Jump to content

Guess Who Just Endorsed Romney?


CQUIRK

Recommended Posts

Wasn't Voight was one of the main actors in September Dawn September Yawn September Bomb? Played the Bishop or something?

There! All fixed! :rofl: Sorry. Couldn't resist! ;)

Link to comment

Wasn't Voight was one of the main actors in September Dawn? Played the Bishop or something?

Yikes, I forgot about that! Interesting...and weird! :o:D

Link to comment

Frankenstein you are a moron -and no, that's not a typo.

I'm a Ron Paul supporter, and the fact that Jon starred in September Dawn, and yet has endorsed Romney is a news item that's very much church-related.

Are you trying to be funny here? because you're not right now.

Link to comment

Frankenstein you are a moron -and no, that's not a typo.

I'm a Ron Paul supporter, and the fact that Jon stared in September Dawn, and yet has endorsed Romney is a news item that's very much church-related.

Are you trying to be funny here? because you're not right now.

Who did he stare at? :P

Link to comment

Another political thread unrelated to the LDS faith. We all acknowledge your man crush for romney, can please stop using this board as a forum to express your man crush.

Why the rude comments? Romney's presidency bid is certainly germane to Mormonisn as much as Kennedy's Catholicism was to his.

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.
  • Similar Content

    • By Anijen
      In reading some of the posts involving crimes [sexual assault], allegations, [Kavanaugh, President Russel Topic], or even controversial subjects such as Climate Change, Book of Mormon Geography, etc.. I have thought to myself there are a lot of faith based concepts juxtaposed up to scientific method and actual evidence. I'd like to discuss both and how it might affect our concept of that topic and what we take away.
      Personal belief systems can take root at a very early age, sometimes as a part of our cultural or ethnic identity. As a result, they are almost impossible to remove without eroding the soil of substance that gives one both a sense of identity and purpose. However, also true, as a consequence, most will not surrender a deeply held personal belief for fear it could lead to their spiritual loss or death. There is nothing wrong with personal beliefs. I, for one, am deeply faithful and active in church. Each person finds meaning and purpose in their own way and that is how it should be. There is a difference between faith and scientific method and reason. Personal faith is not a problem unless it gets in the way of objective forensic investigation and examination.
      For example; using faith based reasoning (let's say using the Bible to prove a point), the premise of an argument and the conclusion are a matter of personal belief and subsequently often considered above criticism. Those who question the premises of such beliefs, religious and otherwise dogmatic, are labeled heretics or worse. I have been called an apostate for not subscribing to a heartland theory, a racist for objecting to a safe-place policy, a climate denier for even questioning global warming (which I know there is climate change, my interests is, is it really all just man made?), a racist and a bigot for disagreeing about kneeling as a protest, a chauvinist pig for thinking men and woman are different and we should use the appropriate public bathrooms.  
      In faith and personal belief, there is little room for critical thinking and no place for doubt. As a consequence, the nature of faith runs contrary to knowledge building. My faith tells me men and women are both children of God and are different from each other, science also tells me there is a biological difference too. We still have debates to how we should act and even appropriate ways to speak. For example is refusing to bake a cake with a message one does not believe in compelling speech?
      Questions, questions, questions... When is testify via faith and testify via science appropriate and acceptable and when is it not?
    • By bcuzbcuz
      This evening, the returns are in. The "Sweden Democrats", Sweden's neo-nazi party, have won 13% of the federal election vote. Roughly 85% of the population have voted. The nine major parties have collected only enough votes to, almost exactly down the middle, split power between the right coalition and the left coalition.. And guess who gets to sit in the middle of the balance, the neo-nazis.
      All of you who said that socialism would lead to ruin, were right.
      Both left and right coalitions have said they'll have nothing to do with the SD's but time will tell. Me, I'm a pessimist. It can only get worse. The end of times is upon us.
    • By volgadon
      http://mormonliberals.org/marriner-eccles/
      A very good friend of mine wrote a fascinating piece on Mariner Eccles, one of the more influential Mormons in the 20th century, and sadly much-neglected now.
      The bit about Mariner and Reed Smoot during the depression is particularly revealing of the political and economic dynamics at play in the church.
    • By CQUIRK
      Here.
      IMO, these people are no better then the Westboro Baptist Church; both are vile, slanderous, and will go to the extreme to "further" their agenda.
×
×
  • Create New...