Tuesday, June 19, 2007

A Mormon for President?

I don’t get into politics much. You won’t often hear me debate them. But I have to say, some of the comments about Mitt Romney’s run for President have really cracked me up.

When Clinton was President and his whole affair with Monica Lewinski was discovered, he walked away pretty much unscathed. The general public opinion seemed to be – what he does in his spare time is none of our concern. Well, let’s look at the facts here – the affair took place in the Oval Office. He had the affair with a White House intern. That doesn’t sound like he was keeping his personal life and his Presidential life separate.

Now we’ve got a Mormon running for office and people from different religious factions are rising up to question his beliefs. Shouldn’t that fall under the “what he does in his spare time is none of our concern” policy? Let’s see – what do they do when they’re not on the clock? Clinton carries on with an intern. Romney will probably go to church (gasp) and say some prayers (gasp).

I’m not meaning to imply that Romney doesn’t have his weaknesses. I’m sure he has scads of them. But let’s get real here. The main objection to Romney running for President is the fact that he’s a Mormon. If the general public can simply forgive and forget what Clinton did, surely there’s room to overlook such a heinous crime as being Mormon.

12 comments:

Karen Hoover said...

Nicely said!

Lynne said...

I remember the stink when Kennedy was elected because he was Catholic. What's the big deal?

Rob Wells said...

Speaking as someone who kinda likes Romney (kinda), I can totally understand why his religion is under scrutiny.

Being Mormon is different from having an affair--being Mormon is an ideology, not just a behavior. Being Mormon means he'll likely vote a certain way on abortion or gay rights.

And it raises the same question that was raised about JFK: if President Hinckley called President Romney on the phone and told him what to do, would Romney automatically do it? (Or, if the Pope called JFK on the phone, would JFK immediately obey?)

Regardless of what you think about Romney's potential answers, these questions are absolutely relevant to his campaign.

Karlene said...

Responding to Rob's comments, I absolutely agree. However, what's fair is fair.

Doesn't someone's behavior reflect their ideology? If someone is behaving immorally, won't he likely vote to support justification of his own immoral acts?

And if someone is so addicted to sex (or whatever) as to participate under the conditions as Clinton did, would not that addiction color and define some of his political acts and decisions as much as another person's faith would dictate their decisions?

If those things were irrelevant to concerns about Clinton, they should be irrelevant in our choice of a new president.

However, I think they are very relevant. I think people of faith who pray and listen to the spirit, regardless of which church they belong to, would make good and righteous choices most of the time. I would love to live in a country governed and led by someone who prays and truly listens to and obeys the voice of the Lord, be he LDS or Catholic or any other faith.

Tristi Pinkston said...

Wow -- I actually spawned a political debate! Rock on, me!

Framed said...

Call me cynical but I feel that the average American identifies more with Clinton's sexual foibles than Ronmey's religious ones.

violetlady said...

What great comments!!

Melissa said...

I love this! Very good post...

Karen said...

Great post! I agree that religious affiliation is extremely relevant. However, history has shown that JFK wasn't so stellar in his behavior. He just never got caught.

Belladonna said...

Here's the other argument I've heard: for those who believe the LDS faith is a big hoax, they do not want to elect a leader of the free world who could be easily duped by false claims. They say if he could fall for this, it shows weak judgment in assessing reality.

I don't know enough about Romney to decide whether I support his candidacy or not...I certainly wouldn't favor him solely because he is a member of the church I belong to. I think it is just as wrong to vote for a person based primarily on their religious faith as it is to vote against him/her on those grounds.

I am sure there will be some things I agree with him on and some things I disagree with - the trick is sorting out WHICH issues carry the most weight when it comes time to cast my vote.

Tristi Pinkston said...

Belladonna -- you make an excellent point. I think every candidate will have good points and bad points, and we'll agree and disagree with all of them. And it would be very foolish to vote for someone just because they belong to our religion, or our club, or live in our state, or went to the same college. Those things don't make good presidents. What it should all come down to is -- who will be the best leader of our country? I just wish more people voted that way instead of with "The Good Ol' Boys" club.

Lu Ann Brobst Staheli said...

Great post, Tristi. It's amazing how much religion Clinton grows when he thinks it will do him good. It's nice to know some candidates are activie members of a church, even when the press ISN'T watching.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...