I guess it depends on where you live – none of the Mormons that I know personally believe in evolution, but neither are they ordinary young-earth creationists. Mostly they believe that Earth itself is only 6,000 years old, but that the materials it was made of are billions of years old, and that’s where the fossils came from.
I do know lots of normal-evolution-and-geology-accepting Mormons online, though.
What? Possession is not part of LDS beliefs? Why would you say that? It’s a little different than Catholic possession, in that LDS theology holds that the evil spirits that are capable of possessing people are the spirits of the people who chose to rebel with Lucifer in the pre-existence and never got the opportunity to come to earth and receive a body, but they’re certainly considered real and capable of possessing people under some circumstances. There’s no formal LDS exorcism ritual, of course, because any priesthood holder is supposed to be able to command evil spirits to depart in the name of Christ.
Now, this I like. You lose me though, up ahead:
As a former comics aficionado and collector, I’m not crazy about the comparison.
And I’ve known of at least twenty hot “chicks” to be comics readers. One now has a PhD in Genetics. At least one of the others is now an author, etc.
(Never got to bone any of them, though. 
Sniff.)
He’d move to the middle after the election - certainly not before the nomination. I would expect he’d think that he’d have enough power in the party to make his renomination safe, and get enough middle voters to be re-elected. The real question is who is the real Mitt Romney, though.
An active, believing Mormon is not going to do anything contrary to the advice of President Thomas Monson. So far, as far as I know, the LDS leadership has not tried to directly influence Harry Reid as a senator or Mitt Romney as a former governor. It does happen to some extent in Utah politics, but for the most part the LDS Church Authorities try to avoid the impression that the church is involved in political lobbying.
One counter-example has me concerned. The LDS Church encouraged its membership to get politically and financially involved in supporting Calif’s Prop 8. I wonder, if we had a Mormon POTUS, whether LDS President Monson would ever receive a revelation from God giving instructions to US President Romney. I believe that if he did, then Romney would be obliged to obey. To the Mormons, LDS President trumps US President.
I know this same argument was used against JFK, and AFAIK the Pope never attempted to rule the USA. Still, I see it as a real possibility with a Mormon POTUS.
And for the record, I was an active Mormon in 2008. And I did not vote for Romney in the primary, because he was a flip-flop.
Since revelations from God seem to follow the election returns, I doubt this would happen. If it did, and anyone found out, Romney would be impeached by a coalition of Democrats and outraged religious conservatives in about five minutes flat, and no Mormon could get elected as dog catcher anywhere outside of Utah. So Monson would have to be pretty dumb to try it.
The LDS Church never admits that its previous doctrines were uninsipred. And they don’t exactly say that God changes his mind, either. They just make new Proclamations and hope that over time people will forget about the old doctrines.
Like polygamy, for example. The 1890 Manifesto officially ended polygamy. The book of Doctrine and Covenants (part of the LDS scripture canon) declares that plural marriage is eternal, but since 1890 that has been interpreted to mean that temple marriage is eternal. The discrepancy is never discussed in Sunday School. Mormons are supposed to believe that polygamy was good when God specifically commanded it pre-1890, and that He does not command it for present-day Mormons.
Or blacks and the priesthood. I would guess that 99% of Mormons in 2010 have never heard that Brigham Young prophesied that if ever a black man is ordained, then the priesthood will be removed from the earth. Since 1978, black men have been ordained. No hateful or racist doctrines are being taught. Mormons today believe that God deliberately waited until 1978 to ordain blacks to the priesthood. He didn’t change His mind, but He revealed his plan over the course of a couple of centuries.
If you ask a Mormon congregation whether Brigham was the mouthpiece of God, they will answer YES! If you ask whether God’s priesthood resides solely in the LDS church still today, they will answer YES! They don’t know that those two statements cannot both be true.
As someone said earlier in this thread, the LDS defense to embarrasing doctrines is to wait a few decades and hope people forget.
I hope you’re right, but I’m not so sure.
If Romney were trying to decide whether to sign a gay marriage bill into law, I wonder if Monson would call him. I wonder if he would call Monson. As I said before, the Church officially stays out of politics generally but made an exception when they felt it was really really really important (Calif’s Prop 8).
Any revelation from God to Romney via Monson would not be published. But I think a discreet phone call is likely.
It was an asinine, ridiculous, and bigoted argument then. Why would it be any different an argument now? Are you even listening to yourself? By the way, when was the last time a Mormon member of the US Armed Forces swore an oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States of America and obey the orders of the President of the Church and those officers appointed over [the military member]”? Let hem help you out with the answer here.
By the way, you do know the leadership of other denominations got involved in Prop 8, don’t you? You do know there are military Chaplains who are LDS and are not hijacking the mission of the Chaplain Corps as Christian Evangelical Chaplains have tried to do, don’t you?
And what about the first assertion you made there? The Democrat LDS Congressmen and Senators aren’t going to go against a Republican LDS POTUS? Yeah, right. :rolleyes:
You are now full-on into CT territory: “My proof of this theory is that there is no proof.”
Why do you believe this would occur with Romney, when his history (and his father’s history) demonstrates no such thing?
Did you vote against the Catholic John Kerry in 2004 because you believed he would obey the commands of John Paul II?
I apologize if my opinion has offended anyone. I was a Mormon until age 31. I am merely trying to see things from a Mormon viewpoint.
Yes, anti-Mormonism and anti-Catholicism are bigoted viewpoints.
I have nothing but respect for our Armed Forces, and I’m not sure how that’s relevant to the discussion. Although I don’t see how your link proves that an LDS serviceman has “never” placed his religious beliefs above his duty, I agree that one can be both an excellent soldier and a Mormon. One can also be both an excellent politician and a Mormon.
Yes, I know that other denominations supported Prop 8. I don’t know how many of them received a Revelation From God ™ to be read to every congregation. My wife and I had already decided that gay marriage was none of our business. When the bishop read that letter at our church, we both realized that we were wrong and that God had decreed His will to His church. Yes, we (temporarily) changed our mind on a political issue to conform with a command from the Prophet. One cannot support gay marriage without admitting that the Mormon Prophet and thus the Mormon God are mistaken on the issue. If I were a politician, I would have had to hade either submit to the Prophet or renounce my faith.
Yes, I know there are LDS Chaplains. I know nothing about the Chaplain Corps, but I have not claimed that the LDS Church intends to hijack their mission.
I didn’t assert that Harry Reid and other Mormon Democrats (they’re pretty rare) “aren’t going to go against a Republican LDS POTUS.” I hadn’t even thought about it. I’m not sure why the idea would get a roll-eyes.
Ex-Mormons have a unique perspective on how much influence the LDS Church has in the lives of the faithful. I am not anti-Mormon or anti-Romney. Like I said, my reason for voting against Romney was that he seemed like a flip-flop. I don’t know that his religion would affect his politics, but if I were still an active believing Mormon and if I were a politician, I would find it very hard to separate the two.
Sorry, I don’t know what CT means.
I am not trying to prove a theory.
Pehaps I should have stated “I think,” “as far as I know,” “I’m concerned,” “I wonder,” “I believe,” and “I see a real possibility.”
May I assume that you are a Mormon? When the Prophet commands the LDS faithful to support a political movement, do you believe that he was prompted by the Holy Ghost? If you were in a position of great political power, would you publicly oppose the Prophet of God?
ETA: Or if you are not a Mormon, then perhaps you underestimate the extent of the faithful’s respect for the President of the LDS Church.
When I was a Mormon, I would not have publicly opposed the Word Of God Via His Prophet.
Very true. Romney has a history of actions that don’t agree with his LDS faith. And for that, I respect him. Or anyway I would if he would stick to his political convictions.
I voted against Kerry because he was a flip-flop. Most of the Catholics I’ve known are pretty good at thinking for themselves. Most of the Mormons I’ve known say that the Holy Ghost has told them that they should obey the Prophet.
We have had a recent POTUS who seemed to have two-way conversations with God. That’s not really a quality that I like to see in a candidate. Romney really doesn’t make a big deal about his faith. I would hate for him to have to choose between what he feels is right and what God tells him to do. But you are correct that he has a good history of thinking outside of the flock.
Oh, I got it. CT = Conspiracy Theory.
As far as I understand it, Conspiracy Theorists ignore obvious explanations in favor of explanations requiring a cover-up involving thousands of participants. That’s why they’re “Conspiracy” theories.
No, what I said was that one man may quietly consult another (not hardly a conspiracy). Or that one man’s faith may inappropriately influence his politics (also not hardly a conspiracy). And I concede that Romney’s flip-flopping seems to be more about aligning himself with the Republican Party than with the LDS Church.
Bush had us knee deep in Christian conservatives. Leaning heavily religious in your picks of judges and department heads and appointments has a very recent pedigree. Do I think Romney would be like Bush? Yep. No proof ,but I think he would put Mormons into lots of impotrant slots. I am not comfortable with him because I am not comfortable with overly religious in charge and I don’t like Mormonism. I was wary of Bush and he proved that he would push religion. I think Romney would too.
Some here would call you a bigot. But I think your concerns are legitimate. In considering a candidate, it is reasonable to examine the candidate’s process for making moral decisions. Does he go with his gut feeling? Does he just obey his party? Does he ask God, expecting a reply? Does he just obey his religion? Does he weigh the pros and cons of each side?
In office, Gov Romney has weighed the pros and cons of each side. While campaigning for POTUS, however, he talks about how he has seen the error of his ways and is now firmly on the Republican side of the fence. Which also happens to be the LDS side of the fence.
I kinda doubt that Romney would put Mormons into lots of important slots. That would be asking for trouble from his political opponents. He may fill appointments with conservative Christians, but not necessarily Mormons.
Oh, get off it. That’s not at all what you asserted.
By the way, care to explain how the LDS Democrats, espcially those in national level office–and they’re really not all that rare, either–are not on “the LDS side of the fence,” whatever that may be?
Oh, get off it. This “CT” is your straw man. I said: “I think a discreet phone call is likely.” From one man to another. One man consulting his spiritual advisor, or one man giving advice to another. In this scenario, one man is POTUS and the other is the Mouthpiece of God (according to the POTUS). And now you’re trying to paint me as a nutjob conspiracy theorist.
Do you believe Monson is the Mouthpiece of God? You didn’t answer whether you are a Mormon. If you are, and if you believe that God told Hinkley that the LDS should oppress the gays in Calif, and if you believe that God told Brigham Young that miscegenation is punishable by death, then you are in a hell of a position to be implying that I am a nutjob or a bigot.
I asserted NOTHING. I said that I had doubts. I said that I had concerns. I admitted that Romney’s record so far does not support my concerns. I stated (from an expert position) that Mormons in general would have a very difficult time resisting the Word of the Prophet. I gave an example of when I was persuaded to an immoral political viewpoint because the LDS Prophet decreed it.
I was unaware that LDS Democrats in office are “really not all that rare.” I have not studied their voting records before-and-after a pronouncement from the Church. I don’t know what Harry Reid’s stance on gay marriage was before God decreed it to his church. I don’t know what his stance is now. If he is in favor of gay rights, then kudos to him; he is making a stand against his God. If he chanded his mind, then I would worry that maybe the LDS God is a US Senator.
I don’t see this as a partisan issue. The Mormon faithful believe that God’s Will is made known via President Monson, as well as via personal revelation to the members of the LDS Church. Those are not peripheral doctrines to the religion; those are basic tenets. Anyone who doesn’t believe that God speaks through Monson is not a believing Mormon.
I don’t think that Romney would let his religion overtly affect his governing. Aside from the fact that he has no core values he seems to be a decent administrator. My problem is that some of the Mormon beliefs are just so out there that I question the judgement of someone who adheres to them. I just can’t get over the idea that The Garden of Eden was in Missouri and the Lost Tribes of Israel went to North America. If you belive that, what won’t you believe?
Sure, transubstantiation is odd, but I don’t know any Catholics who actually believe that the host is literally the body of Christ, despite the church maintaining that position. Would an educated, out-in-the-world type person like Romney really believe the fringey stuff?