« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Attacks on Mormons are ramping up: here is what you shouldn’t believe

By: ew88 (Diary)  |  April 13th, 2012 at 02:12 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

I am a Mormon. I am not offended when media articles and editorials don’t ‘get’ the Mormons, but I’d really like everyone to know that there are better sources of information. I don’t ask people to agree with my beliefs, but I do ask them to form educated opinions by consulting with official Church doctrine and not other sources alone, just as you wouldn’t trust an English teacher to tutor you accurately in physics.  With the spotlight on Mormons as never before, I have seen all sorts of underinformed comments, opinions, and articles.  lds.org, mormon.org, and mormonewsroom.org are great resources for fact-checking or your own enlightenment. Mormons and other Christians and people of other faiths have so much more in common than they hold different that it seems silly that media or pastors or whoever else teach false information to scare their members away from understanding and accepting the Mormons.  There is no reason in the internet age that people should not understand each other for too little information!

Matthew 20: 16-20

     16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?

 17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.

 18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.

 19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.

 20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

This scripture in Matthew is relevant as you judge the LDS Church. Are the Mormons you know good people doing good things or the opposite? By their fruits shall ye know them. Go to Mormon.org/values/ to learn more or visit mormon.org/articles-of-faith/.

To make it even easier for you, I’d like to devote this post to debunking some common Mormon myths.

  1. Mormons are racist. We don’t really know why the priesthood wasn’t available to all worthy male members of the Church until 1978. Early in Church history all priesthood blessings were available to all Church members regardless of race. Early Mormons were against slavery and bought freedom for some slaves who believed the gospel of Jesus Christ and wanted to join their fellow Saints. Here’s the biggest indicator that racism isn’t a belief of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints: the Church is 14.5 million members strong worldwide, with especially rapid rates of growth in the continent of Africa. The Church also grows quickly in South America. There are plenty of LDS members among the African American and Hispanic American communities as well. Would this happen if we were racist? I think not. The invitation to come unto Christ and be perfected in him is open to all and we welcome all.
  2. The Book of Mormon is of the devil, or Joseph Smith wrote it, or any number of other lies. People who slander the Book of Mormon either take words in it out of context, or they have never read the Book of Mormon in the first place. Joseph Smith, a man with a third grade education, translated in 60 days, with divine help, an ancient record written on gold plates from the people who had lived in the Americas and were directed and visited by Jesus Christ following His resurrection. Read it for yourself and form your own opinion. It’s a book, it’s not going to bite you. The full name is The Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ. You can read about the beginnings of the Book of Mormon at Mormon.org/Book-of-Mormon/.
  3. Mormons are polygamists and Joseph Smith founded the Church because he had a mistress. False! Joseph Smith founded the Church as a young married man, under direction from the Lord Jesus Christ. To read Joseph Smith’s story, visit mormon.org/joseph-smith/. You can find information about the Restoration of the gospel of Jesus Christ through Joseph Smith at mormon.org/restoration/. Polygamy was a part of the early Church, just as it was practiced anciently with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. To my knowledge all marriages were by invitation to those who had the faith and temporal means to support additional women and children. There were many widows among the early Saints and more women than men. It was a trial of faith for the members asked to participate, including Joseph Smith himself.
  4. Mormons are all conservative. Actually only 85% of us are Republicans (of the 6 million Mormons in the United States), and there are several prominent LDS Democrats. Look no further than Harry Reid. Do politicians bring up his religion? No. But that gets into politics and media bias and we’re focusing now on Mormons right now.
  5. Magic underwear. Temple garments are sacred, and remind the wearer of covenants he or she has made with God in the temple. We don’t talk about sacred things to protect their sanctity. It is out of respect for God, not a desire to be secretive. Cast not pearls before swine, that sort of idea.
  6. Mormons are brainwashed. Hah! This one makes me laugh, because in reality Mormons are encouraged to seek answers  themselves through study, prayer, and the inspiration of the Holy Ghost. Being encouraged to question and find answers for ourselves we are most certainly not brainwashed.

Other questions? Ask me in the comments or hop on over to mormon.org to find more answers.

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • UKconservative

    Hi,

    Just a quick one to say that I enjoyed reading your piece. Although I am not a member of the church myself, I have researched the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints and, obviously, agree with all the points that have been raised above.

    In my decision as to who to support in the Republican race, it was not based on religion in any way whatsoever; as far as I am concerned, if the candidate has good conservative policy ideas and is a person with values, I am not too concerned as to their religious beliefs.

    I looked at numerous candidates and found that two of the candidates who I found myself attracted to the most were Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman, both members of the church. I felt that both Romney and Huntsman offered policies of value and that Huntsman was far more conservative in his ideas than the media wanted you to believe. For that, I can think of only one reason, the media was scared that the Republican Party might have put Huntsman forward as their candidate and gave Obama a challenge that, in my opinion, he would not have been able to overcome.

  • naraht

    A couple of points to be made.

    1) Yes, the church under Joseph Smith granted the Priesthood to a black man. Joseph Smith’s position on Negros when he ran for President was fairly good for the time. Remember that

    2) Brigham Young is the one responsible for the denying of Priesthood to Negros, policy had more or less been set by the time he died in 1877.

    3) At various times statements on Negros and the Priesthood by Brigham Young were mistakenly attributed to Joseph Smith.

    4) If the Church had changed its policy on Negros in say1958, it would be a minor footnone in history rather than something to be used against the Church.

    5) The Intermontane West was among the last areas to deal with the effects on the Civil Rights movement (late 1960s and 1970s)

    6) Church efforts to expand to South America, specifically Brazil were being considerably complicated by this church policy which was being interpretted with a “one drop rule”. There are stories that a fairly highly ranking member of the Church gave up his Priesthood authority when he found a Black in ancestry 5 or 6 generations back.

    7) The situation involving the changeover in prophets affected this considerably. President McKay was in no condition to do so in his last years (1966-1970 or so), Joseph Fielding Smith (1970-Mid 1972) was apparently not the person to do so and Harold B. Lee (Mid 1972-late 1973) had arguably been the apostle most opposed to giving the Priesthood to Blacks since the 1950s. Spencer W Kimball (1973-1985), OTOH had probably been the apostle *most* in favor of giving the Priesthood to Blacks.

    • naraht

      Sorry, what I mean to say was that Lincoln’s position on Blacks wasn’t exactly that of today in any way…

    • http://conservativemormonmom.blogspot.com ew88

      that all Church decisions and policies are made by revelation. It may be that prophets before President Kimball hadn’t asked the question, I don’t know. The prophet seeks guidance from God, and when he gets an answer on the direction to go, he runs it by the by the council. The prophet leads, and then the quorum of apostles supported the decision unanimously before its announcement to the Church. It is not the decision of one person. It is revelation from God, which is supported by Church leadership before a policy change happens. I’m not trying to make excuses for ‘racism’ but I am trying to clarify how the Church works. A large majority of Mormon people around the world were overjoyed when the announcement finally came. That isn’t racist.

      It’s not like Mormons are the people who were joining the KKK or supporting unchristian behaviors leading up until the Civil Rights movement. Nor have I heard of segregation in the Intermountain West if you want to get into that. That said, no one and no group of people is perfect except Christ. We try to be like Him and we all come up short at times or all the time! We are all trying to learn how to love each other like He loves us, when it all comes down to it. Rather than focusing on a few bad points, we can choose to focus on all the good that the Church has done and that the Church teaches.

      • lapert

        I understand the defense you are trying to make, but appealing to revelation as the basis for these decisions is unlikely to persuade and more likely to harden views of those who don’t believe Mormon’s are privileged to special revelation in modern times.

        Similarly, your answer above in #2 is at best arguable. Asserting to others that Joseph Smith didn’t write it but it was in fact golden plates from people of the Americas who were visited by Jesus after his Resurrection isn’t going to make it easier for those who are prone to believe these attacks to take your rebuttals seriously. Better to stick to the historical and sociological inaccuracies than try to defend the doctrine of the faith itself.

        • jbmstub

          Of course the press will attempt to make it so in order to undermine anyone who has any conservative/religious principles. I will support and encourage everyone to vote for Mitt because he will be a far better president than Mr. Obama. He appears to be very good and virtous man. However, I do not agree with Mormonism as a religion. As a committed New Testament Christian I believe that Mormonism is a false religion and Joseph Smith was a false prophet. Neither of those disqualify Mitt Romney from serving as POTUS, nor do they prevent me from voting for him. I will vote for him as POTUS not as an officer of any church. Defending Mitt on your view of mormonism as a religion, in my opinion, is a mistake that falls right into the trap of liberals who hate all religions and could offend those of us who are firmly convinced it is a false religion. I will not debate that issue on this page because this is not the place for that argument.

          • http://conservativemormonmom.blogspot.com ew88

            Hence an article talking about what you shouldn’t believe from the press about the Mormons. Their focus on Mormons is to scare people away from Romney by making all Mormons seem weird or wrong or racist or anything else I mentioned. Of course Romney’s religion and personal beliefs shouldn’t matter and doesn’t matter to most people, just as you and I are entitled under the Constitution to believe whatever religion we choose. Long live religious liberties!

            It seems many comments here are suggesting that this article isn’t relevant to the political sphere. You’re right, it’s not. But I’m not the one who has interjected Mormonism into the press: that would be the liberals! They have dragged out all sorts of things about the Mormons that are particularly irrelevant to the matters of the day, to ‘inform’ people who Mormons are (by their interpretations). Exactly as the title of my article suggests, I lay bare the standard lies you’ll hear across the general election for your own information, not really for combating liberalism ‘by playing into their hand.’

            I get what you’re all saying about not ‘accepting the liberal premise’ but I still think it may be appropriate to fight lies with truth rather than ignore them altogether at times. Again, why shouldn’t we try to understand and respect each other in this day and age?

          • jakeofalltrades

            America will side against the party that seems like it’s just being mean.

          • aesthete

            Remember those South Park episodes about Mormonism?

            (Non-Mormon) Americans basically agree that Mormonism is weird, and don’t mind saying so — maybe a little unfair given that orthodox Christianity is just as bizarre in some ways, but them’s the breaks.

            They also think that Mormons are upstanding folks, and don’t really like it when it seems like decent (if eccentric) folk are getting harassed for no good reason. Frame it that way, and you avoid the discussion of your faith’s somewhat more bizarre points — a discussion which you won’t win, because your faith is a little bit bizarre, in actuality!

            Emphasize Mormonism’s tolerance for, and respect of, religious freedom and American values — and don’t get in the weeds talking about history or theology.

          • aesthete

            This advice is for political purposes only — I wouldn’t presume to tell someone of a different faith how (or if) they should proselytize. Don’t want to give away the trade secrets… :)

          • jakeofalltrades

            And I’m not a Mormon btw… I’m rather hardcore in my Christian theology and will not abide a conflation between our religion and theirs. Neither will I abide the religious test the Demonrats proffer whilst themselves being drunk on the Opiate of the @sses (atheism).

          • northeastred

            Was that a joke about “Magic Underwear?” I don’t get it. Sacred? Private? Are you talking about Mitt Romney’s tax returns? Why would you write a serious piece about Romney’s faith and soil it with some idiotic reference to magic, sacred underwear? Those are just the kinds of things that will cause stupid people to not take Mormons seriously. Is this The Onion?

          • gekster

            ;)

          • Jack_Savage

            Perfect.

          • http://www.rightspeak.net/search/label/-Right%20Wingnut rightwingnut2

            …but If I had, I would be all over this character.

          • Jack_Savage

            And who needs MSNBC when you can get comments like this right here, including the one above?

          • Bill S

            .

          • Jack_Savage

            But he is getting too clever by half.

          • jbmstub

            they are mean, nasty and evil (press and liberals) while mormons are good decent folk. stay out of theology and let the evil truly stand out.

          • Melody Warbington (rwm52)

            After all, they don’t seem to have much of a problem with the attacks on Christians.

        • naraht

          And someone who believes that the LDS Church leadership did receive revelation from God in regards to giving Blacks the Priesthood should simply join the Church since accepting they received revelation on that means they also have revelation in terms of things like Baptism for the Dead and Temples.

  • http://conservativemormonmom.blogspot.com ew88

    But I think that these principles are things that people should understand about the Mormons beliefs, whether they aren’t as strong an argument or not.
    I dare say that there are things in every religion that have to be taken on faith. That is how it works – the spiritual realm doesn’t work by physical laws like the scientific method. Rather, Christ teaches that if ye seek ye shall find. Meaning, you have to be willing to take religious beliefs on faith (seek) before you may see the evidence of them in terms of answers to prayers, a testimony of Christ’s divinity, etc (find). As C.S. Lewis lays out in Mere Christianity.

    I am not trying to make the attackers stop attacking Mormons. They’re going to do what they’re going to do. Rather, I’d like to inform people about what they should ignore about these attacks rather than believe point blank. I’d like to aid the understanding of Mormons, by promoting Church-approved sources of information like mormon.org, lds.org, and mormonnewsroom.org.

    • kaheo

      The ban of minorities to become priests was set by God and not by them. Does anyone really believe God would give instructions to ban or not to ban minorities?

      The policy was thankfully reversed, but no apologies made, since the initial rule was inspired by God or his prophets.

      I’ve asked several Mormons face-to-face if they think this was a wrong policy and never gotten an answer. Did God have a problem with Minority priests, or was it the Church’s leadership between BY years and 1978?

      If they just said: We (or Brigham Young) got it wrong, and we corrected it in 1978, I think this would be a non-issue. BY is however, a highly regarded figure and I suspect, not many Mormons would be happy with that correction.

      The Bible was also wrongfully used to justify slavery, but you won’t hear Protestants/Catholics claiming God gave a revelation to change the rules and thus the need for the 13th Amendment. Most Christians I know say it was wrong and should never have happened. Mormons should do the same.

      • http://conservativemormonmom.blogspot.com ew88

        The official answer of the Church authorities is when these attacks of racism appear is “We don’t know but we condemn racism an intertolerance in any form.” Doesn’t explain much, we just have to accept it (as Mormons) and move on.

        • withaplum

          surely since you are encourage to think for yourself and ask questions, you must have some ideas. I mean just accepting it sounds a little bit like you are… brainwashed? :)

          • kaheo

            won’t help clear up controversial policies by the Mormon church.

            If the best answer is: “We don’t know why we denied minorities priesthood, but we just accept it as it was”, then can you blame people for seeing the faith as an endorsement of racism prior to 1978 and possibly even beyond 1978 if they ignore what happened prior to that?

            The Mormon Church waited till 1978 to condemn racial discrimination in their own Church? Why?

            This issue may come up closer to the election. I personally don’t think this should even be discussed at the Presidential level, the Economy is most important. However, Romney maybe asked the same question. Saying “We don’t know” is definitely not going to convince many folks and will reinforce the notion that Mormons are or used to be racist in their policies towards minorities.

            I really think you can give a better answer.

          • http://conservativemormonmom.blogspot.com ew88

            I know exactly what you all are saying (and why it seems ‘brainwashed’) and I know that these sorts of answers put us Mormons in a tight spot. But while I don’t mean that we accept past racism, I do mean we have to accept the answer as the best answer we’re going to get from our Church leadership. Believe me, I have thought a lot about this question as have many other Mormons, especially the ones who are black. At the end of the day, we have to come back to what we know is true, and what we understand. We all have received answers for ourselves that the gospel of Jesus Christ is found in the LDS Church, that the Church is true, and that God leads His Church today. That faith and testimony is what keeps us in the LDS Church, and that same conviction is why hundreds of thousands of people join the Church worldwide each year. So even though we don’t know why blacks didn’t have the priesthood for so many years, and would love to find out, we have patience that our questions will be answered some day. If not in mortality, than the eternities.

          • Ann_W

            While I was still very young (10) in 1978, I was aware of the issue and my dad was a good, intelligent man who struggled with this issue.

            Because there seemed to be precedents in the Bible (i.e. no gospel to the Gentiles in the N.T., and the restrictions on the Levitical priesthood) it didn’t seem impossible (to us at the time) for God to have a reason for this restriction. My dad also always taught me that at some point blacks would receive the priesthood (when all decendents of Abel had received the priesthood, absolutely not doctrine as far as I know, I have no idea where that came from.) So we were honestly waiting for the good news that our black brothers and sisters would get these blessings soon. That day finally came, and we all celebrated. That was exactly what my father believed, I never saw or heard anything racist from him.

            In hindsight, knowing more now, it seems to me that it really is possible that this was incorrect doctrine that was instituted by B. Young. There is precedent for a prophet to be a bigoted individual (see Jonah). And I don’t think that prophets always get everything right (see 1 Cor. 13:9-12). But there are also quotes of BY’s that have been taken out of context to make his words seem worse than they are.

            Meanwhile, the church does not condone racism. And my experiences at church have been that there is way more diversity at my church than my community and we all love each other and are so glad for each person there. We all couldn’t care less what color a person is when we enjoy what they add to our congregation.

          • kaheo

            Ann said “…it seems to me that it really is possible that this was incorrect doctrine that was instituted by B. Young.”

            This is what I think happened and what rational folks would see as acceptable, but wouldn’t it be frowned up in the Mormon Church if one were to criticize policies instituted by B. Young?

            And is this the reason why most Mormons shy away from giving their true feeling/opinion about this issue?

          • http://conservativemormonmom.blogspot.com ew88

            There are times that the prophet will speak as the prophet, and other times where he’ll speak as himself, a man. Brigham Young himself even stopped himself and corrected what he had said as a man, to speak as the prophet.

            But yes, speaking this way does make us feel a little uncomfortable, because we really don’t know the answer to the question.

          • kaheo

            This is how the Church leadership had said it 1978 and even when they do so today, but unfortunately, they don’t explain it that way. In this case, the 1978 revelation was not a correction of a prophets mistake but rather a change in rules given by God.

            If the two are indistinguishable (prophet-speak vs man-speak), how can Church members know what is right and what is wrong. What happens when a prophet is discovered to have spoken as a man and their words are taken as those of a prophet for almost a century?

            Why is so hard to say that B. Young was wrong as it is obviously clear today (to me and even maybe you)? It seems pretty straightforward and would settle this for many of us who question this policy.

            Is the fear that accepting that B. Young was wrong on certain issues, it could open a can of worms as to whether he was wrong on other teachings/policies thus alienating Church members from his teachings?

          • avagreen

            Quite a few in fact.

            Lesson Highlights

            *Peter learns in a vision that the gospel should be preached to the Gentiles.
            *Peter is miraculously freed from prison.
            *Saul (Paul) and Barnabas preach the gospel to the Gentiles.
            *The Apostles determine that Gentiles do not need to keep the law of Moses.

            Chapter 10-14
            An angel ministers to Cornelius

          • avagreen

            1 And certain men which came down from Jud

          • Ann_W

            And of course you are right, but I was talking about the restriction in the Gospels. Gentiles were only allowed to convert after Christ’s death after Peter had his revelation.

          • avagreen

            allowed to respond.

            Christ only had 3 years to teach his disciples to serve them for the rest of their lives, who then were given what is called the Great Commission to carry on his message to others, reported in Matthew 28:1620.:
            The Great Commission
            16 Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. 17 When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. 18 Then Jesus came to them and said,

          • avagreen

            IIII

          • jakeofalltrades

            It’s probably not a word in His vocabulary.

          • kipling

            Although Jesus did not send His Disciples directly to the Gentiles until after the resurrection, Gentiles often came to Jesus to hear the gospel message. There are numerous instances where Roman Centurions came to hear Jesus or to ask a blessing. Jesus always responded. The Gerasenes Demoniac of Mark 5:1-20 was most likely a Gentile – not the pig farming of the region. Jesus often ministered in Galilee and the Decapolis, which also had large numbers of Jews and Gentiles living together. The Syro-Phoenician woman of Mark 7:24-30 is another example. The 4000 fed in Mark 8:1-10 certainly contained Gentiles because it was in a predominately Gentile region.

            God promised Abraham that his descendants would be a blessing to all nations. The Jews were supposed to be a light to the world and the Jewish temple even had a Court of the Gentiles where the Gentiles could come from all over the world and hear the message of the true God. When Jesus cleansed the temple in Mark 11, most of His anger was directed at the Jewish authorities who had closed the Court of the Gentiles and set up a market there. He was angry because they had denied the Gentiles access to the true God in order to make a buck by defrauding the Jews.

            God’s plan always included the Gentiles. Even the Old Testament gives witness to Gentile converts to Judaism. The Book of Acts and beyond is simply fulfillment of the promise to Abraham.

          • aesthete

            I’d also note that the Pauline epistles rely heavily on the text of the Old Testament to buttress his claim vis a vis Gentiles being allowed claim to the gospel.

          • kipling

            As in – that is a good point.

          • Ann_W

            I agree that the plan was always for it to eventually go to all people. But anyway, it’s kind of a tangent.

    • lapert

      Rather than tell people who aren’t going to accept the revelatory nature of your faith what they should ignore you are giving them the cover to see all the attacks as valid. I mean if you think that the Book of Mormon is really a revelation from God than you probably are racist polygamists who wear magic underwear.

      Of course, I don’t think Mormons, or Mitt Romney, is racist and clearly not a polygamist and I do understand the concept of sacred garments – but your line of defense makes it easier to focus not on the historical context of those issues and instead on the apparent differences in the religion.

      • Tbone

        I doubt that there is a person in the United States that isn’t happy that their next door neighbor is a Mormon.

        They are great citizens, neighbors and friends. If some one doesn’t like Mormons, they can take the greased slide to Hell.

        • Ann_W

          JK, it’s a new side of you. ;)

          • Tbone

            this World would be a lot better place. If all heathens, Buddhists, Hindus and attorneys became Mormons this World would be a better place. But, if all Philadelphia Eagles fans became Mormons it would ruin Mormonism.

          • jakeofalltrades

            because they thought it was a CIA front to spread pro-Americanism, is fine in my book. Seriously – Mormonism is religiously patriotic – it’s in their eschatology.

          • aesthete

            as far as politics are concerned, anyways.

          • Ann_W

            no text

          • http://www.thestandardcandle.com Justin Spagnolo

            I wonder if the fans in Philly know that

            Andy Reid and Vai Sikahema are mormons…

      • Ann_W

        I’m an active Mormon and <3 my faith, but I don't really see a faith based defense of Mormonism as being useful in the political realm. I have been tempted many times to write a defensive diary, but I think we'll have to stick with how religion affects the election, and any current issues that people raise– not a general defense of the religion. But the links to mormon.org, etc. are probably helpful.

        On the bright side, I think that redstate is filled with people who can accept that differences in religious beliefs don't stop us from working together to make America stronger.

    • Martin Knight

      Trust me, the Presstitute asking him all those questions will want to “move on” right quick.

      • Kyle-MI

        If anyone brings up anything about Romney’s religion he should just say, “I believe the same thing as Harry Reid.” If they press further he can always mention how curious it is that no one asked about these things when Harry Reid became Senate Majority Leader.

        • Ann_W

          to important posts if their religion was a disqualifier.

          • redmomof4

            As a Christian, I know what I believe and that is the Bible, and only the Bible. The Bible warns that nothing should be added or taken away from God’s word, it was finished and complete. I totally disagree with the book of mormon. I do LIKE mormons though. I have neighbors who are, a really good friend who is mormon and even some distant family who is mormon. They are all wonderful people with great morals, work ethics and I would definitely put my trust in them as people and friends. Not my salvation though. I won’t get into specifics, because I’m not here to debate mormonism vs. mainstream Christianity. But I will say, there are too many things that they believe that I think go against God’s word. I have talked to my friend about a lot of things and we’ve had to agree to disagree, because I find her “rationale” completely silly. I also can’t place any faith in the supposed transcription of some found gold tablets, but a common conman and criminal, Joseph Smith. It’s easy enough to research his life. Can people change? Sure, but reading the timeline of his life, he did very questionable things supposedly after the so-called tablets were found.

            Now, someone has asked me how can I vote for someone who I plainly disagree with religiously? 1st off, I have to see if our morals align. And I believe that socially, I agree with Romney on most things, whereas, with Obama, next to nothing. I also happen to disagree with Catholocism and the Catholic church. I find most of their teachings out of line with the New Testament church. I feel that with any Christian church though, if you put your faith in Jesus and repent, you will still be saved, regardless of your doctrine and denomination. Not every person in every denomination, believes exactly as their church doctrine decrees. Some might go to a church just because that’s what their family always did, yet have a different understanding of the Bible regardless.

            I can’t make that kind of judgement for everyone. It’s between them and God. All I can do, is base my votes on a candidates words and actions. I think that Mitt Romney has integrity and has the background, education and knowledge to drag us out of this pit that Obama taken us down into. Regarding the Health Care Mandate in MA….There is a difference between something being done on a state level and a federal level. I really don’t have a problem with the fact that he implemented it in Mass. As long as he’s against Obama care, abortion and for job creation and cutting our deficit, I can 100% stand behind Mitt Romney.

        • freedom555

          Harry Reid got his power deviously and keeps it in part by facing inept Republican opposition in Nevada.

          Harry Reid is respected by few Democrats and even fewer Independents.

          For Romney’s skeptics, reminding them that he shares a religion with Harry Reid dooms Romney further.