Senator Harry Reid, "cultist?"

Dear readers, is it now time, four weeks out from the midterm elections, for clergy to turn their attention to other matters than the religious beliefs of individual candidates?
______________________________
Witness the state of this once great nation, thanks to the clergy. We are become a Zoo.

It is time for clergy "to turn their attention" to matters concerning their religious institutions for which Americans allow them to exist on the dole.

They exist on the dole providing they do not meddle in the affairs of state; however, use their pulpits for political propaganda; they lobby congressmen, effectively breaking down the wall that should separate the clerics from governance. They get laws changed, modified in their self-sanctified names. They interfere in American international affairs.

They break the law, molest children, and receive protection for their immoral, inhuman, godless activities.

Get the clerics off the dole. End nonprofit status for religious institutions. Separate church and state, long, long overdue.

Harry Reid's theology is based on First Century Christianity, not Fourth Century Creeds. For example, the Church of Jesus Christ (LDS) views on Baptism, Lay Ministry, the Trinity, Theosis, Grace vs. Works, the Divinity of Jesus Christ comport more closely with Early Christianity than any other denomination. And Mormons’ teenagers have been judged to “top the charts” in Christian Characteristics by a UNC-Chapel Hill study. Read about it here:

http://MormonsAreChristian.blogspot.com

Those who would denigrate Harry Reid's religion, usually have an ulterior motive, such as Pastor Reed's attempt to slime Harry.

Mormons have a better understanding of Christianity than any other denomination, according to a 2010 Pew Forum poll:

http://www.pewforum.org/Other-Beliefs-and-Practices/U-S-Religious-Knowledge-Survey.aspx

11 of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were non-Trinitarian Christians. Those who insist on a narrow definition of Christianity are doing our Republic an injustice.

Having said that, I doubt most Nevada Mormons will vote for Harry, despite Pastor Reed's insult. Sharron Angle's emphasis on the U.S. Constitution and INDIVIDUAL salvation and charity are based on the Mormon concept of free will.

Of course Senator Reid's church is cult based on a particularly idiotic scripture written by a convicted swindler.

I expect to vote for one its members for President in 2012.

If 91 percent of Blacks vote for Barack Obama, the vast majority becuase he is Black; should a similar percentage of Nevada Mormons vote for Harry Reid? ? ? NO - Harry's Pelosi / Obama Marxism / Socialism doesn't set well with them. Mormons don't believe in George Soros, Jeremiah Wright and Saul Alinsky's "religion".

FarnazMansouri2 To your:

They break the law, molest children, and receive protection for their immoral, inhuman, godless activities.
Get the clerics off the dole. End nonprofit status for religious institutions. Separate church and state, long, long overdue.

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

There have been instances of immoral behavior by members of the clergy but it is not limited just to the clergy. To cast all clergy members under the same umbrella and it is not right or fair to do so.

I don't know why secularists shout separation of church and state, because there is a separation of church and state already in this country.

There has not been a state mandated religion that all citizens of this country MUST BE MEMBERS OF.

It is not the clergy that have turned this great nation into a zoo, it is the secularist reigion with their moral-less values of anything goes, and we know better than God attitudes that have taken a highly moral nation based on Biblical Christian values and keep taking God out of every aspect of our society that is causing this country's down fall.

Take God out of our society fiber, and we will end up as Godless as Russia, Nazi Germany once were and see how that worked out.

Governments can never achieve the utopia secularist seek, will never happen while man is involved.

Bot1 to your reply in part:

Mormons have a better understanding of Christianity than any other denomination, according to a 2010 Pew Forum poll:

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

They may have an understanding of christianity, but the Mormon Jesus is not the same Jesus of the Biblical Christian doctrine. If a Christian does not KNOW the Bible, which there are many that truly dont, they can be misled.

The word "cult" unfortunately has bad connotations in contemporary English and perhaps the word "sect" or just "church" should be used. This is the trouble Pope Benedict got into when (writing as Cardinal Ratzinger) his theological distinction between the Catholic Church and other Christian denominations got translated as calling them "cult" and "not churches."

Regardless of the choice of words, the substance of the distinction between LDS and other faiths in Christ is a legitimate question. The LDS theology of the nature of Jesus Christ is substantially different from the traditional trinitarian understanding. Some Christian denominations do not recognize LDS baptism and some theologians think the LDS should be considered a fourth Abrahamic faith instead of being just one more Christian denomination. Many find it difficult to reconcile a supposed return to a pure, original Christianity with a new and independent revelation 1700 years later.

In any case, a candidate's religion should not matter unless it is clear that the tenets of the faith prevent the execution of the duties of office. If the individual is going to impose it in some unconstitutional way, or favor people of his or her own denomination to the detriment of others, that's more of a problem with the individual than the particular faith.

There has not been a state mandated religion that all citizens of this country MUST BE MEMBERS OF.

Sorry, but when the "Bishops" refuse to sign off on health care reform until it meets their criteria, when they lobby Congress, and have Stupaks and Nelson's shamelessly reporting that they will not approve anything that the Bishops don't, when the Fundies and Congressional shills do the same, that is tantamount to Establishment.

And this is merely one of many instances.
Further, religious entities endlessly violate the requirements of their non-profit privilege by propagandizing politically from their "pulpits," all over the internet, etc. They use the money they gain from OUR tax dollars to lobby Congressmen.

In many states the police were PREVENTED from arresting Catholic priest pedophiles. Said garbage were either permitted to remain, transferred, sent on retreat, or pensioned off. This continued on through 2006.

They rape, turn the nation into a Zoo, violate the Establishment Clause, etc., and live off the backs of working Americans.

Separate Church and State. End the non-profit dole. Keep the clerics out of Congress.

Had no idea that Reid is Mormon. That's great. I love the Bible but it teaches me to be anti-god so bear with me. I'm a YHWHist Jew not an Adonai Jew.

I look at it as the Abrahamic religion in two books: Bible and Quran. It's the First Testament, Second Testament, Third Testatment, Fourth Testament. So wonderful to be born in the US of patriotic mom who wouldn't allow god in the house at all. Then she makes my brother and me go to Hebrew school. Little did she know what a valuable gift that was for me. She did it because Christianity was being taught in the DC public schools during the depression. She was from East Bronx NYC.

So after 9/11 and the takeover by Muhammad in resurrection, I enjoyed the fact that the Fourth Testament forced Jesus to outrank Muhammad. Only in America:)

In the meantime, the two books I'd love all public high school kids to include in their literature are: Deuteronomy and 4 Maccabees. How about talking to your Muslim friends about reading these two books together?

Farnazmansouri2: to your

Sorry, but when the "Bishops" refuse to sign off on health care reform until it meets their criteria, when they lobby Congress, and have Stupaks and Nelson's shamelessly reporting that they will not approve anything that the Bishops don't, when the Fundies and Congressional shills do the same, that is tantamount to Establishment.
:::::::::::::::::::::::::

They objected to abortion concerns on the health bill, as a religious institution I believe they have not only a right but a duty to object to such issue. Look at the results have abortions stopped ???

::::::::::::::::::::::::

And this is merely one of many instances.
Further, religious entities endlessly violate the requirements of their non-profit privilege by propagandizing politically from their "pulpits," all over the internet, etc. They use the money they gain from OUR tax dollars to lobby Congressmen.

:::::::::::::::::::::::

I can asure you no church I have ever gone to will tell you who to vote for, but if they voice their objection based on a political or social issue contrary to biblical christian principles I have no problem with it. That is what a preacher is there for.

Churches use money from the congregation not Tax dollars.

:::::::::::::::::::

In many states the police were PREVENTED from arresting Catholic priest pedophiles. Said garbage were either permitted to remain, transferred, sent on retreat, or pensioned off. This continued on through 2006.

""""""""""""""""""""""""""

That is a separate issue, the catholic church is wrong to have covered up those abuses that have taken place, God holds those in church positions to a higher level of accountability, I would hate to be in their shoes because they will pay for it at their judgement day in front of God.
;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;

They rape, turn the nation into a Zoo, violate the Establishment Clause, etc., and live off the backs of working Americans.

::::::::::::::::::::::::

Again why do you apply the they to All Clergy that is PREJUDICE, make the ones guity pay, but do not apply guilt TO ALL CLERGY. AS for the law enforcement agencies if they did not enforce the law, then that needs to be brought out and have those agencies be accountable for derelection of duty.

How do they live off the backs of working americans, the congregation support the churches NOT TAX DOllARS.

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

Separate Church and State. End the non-profit dole. Keep the clerics out of Congress.

There is separation of church and state.

It's interesting that Mormons are only a "cult" when the members don't have an "R" next to their name.

For example, the Mormon Mitt Romney (R) doesn't belong to a cult by the reasoning of Sharron Angle and her rapture monkey preacher.

greenstheman:

A general reply to your post.

First, the RCC, and its thousands of priest pedophiles given a pass, is only one, albeit horrific example. But, as long as we're on the topic of the RCC, how is it that it is both a SOVEREIGN nation in this country, and, therefore, until now exempt from law suits by Americans, AND a religious nonprofit?

Illegal much.
_-______________________________________
As for the rest of them, let us turn now to the Presbyterians, perhaps, the wealthiest of the Protestant denominations, whose wealth stems from huge profitable investments, some of them in countries on Human Rights Watch hit lists. The way for their investments is, of course, paved by our Christian run Congress, lobbied by said Presbyterians.

The nonprofit status which subsidizes the lobbying Establishment violating Presbyterians aids and abets their law-breaking.

No conscience clauses. No Nonprofit status.
Separate church and state.

FarnazMansouri2 To your:

HOW is the Catholic church a sovereign nation?? I have not suggested that any wrong doings by ANY CHURCH, RELIGION that has comitted crimes go unpunished, if law enforcement has looked the other way then they too should be investigated and dealt with.

If Presbyterians make investments in countries that are on human rights lists then I would hope that their church members would make their leaders accountable for their decisions and take corrective actions.

I have news for you but congress is not a Christian run congress, and definately the courts are not run by Christians, there would still be prayer allowed in schools and it would be OK to say the pledge of alligance with the words " under God " let's be real here OK??

I don't have a dog in this hunt, I am not a catholic or presbyterian so I am not defending them. There is no perfect anything in this world when man is involved that includes churches to expect anything otherwise is unrealistic, The only thing perfect is God and God's Truth.

No one of sound mind can condone or advocate any religions wrong doings, there has to be accountability, but ultimately all are accountable to God wether you believe in God or not.

Miss_Fedelm To your:

It's interesting that Mormons are only a "cult" when the members don't have an "R" next to their name.

For example, the Mormon Mitt Romney (R) doesn't belong to a cult by the reasoning of Sharron Angle and her rapture monkey preacher.

""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

When something is true it applies to all not just some.

A cult is a cult is a cult no matter the party. And in the case of this cult spending its tax exempt profits to eliminate the right to marry, it is incumbent on all freedom loving Americans to hold this them up for scrutiny. After all, which group is it REALLY that isn't born that way, has to recruit people, targets children especially to swell it's ranks and has special rights in law (it was to protect Mormons in particular that anti-discrimination laws were passed after all). And look no further than the Mormons if our country is really concerned about polygamy. There are now two shows trumpeting it. And one of those is a reality series. If the Republicans truly believe this is a Christian nation, they should stop associating with a group whose heresy is easily identified.

How, then, will what's left of the Republicans reconcile this with their support of Bishop Romney and Elder Beck? Or do they cherry-pick the Mormons they want to demonize like they cherry pick the Constitution and their Bible verses.

The real "cult" is Palin's evil brew of intolerant evangelicals, Mormons and Donohue Catholics combined with a tired old white-supremacist Southern political party.

Angle demonstrates her teabagger lunacy by alienating the Mormon vote in Nevada.

They may have an understanding of christianity, but the Mormon Jesus is not the same Jesus of the Biblical Christian doctrine. If a Christian does not KNOW the Bible, which there are many that truly dont, they can be misled.

Posted by: greenstheman

----------------------------

My Christ's better than your Christ
My Christ's better than yours
My Christ's better
'cause he's a Baptist
My Christ's better than your

You don't have to be crazy about Harry Reid to understand that religious whacko Sharron Angle has thrown out a red herring here. Her own self-declared Southern Baptist affiliations and her dissembling, religiously driven platform are qualities that should automatically disqualify her for public office in a more informed world.

You'd think people would eventually outgrow the need for all the empty political histrionics in lieu of more substance from their wannabe elected officials.

Neither Harry Reid or sometime GOP Senatorial nemesis Orrin Hatch are noticably impeded in their congressional duties by their Mormonism, whereas this nitwit Angle lives and breathes the worst kind of religious fundamentalism - a bible-thumping apologist for the retrograde thinking of the bad old past.

Playing the religion card here is underhanded and the worst kind of hubris - but that's what she's all about.

That a significant bloc of the voting public would take her seriously as a candidate for the US Senate says plenty about the power of ratiocination and contemporary voter IQ, and even more about the failed public education system in the USA.

Persiflage,

Re: Your post

Agreed on all points. Angle is a religionist loon, right at home in the current God barking Zoo, formerly known as American politics.

INteresting the amount of funding she's getting from out-of-state residents, whose keepers have let them loose on this election.

I suspect that atheists and agnostics will not have too much longer to wait before institutionalized religions lose their nonprofit status and privilege of lobbying Congress. They are making themselves so comical both here and around the world that many Americans, including believers, are finding their meddling and demagoguery less and less tolerable.

In the meantime, Reid and Pelosi continue to get away with one sort of corruption after another. It may be that the entire Congress is corrupt, regardless of religious affiliation, and it would be helpful if some attention were paid to the graft of our elected officials.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2009/sep/sen-reid-threatens-newspaper

Perhaps, OnFaith could pose a question on Congressional religiosity and Congressional corruption. More than a correlation? Yes_____ No______

:0

'It may be that the entire Congress is corrupt, regardless of religious affiliation, and it would be helpful if some attention were paid to the graft of our elected officials'....

Farnaz, I think at the very least both the congressional and elective processes are corrupt and completely devoid of the kind of hoped-for political pragmatism that focuses primarily on conscientious legislation for the common good. An idea more mythical than real, I admit :)

Instead, our so-called representatives are preoccupied with concerns that completely impede and obstruct what they are elected to do in the first place (although obstructionism does seem to be part of entrenched GOP operational policy in congressional circles).

Personally, I don't believe congress feels pressed to get anything in particular accomplished. On a personal level, most of these folk are very, very comfortable compared to their constituents and remain aloof from ordinary concerns, to a significant degree. Love him or hate him, Ted Kennedy seemed to be an exception to this rule.

When Meg Whitman can spend 100 million dollars of her own money to get elected governor of California without feeling the pinch, this is a salutary tale of epic and widespred political corruption in the 21st century. I think the beloved mayor of NYC spent even more to remain in office ;^)

I guess I can tolerate rich folks, as long as they leave religion out of the conversation. I'm with you on the end of tax exemptions for all religous organizations and their affiliates. I think that time is coming, by way of public fiat.

to "GreensTheMan":

If a church follows First and Second Century Christianity, how can they be following a different Jesus than the Fourth Century Jesus?

While Constantine supposedly converted to Christianity in 312, he wasn't baptized until on his deathbed 25 years later. In the intervening years he had his wife and eldest son murdered, and from all appearances he continued as a worshipper of the sun god. Long after his supposed conversion he had coins minted with a portrait of himself on one side and a depiction of his "companion, the unconquered Sol [sun]" on the other.

The "Christianity" Constantine endorsed was already considerably different from that practiced by Jesus Christ and the apostles. The emperor accelerated the change by his own hatred of Jews and religious practices he considered Jewish.

For example, at the Council of Nicea (A.D. 325), church authorities essentially replaced the biblical Passover with Easter, a popular holiday rooted in ancient springtime fertility celebrations. Endorsing this change, Constantine announced: "It appeared an unworthy thing that in the celebration of this most holy feast [Easter] we should follow the practice of the Jews, who have impiously defiled their hands with enormous sin, and are, therefore, deservedly afflicted with blindness of soul . . . Let us then have nothing in common with the detestable Jewish crowd" (Eusebius, Life of Constantine 3, 18-19, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, 1979, second series, Vol. 1, pp. 524-525).

Constantine's affection for sun worship had earlier led him to endorse Sunday, the first day of the week and a day dedicated to honoring the sun, as a weekly day of rest in the Roman empire . This created considerable hardship on those Jews and true Christians who continued to keep the biblical Sabbath on the seventh day of the week. (A century later the Council of Laodicea would essentially outlaw Sabbath-keeping and Christian observance of the biblical Holy Days.)

British historian Paul Johnson summarizes how Constantine's approach of merging religious practices produced a corrupted Christianity that meshed paganism with biblical elements: "Thus the followers of Isis adored a madonna nursing her holy child; the cult of Attis and Cybele celebrated a day of blood and fasting, followed by the Hilaria resurrection-feast . . . the elitist Mithraics, many of whom were senior army officers, ate a sacred meal ...

"Many Christians did not make a clear distinction between this sun-cult [Mithraism] and their own. They . . . held their services on Sunday, knelt towards the East and had their nativity-feast on 25 December, the birthday of the sun at the winter solstice ...
"How could the Christian Church, apparently quite willingly, accommodate this weird megalomaniac [Constantine] in its theocratic system? Was there a conscious bargain? Which side benefited most from this unseemly marriage between Church and State?

Christians surrendered to the Empire

Persiflage, agree on Whitman, Bloomberg (whom I don't love), Corzine, et al.

I think Whitman's recent decline in the polls is, in fact, attributable to campaign overkill and self-financing. Americans are growing weary of big business, big media, big union, big personal fortune purchasing of elections. And then there is her sell-out to the cops.

Old Jerry is not faring well under the pressure, however, as witnessed by this clownish Diaz PR disaster. Not to mention the probably planned overhearing a conversation among aids.

And then there is just a dearth of thinking it through on Jerry's part. It didn't help him to say he'd create jobs in financially floundering California by exploring green initiatives.

The funny thing about people who refer to members of other faiths as cultists is that they identify themselves as having a very primitive level of moral development. They have just told the world, "I am still in an infantile, ethnocentric level of spirituality. I haven't even grown up yet."

When such statements come from people who are supposed to be religious LEADERS, well, is it any wonder that we have so much strife in the world...? Such people don't know enough about morality to teach anybody anything. Instead, they become a stumbling block to their parishioners.

Justin Martyr ca 150 A.D. clearly states that the early Christian church celebrated Eucharist on the first day of the week, i.e. Sunday. Not to say that some early Jewish-Christians (before differentiation of the faiths) did not also observe the Jewish Sabbath, a practice that later fell away and was discouraged (and not practiced in Gentile convert areas anyhow), but Sunday worship was not pulled out of some Council member's ear in the 300's just to make a distinction between Christianity and other faiths. As for the date of Easter, the original events followed closely on the Passover so it makes sense to celebrate Easter at that time. The fact that every culture in the northern hemisphere already conveniently had a religious event going on around that time doesn't change the original chronology.

Most of these theological arguments work backward from a dislike or distrust of the historical, institutional Catholic church, to a theological rejection of its formulations of the faith, to rationalizations of why it had to be dishonest or mistaken, and then to an alternative theology and biblical explanation crafted to support the position. No different from those who claim that the Gospel of Thomas, Judas, etc. must be the true ones--they were thrown out or "suppressed" therefore they must be right, and the gospels we have must be wrong simply because they were accepted by the powerful. But notice that the faiths that say Catholicism is a heresy that ruined "real" Christianity are usually the same ones who want to be best buddies with the Catholics when election time comes around because of the Catholic Church's pro-life ethics. We think your Pope is the Antichrist and you're going to hell, but come on down and help us get some petitions signed anyway, thanks!

BOT1 to your reply:

If a church follows First and Second Century Christianity, how can they be following a different Jesus than the Fourth Century Jesus?

;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;

The difference between Christian churches and other religions is this, Christians accept Jesus Christ as the Son Of God, who came into flesh, born of the Virgin Mary, died on the Cross for our sins and rose on the 3rd day. It is this Jesus that is Biblical.

Others believe Jesus was merely a prophet, and not the son of God. That is the difference.

As for Constantine and the rest of your post I agree with your post, that is why I am not a Catholic, there are many things about that denomination I do not believe is biblical.

I will leave it at, that because this is truly not the best venue to get into theology, I believe that is done best face to face.

Farnazmansouri2 to your:

I suspect that atheists and agnostics will not have too much longer to wait before institutionalized religions lose their nonprofit status and privilege of lobbying Congress.
;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
So the atheist and agonstic religions are able to have the right to lobby congress, and institutionalized religions should not have the privilege??? did you decide that it is a privilege for religions to lobby congress?? and not a right??

Interesting so people of Faith cannot influence government according to you because their churches have non-profit status??? but i guess it would be ok if they where taxed, then they could really throw some serious money into the pockets of politicians the way, unions, and big interest groups do and millionares do.

Boy that would really separate church and state according to your thinking, I don't think so.
;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;

They are making themselves so comical both here and around the world that many Americans, including believers, are finding their meddling and demagoguery less and less tolerable.

I guess it's ok though if government gives ok to the Muslims as Obama did about the Mosque in NYC, so where's the separation of church and state there?? HUMMM!!

It just never ends does it??

I'm sure Angle will "recast" (flip-flop) her position (like she has on the VA) when Bishop Romney runs for president.

A good argument for the elimination of tax exemptions for religious organizations, churches, and affiliates here - particularly apropos of the poor performance by religious folks vs atheists on the recent 'what do you know about religion' test - see the entire article via the included link:

'So the charitable argument is bunk. The only remaining case is that churches are educational organizations- they teach people about individual faith traditions, about the Bible, etc.

But is this really the case? How much do Catholic churches, for example, really teach about the history and traditions of the Catholic Church?

You don't hear sermons about the idolatry of indulgences. They don't preach about the top-down corruption of the Church or the fact that about half of all American bishops are accessories to sex crimes.

They do not do history lessons about the Crusades or teach social science courses about the Vatican's support of HIV transmission in Africa and Latin America. No, they stay on message, and what a message it is- gays are evil, sex is evil, science is evil, you are evil, now give us money.'

http://teapotatheism.blogspot.com/2008/08/case-against-religious-tax-exemption.html

greenstheman:

Re: Your post to me

I think "people of faith" and people of no faith are, de facto, Constitutionally permitted to lobby Congress--as individuals.

This means that any minister, priest, rabbi, imam, et al, may, of course, lobby Congress, and be given the same standing as any other private citizen.

What the Establishment clause suggests is that RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS may not do so.
It also suggests an end to nonprofit status for said entities, long, long overdue.

The health care bill should be reviewed and any instances that bear the stamp of clerical interference should be scrutinized. Conscience clauses should be abolished. Faith-based programs should end.

As for the mosq near the WTC, I don't quite see how it fits in this discussion. Further, Obama didn't give the go ahead as he did not have the authority to do so. Only the community board was legally entitled to sign off on the mosq and it did, overwhelmingly. But, again, the construction of this mosq is irrelevant to our discussion.

Farnazmansouri2 to your:

The health care bill should be reviewed and any instances that bear the stamp of clerical interference should be scrutinized. Conscience clauses should be abolished. Faith-based programs should end.

''''''''''''''

I couldn't disagree with you more, I think it's up to a Faith based institutions to speak out against government's that push moral injustices on it's people, I do not think that Churches have spoken out against the genocide that goes on in Africa for example.

I do not believe the government should force people who are against abortion to use their tax dollars to fund it. I don't see anything wrong with a faith institution opposing it, it does fall under freedom of speech. I am not saying that churches should be giving money to congressmen/women mind you, but they certaintly can oppose it publicly.

As far as Obama and the Mosque, my point is this, if there's supposed to be separation of church and state then as president of the USA, he should let the situation play out itself without making opinion public, giving the apperance he is sympathetic to the mosque.

Greenstheman

"I couldn't disagree with you more, I think it's up to a Faith based institutions to speak out against government's that push moral injustices on it's people, I do not think that Churches have spoken out against the genocide that goes on in Africa for example."
________________________
I think that Sudanese genocide, other genocides should be of concern to us all. I would hope that synagogues, churches, mosqs, temples speak out against all atrocities, since our government has a poor track record on that.

Further, I do not think it requires nonprofit status and my tax dollars for them to do so.

I have no objection to religious institutions "speaking out," as it were. Where I have a problem is with their lobbying Congress. AND I MEAN lobbying. They're using our tax dollars to PAY LOBBYISTS. Clergy also lobby Congress on behalf of their institutions. The foregoing violates the conditions of their nonprofit status, which they should not have in any event. Separate Church and State.
________________________________________
"I do not believe the government should force people who are against abortion to use their tax dollars to fund it. I don't see anything wrong with a faith institution opposing it, it does fall under freedom of speech. I am not saying that churches should be giving money to congressmen/women mind you, but they certaintly can oppose it publicly."
____________________________________
Abortion is a legal medical procedure in the United States of America. What you want your tax dollars to go to should be irrelevant so long as abortion is legal.
It isn't irrelevant because religious institutions have subverted the Establishment Clause. This is what I want to see in court, along with conscience clauses, faithy programs, etc.
________________________________
As for Obama and the mosq, since it isn't relevant, let's save it for another time.

The "Establish Clause" in the First Amendment was intended to prevent Congress from establishing a national religion (Episcopal, Congregational, Baptist, Catholic, etc.). Most of the posters to the Washington Post will be surprised that individual states continued to have tax-supported churches for 100 years after the Constitution was written. The Consitution only prevents the National government from establishing a national religion

How you can deduce that churches cannot comment on pending government legislation is beyond my comprehension.

"They may have an understanding of christianity, but the Mormon Jesus is not the same Jesus of the Biblical Christian doctrine. If a Christian does not KNOW the Bible, which there are many that truly dont, they can be misled."
-------------
Just to clarify - Mormons are Christians . The correct name of the Church is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latterday Saints.

Mormons believe the Bible ( Old and new Testament) to be the word of God. They believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God born of the Virgin Mary, died for our sins and rose again ( resurrected). The Book of Mormon does not replace the Bible in the Mormon Faith - it is an additional Testament of Jesus Christ

Mormons believe in Baptism by immersion ( as taught in the Bible - in the manner Christ was baptized by John) by authority.

That seems pretty "biblical" to me and clearly the Mormon Jesus is the same Jesus in the Bible.

Oh, boy. This is gonna make Mitt Romney's day.

With members of his own party trashing his bizarro religion, he's not going to have any credibility in the 2012 campaign.

Harry Reid does belong to a Cult. The Cult of socialism, big government and Obamaism.

oraclevoice to your reply:

Mormons believe the Bible ( Old and new Testament) to be the word of God. They believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God born of the Virgin Mary, died for our sins and rose again ( resurrected). The Book of Mormon does not replace the Bible in the Mormon Faith - it is an additional Testament of Jesus Christ

'''''''''''''
Mormons believe God the father was once a man but progressed to Godhood,He has a physical body as does his wife ( heavenly mother) . Do not believe in the Trinity, they believe Father, Son, & Holy Spirit are 3 separate gods, and that all worthy men may one day become god themselves.

They believe that Jesus was created as a spirit child by the father and mother in heaven, and is the "elder brother" of all men and spirit beings. They also believe the father (Elohim)had sexual union with Mary to create Jesus body.

They also believe Jesus death on the cross does not provide full atonement for all sin, but provide everyone with resurrection. They believe the Holy Spirit is not God but and influence or electricity like emanation from God or light of Christ.

They believe in resurrection by grace,but saved by works, including faithfulness to church leaders, Mormon Baptism, tithing, ordination,marriage,and secret temple rituals, no eternal life without Mormom membership.

They use the Book of Mormom, Doctrine and covenants; Pearl of Great Price, also King James Bible version only,or Smith's inspired version, authorative teachings of Mormom Prophets and other LDS " great Authorities".

From everything I have read and also ex Mormom church members I know personally, the Jesus of the Christian faith is different than the Jesus of the " Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints ( Mormoms)

This is just an over view, just because the name Jesus is in the name of the Church it does not make it the Jesus of the Christian Faith.

Farnazmansouri2 to your reply:

Abortion is a legal medical procedure in the United States of America. What you want your tax dollars to go to should be irrelevant so long as abortion is legal.
It isn't irrelevant because religious institutions have subverted the Establishment Clause. This is what I want to see in court, along with conscience clauses, faithy programs, etc.

'''''''''''

Just because it is legal does not make it moraly right, while I may not be able to change the way my tax dollars are used, it does not make MY wishes not to be used in that way, irrelevant, anymore than it makes your wishes to use your tax dollars for abortion irrelevant TO YOU.

We have to agree to disagree in our world views as they are opposing, it's both of our rights to hold on to those views. I do not hold anymosity towards other peoples world views.

I do appreciate when people can discuss their views without demonizing or being rude to each other, have a nice evening.

Grreenstheman:

Just because it is legal does not make it moraly right, while I may not be able to change the way my tax dollars are used, it does not make MY wishes not to be used in that way, irrelevant, anymore than it makes your wishes to use your tax dollars for abortion irrelevant TO YOU.
______________________________
I quite agree; moreover, I'd go further and say that you had every right to join those citizens who opposed abortion health care coverage.

However, that did not give the Catholic "bishops," Protestant clergy the right to lobby Congress, to politicize/and propagandize, both activities denied by the Establishment clause and their nonprofit status. However, said clergy violated both, managed to legislate their views, thereby acting in ways that are patently illegal--Again.
-----------
I, too, have appreciated/appreciate our discussion.

@ GREENSTHEMAN OCTOBER 11, 2010 5:12 PM

I am LDS and you are misrepresenting a lot of my beliefs. You have done what many have done: rewording IDEAS as opposed to making a sincere attempt at presenting official doctrine.

Example 1: "hey also believe the father (Elohim)had sexual union with Mary to create Jesus body."
This is not true. There is no doctrine on this. Possibly you can find "mormons" that may think this, but that does not make it true. I can find some Catholics that believe Protestants can make it to heaven, but that does not make it Catholic doctrine. I have not heard this taught by anyone of my faith in any of the many classes I have attended and it is not in scripture either.

Example 2: "heavenly mother"
Well a mother in heaven is at least alluded to in a hymn, but adding any detail is not doctrinal. "Wife" and "physical body" relating to a "heavenly mother" feels like you're bringing up minor/obscure things and adding your own spin to try and make my faith sound strange (no lame jokes please; I have heard them).

Example 3: "Do not believe in the Trinity, they believe Father, Son, & Holy Spirit are 3 separate gods"
We do believe in the Godhead (a word actually found in the Bible unlike Trinity) and that the Father, Son, & Holy Spirit are worshipped as one God. The part of the 4th Century Nicene Creed that is rejected is that Christ is of one substance with the Father.

Please try be more educated if post about my faith. It is frustrating that inaccuracies like yours perpetuate myths that confuse the public when there are so many people that would like to be educated as to what the LDS (Mormon) Church really teaches.

It is interesting to note that Wiki does classify the LDS Church as Christians under the Nontrinitarianism movement. That seems pretty fair and impartial to me.

Take care and thanks for reading.

Sorry about the grammatical errors in my post above. I guess I should have read it more than once before posting.

Anyway, I live in Nevada and strongly believe Reid needs to be removed for due to his poor economic leadership. Pelosi and Reid took over congress in 2006 which is right when they could have prevented a collapse (Bush too, but clearly he took his lumps and is gone). Sure, it is tiresome to hear about religious attacks, but an Angle vote is the only way to convey that Harry Reid has failed so that is what I will do.