Redstate

How about if they provide us with some of the context?

------------
The Red Sox Republican: Burkeanism, Baseball, and Sundries.

Ever since Mitt Romney gave a speech on religion a week ago, every 1st and 2nd question to Huckabee has been regarding Romney's faith and whether Mormon's a Christians?

For the last week and he's done is essentially say "no comment". There are serious differences between Mormonism and Christianity, and it begins with the last verse in the Holy bible.

This discussion, and focus by the Romney camp to make this campaign all about Romney's faith does not do any bit of a service to the voters. Although I will give him this, unlike his public positions on immigration, gay marriage and abortion, Romney has only had one religion/faith his whole life.

Oh... NOW I understand why Romney wants the focus of this campaign to be on his religion...

as it was pretty harsh, and maybe came off offensive.

I'm a big Huckabee supporter, but am not a simple "social-religious-evangelical conservative". I started supporting Huckabee because of where he stood on the issues, and that he's the best candidate to address them while standing firm in conservative principles.

It's frustrating to me that this whole campaign so far has been on anything but the issues the voters care about. Out of 900+ minutes of debate so far, only 5 or so have been regarding Health Care and Education...

Let's focus on the issues that matter for once. And Romney's religion of preference or Huckabee's for that matter- don't matter. How it's influenced them- obviously...

It's frustrating to me that this whole campaign so far has been on anything but the issues the voters care about.

If you ask me, Huckabee has been one of the biggest proponents of this. His first major ad was one discussing his faith-because, you know, there's been a big clamor for Huckabee to explain this whole 'Baptist' and 'Christianity' thing. It's just so foreign to so many people.

Go to Huckabee's issue page. Here is the top five:

• The Secure America Plan
• Faith and Politics
• Sanctity of Life
• Veterans' Bill Of Rights
• Education And The Arts

Only one is an issue that people are clamoring to hear something on. Foreign policy ranks lower than marriage, and only above agriculture, crisis management, 2nd amendment rights, and "vertical politics".

Tell me when Romney has pushed what should be non-issues. Tell me when he has tried to make the discussion on who has flipped the most, who is the strongest Christian, etc. You won't find it, because he's tried to make the election about the issues.

People are criticizing Huckabee because they realize that his rise is attributable to both his lack of scrutiny, and the role his faith plays to evangelical voters. He, to his discredit, has been the primary exploiter of that religion. If anyone wants to make it about the issues, he should probably be the one to start.

Vote for the ulti-mitt conservative. Romney 08!

Formerly known as ShowMeConservatism. For more common sense conservatism, visit the Show Me Conservatism blog.

For the last week and he's done is essentially say "no comment".

If that were true, we wouldn't be having this issue.

There are serious differences between Mormonism and Christianity, and it begins with the last verse in the Holy bible.

So what? Irrelevant. You keep talking as if the media or the Romney camp manufactured this fight, but no one else here wanted to bring up the last verse in the Holy Bible.

This discussion, and focus by the Romney camp to make this campaign all about Romney's faith does not do any bit of a service to the voters

Romney has tried to avoid making the campaign all about Mormonism. If you think this discussion is a bad idea, tell Huckabee to stop starting it.

They that are with us are more than they that are against us.

so stop manufacturing your own b.s.

Mormons and Christians share a great deal of the same values, but Mormonism are not a humble Christian sect; just like Christians aren't a humble Jewish sect.

Romney has tried to avoid making the campaign all about Mormonism

Really? So when was the last time he talked about his position on any of the issues that matter in the race without attacking one of fellow Republican candidates?

wild speculation. And Romney's not the one using religion to attack anyone.

taken in or out of context - being a Christian he should understand he has a bullseye on his back by the media.

that said.

wild speculation. And Romney's not the one using religion to attack anyone.

I disagree after listening to Mara Liason and a few others last week after Romney's speech. From what I gather it was written with several jabs against Huckabee.

In any case, Mike should know better. It will be interesting to say the least.

Anyone care to talk about issues again? Oh thats right, it reminds people that Fred is the consistent conservative. thanks.

What jabs at Huckabee's religion did Romney make? I think that's nonsense.

They that are with us are more than they that are against us.

You mean the Context

If the context was supposed to exonerate Huckabee's loathsome statement, why doesn't Huckabee show the context? And the context is the full quote of Huckabee's statement, not some campaign flunky's spin about it.

At the Huckabee campaign site link that was supposed to put his statement "in context", there's only spin, not Huckabee's own words.

But if I had to guess, it would probably go along these lines:

"Romney doesn't get any hard questions about his faith (e.g. "Were Jesus and satan brothers?"), while the press keeps questioning me about my faith (e.g. "Do you believe in Adam and Eve?", "What about women pastors?"). We should move beyond these theological discussions and discuss the issues that are facing Americans -- important issues like health care, education, and immigration."

it will be interesting to see what it turns out to be...

"There isn't a man alive who hasn't wanted to boot an infant." - W.C. Fields

Huckabee is going to get a nice bump out of this story from conservatives, who will be rightly miffed at another media hit job.

------------
The Red Sox Republican: Burkeanism, Baseball, and Sundries.

If that's the context, its whiny but I'm not insulted.

They that are with us are more than they that are against us.

He could have left Mormons out of it altogether.

quietly until the "Christian Leader" add came out. It's been down hill from their.

I think Huckabee burned him self with that part of the advertisment, and its a brutal lesson in politics.

You obviously weren't watching his answer on evolution close enough...

Christian versus Mormon isn't the issue that matters in Iowa. What matters is how your faith has influenced you, and "what that means"(which is different for all the candidates).

some of the literature they were passing out at the SBC in Salt Lake where he spoke a few days ago. I believe one book was (Mormonism Unmasked). I'm sure the answer is in that book.

He's running for President, not for the "I read every book at such and such Conference" Award.

Please...

They that are with us are more than they that are against us.

your cynicism is killing me already...

My cynicism is indeed murderous, but that was TIC, not cynicism. I actually wouldn't be surprised if Huckabee has read some of the baser anti-Mormon books, but if he's willing to stop spouting anti-Mormon cliches on the campaign trail, I don't care.

They that are with us are more than they that are against us.

It is a common attack, but usually only the sort of thing you get on the internet or in remaindered books by people with mail-order degrees. Even if fighting about religion were proper for a campaign, I'd expect something a little more sophisticated.

They that are with us are more than they that are against us.

They can claim that it is technically accurate while knowing full well that it is misleading and that there is no way that it could be accurately answered in a news sound bite.

Plus if he drops the bombshell the right way then he gets to walk away acting innocent while the media continues to blast the content of the attack ensuring that it gets maximum coverage among the target audience.

Also it conveniently takes the attention away from Romney's political success of receiving the National Review endorsement and improperly focuses the attention on his religion instead.

So which is it, bumbling idiot or devious mastermind?

Jesus and Satan were originally spirit Brothers...

Why don't you ask Romney to deny that's the case in the same way the media has swarmed Huckabee for over a week to get him to say anything about Mormonism and if it was a Christian Religion. I'm sure if it's not the case, saying Romney was one of the elders in his church, than he would know.

Religious debates belong in Religious debates, not in campaigns for President. I thought the past speech by Romney was supposed to seal the deal once and for all?

I think its because Huckabee has run ads about being 'a Christian leader' and has kept bringing up religious stuff himself in so many venues. He had an opportunity to reboot after the Romney speech but he hasn't.

They that are with us are more than they that are against us.

Huckabee's Christian faith has influenced him a great deal. And it's important that the voters understand HOW it's influenced him and what it means or will mean to him as President.

I'm sure Romney's Mormon faith has influenced him a great deal. And although he gave a speech on why it doesn't matter (and I think that's right- religion doesn't matter), he hasn't explained to the voters HOW it's influenced him and what it means or will mean to him and America as President.

Religion doesn't matter- but how it's influenced you and how it will influence your actions in office does.

Huckabee isn't talking about how his faith has influenced him. He's talking about his religion, period. You don't need to run as the "christian" candidate to let people know what your political principles are.

You and I obviously didn't read the same Romney speech.

They that are with us are more than they that are against us.

You know we have reached the peak of the internet age when you can say "You and I obviously didn't READ the same Romney SPEECH."

I guess it's just a coincidence that Huckabee happened to drop a controversial one that would be easy to misunderstand?

Religious debates belong in Religious debates, not in campaigns for President.

Lets get back to issue that matter folks - we are supposed to be electing a commander in chief, not a pastor in chief.

thanks.

He is a representative of my party.

I am sure he will come up with something quickly. Its what he is good at.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

Thanks. Look, I'm just trying to avoid jumping the gun here. It looks like this is probably Huckabee's equivalent of John Kerry's whole 'Dick Cheney's daughter is LESBIAN and I have no problem with her being LESBIAN' but I really, really, really don't want an evangelical/Mormon fight in the GOP so I'm trying to hold my fire as long as possible.

They that are with us are more than they that are against us.

evangelical/Mormon fight in the GOP. Practically speaking we have the same values and morals. Why don't we start asking questions regarding education and health care and the economy and the war on terror?

I'm sure Huckabee would jump at the chance. But oh that's right, all he's been asked about the last week has been Romney's religion.

Then he should say. 'No comment. About the economy . . ." But maybe this was just a slip-up because he keeps getting asked so much. Then he should apologize and we'll all put it behind us hopefully.

They that are with us are more than they that are against us.

You said yourself that the Mormon faith believes that Jesus and Satan were originally spirit brothers (along with all of the other angels and demons).

It's a major distinction between the two, just like the belief in the Holy Trinity as opposed to 3 different beings is a major distinction as well.

This should be put behind us though, a theological debate (although I love participating in them with people of all faiths) should not be front and center in the Presidential race.

For interjecting a common anti-Mormon smear into a political campaign.

Next.

They that are with us are more than they that are against us.

But if its true, its not a smear, is it?

I am not an expert on theology but I have seen many source refer to them as "spirit brothers".

You can't smear someone with the truth. Only if this was a fundamental lie/fabrication could you claim its a smear.

I think the analogy to Kerry bringing up Dick Cheney's lesbian daughter was an apt one.

1. It's not false
2. It was brought up because it was known that some voters would have a problem with it
3. It's a private matter and not relevant to a political campaign

If this was a planned moved by Huckabee then it definitely got the exposure that he was hoping for.

Thank you for laying out a logical and correct argument.

This is another example of Huck not being a conservative. Smear tactics belong to the liberals.

The Chad

"Feminism was established to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream." ~ Rush Limbaugh

Speaking of liberal smear tactics, have you seen liberal commentator Larry O'Donnell's take on Mitt's speech? It makes the discussions on here look pretty tame.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mark-finkelstein/2007/12/08/larry-odonnells...

and that the devil is the fallen angel expelled by God, not true? If it is true than the Morman statement about such holds water.

I think Huckabee is a religious baiting piece of crap even if he is "my brother". He is just an Al Sharpton wolf appearing sheeplike.

Freedom of Religion not Freedom from Religion

a theological debate should not be front and center in the Presidential race.

If your argument is that he really doesn't intend to spew this stuff but got "tricked" by the media into saying it, that is an argument against his being qualified for the job. The media will pull all kinds of games with the eventual nominee trying to trip him up. If he can be trapped this easily, there is a problem. And that's making the charitable assumption that he was trapped into making this comment.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman

nt

Lets get back to issues - which ya'll know fred beats both on. :)

______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

good analogy. I am only offended to the extent he intends to make a "Mary Cheney" statement.

the tenets of the Mormon faith are irrelevant in the campaign. it is possible to believe that Mormonism is a cult (meant in the least pejorative sense, that is that, though there is room for disagreement in the Body of Christ, that if the word has any meaning, there are things a "Christian" must believe, and things he cannot believe, to be called such) and to support Romney for President. I should know; I fall squarely in both camps. As Mitt has said again and again, we may not share the same articles of faith, but we do share the same values, and that is what is important. Every Mormon I have ever met, without exception, has been an outstanding and upstanding person, and that says an awful lot (of course, I've not met Harry Reid, so your record remains spotless with an asterisk, I suppose ;)). I am voting for a political leader, not a religious one (though it does not at all hurt Huckabee that he has been the latter, quite the contrary). We can like and support a candidate and still have theological debate and differences with them. We shouldn't act like those differences don't exist or can't be spoken about, even during a campaign involving an adherent of that faith; that discussion can be calm, rational, frank, even (I would hope) non offensive, worthwhile and engaging. But it is utterly inappropriate for them to be an issue in the campaign (that goes both ways; it would be just as inappropriate and bigoted in my view to vote for Romney because he is a Mormon, or Hucakbee because he's Southern Baptist (though one might fairly consider his being a minister as a positive and at least somewhat-relevant experience, something he's done rather than something he coincidentally is), or Hillary because she's a woman, or Obama because he is black, as it would be to vote against them for those reasons). Obviously there is some tension here: to what degree does allowing said discussion invite attacks that are bigoted and ungermane to the political debate; to what degree does ignoring those differences allow said attacks to flourish underground? I suppose in this context, and on this site, that the appropriate course is not discussion, per se, but getting the admission out of the way that yes, there are differences is vital, IMO, lest those underground worries fester. And that, I think, Mitt did pretty well in his speech on faith, and that simple statement is something I think we all here should point to, whether or not we support Romney. The point isn't whether or not Mormons are Christians - trying to convince someone who believes otherwise is only likely to make them more hostile (not necessarily to Mormons, but to the person in their view attempting to square a circle - even if you think the circle is a perfectly likable shape, you may feel your intelligence is being insulted if someone tries to call it a square); the point should be whether or not they share the same values and political vision for the country, and that I think they unquestionably do.

I like Huckabee quite a bit as well, but if he is indeed trying to make a Mary Cheney statement it, while not unforgivable (that wouldn't be very charitable), is to be condemned just as we condemn the twitterers in the MSM.

In your analogy, I am assuming that Huckabee = Kerry, Romney = Cheney, and Romney's Mormon faith = Cheney's lesbian daughter.
For this analogy to work, Romney needs to be supporting anti-Mormon rights positions. I think there is ample evidence that Romney supports the rights of Mormons to marry, so the analogy doesn't hold water.

I think you're looking at it wrong. The similarity is that it has nothing to do with Romney's ability to govern. But it is something that some Republican voters might get upset about. Which is, of course, the whole reason why it was stated.

"There isn't a man alive who hasn't wanted to boot an infant." - W.C. Fields

...because it is unbiblical. Since this is RedState, I will not elaborate.

There's tons of things about Mormons that evangelicals say are not found in the Holy Bible, but few of them inflame their passions the way this one does. That's what I don't understand. Mormons don't go around saying 'Hey, we think that there is a technical sense in which Christ can be said to be related to the devil' and its not something that matters much to us. If someone announced there'd been a big translation error or something and lucifer wasn't Christ's brother in any sense, I and most other Mormons would be like, 'yeah, so?'

They that are with us are more than they that are against us.

But it is definitely a defining difference between the two faiths. For Christianity, as it says in the Bible, God sent his "one and only son".

There are a ton of other reasons too, but it all highlights that Mormonism is not a form of Christianity. Just like Christianity isn't a form of Judaism. They share many of the same beliefs and morals, yes- but they're distinct and disparate.

______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

Mormons believe that Christ is God's only son too. You know any other virgins that conceived? For Mormons Christ and Lucifer are brothers in the same sense that everyone is brothers.

They that are with us are more than they that are against us.

They also believe that Mary wasn't a virgin, since she was impregnated by a physical being. The virgin birth is a central tenant of Christianity. None of this matters in a political race, but I think if we can question Kucinich seeing a UFO we can question rationality in other areas too. (Satan was also a positive character, wanting to elevate man to be like "gods" by eating the fruit).

The "religious test standard" only applies to appointments and votes made by office holders. Individual voters may weigh such considerations for themselves. For example, I might have reservations (fair or not) about electing a Muslim during a time of war between our nation and extremist Islam.

I can be called a bigot, but I've never been a Muslim either. But would we hold it against a former Muslim if he felt his old faith was harmful to our nation? What if a fomer Mormon had reservations about current Mormons, knowing what he does about the faith?

And whose more at fault here? The folks (and I am guilty of this) who point out what Mormons DO believe when they try to pretend some of the beliefs are harmless or still "Christian", or the Mormons who use the site to point out how their religion is so normal? While folks are expected to not consider Romney's faith against him, what does everyone honestly expect to happen when the primary hits Utah (we all know that few Mormons will consider anyone but Romney). Isn't that hypocritical?

It's clear that I strongly oppose the LDS faith. But as I wrote on another thread (the diary on pick your top three) I have Romney tied as my number two choice, and Huckabee doesn't even make my list. Bottom line? You can detest the LDS faith (as I clearly do) and think well of Romney (though I dislike his flips), and you can be a member of the evangelical Christian community and think Huckabee doesn't have a record that is desirable.

I don't like any of the candidates right now. But I'm not going to weigh the LDS faith against Romney or Huckabee's Christianity in his favor. The only "won't vote" scenario for me is a pro-choice candidate, and I could still vote down ticket if the rabid rinos don't disinvite me to their little tent.

"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" - Defoe

Mormons do believe in the virgin birth. See http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/EoM&CISOPTR=439...

I will admit that some have speculated otherwise, but it is not doctrine nor is it scriptural (in my opinion).

Satan is only a "positive" character in the sense that he provides the opposition that allows everyone a choice - follow God and keep his commandments or follow Satan. I don't believe he serves any other real role.

Your analogy would be better if, say, Christians tried to follow the teachings of Moses, but believed he re-appeared and gave a second Torah.

Mormons and Christians (I myself don't separate them) both follow the same savior. Mormons believe Jesus gave an additional revelation. But it's not as if they're introducing a second son of the Lord, or a new prophet.

A disagreement over the validity of a revelation is very important. But it doesn't necessarily make Mormons non-Christians.

"There isn't a man alive who hasn't wanted to boot an infant." - W.C. Fields

---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman

I don't think it should factor in to the presidential sweepstakes at all. That's my position.

.

Mitt has Huckabee on the ropes?

Clearly you don't understand the meaning of the word "trend" and what its relationship is to this race. Namley, the fact that Romney has been steady and slightly falling while Huckabee has been very quickly rising.

I think any objective, outside observer if given the poll numbers over time and a basic understanding of the dynamics at play they would conclude that it is Huckabee with the upper hand here.

I think that Mike Huckabee is probably on solid theological ground here, but crazy scary political ground.

I want to elect a commander-in-chief in November 2008, but a pastor-in-chief. I have a pastor and I like him just fine, thank you.

that should be "not a pastor-in-chief."

Reporters have asked these questions without ceasing since Romney delivered his speech. Which has been leading me to question why he gave it in the first place, as he really didn't need to. Huckabee's being asked question after question on Mormonism, because Romney refuses to answer these questions...

Lets get back to the issues, where Huckabee wins hands down on Education, Health Care, economic opportunity, etc.

Romneys' speech was about where this Nation came from and where he would like to take it. He spoke the word Mormon once.
He doesn't want religion in this race at all and he said as much.

Huck is the one that brought out the "Christian Leader" banner.

All he has to do is follow Romney's lead and NOT comment on specific tenants of religion. But he can't. It's not his fault, he feels obligated by God to include specific religion in politics, just as Romney feels equally as strong to not include specific religion in politics. Neither is wrong or evil or trying to be sneeky, they are just doing what they feel is right.

The only thing I know for sure is that In one year, 45 million Americans have an improved opinion of Mormons. As evidenced in ABC News/Washington post polls:

"Less Likely to Vote for a Mormon"

Dec 2006 = 36%
Now = 21%

Thus, Huck had better rethink what is "right". We all know that politics and specific religion do not mix!

Firstly: those seeking POTUS should not discuss specific religion.

Secondly: unless the evangelicals really have a desire to continue to promote the growth of the Mormon church they should focus more on what they believe and less on what is wrong with another religion. i.e. you don't point the way by saying another direction is false.

You really don't want to argue that the political campaign is helping one church over another. If I thought Romney were advancing the cause of the LDS, even indirectly, it would be my privledge to oppose him not only in the primary, but also in the general if it came to that. This helps the party how? Turning this into a faith war is bad for everyone.

As for your second point, it is impossible to maintain the right without condemning the wrong. Churches with different doctrines are going to conflict. Deal. But deal with it someplace other than RedState; this is not the place for theological fights.

Its Huckabee's camp going after Mormonism for polictal advantage. Will it work? yes. It will hurt Romney's chances to become POTUS. At the same time will it boost mormon conversions? yes undoubtedly. Indirectly, Huckabee is benefiting politically at the cost of increasing interest in the Mormon church. If left alone would the issue go away? no. But it certainly wouldn't have the momentum it has now. And for the record I really do believe that Romney would prefer to have the issue go away.

On reflection I agree with you that the second point doesn't need to be posted on Red State. Not that I think it wasn't a good point.

The last time this was asked by ABC/WaPo was June and the number was 30% for those leaning R, with about half that number saying they would definitely not vote for a Mormon. It would be interesting to see how those numbers are shaping up now after so much more coverage.
My guess it that the leaners might be marginally lower but the definites will have hardened.
I don't think that we will ever completely overcome the tendency of people to give some preference to their co-religionists in politics and other venues, but hopefully we can make more progress on that second number (definitely will not vote for).

Just curious. What do you think the response would be in the R primaries if Romney was an agnostic or atheist rather than a Mormon. My guess is that he would stand no chance whatsoever at getting the nomination. BTW agnostics and atheists don't do much better chance in the D races, so the failing (if you are inclined to see it as such) is on both sides of the political divide.

Should've stayed with religions shouldn't be a factor in the Presidential sweepstakes

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2...

Lets not forget that Pat Robertson once polled 25% of the vote in Iowa, and never came close to sniffing the GOP nomination in 1988.

I'll note that Mormons may very well believe, on some level, something that could be interpreted this way.

You sure you don't want to re-tract that. I could go on with a biblical attack on your statement, and how whacked off that was, but... This is a political site, not religious.
.
_____________________________________________________
American First, Conservative Second, Republican Third

What's to retract? I don't know what Huckabee was referencing in Mormon theology, if anything, and I was noting that.

I doubt most people posting on this thread know whether or not there's something in the Book of Mormon or LDS theology that could be interpreted in the way described. Do you? Are you all read up on LDS theology?

Anyway, I don't see a reason why I should retract an honest admission of ignorance. And I won't.

As you note this isn't a biblical site, but this is clearly relevant to the discussion (both ours and the wider one). From wikipedia:

God's spirit children: Through an unexplained procreative process, God created spirit bodies for an innumerable number of intelligences.[8] "[S]elf-existing intelligence was organized into individual spirit beings"[9] and they became the "begotten sons and daughters of God".[10] The first-born spirit child of God the Father was Jehovah, whom Latter-day Saints identify as the premortal Jesus Christ.[11][12][13] Jehovah was a god[14] and was like God the Father in attributes,[15] but he did not have an immortal physical body like God the Father until his resurrection.[16]

...

War in Heaven: Lucifer, another of the spirit sons of God the Father, also sought to be the chosen Savior; however, he proposed that the free agency of humankind be abrogated so that "all mankind" would be redeemed through compelled obedience.[23] Additionally, Lucifer proposed that all glory and honor be transferred from God the Father to himself.[23][20]

Emphasis obviously added. Now it's, you know, possible wikipedia isn't the last word on Mormon theology, but I think this is generally what the statement/smear was referring to. As noted in the original post, however, in responding to Huckabee directly I'm sure Romney and the LDS Church can adequate defend themselves.

"As noted in the original post, however, in responding to Huckabee directly I'm sure Romney and the LDS Church can adequate defend themselves."

The whole point is that we shouldn't have to. Huckabee shouldn't have tried to drag religious controversies into the campaign. Save them for the theological debates.

The church's statement regarding Huckabee's remarks is as follows:

"We believe, as other Christians believe and as Paul wrote, that God is the father of all," said the spokeswoman, Kim Farah. "That means that all beings were created by God and are his spirit children. Christ, on the other hand, was the only begotten in the flesh and we worship him as the son of God and the savior of mankind. Satan is the exact opposite of who Christ is and what he stands for."

I know a lot of LDS folks and, as others have commented, are generally very good, honest people with impeccable family values. I'm sure Mitt Romney falls into this category as well. I'm sure Huckabee fits that description too. Values, I believe, both Republican religious and non-religious people can ascribe to.

However, with regard to the current post on whether the LDS church is a Christian organization, I believe one distinctive difference between evangelical christians and Latter Day Saints is who they believe Jesus is.

Evangelicals believe Jesus is God incarnate. One and the same -- Jesus is fully man and fully God. Not so for the Latter Day Saints.

Rather than asking the Mormons if Jesus and Satan are brothers, a better question is to ask about the numerous references Jesus made of himself stating he and God were One in the Book of John and whether they believe that. They will either explain it away or dismiss it entirely. If they answer correctly, they will say no, Jesus is not God.

Why I didn't want to get into religion, you seem determined. I often refer to my wife as my better half. We are of one purpose and we have the same goals.

When Jesus came up out of the water, the Holy Spirit descended as a dove, and the voice of God spoke from Heaven, saying

"This is my beloved son,
in whom I am well pleased."

Now, unless you think god is talking to himself, it appears there are three personages here.

But, once again, this is a political debate, not religious.
.
_____________________________________________________
American First, Conservative Second, Republican Third

Where in my comments did I debate politics and religion? I was just explaining a factual difference between the LDS and Christians as there seems to be a lot of confusion.

You answered your own question.

Now, unless you think god is talking to himself, it appears there are three personages here.

There is three persons -- one God in three persons - God the Father; God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.

You've previously stated that you've read the Bible through 6 times. I'm afraid you're missing something in your extensive readings or are reading a very bad translation.

iam

Not to worry, Pastor Huck will start each and every fireside chat once he gets into the Presidency with a discussion of theology. Maybe his state of the union reports will end with an altar call. That's just what the founders of this country intended and just what we need....Right?

______________________________________
Proud member of the Barry Goldwater wing of the party !