Mormon Accepts Gop Nomination - A Historical First

[Mudcat]

As of yesterday, Mitt Romney is the first LDS to receive a majority party nomination in US history.

I know in the past LDS have suffered persecution and ridicule over their beliefs and on some level still do. But I think people are coming to realize that LDS are hardworking people of integrity, even though they might disagree with them on religious matters. I saw yesterday's nomination as good evidence that positions towards LDS have changed over time.

In a world that often gives us more bad news than good, I just wanted to say it's good to see that things can change for the better once in a while.

I am sure many of you are proud of this milestone for LDS and I just wanted to take an opportunity to say congratulations.

All the best,

Mudcat

[thesometimesaint]

Mudcat:

To me it's a mixed bag. I'm thankful that we're not being persecuted to the extent we were, but putting religion into politics just rubs me the wrong way.

[theplains]

To me it's a mixed bag. I'm thankful that we're not being persecuted to the extent we were, but putting religion into politics just rubs me the wrong way.

If one took Romney's faith out of his political actions or aspirations, this would make him a hypocrite in God's eyes.

A man's faith should always direct what he does ... whether he is in or out of the political sphere.

Regards,

Jim

[thesometimesaint]

If one took Romney's faith out of his political actions or aspirations, this would make him a hypocrite in God's eyes.

A man's faith should always direct what he does ... whether he is in or out of the political sphere.

Regards,

Jim

I don't expect any one to abandon their religious beliefs/non-beliefs when running for political office. No one could do it even if they wanted to. However the function of law is to allow those belief and the free exercise there of without infringing on those same rights of others not of our beliefs.

[mapman]

I think it was definitely an important moment. I just hope that the press covers the LDS Dems thingy at the Democratic Convention with Bro. Reid to provide some balance. I have nothing against Bro. Romney, but I fear that he will unintentionally make the church become more associated with the Republican Party in people's minds. To be associated with American partisan politics would not be good for the church, especially outside the US.

[KevinG]

Do we really want to own the LDS Democrats?

(I kid)

[Tacenda]

If one took Romney's faith out of his political actions or aspirations, this would make him a hypocrite in God's eyes.

A man's faith should always direct what he does ... whether he is in or out of the political sphere.

Regards,

Jim

I felt a little bad for the Athiest Republicans in the room during the convention because they brought in God quite a bit, but then again I'm sure they are use to it being that the majority rule.

[KevinG]

I felt a little bad for the Athiest Republicans in the room during the convention because they brought in God quite a bit, but then again I'm sure they are use to it being that the majority rule.

It could be that those are genuine beliefs for a majority of Republicans.

As a Mormon I wasn't offended when a Catholic Cardinal gave a prayer. Why should an atheist Republican, knowing who they associate with, be offended in any way by mentions of God?

[thesometimesaint]

Do we really want to own the LDS Democrats?

(I kid)

At one time Brigham Young had to force some members to be Republican. I not too sure that the majority of LDS would care much about American politics.

[Garden Girl]

I was pleased with the way Romney let others "introduce" his faith and tell about his activities as a "pastor" as they called it, so people would understand the role...

Everyone had been saying they didn't "know" him and thought he was so stiff and couldn't relate to everyday people because of his wealth... when members of his former congregation told their experiences with him as their pastor, there were tears visible among the delegates, even the men... if those experiences and others from the people he helped in Church, business, the Olympics, etc don't show his ability to relate to people, then nothing will, and shame on those who can't see it.

I was pleased because it gave a view of the responsibility a "pastor" (bishop) in the LDS faith bears, including counsel on everything from spiritual matters to personal to financial... all without pay for the many hours required. I feel that description of responsibilities was the positive message that allowed people a look at our faith and at Romney and his ability to feel compassion and serve others.

GG

[mnn727]

I'm not a big Romney fan HOWEVER when people look at him and say he's out of touch with the common American because he is rich, that gets me: As a Bishop and a Stake President you see people at both their best and their worst.

[KevinG]

At one time Brigham Young had to force some members to be Republican. I not too sure that the majority of LDS would care much about American politics.

I love that tidbit of history. In order to avoid accusations of block voting the Saints had to be assigned political parties.

[Libs]

I understand that the religious aspect probably resonants with a lot of Republicans, but I did think it was a bit overdone, at this Convention. Seems like it would have been more productive to focus on policy and what they plan to actually do. I still don't really know for sure. It was all very vague.

[Deborah]

Do we really want to own the LDS Democrats?

No.

And I'm not kidding.

[KevinG]

Overdone?

Is it too far fetched to think the Republicans at that convention have a real belief and conviction in their religion?

While conventions are done for show I don't take such a cynical view of heartfelt beliefs and prayers.

[Kenngo1969]

^{Thank you for the kind words, Mudcat! Please give our best to Mrs. Mudcat and all of the little Mudkitties.}

[Kenngo1969]

I understand that the religious aspect probably resonants with a lot of Republicans, but I did think it was a bit overdone, at this Convention. Seems like it would have been more productive to focus on policy and what they plan to actually do. I still don't really know for sure. It was all very vague.

Governor Romney's detractors (seemingly unanimously, from what I have read) derided this convention as long on rhetoric and short on policy specifics ... as though all conventions aren't? When pundits talk of "rallying the base," that's not just some sort of abstract metaphor. (Granted, if one is Republican, one cannot expect to win a national election simply by appealing to one's base.) It's like the difference between what happens at church and what happens at FAIR. The function of church is to facilitate the operation of the spirit in people's lives. If they want to know the nuts-and-bolts of history or policy, they can come to FAIR. People go to conventions to rally around their candidate. If they want the specifics on Governor Romney's Fifty-Something-Point Economic Plan, they can go to MittRomney.com. That's why conventions have the look and feel of a pep rally. Just as a Republican won't win an election merely by appealing to the base, s/he won't win an election by failing to do so, either. And when the primary Republican field was so crowded, that was the question on everyone's minds: could Governor Romney win over the skeptical elements of the base? He may win the election or he may not, but at least he's done that.

[Tacenda]

I understand that the religious aspect probably resonants with a lot of Republicans, but I did think it was a bit overdone, at this Convention. Seems like it would have been more productive to focus on policy and what they plan to actually do. I still don't really know for sure. It was all very vague.

I have mixed feelings (I gave both you and Cal points). I think if it's distributed evenly, religion/service and the policies, then it's a good thing. I'm still up in the air on what Romney will do any differently than previous presidents, for example George Bush. But was delighted to hear about him crossing off all his campaign promises as he finished them, when he ran for governor!

[thesometimesaint]

KevinG:

The sad dark history of this world is that we get ourselves into trouble anytime we mix religion and politics. I really don't want to see the US go further down that dark road.

[Kenngo1969]

I have mixed feelings (I gave both you and Cal points). I think if it's distributed evenly, religion/service and the policies, then it's a good thing. I'm still up in the air on what Romney will do any differently than previous presidents, for example George Bush. But was delighted to hear about him crossing off all his campaign promises as he finished them, when he ran for governor!

At least Governor Romney has a record he can run on, in contrast to the incumbent. Either the latter hasn't done what he said he was going to do (close GitMo, cut the budget deficit in half, ad infinitum) or at least a sizeable minority hasn't liked his policies (Obamacare). Last election, it was, "Hope and Change." This election, it'll be "Not Much Change, But Boy, Dang It All If we Don't Still Have a Lot of Hope!"

[mapman]

Do we really want to own the LDS Democrats?

(I kid)

Who's "we"? All the Republican Mormons?

[Calm]

It seemed to me that Romney's former counselor referred to the reason why Romney may have been reluctant to bring up that side of him and that is Romney doesn't personally make a big deal of it because of the confidentiality issue of being a bishop even though I have come across several stories being volunteered by those he has helped during the campaign with commentators wondering why Romney's people weren't making good use of such stories. I think it was a useful time to do so for both Romney and general LDS....that is about as big of a guaranteed audience that we could ask for for teaching what it means to be a member of our faith, even a leader in it, but I would dislike to see it being used much more as it begins to appear to me to be taking advantage of those one is supposed to care for, not use to self promote.

There is a fine line between promoting charitable works and selfpromotion. It is necessary to publicize some in order to let people know not only what is out to get help, but also promotes ways to help others; but too much degrades those that are helped and turns those that are supposedly helping into attention getters....not a good thing.

[Mudcat]

^{Thank you for the kind words, Mudcat! Please give our best to Mrs. Mudcat and all of the little Mudkitties.}

Will do!

Have a good weekend.

[Darren10]

I felt a little bad for the Athiest Republicans in the room during the convention because they brought in God quite a bit, but then again I'm sure they are use to it being that the majority rule.

"God" is a title. Atheists are 100% free, as well they should be, to interpret "God" as "nature". It is perfectly legitimate to speak of our rights, which no doubt come from God, as "natural rights". Natural rights are rights we have just because we exist. They are not granted to us by government; but granted to us naturally, namely by God.

[ERayR]

I don't expect any one to abandon their religious beliefs/non-beliefs when running for political office. No one could do it even if they wanted to. However the function of law is to allow those belief and the free exercise there of without infringing on those same rights of others not of our beliefs.

Are you somehow Romney is somehow going to infringe on someone else's right to the free exercise of their religion??