Comments on: Romney To Give "Religion Speech"

Mormon Candidate Will Address His Faith As His Lead In Iowa Falls To Huckabee

Add a Comment See all 209 Comments
by oscarez December 3, 2007 6:16 PM EST
Nancy_Naive, you have done it now. Huckabee is known for being thin-skinned and vindictive.
Reply to this comment
by moronpolitics December 3, 2007 5:57 PM EST
ANTI-SLAVERY DUDE. If you meant with the mormon church I misunderstood. I was referring Americans in general. Opposition to slavery was an important force long before the Revolution. Within the LSD/LDS church I wouldn''t know. I consider the entire movement an obvious scam by a known conman. period.
Reply to this comment
by abdoul_pasha December 3, 2007 5:48 PM EST
George Bush has lost the measure.
Reply to this comment
by abdoul_pasha December 3, 2007 5:47 PM EST
Why does the USA say which country can have and which cannot have a nuclear power?
Reply to this comment
by liberty4all2 December 3, 2007 5:38 PM EST
Nancy_Naive: LOL. I LOVE IT!
Reply to this comment
by edward1975-2009 December 3, 2007 5:06 PM EST
denn034; And what church ( christian ) on the face of the Earth does not claim to be the Restored Church of God. It''s their selling point! And apparently many buy into, if you look at church bank accounts. That''s the problem with organized religion, can''t just bring the Word of God to people, nope they have to be the one true church. And upon any investigation, all will be found with shortcomings.
Reply to this comment
by liberty4all2 December 3, 2007 5:04 PM EST
One of our nations greatest leaders for change was Malcom X. Toward the end of his life he became a tremendous spiritual leader. He averted that spirituality is a necessary characteristic of leadership (read his book). I agree with him. On that note, I want a spiritually based president.

We live in a country that separates church from state and it is at a point that if there is anything to do with God in politics we decry it. The history of a separate state was because the catholic church ruled the government centuries ago. We wanted a government free of a church''s rule. Don''t confuse that with a person believing in God. It isn''t Mormonism or Catholicism or any religion leading the country. It is a person. This country has always been ruled by the people and for the people. I think Romney knows that. He won''t jeopardize our country''s greatest attributes of choice and voice. Mormons believe too heavily in the ability to allow others to choose and reap the consequence.
Reply to this comment
by edward1975-2009 December 3, 2007 4:56 PM EST
Romney has potrayed nothing other than a conviction to ideals he holds for truths. And a willingness to educate himself. And we find fault in this why? Granted we are not used to this in our politicians, but compared to this field of incompetents, he is a refreshing breeze. Whether or not you like his religious beliefs is irrelevent. Whether he can lead in a time when this country so desperately needs a leader is the issue. And this is what you have to ask yourself.
Reply to this comment
by glencho December 3, 2007 4:46 PM EST
The bigotry coming from the religious camp pales in comparison to the bigotry and arrogance from the agnostic/atheist contingent.
The mantra from humanists is repeatedly "those who believe in God can''t be trusted to be rational or are incapable of reason".
Such closed mindedness from those who claim to be the torch bearers of enlightenment is tiresome.
Further Romney earned his way through college and made his own fortune. (Read A Mormon in the Whitehouse, Hugh Hewett) He can stand on his own accomplishments, which are not few.
Mormons are law abiding patriotic Americans who for the most part don''t commit crimes and serve in the military.
I have listened to liberals frantic hand wringing over "W" wanting to establish a theocracy. After 8 years we are still a representative republic. America can probably survive a Mormon in the Oval Office.
Reply to this comment
by denn034 December 3, 2007 4:44 PM EST
Religion shouldn''t be a topic in a presidential race but, the fact that little is known about the Mormons is like facing the unknown and it''s scary. The fact that it''s scary probably justifies Romney''s giving a speech on it.
Reply to this comment
by edward1975-2009 December 3, 2007 4:41 PM EST
flyingtree: You better check your facts. Though you can find evidence of a movement towards anti-slavery, the issue itself would not began to be determined until after the Civil War began in 1861, some 25 yrs. after the posting of Smith in April 1836. Again check your facts, it''s these half truths that lead to mis-information and a clouding of the facts. This issue was braoched in the wee hours, by a gentleman with concerns of the standing of blacks within the LDS church. Helps to check prior post before diving in without a clue.
Reply to this comment
by marcodele December 3, 2007 4:41 PM EST
Usually republicans nominate whoever has the most money. Romney should get the nomination.
Reply to this comment
by denn034 December 3, 2007 4:40 PM EST
The Mormon Doctrine and Covenants, their third volume of scripture, in the first section insists that Mormonism is "the only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth, with which I the Lord am well pleased." It would take a suprahuman speech of extra-presidential proportions to get around that one. Yes, Mormons tolerate other religions and religionists that don''t criticize the Mormons only!
Reply to this comment
by micma-2009 December 3, 2007 4:38 PM EST


Romney''s fascist party will never accept him. However, considering his record of flipp-flopping on every issue, he could always convert to mainstream Christianity.





Reply to this comment
by nealb4zodd December 3, 2007 4:35 PM EST
All of you out there stuck on Romney''s faith are overthinking this. Romney''s presidency has NOTHING to do with your hang-ups of the Mormon doctrine, gold plates, priesthood, heavenly-mother or temples.

The bare bones of Romney as president is his integrity to make and keep promises and commitments, being honest, true, benevolent and chaste. Strong morals and family values. Thats his character. - Thats what the Mormon church is known for.

Whether you think Mormonism is a sham or not, it breeds honest and Christlike men, women and children who stand for something good.

If you dont want Romney because you disagree with his politics, thats fine - - but tearing a man down because of his faith and moral convictions, thats just UnAmerican. - especially when that faith has proven to represent the highest level of commitment, integrity and charity.
Reply to this comment
by Krazcarl December 3, 2007 4:33 PM EST
Oh My Gosh!!! He has mistaken me for someone that cared....He shows me the tablets he gets my vote. Like in the 1800''s if you found golden tablets you wouldn''t hold on to them just bury them again for prosperity. I have high ground in Fl. cheap real cheap.
Reply to this comment
by marcodele December 3, 2007 4:00 PM EST
What bothers me about Romney is not his brand of religion, but the fact he is now pandering to the evangelical vote. Add that to his sense of political entitlement based on his father''s name and fortune, and you''ve got W all over again.

When the leader of our great country is chosen based on religiosity, then everything our country was founded upon will be nothing more than history. The U.S. will be like the middle east: a majority of religious fanatics creating government policy.
Reply to this comment
by moronpolitics December 3, 2007 3:52 PM EST
wadyaknow: You got it brother. go to moronpolitics and place a comment. People need to be informed. If you can believe Joseph Smith, you shouldn''t be trusted to deal with world leaders like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Putin. They will sell him magic beans just like Jack.
Reply to this comment
by mojo884 December 3, 2007 3:51 PM EST
Personally, I think I''d be more comfortable with a moderate agnostic as president. Religious extremism is always bad, regardless of the particular brand of faith. I''d like to think the religious leanings of our president are NOT going to be shaping our future.
Reply to this comment
by mojo884 December 3, 2007 3:47 PM EST
Personally, I think I''d be more comfortable with a moderate agnostic as president. Religious extremism is always bad, regardless of the particular brand of faith. I''d like to think the religious leanings of our president are NOT going to be shaping our future.
Reply to this comment
See all 209 Comments

Exclusive Webshow

Mike Huckabee on GOP "rock stars," 2012, health care reform and more. Watch Now

  • MOST POPULAR
Latest News
News in Pictures
Scroll Left Scroll Right
Connect with CBS News

Stay connected with the CBS News using your favorite social networks and online news applications: