Sunday, February 19, 2012

Rick Santorum Slams Protestantism

H/T Terrye

I thought Newt Gingrich was supposed to be the candidate who everyone feared could open his mouth, say something damning, and end any chance of a Republican winning in the White house if he were the nominee?

Well move over Newt....Rick's got you beat in the bizarre statements category. No, he doesn't want to put a base on Mars, his statement is much deeper and cutting and as a Catholic myself who shares Rick Santorums faith, I'm embarrassed and outraged by his statement.
Rick Santorum's recent comment that Barack Obama ascribes to “some phony theology. Not a theology based on the Bible" raised eyebrows this weekend, but its real impact may be in reviving a far more aggressive statement Santorum made four years ago.
Here's the quote, dredged up from a 2008 speech at a Catholic college:

We all know that this country was founded on a Judeo-Christian ethic but the Judeo-Christian ethic was a Protestant Judeo-Christian ethic, sure the Catholics had some influence, but this was a Protestant country and the Protestant ethic, mainstream, mainline Protestantism, and of course we look at the shape of mainline Protestantism in this country and it is in shambles, it is gone from the world of Christianity as I see it.
The full story is HERE.

It is bad enough that President Obama is trying to divide this country by economic class warfare, How can we now take seriously a Presidential candidate who's very statements would pit one faith against another or portrait one faith as a "phony theology" and somehow responsible for the counties morale or cultural decline?

Please check us out on Facebook and If you like what you see, please "Like" us. You can find us here.

136 comments:

Ben said...

Wow. What a great/damning quote by Santorum! How did you find that? We should re-post this over on MRC.

Ben

Teemu said...

In 2004 Bush won majority of both weekly attending and less often attending mainline protestant. They made almost 20% of Bush 2004 coalition.

Then bashing libertarians, who generally make about 20% of GOP coalition in presidential elections, that isn't good either.

Teemu said...

I think actually Gingrich could soon be more electable than Santorum.

Gingrich has nutty ideas, and says nutty and offensive things about his political opponents, but that isn't as bad as attacking huge identity groups in general.

Relatively few people classify themselves as part of socialist secularist machine, and few of them would vote Republican anyway.

But many see themselves as women, African American, libertarian, or protestant, or would find stupid offensive comments of those groups inappropriate even if they are not part any of them.

Teemu said...

I think actually Gingrich could soon be more electable than Santorum.

Gingrich has nutty ideas, and says nutty and offensive things about his political opponents, but that isn't as bad as attacking huge identity groups in general.

Relatively few people classify themselves as part of socialist secularist machine, and few of them would vote Republican anyway.

But many see themselves as women, African American, libertarian, or protestant, or would find stupid offensive comments of those groups inappropriate even if they are not part any of them.

Lionhead said...

Bosman, so now we're going to have a "quote duel" on Mitt vs. Rick. Great strategy. I hope you continue. In the mean time just how could your man Mitt, the experienced business leader, former Governor, political operative 'technocrat par excellance' make a statement like this:

“It is an honor to have the support of Sheriff Babeu,” Mr. Romney said at the time, in an e-mail announcement released by his campaign. “His efforts working to protect our border are critical to lowering crime, reducing illegal immigration and stopping both drug and human trafficking. Sheriff Babeu has been a leader in the call for the federal government to secure the border. As president, I will work with leaders like Sheriff Babeu to protect our Southern border, provide the required assistance from the federal government and put an end to the magnets that cause illegal immigration.”

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/18/romney-campaigner-in-arizona-resigns-after-accusation/?ref=politics

Why I'm shocked, shocked, Mitt could fail to vet his Arizona co-chair in such a sloppy fashion especially since he took money from his Democratic 'friends' in Arizona. Some simple internet searching could have uncovered all of this. The Democrats have just given you an example of how they will destroy Romney in the Fall. For all we know, he may have many Democratic operatives in his camp just lying in wait to self destruct themselves & take Romney with them. Too funny Bosman, as always, keep up your never ending stream of GOP Establishment "Smut Speak."

BOSMAN said...

LionHead,

Like I said yesterday, you're good for a laugh.

To equate this statement or Santorum to somehow Romney not asking Babeu to turn over his computer so he could search for porn or better yet have him take a lie detector test and ask, do you have a gay Mexican love slave as a screening criteria to join his campaign and is somehow now Romney's fault, is LAUGHABLE!

Lionhead said...

Bosman thanks for raising the point re computer. Don't forget Romney bought up all the computers in Massachusetts before he left office. Just sayin'......

BOSMAN said...

Yeh he did!

He also left over 500 boxes of documents to the INCOMING DEMOCRATIC administration and said, have fun trying to find dirt!

Teemu said...

It was brilliant move to leave all the documentation in paper format, 600 boxes, NOT archived in any way.

For example, it makes pulling off that kind of "Romney is responsible for every action of every person of he has ever communicated or associated with" type of crap you are trying to pull much harder :D

BOSMAN said...

My KINDA GUY!

Right Wingnut said...

Yet, many in your camp fretted over the Palin emails for months...

What a bunch of hypocrites.

Right Wingnut said...

If Palin would have dumped boxes of unfiled, and took the computers with her, imagine the outrage.

BOSMAN said...

Notice that LionHead and RWN won't defend Santorum on this, they'll simply try and change the subject.

Right Wingnut said...

*dumped boxes of unfiled emails*

Right Wingnut said...

Bos, I'm anxiously awaiting news to come forth about possible associations Mitt had with members of his church who supported the "no black's in leadership policy."

BOSMAN said...

RWN,

Is your comments here similar to what you indignantly refer to as spam in your posts?

Right Wingnut said...

I'm referring to the anons. I own my comments, for better or worse.

Anonymous said...

RW, It might be better for you to just be quiet about things of which you are completely ignorant.

I don't even know what you are implying.

In the church there was not a whole lot anyone could do about the policy until the Presidency decided it was time for a change. It came far later than I, and most members would have preferred. But Romney had zero to do with any of it.

Some people mistakenly believe that Romney had/has some kind of influence with the leaders of the church. It's just not that way. Romney was a relatively low level leader in Mass, and that's it.

But, if you want to open the door to how other churches treated black people in this country for decades, sure let's do it. It's not pretty, though.

-Martha

BOSMAN said...

Actually, I can't imagine how you or LionHead could defend Santorum's comments.

SPAM...I guess....is your way of lashing out when one can't defend the indefensible?

Anonymous said...

RW, I know you've been chomping at the bit to see the black Mormon issue out in the open. You can hardly contain yourself. I'm afraid you are going to be disappointed in the end.

-Martha

Right Wingnut said...

Martha, I don't care what the policy was. I'm just pointing out that you will see stories about it if Mitt is the nominee, and they will somehow try to implicate him...whether fair or not. Just hope that Axelrod doesn't have a videotape or other evidence indicating the Romney (or even his father) supported it.

Right Wingnut said...

If some damning evidence does exist, I'd prefer for it to come out now rather than in October.

Anonymous said...

RW,

"I'm just pointing out that you will see stories about it if Mitt is the nominee, and they will somehow try to implicate him.."

Well if they have a video implicating Romney like they have a video here implicating Santorum, it won't be very hard, will it?

Anonymous said...

Isn't this post about Santorum's outrageous statements on religion?

Right Wingnut said...

anon,

Save your breath. I'm for a brokered convention. My only interest in Santorum at this point, is keeping him alive long enough to accumulate a significant number of delegates.

Right Wingnut said...

Same with Newt, unlike many in the ABR camp, I'm thrilled that his sugar daddy is going to pony up for another $10 Million.

Terrye said...

RWN:

So, thanks to Santorum's utterly ridiculous comments we are going to have a war of words over religion..is that what you want?

The man went out of his way to attack Protestants..is this Northern Ireland..and you follow that with some crap about the blacks in the Mormon church..well since Santorum is a Catholic why don't we just debate the Spanish Inquisition? Or maybe we can fast forward to the Priests as child molesters scandal...wouldn't that be fun?

He is divisive and controlling. He wants to invade people's faith, their bedrooms, every part of their lives..have to be discussed with Saint Rick

There is no way most people are going to tolerate that crap.

Terrye said...

Lionhead..what exactly does Romney firing someone on his campaign have to do with Santorum insulting Presbyterians?

Read what he said..he was at a Catholic College giving this speech in 2008. Am I supposed to assume that he did not mean what he said?

Right Wingnut said...

If it goes to the convention, Santorum very well might be the best candidate standing. A brokered convention would give the party an "out" if none of them are electable at that point in time.

Right Wingnut said...

Terrye, Whether or not the church allowed blacks in leadership has nothing to do with church doctrine. It's not an attack on Mormonism. If Mitt has ties to that in any shape or form, it will be a campaign issue.

Anonymous said...

Santorum is a religious bigot!

Kim said...

Lets see evangelicals that support Santorum explain this one away.

Anonymous said...

ROMNEY2012!!!

Anonymous said...

check it out. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/04/santorum-mormonism-cult-christians-2007_n_1183814.html?ref=email_share


What a jerk this Santorum dude is.

Ellie

Terrye said...

RWN:

What a sneaky way to try and avoid the issue...so, this is how it works..Santorum runs his mouth and attacks Protestants...you respond by making up some nonsense about how Romney is "tied to" something in the Mormon church that has nothing to do with him.

Gee..Rick was a Catholic when those priests were molesting little boys, so I guess that make him a child molester..right? Isn't that your logic works?

Pathetic. There is no way to spin this and trying to do so by slamming Romney just makes you look desperate.

Anonymous said...

Rick Santorum Called Mormonism 'Dangerous Cult' In Minds Of 'Some Christians'

Anonymous said...

Like I said, Santorum is a religious bigot and will never be President.

Anonymous said...

For those that want to open the black issue in the LDS church, have a talk with these guys first. Get it right from the sources. (full disclosure, my family attends these meetings, as we have black children and want to do all we can to help them in their lives.) http://www.ldsgenesisgroup.org/
Ellie

Anonymous said...

Why isn't the media bringing this up?

Fox News brings it up in passing, and doesn't go into any details other than to say, Santorum's comment may cause a problem for him.

Anonymous said...

The argument about whether or not the candidate had any role in establishing church policy is an absolute attempt to discredit him by creating conflict on an issue that is a non-issue. Those who understand church history know the accusation is false as the issue of blacks receiving the priesthood was a policy that existed long before and was annulled during a time in which the candidate had zero influence. In addition the candidate has never held a position of responsibility in the church that would allow him to have any influence when it comes to policy issues. In summary we have someone who is misinformed trying to influence the misinformed due to their collective lack of knowledge. Nice try.

Joel2012

Right Wingnut said...

The complete text of Ellie's Santorum hit piece for context. BTW, who did Santorum endorse in 2008?

What role should religion play in the public square? How did my own Roman Catholicism shape my work as a senator? Such questions were never far from my mind while I served in Congress. So, when Mitt Romney gave his "religion speech," I listened not as a political analyst, but as someone who wrestled with this subject for more than a decade.

Romney's speech was thoughtful and courageous. Unlike John F. Kennedy in 1960, he didn't cop out and say his faith does not matter. Romney gave an impressive defense of the believer's right to be engaged in politics. He also exposed the danger in secularist attempts to drive religion from our public life.

At one point, though, he opted for prose over accuracy by saying "freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom." Sociologist Os Guinness said it better, that "freedom requires virtue, virtue requires religion, and religion requires freedom."

Virtue - a person's ability to control his desires and order his actions according to the Golden Rule - makes freedom and democracy possible. For most, virtue is derived from religion, but that hardly means a man without religion cannot reason his way to virtue. Witness the ancient Greeks.

Our Constitution granted unprecedented liberty to the individual. But liberty without virtue devolves into license; and license, into chaos. This truth can be seen in the violent lawlessness that plagues our city today. Would we have less violence if our city's young were regular churchgoers and religion formed their consciences? The basic choice is this: Do we want to be governed more by well-formed consciences and social norms or by intrusive police states and detailed legal codes?

That said, the Romney speech came in the context of two concerns that some voters have raised about his religion: How would his Mormon faith affect his presidency? Would a Mormon president enhance the stature of Mormonism and lead more Americans to convert to that faith?

Romney tried to settle the first question by saying that "no authorities of my church . . . will ever exert influence over my decisions." Fine, though few thought this would happen in the first place. He also said that "a person should not be rejected . . . because of his faith." His supporters say it is akin to rejecting a Barack Obama because he is black. But Obama was born black; Romney is a Mormon because he accepts the beliefs of the Mormon faith. This permits us, therefore, to make inferences about his judgment and character, good or bad.

He tried to address the questions by discussing Jesus, suggesting that the specific theological tenets of Mormonism are not in any important respect different from those of traditional Christianity. I disagree. However, voters should use extreme caution in factoring theological tenets into their assessment of a candidate's qualifications, because theological tenets, as opposed to moral tenets of a religion, transcend reason - consider, for example, the virgin birth.


Continued...

Right Wingnut said...

But, it is fair to look at a candidate's faith from the standpoint of its moral teachings or, as Catholics say, its "social teaching."

Romney hit on the correct voter question: "Does [the candidate] share these American values: the equality of humankind, the obligation to serve one another, and a steadfast commitment to liberty?" He said "yes," and provided some examples to bolster his answer. It was Romney's best argument to Christian conservatives - we may not see God the same way, but we see our obligation to God's people the same way.

It could have been even better had he acknowledged a fact that can't help be true for a person of real faith - that the moral teachings of an individual's faith will do more than shape his character, they will influence his decisions.

The social teachings of my faith were a factor in my work as a senator. The horror of AIDS and the tragedy of the millions of orphans it has left in Africa prompted my support for greater U.S. funding. But it was Christ's mandate to care for the poor that inspired my efforts to take a leadership role.

Romney missed an opportunity to connect with Christian conservatives by citing specific moral teachings that Mormonism has in common with their faith.

Would the potential attraction to Mormonism by simply having a Mormon in the White House threaten traditional Christianity by leading more Americans to a church that some Christians believe misleadingly calls itself Christian, is an active missionary church, and a dangerous cult?

How does a candidate possibly address such concerns?

Assume for the sake of argument that there are valid considerations. Shouldn't we look at everything about the candidate, including positions on the issues that could have even a more dramatic impact on Christianity than his personal faith? What about the candidate's willingness to confront the threat of radical Islam's war against Christianity, or the current efforts to undermine our Judeo-Christian culture and even our religious freedom? Like most voters, my faith matters more than politics, but we are electing someone to the most important political position in the world. I'm more concerned about losing our children to jihadis or a materialistic culture than losing them to Mormonism.

I admire President Bush's religious commitment, but I've never been tempted to become a Methodist. Kennedy's election didn't produce a surge of converts to Catholicism in the 1960s. A Mormon in the White House? Christianity has survived far tougher tests over the last 2,000 years.

Faith still matters in America. Mitt Romney showed it matters to him, too. He should be a viable choice for voters whose faith matters to them.


http://articles.philly.com/2007-12-20/news/24996925_1_romney-speech-mormon-faith-religion

Anonymous said...

RW, LOL. my hit piece. Here's another for ya...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8q7l70tmxWg&context=C3874400ADOEgsToPDskJu21-gQGvizlEOJEPRfRj3

Ellie

Anonymous said...

If anything, I have heard that the Romneys were part of a movement that encouraged more black leadership in the Church. Mitt's dad was committed to civil rights and, I believe, to desegregating housing during the Nixon administration. While none of the Romneys would have had the ability to change policyin the Church, they were definitely among the members of the Church who were concerned about the policy.

Those of us who are members understand that changes happen WITHIN the Church, not without. Going to the press and leaving the Church might help a person politically, but it will not change anything. That is how it is. Period. Mitt was too young to have been able to influence anyone much, but I bet his dad did.

Still, Santorum is a holier-than-thou guy, and I really wish he would quit preaching to everyone. I saw symptoms of this when he endorsed Mitt in '08. It really turned me off then, and it has only gotten worse since then. We have got to move the debate back to the economy and jobs before the entire Republican dialog about religions and social issues turns the voters completely off. That is the real reason why all of the Republicans negatives are going up--most people in the center and left are less passionate about social issues, and lots of discussion about them turns them off.

AZ

Right Wingnut said...

AZ,

I'd be interested in the evidence that Mitt spoke out against it at the time.

Right Wingnut said...

here's an article from two weeks ago about the black Mormon issue. Don't shoot the messenger.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/story/2012-02-01/mormon-romney-black/52920394/1

Right Wingnut said...

It turns out that neither Mitt or his dad publicly criticized the church for the policy.

Right Wingnut said...

I did not know about this part...

The church had also barred black men and women from temple ceremonies that promised access in the afterlife to the highest heaven.

Lionhead said...

RW, that's quite a story there from USA Today. I never was aware of such things until just now. I can see Team Obama gleefully delving into this if necessary, especially since he's black & Mitt's white. Oh, boy....

Thanks to Bosman, who opened the Pandora's Box, we all have the information to start from to research this issue.

I'd like to make one general comment, which is from the Ricochet article, linked earlier, by a commenter named "Franco:"

"Wow, this post really nails it, and the comments provide ample support. Even Romney supporters unwittingly exemplify the very attitudes discussed. It never ceases to amaze me how you can tell people exactly what they are doing wrong and it's like they can't even hear you. They are unable to process the information.

There is a certain kind of bigotry within the Republican party that has become evident over the last two election cycles (maybe more) that plays right into the very problem many of us have. There is a contempt for voters, and this highlights the main reason why we have equal contempt for the operatives and pundits. Increasingly our elected leaders are out of touch, they get voted in and they do as they please and spin us. Then they tell us the other guys are worse and their operatives tell us were are being unrealistic. Most galling is the expectation that individuals should subsume their personal preferences in candidates because the smart people have figured out the entire game as to who has the best chance of victory. Besides being insulting and undemocratic, these folks have a remarkably pathetic track record for picking candidates."

If ever more truer words were spoken to describe the commentary of the cadre of Romney supporters, this one typifies that mindset. (Martha if you need the link, e-mail me at (tbtfof at yopmail.com) for it.)

Doug NYC GOP said...

RWN IS Craig for Losers from Race and ROS.

There is no other explanation for him.

He posts BS accusations about Romney 24/7 which he then flees from once any for of resistance, truth or fact is presented.

When faced with his current ABR candidate's idiotic statements, he tries to diffuse and detour the conversation into made up accusation about Mormaons and Blacks.

I don't think John Deere has inveneted a better manure spreader than this tin horn.

Doug NYC GOP said...

And RWN does this in his role as "Keepr of the Flame in the Church of Palin"

He doesn't give a hot if Santorum or anyone else wins the nomination as long as it's not Romney.

Why?

Because he know's Romney offers the best chance of beating Obama, which would send his Lady back to the bleacher seats (where she belongs btw) for at least 8 years.

Don't be surpised if the nominee is not Romney to see a sudden dissatification witht he GOP and threats to "sit this one out" peper his comments.

Terrye said...

Doug...some of those Palinistas actually believe that Sarah Palin could get the nomination if she bothered to try for it..or a brokered convention might get her there.

It will not happen. They can talk about how many people do not like Romney, but a lot more Republicans like Romney than still support Sarah Palin. When your own party think you are unelectable..then it is all over.

Terrye said...

Lionhead:

I have to say I don't give a damn what some guy named Franco said.

The sad thing is that you know Santorum is full of it..you know he has no understanding of how the economy he works and he has a tendency to be a preachy controlling kind of nut case who says stupid things designed to piss off millions of people.

you deal with that by smirking and going after Romney through a guy called Franco.

SAD.

Terrye said...

RWN:

Go ahead. Go after Mormons and then say you do it because you are Santorum supporters and if Santorum thinks it is okay to attack Protestants in general then it is okay for you to attack the Mormon faith...because attacking people based on their religious beliefs is what Santorum fans are all about.

Terrye said...

It is absolutely pathetic..RWN and Lionhead deal with this remark by Santorum by trying to create a scandal about the Mormon church..

Speaking of not shooting the messenger RWN...you should take heed yourself.

Lionhead said...

Terrye, in both your comments, you just confirmed what Franco said! Your absolutely, completely unable to process the words. This is Fantastic!

"It will not happen." Are you absolutely sure it will not happen? Do you have connections with higher powers?

"I have to say I don't give a damn what some guy named Franco said." I'm sure you don't because the story in your head supercedes any other thoughts any one or group of people may possess. WOW!

If this doesn't smack of elitism, I don't know what does. So, you're going to rule over us all through your candidate Mitt Romney right? He knows best, & so do you. That's very nice of you to decide the fate of the Nation, but unfortunately, it doesn't work that way Terrye. We're still in a Constitutional Republic. We actually get to choose our representatives, not have them crammed down our throats through elites like yourself. My last word to you is Pathetic.

Terrye said...

Lionhead.You do not know what you are talking about. You really do not..Santorum makes some nasty remarks about Protestants and RWN responds by attacking Romney and his religion and here you are talking about bigotry.

I am processing just fine..you are the one making ridiculous accusations.

BTW, as far as civil rights and Mormons are concerned, George Romney supported the Civil Rights Act..which is more than be said for Barry Goldwater or Ronald Reagan.

Terrye said...

And btw, Lionhead. I can not think of any remarks more out of touch with Americans and their views than those espoused by Santorum. The fact that you felt the need to ignore his comments and go after Romney and Romney supporters says it all.

Lionhead said...

"Lionhead.You do not know what you are talking about." No, I guess not Terrye, I'm just part of the great unwashed masses of folks in the USA that just don't understand all these kinds of complex issues. So, I'll just ignore all the insults & fall into line behind the elitist candidate no matter who he is, or what any of his beliefs are. I'll just be a good little sheep for you & your grizzly gang of elitists.

Sorry, that doesn't work for me. But thanks for all of you revealing yourselves here, because over time, all the things in your minds do come out to be expressed. The one thing I'm picking up loud & clear is that all of you are superior to anyone else, so I guess that confirms your belief you're special & chosen people. I think not...

Ohio JOE said...

"RWN IS Craig for Losers from Race and ROS." No, he lives in CA, not MN. Check the address.

Terrye said...

Lionhead:

Oh please, spare me the victimized conservative being badly treated by the elite crap.

There is nothing conservative about Santorum's remarks about Protestants..they were intolerant and judgmental and the fact that you feel the need to take those remarks and justify them by assuming that anyone who has a problem with them is treating you like the "unwashed masses" just tells us how desperate you are.

So spare me the sanctimonious lectures.

Anonymous said...

"RWN IS Craig for Losers from Race and ROS."


LMAO!!!.........Very close. I think RWN is the Craig for Losers of RightSpeak.

Anonymous said...

Lionhead, you said: "we're still in a Constitutional Republic. We actually get to choose our representatives, not have them crammed down our throats through elites like yourself."

Which is it, because you can't have both. Are we going to choose, or will the nebulous 'elites' choose for us?

Right now, the voters are choosing Romney. He has the most delegates and votes. Even though the elites are lined up against him.

I'm fine with the voters choosing. How about you?

-Martha

Terrye said...

Martha:

And I don't know about you, but I never thought of myself as an elite.

In fact, I am a 60 year old woman of modest means with not a lot of social standing.

I find it downright funny to think of myself as an "elite".

Anonymous said...

Great to see that RW and Lionhead have finally outed themselves as religious bigots. All of RW's prior protestations have all just flown out the window.

Big E said...

Bingo on Rightwingnut and your Lyin' head. What jokes. Something is posted right from tricky Ricky's mouth, and the ginormous intellect of Lyin'head tries a take down of Mitt for having an Az co chair that is gay.

Nice try dodgin' Lyin' head, but what's your answer for how Santo stalkers are going to spin his anti-protestant, anti-Obama, and anti SLC olympics srcurity?

The issue isn't any other distraction Lyin' Head, it's how much fun it will be watching you and the Romney haters try to do your Santo Shape Shift with his fifth gaffe in five days.

C'mon Lyin' Head, you are always all over Romney for his one gaffe every three weeks. Let's hear some good old fashioned Santo Shape Shifting you bloviating gas bag:)

Big E said...

Santo is in trouble. Hard core social cons, a decided minority of caucus and primary goers will be a little uncomfortable with Santo's mouth. They will NOT tolerate any harsh religious judgment from Santo. Ever. Too many Santo stories lately w his big mouth causing him grief. Good lesson for all of us, never buy your own press clippings, the very same mouth that kisses you will often bite you just as fast.

Right Wingnut said...

No....It's not bigotry to criticize the church's past policies regarding race.

....Until 1978, the LDS church banned men of African descent from its priesthood, a position open to nearly all Mormon males and the gateway to sacramental and leadership roles. The church had also barred black men and women from temple ceremonies that promised access in the afterlife to the highest heaven....

This has nothing to do with the church doctrine. It was a result of decisions made by the leadership. Many Mormons who participate on this site have been outspoken against the church's previous policies. Are they bigots too? Of course not.

Fortunately, the church reversed those racist policies in 1978. My questions have nothing to do with church doctrine, or what they did in the past.

I was disappointed to learn today that neither Mitt, nor his father ever spoke out publicly against the racism that was taking place right under their noses. In fact, as recent as 2008, Mitt refused to criticize the church for the atrocities.

...In a 2007 Meet the Press interview, Tim Russert noted that Romney was 31 when the priesthood ban was lifted in 1978. "Didn't you think, 'What am I doing part of an organization that is viewed by many as a racist organization?'" Russert asked.

"I'm very proud of my faith, and it's the faith of my fathers," Romney answered. "And I'm not going to distance myself from my faith in any way."...Pressed by Russert, Romney refused to say his church was wrong to restrict blacks from full participation....


...Romney's father, George Romney, also faced criticism over the priesthood ban when he ran for president in 1968. He answered by extolling his civil rights record as governor of Michigan.

George Romney, like his son, refused to publicly criticize his church....


This will be a problem for Mitt should he be nominated to face our first black President....especially considering the church has never apologized.

...The LDS church has neither formally apologized for the priesthood ban nor publicly repudiated many of the theories used to justify it for more than 125 years....

I'm sure the DNC has been working feverishly behind the scenes to find connections between the former Bishop Romney, and anyone who supported these policies. Let's hope they come up empty. Even if they do, they'll just make stuff up.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/story/2012-02-01/mormon-romney-black/52920394/1

Right Wingnut said...

By the way...I find it curious that we rarely see people of color in the backdrop at Romney's rallys. How long before people start to notice?

Anonymous said...

RW, I wouldn't go the race route if I were you. Palin has her own checkered racial history.

-Martha

Right Wingnut said...

Martha, Only stuff that was made up by the left. Nothing as concrete as racism in a church where she was once a Bishop.

Right Wingnut said...

I'm done with the PC BS. I've been wrongly called a bigot at least 100 times. I will no longer tip toe around this stuff.

Right Wingnut said...

...Everything is fair game to Romney supporters when attacking the other candidates.

Teemu said...

It wasn't policy, it was doctrine, Old Testament also has some anti-African comment, it was based on that.

The church received "revelation" or something in 1978 and changed the doctrine, I don't know the details of how the doctrine change works for LDS. By the way even MSNBc said that George Romney got some warning or censure for his internal criticism in the church.

" Mitt refused to criticize the church for the atrocities."

Lol, what atrocity, that is one of the stupidest comments I've ever seen, not allowing some people as members is atrocity? I don't think there has ever been a single atrocity done against African Americans by Mormons, there weren't any Mormons in the south when people were lynched etc.

Right Wingnut said...

Teemu,

Maybe not atrocities, but from my understanding they were allowed as members, just not priesthood, or access to the "highest heaven."

....Until 1978, the LDS church banned men of African descent from its priesthood, a position open to nearly all Mormon males and the gateway to sacramental and leadership roles. The church had also barred black men and women from temple ceremonies that promised access in the afterlife to the highest heaven...

Right Wingnut said...

By the way, are there different levels of heaven? If not, then I will call into question the accuracy of the USA Today article.

Right Wingnut said...

Disregard my last question. It appears as though there are.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Degrees_of_glory

Doug NYC GOP said...

By the way...I find it curious that we rarely see people of color in the backdrop at Romney's rallys. How long before people start to notice? -RWN @ 615pm
----------

No self-respecting Republican or Conservative would say something like that about any of our own.

What a fucking asshole you turned out to be.

Right Wingnut said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Right Wingnut said...

Doug NYC GOP said...
By the way...I find it curious that we rarely see people of color in the backdrop at Romney's rallys. How long before people start to notice? -RWN @ 615pm
----------

No self-respecting Republican or Conservative would say something like that about any of our own.

What a fucking asshole you turned out to be.
- Doug NYCGOP @ 6:57

_______________________________

Doug, Left wing style attacks seem to be the norm around here. Just playing your game, dickhead.

Doug NYC GOP said...

RWN Douche BAg,

You are the king of left wing attacks but unfortunately you don't have the balls to back them up. You run away.

The more desperate you get the wilder and more coarse you get.

The only reason I used profanity is because it seems it's the only way to get through to you.

So fuck off and quit this site already. For good this time.

We don't racial bigotry paraded around here so yo can get your political rocks off.



(Sorry to other who take offense - I'll rpent later.)

Publius Nemo said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Terrye said...

What is interesting to me is that we all had to endure RWN's feigned outrage when anyone made mention of the fact that some of Romney's detractors had a big problem with his religion...he wailed about people calling him a bigot..and here he is talking like a bigot.

I tell you what RWN...this can go on forever..you could also talk about how all those KKK people were protestants..that way you could join your friend Rick in his Protestan bashing.

All of this so that you do not have to deal with the fact that Rick Santorum said something stupid.

Right Wingnut said...

No, Terrye. Sorry to disappoint you. I'm not a bigot. In fact, I'm browsing the web to learn more about Mormonism. For instance I did not know about the three levels of heaven...or Degrees of Glory. It's an interesting read. I don't have a problem with people believing that, as long as I'm not forced to believe it.

Anonymous said...

I really have to tip my hat to RW. He did a pretty dang good job of maintaining his charade of not being a bigot for a very long time. Eventually every bigot slips up though.

Doug NYC GOP said...

Terrye at 7:15...

That is it in a nutshell.

RWN NEVER backs up his claims.

If he says something is on the Internet, he doesn't provide the link, just tells everyone to researchg it themselves.

If posts an inaccurate post with incomplete info, he bails on it and hides out for a few days.

When Romney is doing well, he gets his panties wadded up and runs off deriding everyone.

The he returns when the race take the usual ups and downs to gloat and preen.

Then for good measure, when he's backed into a corner, he whips out the race card, which the Left uses all the time.

Fake, Phoney, Fraud.

Terrye said...

And RWN:

Like I said, George Romney actually did support the Civil Rights Act..the fact that he was a Mormon did not stop him from doing that..

Meanwhile Goldwater and Reagan did not.So, does that make them racists?

I mean come on you coward....why just go after the Mormons? We can all go down this road..thanks to Ricky and his big fat mouth we can start calling each other racists and attacking other religions and maybe even insulting women while we are at it. After all, Sarah is one of those greedy selfish feminists who abandoned her children. Just ask Rick.

and then you can just cherry pick some thing out of nowhere about the Mormon church and try to change the subject.

You are losing this argument.

Right Wingnut said...

Like I said, George Romney actually did support the Civil Rights Act..the fact that he was a Mormon did not stop him from doing that.. - Terrye

Was the church opposed to the Civil Rights Act?

Publius Nemo said...

Picking on peoples most sacredly held beliefs is demoralizing. I think Santorum should stick to commenting on his own religion and respect the way other people approach God. Frankly it is none of his business. And that goes for everyone on this blog and country. Rick will surely clarify his statements and hopefully stop critiquing other's theology. Christianity is a faith of tolerance and brotherly love. Please forgive and move on. Many of us believe in the words of Christ but have different ways of praising him. Let's call it a day and stop mixing politics and religion.

Doug NYC GOP said...

No, Terrye. Sorry to disappoint you. I'm not a bigot. In fact, I'm browsing the web to learn more about Mormonism. For instance I did not know about the three levels of heaven...or Degrees of Glory. It's an interesting read. I don't have a problem with people believing that, as long as I'm not forced to believe it.

RWN - February 19, 2012 7:20 PM
---------

More hypocritical BS.

No is going make you believe anything about Mormonism or make yo change your religious views, if you even have any.

This statement smacks of the same under the table bigotry (yeah I used the word) as the "Don't Mormons believe that Jesus and the Devil were brothers" comment aroused.

Keep it up though RWN, the more you write the more you expose yourself.

Terrye said...

RWN:

Until today I would have agreed with you and said that you were not a bigot..but you have changed my mind.

You managed to play the race card, attack the Mormon faith...all in an effort to change the subject so that you do not have to deal with Santorum's stupid comments.

So, are there different heavens?? Gee I don't know..but I do know there are some Protestants out there who think that Catholics worship Mary as if she were a God..so why don't you find some cherry picked quotes about how weird the Catholics are.

And then maybe you could go after the Jews..

Right Wingnut said...

Never mind, Terrye. I looked it up. It appears as though the church opposed the Civil Right Act, and wrote this scathing letter to George Romney for supporting it. I mean this letter is brutal. He still never publicly criticized the church though.

http://www.boston.com/news/daily/24/delbert_stapley.pdf

Right Wingnut said...

Terrye, did I say it was "weird" that Mormons believe there are multiple heavens? Nope. I did not know about it until today. I honestly don't care.

Terrye said...

RWN:

Some elements probably were opposed to Act..and so were the Dixiecrats, most of whom considered themselves Christians and would leave the Democrat party because of this.

I do not doubt that there were Catholics that were opposed as well.

The point is you went out of your way to attack the entire Mormon faith for no other reason that to cover up for Santorum and in the process you ignored the fact that in 1964 a lot of people were opposed to the Civil Rights Act..including icons like Goldwater and Reagan...but George Romney stood up to all of them and supported civil rights. He always did support civil rights. It is outrageous to assume otherwise based on faith.


shame on you

Terrye said...

RWN:

No, you are right..you did not say it was weird....but you did make the comment for the obvious purpose of making the Mormon faith the topic of discussion rather than Santorum and his words.

A cheap trick that is fooling no one.

Right Wingnut said...

I'll check back later. I have to run for a while.

Terrye said...

RWN:

I grew up in Oklahoma in the 50s. I remember when the Civil Rights Act was passed..you can make an issue of the reaction of the Mormons to it all you want, but I remember those days and if the only people opposed to the Act had been Mormons it would have passed a lot sooner and with a lot less trauma..but thanks for showing us what a bigot you are for picking out the Mormon reaction and ignoring the church bombings and riots and everything else that was taking place back then.

Ohio JOE said...

"Palin has her own checkered racial history." Care to share actual fact Martha or are you just throwing stone?

Ohio JOE said...

RW: With respect, I know you are just get back at the Romneyites for their meltdowns, but it is not fair to paint Mormons as racists. Some Mormons are racist, but some non Mormons are also racists. Leave those kind of tactics to the Generalisimo and his friends.

Terrye said...

Ohio Joe:

I am not sure about that..but according to Santorum's teachings..women like Palin who are not only Protestants, but work outside the home are selfish feminists and not real Christians.

Maybe that is why her daughter got in trouble. I used to think that was none of my business...but hey, if the fact that someone associated with the Romney is gay is a big deal and reflects on Romney, then I guess the fact that Palin's daughter got pregnant outside of marriage reflects on her as well.

Well..at least Bristol did not do something really awful, like use birth control.

Terrye said...

Ohio Joe...I do agree with your last comment.

Ohio JOE said...

Terrye you are truly ignorant of both Mr. Santorum and Mrs. Palin if you think that. You truly do not get it if you think that Mr. Santorum does not think that Mr. Palin is a Christian. Please do your homework instead of putting words into people's mouths that are not there.

Terrye said...

Ohio Joe...

I am not putting words into anyone's mouth...Santorum said there is no Christianity in the Protestant faith...that is what he said. He said Protestantism has gone from the world of Christianity.

And Palin is a Protestant, isn't she?

Ohio JOE said...

"And Palin is a Protestant, isn't she?" First off, most Pentecostals do not consider themselves Protestants per se. After all, they have the same position as Catholics, Mormons and Episcopalians on Faith and grace. However, you have taken Mr. Santorum out of context just as RW has taken Mormonism's position on race out of context.

Right Wingnut said...

OJ, I did not say Mormons are racist. You're reading too much into my comments. Leave that to the Romneyites.

Anonymous said...

You know, I don't see the point in Rick saying that Protestantism is "gone from the world of Christianity."

What does he solve by saying such a thing. What do you solve! He comes off as being a tool, like usual. It's like when a mom in Missourri told him she couldn't afford her son's $900 a month cost for prescription medicine. He responded by saying,

"People have no problem going out and buying an iPad for $900."

Now, how did he know what the woman's financial situation was like to make such a comment!

Rick just always comes off as whiney, pompous, and judgemental.

Terrye said...

Ohio Joe..it was not out of context and Santorum himself made no attempt to make an exception of evangelicals or Pentecostals or Amish or anyone else.

He created this situation with his own words.

Terrye said...

RightWingNut..no..you don't have the guts to just come out and say it..so you make a lot of leading comments instead. Your meaning was obvious.

Anonymous said...

RW, I think you are just happy to find whatever way you can to slime Mitt Romney. If you can use the LDS church to do so, you have no problem doing it. I think that is a shame, and it's a poor reflection on you.

But you cannot point to one single incident of Mitt Romney saying or doing anything that could be seen as racist. Why? Because he is not a racist, and neither is the church he belongs to.

Palin, on the other hand does have plenty of people in Alaska who see her as a racist. Even her own father said she left her first college because she was uncomfortable with the 'ethnic' people there.

And FYI, The Mormon church did not oppose the Civil Rights Act.

Also, much of that USA Today article was just plain false. I'm not going to get into it, because it would take too much time to refute each and every statement made.

Quite often, the articles I read about the church are filled with errors. There's not much anyone can do about it. Sometimes I try, and I have emailed writers many times with corrections. Rarely, I get a polite response. But most of the time it's pretty clear that there is an agenda behind what is written. And obviously it's all about making Mitt Romney look bad.

So, you joined the dark side today. Doesn't surprise me one little bit.

-Martha

Right Wingnut said...

Martha, I don't think Mitt is racist, but did you read the letter I linked to written by a church official to George Romney? It's fairly clear that they opposed it. That letter is disgusting. I think the policies of the church were racist until 1978, but that does not mean I believe all Mormons to be racist.

Anonymous said...

What are you talking about RW? THEY? No, THEY did not oppose it! The LDS church took no official position on the civil rights act--as is most often the case concerning legislation.

Now as for Delbert Stapley, I guess he did. So what. He DID NOT SPEAK FOR THE CHURCH. Period. And, he was wrong.

I can't help it if some of the leadership of the church in the past had misguided opinions on blacks. But he is not the church, he was one man, and even in that stupid letter he wrote to George Romney, he makes it clear that he is not speaking for the church.

BTW, Ive read it before, and if that's all you can find, you don't have much. Darn, no dirt on the Romneys!

-Martha

Right Wingnut said...

Your accusations against Palin are bullshit, and you know it. She's so uncomfortable with Asians that she married one. Yes, Yupik Eskimos originated from Siberia and Asia. Furthermore, here is a statement from her communications spokesperson in the governor's office in response to another accusation of racism.

Sharon Leighow, communications spokesperson in the Alaska governor’s office, disputed the allegation. She said that Palin’s press secretary was part African-American and that two of her senior advisors were Filipino and Korean. Leighow was also adamant that Palin did not hire staff persons based on color, but solely on talent and skill. As she put it, “Governor Palin is totally color-blind.”

Nice try, Martha...you twit.

You and Ellie are the reasons I'm opposed to Romney to the extent that I am. I probably wouldn't have supported him anyway, but you provide extra motivation.

Publius Nemo said...

Enough already! Mormons are weird. Cesar and the Jews said the same thing about the cult of Christianity. Get some prospective on your own religiosity. Amen already!

Right Wingnut said...

Pub,

Who said Mormons are "weird?"

Anonymous said...

Right WingNut is weird.

Publius Nemo said...

RW, Not everything is about you and my comment was intended for everyone on this site. This entire conversation is pointless. Should you tell us about your church so everyone can take pot shots at it for it's bad practitioners and policies from past and present? Should Gingrich and Santorum answer for Catholic or Evangelical "atrocities"? If my history serves me well weren't the Mormons driven from the state of Missouri and killed? No wonder Romney lost. 100 years ago he would have been murdered for his beliefs in that state. And Mormons were abolitionist before the South fought a war against the states so let's not go around judging everyone with 21st century glasses. It's an over simplification and wrong. The point is leave these peoples church's alone. If he says inappropriate remarks that is one thing. Everything else is simply out of bounds. But you have your freedom of speech just like Romney has his freedom of religion protected by the constitution which also states there is to be no religious test for office. Some want to impose a test and that is wrong. Santorum has misspoken and is cleaning up his mistake so why double down on his misstep? He's distancing himself from the comments so should those that support him. Religion has nothing to do with it!

Right Wingnut said...

Everything else is simply out of bounds.

Nothing is "out of bounds" on this site. You haven't been here for long, have you? This site has always been a free for all. You're allowed to say anything you want about anyone, as long as their name isn't Mitt Romney. There was a time when I was more measured in my comments. They made their bed, now they must sleep in it.

Anonymous said...

Well said, PN. Thanks.

-Martha

Publius Nemo said...

RW, According to our CONSTITUTION religious test are out of bounds. You want to judge a man by his church's history and you are dead wrong to do so. Please enlighten the "nothing is out of bounds" community on your prescribed religion. I am sure there are people that can disparage it. I won't because it is far beneath me and any other christian of conscious. Peace and Plenty, PN

Publius Nemo said...

CONSCIENCE that is. Peace, PN

Right Wingnut said...

Who says I'm applying a "religious test?" Furthermore, people can vote for someone for any reason they want. Mormons are clearly more likely to vote for a Mormon. Is that a religious test? I don't think so. They're more likely to identify with a Mormon candidate. So what.

As for the LDS church....I don't have a problem with what they believe. My points were relating to their anti-black policies that existed until 1978, and the potential ramifications in a general election against the first black president. That's it.

By the way...spare me the fucking outrage. Your fellow Romney supporters have been running around crying bigotry every time Romney loses a state, or whenever they feel Romney is being slighted in some way. Every non-Romney supporter on this site, and at Race has been called a bigot numerous times. In addition, Santorum has been attacked repeatedly for expressing his religious beliefs.

Right Wingnut said...

Before Santorum was attacked here for his religious beliefs, Huckabee, Palin, Perry, Bachmann, and Gingrich were the prime targets. It depends who's highest in the polls.

Publius Nemo said...

I disagree. I find your language demeaning and arguments unchristian. You are free to hate whom you please. I can speak for decency and for the society that many of the founders intended. I have no ill will towards you. You impose and project on me the arguments from other Romney supporters and that is not fair. Good luck buddy. Peace and Plenty, PN

Anonymous said...

This comment board has sunk to such a low level that the comments aren't worth reading. You asked me a question, RW, and maybe sometime I will try to answer it, but the tone here has become so uncivil I just don't have more to add at the moment. I noticed Doug's language before yours, RW, and commend you for not being the first to throw the f-bomb. That's a step in the right direction.

Santorum has some pretty big religion problems on his hands right now that are even worse than this blog post. [If anyone can remember what the original post was about!:)] Article 6 blog has about 3 posts up about it. He has really got to stop trying to get the religion vote! It is not looking good here.

AZ

Matthew Jenkins said...

There is no policy like that.

Matthew Jenkins said...

You own them as "Right Wingnut"? You might as well post as anonymous.

Matthew Jenkins said...

George Romney, Mitt's Dad, fought for the civil rights movement very heavily, and there is plenty of evidence to support it. There are no skeletons in the closet with the Romneys.

Matthew Jenkins said...

True. Also, how do the tea party people that support Santorum explain his concerns with the tea Party recorded at a town hall meeting last June? Search you tube "Santorum tea party concerns"

Anonymous said...

Palin is no racist, she got her freak on with Glen Rice for pete sake.

Anonymous said...

What a riot this topic and chat has become! I find it interesting when an individual with absolutely zero knowledge of the facts begins making an issue from a non-issue. History has shown many examples of misguided beliefs in many areas, no entity is immune, not church, nor state. To understand the dynamics pertaining to the original topic of discussion one has to have lived the life as a faithful latter-day saint. Despite the attempts to sensationalize, church members as a whole held no animosity or ill-will against blacks in any way and did not view them as second class citizens. Many blacks who joined the church during this time did not view the church's doctrine as being a reason for not converting, noteworthy to mention that blacks did indeed embrace the church in that era. It had always been the church's position at the time and well known by it's membership the time would come where all worthy male members of the church would receive the full blessings of the priesthood, hence the 1978 proclamation was well received by all. Today the church continues to enjoy rapid growth among black converts with no lingering affects of the old doctrine impeding on it's missionary efforts. And as I originally stated in my first post, none of this has anything to do with the candidate and/or his ability to influence church leadership.

Joel2012

Terrye said...

RWN:

Santorum is not being attacked for his religious beliefs..he is being criticized for saying there is no Christianity in the Protestant faith..in other words..he is the one doing the attacking..the other people are reacting to the attack..the fact that you can not see the difference is telling. It really is.

Massachusetts Conservative said...

SHUT UP ABOUT SARAH PALIN, YOU LOSERS. JESUS CHRIST! MOVE ON WITH YOUR SORRY LIVES.

Ohio JOE said...

"Palin, on the other hand does have plenty of people in Alaska who see her as a racist." People are free to be ignorant and have false views.

Anonymous said...

Sarah palin got her groove on with Glen Rice and she paid him with SarahPac money to keep him quiet.

Palin should be locked up in an igloo, she has no business telling anyone what to do, sadly she has brainwashed followers willing to eat from her ass.

Her motives absolutely obvious, stop Mitt and hope for Newt or Santorum so they can lose to Obama and she will run in 2016.

Doug NYC GOP said...

WOW!!!

Anonymous said...

GO MITT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!