Romney’s Mormon Problem

October 17, 2011

Mitt Romney and the weird and sinister beliefs of Mormonism.
By Christopher Hitchens

I have no clear idea whether Pastor Robert Jeffress is correct in referring to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, more colloquially known as the Mormons, as “a cult.” There do seem to be one or two points of similarity. The Mormons have a supreme leader, known as the prophet or the president, whose word is allegedly supreme.


Read More: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/fighting_words/2011/10/is_mormonism_a_cult_who_cares_it_s_their_weird_and_sinister_beli.html

Posted by Tom at 18:44

Labels: , , , , , ,

5 comments:

Anonymous said...
October 17, 2011 at 9:11 PM  

Aren't all religions cults, to lesser or greater degrees? The Catholic Christian faith certainly resembles a cult of Mary. Look at the unquestioning faith that religious followers have and their blindness (and sometimes violent reaction) to reason that threatens that faith. If these religions had been started in modern times, they could reasonably be viewed as cults.

 
Anonymous said...
October 18, 2011 at 1:08 AM  

Would it be possible for The Rapture to include Mormons, and occur, like, tomorrow? Just think of the beneficial effects on global warming of all those missing carbon footprints!

 
civil libertarian said...
October 18, 2011 at 8:15 PM  

@5ecular4umanist:
You make only good points as far as I'm concerned; provided that the following caveat is observed:



I would have to say that there is a bit of a hierarchy with relationship to the sanity or lack thereof in this group versus that group and so on. I would have to agree with you, that at this point in our history the catholic church is a much greater threat to human freedom than mormonism. I don't think hitchens would contend otherwise. He's already shed light on the religious insanity of other candidates (Bachman's schizmatic Lutheran beliefs, Perry's harsh calvinism, Obama and the religious "Wright"). In a sense it was Romney's turn. It's especially important to clear the air, so to speak, because Romney is either touting himself, or allowing himself to be touted, as the so-called "sensible man". Check the facts cited in the article. This is Romney's past. Signs point to him being not a "My wife grew up in Utah" fringe mormon, but a XXX hardcore gonzo mormon.

The sad question is, when we consider how fundamental Romney's beliefs are, why is it that natural enemies of the religious right (far-lefties and so on) then take the view that the man is a victim of religious persecution? Because he's from a rival fundamentalism? This "enemy of my enemy is my friend" canard might as well be a "gauchiste epitaph" to paraphrase from the great author Samuel Delaney. As with the right, they fail to see the real enemy to liberty (Islam) because they are too busy chasing shadows.
Over here someone on the right criticizes war spending and the national security state because it goes against the constitution. These same people would have us refrain from defending the constitution abroad. Even to defend our liberties against religious tyrants in our own country, would be to these so called libertarians, a violation of the constitution, rather than one of its imperatives.

Meanwhile, on the left, somebody is clamoring about the corporate this and the imperial that. They join together with the paleo right on the ridiculousness of the American security debacle (apparently as libertarians) only to deride any such charge that they themselves may be ridiculous. Apparently, we are compelled to defend the enemies of liberty, not to attack them. Whether they be muslims or mormons; whether their supporters be right or left. It does not matter for the two sworn enemies of right and left will band together in the name of "non-intervention". They'd like to think that this disgusting conventional wisdom fits in with some sort of traditional parochial wisdom. Well, it certainly runs counter to the revolutionary spirit of '76. As for avoiding war, when our founders attempted to do so, it usually had more disastrous consequences for the nation not less. The lesson of both the Adams and Jefferson presidencies is that avoiding war can have more dire implications than fighting one. This course may have just as many undesirable implications for our liberties (Adams), or for that matter to our stability and prosperity (Jefferson), than the wrongs visited upon us from taking any other course which could be rendered.

How many times have we seen the left ally itself with those who stand against its principles in the name of "they're not as bad as..." YES! YES! YES! THEY ARE AS BAD AS! IN FACT THE MUSLIMS ARE FAR WORSE AS MOST REALIZE! I say that not as a leftist (because I'm not a leftist) but as an American and an enemy of broken thinking.

I realize that was a hell of a caveat with views that many don't agree with. Still, every point you made was nonetheless salient and thoughtful insofar as I could see. The fact remains that those who preach ignorance and bigotry cannot claim the insult of "religious prejudice". In conclusion, a thorough analysis of Romney's faith is long overdue.

 
Anonymous said...
October 20, 2011 at 4:27 AM  

civil lib.... your sentence construction is kinda wack. i think you lose track of where you are inside a sentence too often for me to even follow you. can you try to say things slightly better?

 
Anonymous said...
October 26, 2011 at 5:42 PM  

[Any Romney fans listening? You will love this bit which sailed into view on the web. Trevor]


LDS a "cult"? What about the "rapture"?

by Bruce Rockwell

Mitt Romney, a Mormon, is "not a Christian" and Mormonism is a "cult," according to Rev. Robert Jeffress, pastor of the Dallas (TX) First Baptist Church.
His "cult" remark is based on his belief that the Latter-day Saints church (which didn't exist before 1830) is outside "the mainstream of Christianity."
But Jeffress hypocritically promotes the popular evangelical "rapture" (theologically the "any-moment pretribulation rapture") which is outside mainstream Christianity (Google "Pretrib Rapture Politics") and which also didn't exist before 1830 (Google "Pretrib Rapture Diehards" and "Pretrib Rapture Dishonesty")!
And there are 50 million American rapture cultists (some of whom turn Wikipedia into "Wicked-pedia" by constantly distorting the real facts about the rapture's bizarre, 181-year-old history) compared with only 14 million LDS members.
The most accurate documentation on pretrib rapture history that I have found is in a nonfiction book titled "The Rapture Plot" which is carried by leading online bookstores. I know also that the same 300-page work can also be borrowed through inter-library loan at any library.
Latter-day Saints believe in fairness, which is why I feel called to share this message.

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
 
 
 

Christopher reads from Hitch-22: A Memoir