Answering 'the Mormon question'

ROM8,

Please specify exactly what I have written that is "deceptive" (untrue, inaccurate, wrong).

Anyone who researches it will find I have written only the truth, in context, accurately portrayed.

But YOU try to divert the point (we call that using "red herring" arguments).

My arguments showed clearly and factually that:

1) Mormon leaders will "lie for the Lord" (as demonstrated by their false report to congress regarding the practice of polygamy)

2) Mormon leaders will violate their own sacred scriptures (D&C 134) to mix religious influence with civil government in a way that denies other citizens of their equal rights under the law (Proposition 8). It is well-documented that the LDS Church was the deciding factor in Prop 8.

3) Mormon leaders have such cultish power over the members of their Church that they can (and did for Prop8) "command" their followers to deprive others of civil rights, and it is written clearly in their Temple oaths and covenants that members are expected to give all their possessions and use all their positions and opportunities ("everything with which the Lord has blessed you or may bless you") for the building up of the LDS Church. This includes oaths to give one's life for the building up of the LDS Church. That is an explicit oath regarding a willingness to "give one's life" (suicide) for the Church.

4) The LDS Temple ceremonies at the time Mitt Romney was "endowed" included graphic depictions of cutting one's throat, disembowling oneself, and other acts of suicide as a penalty for revealing the secret oaths and failing to be faithful to them.

These are not lies. These are facts. These are not taken out of context. They are true, accurate, and reliable.

As such, your unsupported assertion that "nothing about Mormon beliefs in general, or Mormon temple ceremonies in particular, that would cause a Mormon public official to violate his or her oath of office" is just not true.

As I have shown, Mitt Romney and other temple Mormons have made explicit oaths and covenants of allegiance to their "Prophet" that take priority over their political responsibilities, civil government, civil law ("the philosophies of men" and "the evil world"), ethics, and common sense.

Finally, you (ignorantly) wrote: "I do give you credit for finally identifying your real motive..."

Nothing I wrote indicated I am a "proponent of same-sex marriage". That is your false assumption. My personal beliefs are irrelevant. What IS relevant is that you have provided NO arguments to counter anything I have reported about Mormonism and Mitt Romney.

Vanka,

It is you who is being deceptive. You are the one taking Mormon beliefs out of context in order to portray the Mormon church as the boogey-man. You clearly know enough about the Mormon church to know that the Mormon eschatalogical belief structure is not material different that any number of other Christian faiths. Like many others traditions, the Mormon faith holds that the resurrected Jesus will return, and when he does all will know that Jesus was and is the Christ.

There is nothing about Mormon beliefs in general, or Mormon temple ceremonies in particular, that would cause a Mormon public official to violate his or her oath of office.

You say the the Mormons practiced polygamy for an additional 10 years after it was officially ended by their church. Even if that is true, it still ended more than a century ago.

When you quote peoples beliefs out of context in an attempt to imply an inaccurate conclusion you are still lying. Fortunately, anyone who has taken the time to get to know a real Mormon knows it.

I do give you credit for finally identifying your real motive. It is no secret that proponents of same-sex marriage are trying to delegitimize those who support traditional marriage by emphasizing Mormon involvement in Prop 8. The widespread ignorance of the Mormon faith tradition makes them an easy boogey man.

But your argument is simply inaccurate. It is not the Mormons or the millions of other religious Americans that supported Prop 8 that are trying to impose their religious beliefs. They are not the ones who have, time and again, used their allies on the courts of this country to create by fiat rights that don't exist in the Constitution. Likewise, they are not the ones using the courts to elevate those imaginary rights above the explicit constitutional protections of religious freedom.

I might add that they are not the ones on comment boards across the internet intentionally lying about other peoples' beliefs.

It is true that Mormons do have some peculiar aspects of their theology that differentiate them from many of the other Christian faith tranditions. But there is nothing secret about it. Mormons across the world are more than happy to tell you about what they believe. (In fact, you might have seen a few of them, they send out a whole bunch of young people in name tags.)

ROM08,

Please cease the deception. You know very well I did not attack Mormons for what they USED TO believe. I explicitly pointed out the stuff that was PAST and that which is CURRENT.

The CURRENT temple oaths that I cited are oaths that Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman make in their temples every time they visit
TODAY.

Those oaths don't just promise to build up the generic "kingdom of God" - they are specific oaths to give all possessions and even one's life to the LDS Church!

As for your quotes from LDS scriptures, that is no comfort. We know from history that Mormons believe the word of their living leaders above scripture.

Case in point: The Mormon Church leader told all Mormons to "do all you can" to fight against same-sex marriage (Prop 8 in California). This despite the fact that LDS scriptures clearly state:

"It is NOT JUST for religions to mingle religious influence with civil government, whereby one religious society is fostered and another proscribed in its spiritual privileges, and the individual rights of its members, as citizens, denied" (D&C134).

Even polygamy was continued secretly for around 10 years after LDS Church leaders swore to Congress that the practice had ceased in the Church (see Quinn).

So, please, stop the lies. Stop denying what your Church really is: a secretive, elitist, imperialistic cult aspiring to "put an end to all nations", and rule the world for a thousand years when "every knee shall bow and every tongue confess" that the Mormon

Jesus is in charge!

@ROM08:

"That all may be true, but Mitt Romney does not belong to any of those groups (which split off from Mormonism more
than a century ago!!!)."

All of those things are part of Mormon culture and its collective membership, and those historical circumstances give insights into that culture: their repercussions are with us to the present day.

"So I guess that means you no longer have a problem with his candidacy?"

(chuckle) - now Rom, you _have_ got a sense of humor, and I _do_ appreciate that :)

@Vanka,

Well, first of all, the Mormon temple ceremonies can't be all that secret, now can they? I mean, people are all over the internet and television (and now this board) claiming to know their contents.

But more importantly, why is it that you and others on this board can only attack Mormons for what they used to do or believe? Let me make a suggestion. All you have to do is make friends with a Mormon and they will tell you what they really believe. Then you can let go of all of your silly misconceptions.

It is true that committing oneself to the building up of the Kingdom of God is an important part of Mormonism (and the rest of biblical Christianity). However, you may rest assured that religious pluralism and self-determination are just as important.

the Mormon's 11th Article of Faith states that:

"We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may."

As for the presidential oath of office, a President need only pledge to faithfully defend the Constitution of the United States. Of that Constitution, Mormon scripture has this to say:

Doctrine and Covenants 101:77

"the laws and constitution of the people, which I have suffered to be established, and should be maintained for the rights and protection of all flesh, according to just and holy principles."

Doctrine and Covenants 109:54

"Have mercy, O Lord, upon all the nations of the earth; have mercy upon the rulers of our land; may those principles, which were so honorably and nobly defended, namely, the Constitution of our land, by our fathers, be established forever."

So a Mormon President, at least as much as any other religous person, can uphold his oath of office without violating any other commitments he made to the Kingdom of God.

I'm sure you are relieved to here it.

@FredJ1:

That all may be true, but Mitt Romney does not belong to any of those groups (which split off from Mormonism more than a century ago!!!).

So I guess that means you no longer have a problem with his candidacy?

Rom08,

Do you deny that Romney has made secret Temple oaths?

Faith is one thing. But oaths and loyalties that take priority above the United States of America and its Constitution are threats to the sovereignty of this nation.

When Mitt Romney went through the Mormon temple, he became "endowed". In order to become endowed, Mormons have to pass an interview (like a catechism for Catholics). The endowment ritual includes many things Mormons are not allowed to talk about outside of the Temples. These secret ("sacred") things include special promises and covenants Mormons make to the Church and to God. One of these "oaths" promises total and complete loyalty to the LDS Church and its leaders, including being willing to give all your possessions to the Church if needed.

The oath is something like this:

"Each of you bring your right arm to the square. You and each of you covenant and promise before God, angels, and these witnesses at this altar, ...that you do consecrate yourselves, your time, talents, and everything with which the Lord has blessed you, or with which he may bless you, to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, for the building up of the Kingdom of God on the earth and for the establishment of Zion."

They also promise:

"And as Jesus Christ has laid down his life for the redemption of mankind, so we should covenant to sacrifice all that we possess, even our own lives if necessary, in sustaining and defending the Kingdom of God (LDS Church)."

Mitt Romney has made this oath, and repeats this oath each time he returns to an LDS Temple.

For a POTUS to have made such a secret oath violates the oath of office of the POTUS. The POTUS must not have ANY higher loyalty than to the United States of America and Constitution.

"Endowed" Mormons should be automatically disqualified because of their secret oaths in their temples that place their loyalty to the LDS Church above their loyalty to the United States of America.

Back a few years ago when Mitt Romney became "endowed", Mormon temple oaths included "penalties" for breaking the oaths:

"We, and each of us, covenant and promise that we will not reveal any of the secrets of this, the first token of the Aaronic priesthood, with its accompanying name, sign or penalty. Should we do so, we agree that our throats be cut from ear to ear and our tongues torn out by their roots."

"The brethren and sisters will now stand, push back the seats, place the robe on the left shoulder, and receive the Second Token of the Aaronic Priesthood. We and each of us do covenant and promise that we will not reveal the secrets of this, the Second Token of the Aaronic Priesthood, with its accompanying name, sign, grip or penalty. Should we do so, we agree to have our breasts cut open and our hearts and vitals torn from our bodies and given to the birds of the air and the beasts of the field."

Rom:

Now you are just plain being too modest:

"Even though Mormons ended the practice of polygamy more than a century ago. You keep talking about it. Of course you don't mention that their sacred writings (including the Bible) clearly advocate chastity before and fidelity in marriage. That is what Mormons believe."

Polygamy was *popularized* in North America by LDS founder Joseph Smith * - who then became the role model for every other tin-horned North American prophet to follow. The membership of the Fundamentalist Mormon Church, all the way to the 'independent' polygamists living in Utah, Canada, etc, revere Joseph Smith, read the Book of Mormon, and think of themselves as Mormons.

* and continued by Brigham Young, etc.

And is it also true that the LDS church has not really repudiated polygamy, but merely suspended it?

===================

The entire mess in Utah/Texas with Warren Jeffs & crew would very likely not have happened without an earlier role model to plant the idea of Prophet+Polygamy in America: specifically Mr. Joseph Smith.

But, then we have the Reorganized Church of Latter-Day Saints - who apparently never practiced polygamy.

So many kinds of Mormons - how to keep it all straight? (chuckle)

HAVE A HEART:

'PEACE & LOVE' for ALL Huumate-People to enjoy On [THIS]
bless'th [NEBULAE-BUiLT] Holyi Space-Ship-Earth (of many).
..
.
..................................... (\;U/S\A;/)
........................ oooooooooooooooooooooo
.................... ooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
............ oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
......... oooooooo .. . . . . . . oooo . . . . . . . . oooooooo
...... ooooooo . . . . . . . . . . oooo . . . . .. . . . . . ooooooo
..... oooooo . . . . . .. . . . . . oooo . . . . . . . . . . . . oooooo
.... oooooo . . . . . . . . . . . . oooo . . . . . .. . . . . . . oooooo
.... ooooo . . . . . . . . . . . . . oooo . . . . . .. . . . . . . . ooooo
.... oooooo . . . . . . . . . . . oooooo. . . . . . . . . . . . oooooo
..... oooooo . . . . . . . . . . oooooooo . . . . . . . . . . oooooo
...... ooooo . . . . . . . . . ooooooooooo . . . . . . . . . ooooo
....... oooooo . . . . .. oooo .oooo .. oooo . . . . . oooooo
......... ooooooooo . . .. . . . oooo . . . . . . . . oooooooo
............ oooooooo . . . . . . oooo . . ... . . . oooooooo
............... oooooooo . . . .. oooo . . . . .. oooooooo
.................. oooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
........................ oooooooooooooooooooooo
.............................. oooooooooooooooo
................................... ooooooooooo
.
.
LOVE! U.S.A., NATO & FREUNDS!
.
.
Credits to “JJ” http://onwapo.wordpress.com

JOL310 is another perfect example. Of course she emphasizes that building the "Kingdom of God" is important in the Mormon belief structure. She of course does not mention that this is true of all of Christianity (at least as taught int he Bible).

Further, she certainly doesn't mention that religious pluralism and the right to religious self-determination are just as central to the Mormon belief system. Is that because she didn't know, or because it didn't fit well with her attacks?

Haveaheart,

The funny (and dishonest) thing about you and many other critics of the Mormon church is that you latch on to these peripheral Mormon "beliefs" that were never universal and are contradicted within their own sacred texts and use them exclusively to define Mormonism.

Even though Mormons ended the practice of polygamy more than a century ago. You keep talking about it. Of course you don't mention that their sacred writings (including the Bible) clearly advocate chatity before and fidelity in marriage. That is what Mormons believe.

Likewise you emphasize (or more accurately allude to) nearly 50 year old beliefs among some Mormons regarding race. You don't bother to put your claims into the context of American history. And you certianly don't bother to mention that the Book of Mormon clearly teaches that all men are alike to God regardless of gender, race or class. That is what Mormons believe.

It is clear that you are not a fan of Mormon theology (or at least of thsoe small, insignificant and outdated portions of which you are aware), but whether out of ignorance or malice, your representation of Mormon theology is dishonest.

Mormon "theology" is an interesting grab-bag of evolving absurdity.

They've been making it up as they go for nearly 200 years now. Each time they hit a bump in the road (e.g., the unwillingness of the U.S. government to sanction polygamy if Utah gained statehood, the refusal to admit blacks to the priesthood and to temple ceremonies, etc.), the current "Prophet, Seer, and Revelator" has a convenient revelation from God commanding precisely the change in doctrine that is at issue.

In each case, the church holds out until the last possible moment before hacking off one of its cherished ideals -- like, for instance, the inferiority of the non-white races. (All that stuff in the literature about "white and delightsome" isn't referring to paint swatches.)

The church hierarchy controls and manipulates the lives of millions of people in order to continue the astonishing accumulation of wealth that can result only from absolute power.

Everything about this cult is fraudulent.

The Mormons believe that the indigenous peoples of the Americas, the Lamanites, were Israelites that came to the New World thousands of years ago. For 150 years, they have taught the American Indians, the Polynesians and the Indians of South America that they are decendants of these Lamanites. This was fine until the discovery of DNA. It turns out that there is no pre-Columbian DNA of middle-eastern peoples in the Americas. There is not a trace of mitochondrial DNA that one would expect to survive over the millenia. There are no vestiges of middle-easterm language. Mormon apologists are having a very hard time with this.

In addition, the Mormons belief in the planet Kolob is attributed to the Book of Abraham, that was translated by Joseph Smith himself from an Egyptian scroll. No problem until the discovery of the Rosetta Stone. It turns out that the Egyptian scroll is nothing more that a typical Egyptian burial scroll to be put under the head of the deceased. It has nothing to do with Abraham or any heavenly bodies.

If Mitt Romney still believes this tripe in view of the evidence that exists today, then how can he be trusted to make a simple judgement call, for example, whether a country that he is about to attack might have weapons of mass distruction?

A faithful, active Mormon has gone through the secret LDS temple endowment ceremony where s/he has taken an oath to observe the Law of Obedience and promised before God, angels and witnesses to “accept the Law of Consecration as contained in the Book of Doctrine and Covenants, in that you do consecrate yourselves, your time, talents, and everything with which the Lord has blessed you, or with which he may bless you, to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, for the building up of the Kingdom of God on the earth and for the establishment of Zion.”

If elected, would s/he view their political position and power as something the Lord has blessed him with? Would s/he keep the sworn oath to consecrate that blessing to the LDS Church? Or would s/he be willing to disavowal the oath s/he made before God, angels, and witnesses?

HAVEAHEART on Mormons: I am obliged to follow my church. Correct but also should be considered for candidates for Congress, Governor, City Mayor. Also applies to several other faiths but not all. Voters should read and get more informed.

Not too many years ago, I met a very nice Morman convert who lived in the same apartment complex as I did. At that time, since she was just beginning her Mormon lessons, she was not able to enter the newly built temple here in St. Louis, nor as she informed me, could I.

If I want to, I can enter Catholic churches, evangelical churches, Jewish synogogues, protestant churches,etc., but not the Mormon temple? If that is still the case, doesn't anyone see a problem with the president of the United States and leader of the entire world belonging to a faith that excludes rather than embraces?

Until the day voters will appreciate a secular candidate, the best we can do now is to vote for the lesser among the evils.
Was JFK a catholic? No, he was a de facto secular.

Mr. Lynn, your last paragraph sums it all up perfectly. That, indeed, is the only question to be asked and answered

Ooops. CULTures & SECTions!

H A V E A H E A R T

Your Candidness is greatly needed. QUESTION?

Which AD best Represent Mitt or Borack?
-
......\......|....../..........
............_..................
......-....(_).....-.........
.............................
....../......|......\.......
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sunshine On RELIGIONS!
..
..
. . _________________
.. |VOTE: Mitt ROMNEY |
.. |YES YES! For: 2012+|
. .|_________________|
................. \../ .................. WORLD PEACE!
.. . . v. . . . . || . . . . . . . . . . .
v . . . . . . . . || . . . . . . . . . . .
.. . . . . . . . . || . . . .V . . . . . .
.. . . . . . . . . || . . . . . . . . HEALING OF NATIONS!
.. . . . , . . . . ||. . . V. . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . & Sunshine On GOVernment's!
. . . . . . . . .
. "COME NOW & LET US REASON TOGETHER"
. . . . . . .
. . . . Mitt (with) ROMNEY, Anything Is Possible!
...
========================================
FREE ad by the APOCALYPTARIAN-PARTY USA!
========================================
.
.
OR The One Below; with Less Noise?
.
.
Your Answer would be greatly Appreciated.
.
Note: There is a big Difference between "CULTSECT .
Pleazza. STOP READING! Aye?
.

erinannie,

I am not, and have never been, a member of the Mormon church. Nor am I a Christian, Jew, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, Jain, etc.

I just read a lot. I'm curious, from a sociological standpoint, about religions, religious beliefs, and how religious people live their beliefs. I'm pretty biased against organized religion in general, so when I take a personal position about a particular religion, it's because I've found something about either the belief system or the church hierarchy to be genuinely odious.

Granted, my comments about the Mormon church are not temperate. I consider it to be a cult, suppressive of individual abilities and talents but emphatic about the necessity to follow church dictates in lockstep.

I also consider it to be a corporate entity, consumed with the task of accumulating wealth. That such an organization can give significant, overt financial support to political candidates and legislation that it favors while still retaining its tax-exempt status is utterly appalling.

These kinds of issues will arise in the ensuing months, as all of the Republican presidential wannabes start jockeying for position. I predict that it will be the non-Mormon candidates themselves (or, more accurately, their aides), who will plant difficult questions and embarrassing revelations about the Mormon candidates along the primary road.

Mormonism will have a lot to answer for.

......\......|....../..........
............_..................
.....-.....(_).....-.........
...........................Sunshine On GOV'T!
....../......|......\.......
.
..
..
.. __________________
.. |VOTE: Mitt ROMNEY |
.. |YES YES! For: 2012+|
. .|_________________|
................. \../ ....................
.. . . v. . . . . || . . . . . . . . . . .
v . . . . . . . . || . . . . . . . . . . .
.. . . . . . . . . || . . . . .V . . . . . .
.. . . . . . . . . || . . . . . . . . . . .
.. . . . , . . . . ||. . . V. .

HaveAHeart-

Your complaints and knowledge of the LDS Church scream of someone who is obviously no longer a member of the faith.
But please, can we set a few things straight? You let your own personal biases creep in, and change a few facts.
You said-
""Non-faith-promoting" behavior, as defined by the Mormon prophet, is not only strictly prohibited; it's punishable by shunning, excommunication, and the resultant loss of livelihood that typically happens when a member is put out of the church. Even the apostate's family is required to reject him/her.

Rev. Lynn says, "There really is only one question that needs to be answered: can you faithfully execute the laws of the United States or is there some religious view you hold that you believe transcends that duty?"

For observant, obedient Mormons who want to remain in the fold and spend eternity with their families, there is only one answer possible: "Yes, there is an impediment to my faithfully executing the laws of the United States, because my first and foremost allegiance must be to my church. In decisions where law and the dictates of my church conflict, I am obliged to follow my church."

Any other answer is patently false."

INCORRECT!
Apostates are NOT to be rejected by their families. Remember the popular line, "Love the sinner, hate the sin?"
Second, if an individual (and it is truly, 100% up to the individual) feels that their God given calling in life is to serve their country, then they can, without reservation, answer YES, I can faithfully execute the laws of the United States.
Or have you forgotten the 12th Article of Faith, "We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law."

Mormons occupy an unusual space in the religious landscape of the U.S. Unlike any other religions that operate on a large scale in this country, the Mormon church requires absolute obedience to its dictates. The penalties for non-cooperation are severe and usually involve rejection by family and church community.

From toddlerhood, Mormon children are trundled up to the podium and made to say that they "know the church is true."

All mainstream Mormons are expected to venerate the "Prophet, Seer, and Revelator," who is always some old white guy next on the list to be head honcho. And this guy -- whether clear-headed or senile -- is the absolute ruler over all Mormons in good standing.

And what does "good standing" mean?

Well, first you have to do all the things required of you by church doctrine. So you attend all services, tithe, wear the sacred underwear and modest clothing, observe "family home evening," and report in to your local ward bishop on a regular basis to confirm that you are doing all of these things and following all the rules.

If you're a male, you acquire mysterious "priesthood" titles and go on a two-year mission when you're 19.

If you're female, you obey your husband and do a lot of work for the Relief Society.

If you do all these things and then dutifully report to your bishop, you will get/keep your "temple recommend," the golden ticket that gets you into one of the handful of Mormon temples across the country.

If you're bad, though, you don't get -- or can't keep -- your temple recommend. This means that, should your daughter or son get married in the temple, you're not allowed to attend.

Most importantly, from the Mormon point of view, is blind obedience to the dictates of Mormon scripture as interpreted or revealed by the current prophet/president. And this is not comparable to Catholics heeding the pope, as is often suggested.

"Non-faith-promoting" behavior, as defined by the Mormon prophet, is not only strictly prohibited; it's punishable by shunning, excommunication, and the resultant loss of livelihood that typically happens when a member is put out of the church. Even the apostate's family is required to reject him/her.

Rev. Lynn says, "There really is only one question that needs to be answered: can you faithfully execute the laws of the United States or is there some religious view you hold that you believe transcends that duty?"

For observant, obedient Mormons who want to remain in the fold and spend eternity with their families, there is only one answer possible: "Yes, there is an impediment to my faithfully executing the laws of the United States, because my first and foremost allegiance must be to my church. In decisions where law and the dictates of my church conflict, I am obliged to follow my church."

Any other answer is patently false.

A rather slanted view on Catholicism. HOw about (instead of referring to the Pope, who is after all the head of a religion) asking if Kennedy would adhere to the teachings of his religion?

Completely agree. I couldn't care less what religion the president is as long as that person can execute the duties of the office and has a full understanding of the First Amendment. The problem is that when politicians speak openly about how their faith guides them - and it is certainly their right to express that as Americans - it can lead to serious skepticism among those of other faiths, to include no faith, that their First Amendment rights will be also be respected and protected.