously vile jerk.

If there's going to be an anti-Romney candidate, I hope its either Ron Paul (my man), or Herman Cain.

Link to comment

Either or, when watching last night's debate, its obvious that Perry is desperate now and will throw any kind of petty monkey wrench into Mitt's momentum. Though to me, and plenty of other voters out there, his behavior only makes him look like a seriously vile jerk.

If there's going to be an anti-Romney candidate, I hope its either Ron Paul (my man), or Herman Cain.

After watching some of the debate clips... I think Romney did rather well and Perry came off as a dark-eyed twirp.

At the beginning of this clip... Perry deflects the question of Faith, turns to the Moderator and takes a swipe at Obama trying to score points with the audience.

Then when he goes off on the Lawn care Issue... Romney had some very reasonable responses and a great politically relevant swipe at Perry too.

The company Romney hired was employing illegals. When Romney found out, He fired the illegal only and gave the company a warning. A year latter when the company was again found using illegal help, he fired the company all together. Then his retort to Perry was classic. "I would implement a e-verify database so companies could easily check the work status of workers. Something Perry voted down." [/endparaphrase]

Link to comment

frankenstein,

Go back an listen to what Romney actually said. He nowhere said that individuals cannot apply a religious test. He nowhere said the constitution "forbids" that sort of behavior.

It is you who are moving the goalposts. Rather, Romney said that such behavior goes against constitutional principles, which it does.

IN post 7 I transcribed what romney he stated that the founders went to great lenght and even put it in the constitution that WE [the people individually or collectively] would not use religion in voting. Romney misrepresentation the Constutuion with such a statement article 6 applies to govenrments not private citizens. But romney knows this but continues to make the same misrepresentations.

Link to comment
Once again, where and how, does the US Constitution prohibit an individual from applying a religious test to voting? The US Constitution applies primarily to the Federal Government, and to the State Governments, and on in limited circumstances to individuals. What part of the Constitution did the pastor violate? If you are going to throw out claims of Constitutional violations surely you can show the violation? (You have sound position with your tax code thread, but that is not the Constitution, and I believe the IRS has a means by which individuals can report alleged violations, hopefully you took screen shots of what you felt was a violation.)

Maybe this is a private spat between you and Zakuska, but let me quote to you what you wrote that Romney said:

what i find to be most troubling because the founder of this country went to great lenght to make sure and even put it in the constitution that we would not choose people who represent us in government based upon their religion

and the Constitution states: no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States

Now, you are right to say that Rev. Jeffress was not violating the Constitution by saying that good Christians should always vote for a "genuine" Christian over a cult-addled Mormon, when the choice is available, and as you make clear, Jeffress has every right to say what the heck he wants to say about it, because he's not the government trying to impose a religious test for public office, and voters have the perfect right to vote based upon whatever criteria they desire.

But Jeffress's statements tread very closely upon advocating a religious test for public office, which again, might be his right, but nevertheless when he advocates violating the spirit of the Constitution and the rights of free speech and exercise of conscience, he is disregarding the spirit of the Constituion that gives him all those rights. If he is not careful, tomorrow he may very well find himself on the other side of the sword he is wielding with such gay abandon at others. Principles must be preserved, or they may become lost.

But it's his right to make a pompous *** out of himself.

Link to comment

Now, you are right to say that Rev. Jeffress was not violating the Constitution by saying that good Christians should always vote for a "genuine" Christian over a cult-addled Mormon, when the choice is available, and as you make clear, Jeffress has every right to say what the heck he wants to say about it, because he's not the government trying to impose a religious test for public office, and voters have the perfect right to vote based upon whatever criteria they desire.

But Jeffress's statements tread very closely upon advocating a religious test for public office, which again, might be his right, but nevertheless when he advocates violating the spirit of the Constitution and the rights of free speech and exercise of conscience, he is disregarding the spirit of the Constituion that gives him all those rights. If he is not careful, tomorrow he may very well find himself on the other side of the sword he is wielding with such gay abandon at others. Principles must be preserved, or they may become lost.

But it's his right to make a pompous *** out of himself.

I would argue that since "We the People" govern this nation, the principle does indeed apply to us as private citizens as much as it applies to duely authroized officers of the law.

Link to comment

I would argue that since "We the People" govern this nation, the principle does indeed apply to us as private citizens as much as it applies to duely authroized officers of the law.

If I wish to vote for the opponent of candidate A because candidate A is a Muslim/Mormon/Catholic/Atheist/AppleFanboy, then that's my right. Even if it is a foolish action.

Link to comment

there is the transcript, where does Romney "specifically" state he " wasn't asking Perry to set a side his religious beleifs." speaking of cognitive dissonance.

frankenstein...

Romney specifically stated he wasn't asking Perry to set aside his beliefs any more than he would his own... the quote can be found in the last paragraph of the Michael Memoli article quoted by Zak in Post #1... that, and I too heard him tell Perry that.

An interesting thing, after Romney explained about the Lawn Company hiring the illegals and his actions to cease using that company because of it, Perry started up on it again and not only Romney but Anderson Cooper showed frustration and said they had been down that road before, while the audience booed Perry for trying to make that misrepresentation again... IMO he came across as a schoolyard thug...

GG

Link to comment

frankenstein...

Romney specifically stated he wasn't asking Perry to set aside his beliefs any more than he would his own... the quote can be found in the last paragraph of the Michael Memoli article quoted by Zak in Post #1... that, and I too heard him tell Perry that.

An interesting thing, after Romney explained about the Lawn Company hiring the illegals and his actions to cease using that company because of it, Perry started up on it again and not only Romney but Anderson Cooper showed frustration and said they had been down that road before, while the audience booed Perry for trying to make that misrepresentation again... IMO he came across as a schoolyard thug...

GG

All in all I think it is a good thing, that the facade and fanaticism of the far right wing is being exposed and the public is becoming aware of it. We can thank Rev. Jeffress for that.

Link to comment

frankenstein...

Romney specifically stated he wasn't asking Perry to set aside his beliefs any more than he would his own... the quote can be found in the last paragraph of the Michael Memoli article quoted by Zak in Post #1... that, and I too heard him tell Perry that.

Yes romney stated he did not want Perry to distance himself from his religion; however romney spent the majority of the commentary stating that voting based on religion is against the Constitution. He also told Perry that Perry should have said what Jeffress said was wrong. As I see it you can not tell someone their religious is wrong and that leaders counsel is against the constition and that the council should not be followed, and in the same breathe say "not trying to distance you from your religion". Having people distance themself from their religion, if ones religion suggests a religious test for voting, is exactly what romney wants; romney does.not want to apply a religious test when voting even if a religion states a follower should

edited to correct spelling error Jefferson --> Jeffress

Link to comment

Yes romney stated he did not want Perry to distance himself from his religion; however romney spent the majority of the commentary stating that voting based on religion is against the Constitution.

Or more precisely, contrary to principles which are present in the Constitution. We've already pointed out the importance of this difference.

Such behavior is not illegal or directly in contradiction to the constitution, but tests against candidates due to their religion are contrary to principles espoused in the constitution.

He also told Perry that Perry should have said what Jefferson said was wrong.
Did he now? You seem to be fast and loose on who said what. (And the pastor's name is Jeffress, not Jefferson.)
As I see it you can not tell someone their religious is wrong and that leaders counsel is against the constition and that the council should not be followed, and in the same breathe say "not trying to distance you from your religion". Having people distance themself from their religion, if ones religion suggests a religious test for voting, is exactly what romney wants; romney does.not want to apply a religious test when voting even if a religion states a follower should
Oh, now Romney said that someone's religion was wrong "in the same breath" did he? You are wrong that Perry's religion asks for a religious test. There are many other Baptist leaders who also reject Jeffress' religious test.
Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...