Log in

No account? Create an account


Okay, let me make this clear: I don't like Mitt Romney. I don't want Mitt Romney to be president. And I myself have plenty of problems with the notion of a Mormon president.


This is from today's New York Times.

Evangelical Christians, who make up a crucial voting block in the Republican Party, consider Mormonism to be heretical, and polls have indicated a significant number of Americans are less likely to vote for a Mormon presidential candidate.


A crucial voting block of the party that runs this country are likely to withhold their support from a particular candidate because they think he is a HERETIC.


Not because they think he's a flip-flopping toady who will take whatever position is convenient to win public support. Not because of his positions, or indeed anything about his politics whatsoever. It's because they think he's a HERETIC. An APOSTATE. He's left they embrace of the true church. He's some sort of crazy cultist who has turned away from the path of the Lord. He's a motherfucking HERETIC.



Dec. 7th, 2007 03:51 pm (UTC)
I saw something on the news last night about this, and some conservative Republican woman said she'd vote for Hillary Clinton over him, and it was like she would choose the devil over the devil's spawn or something like that.

Also, apparently, if he wins, all of America will turn Mormon and the guys on the bikes with the short-sleeved shirts will be insinuating themselves into your house saying, "Let me tell you about the president's religion."
Dec. 7th, 2007 04:08 pm (UTC)
I guess "Satan or Satan's spawn" is as good a description as any of the way I feel every election day.
Dec. 7th, 2007 03:54 pm (UTC)

Oh, don't be so sure.
Dec. 7th, 2007 04:09 pm (UTC)
No, I'm not saying the guy isn't a reactionary kook -- I just think it's ironic that he's being shunned by a bunch of other reactionary kooks because he's the WRONG KIND of reactionary kook.
BLANK - anne_jumps - Dec. 7th, 2007 04:12 pm (UTC) - Expand
Dec. 7th, 2007 03:56 pm (UTC)
I have less of a problem with a Mormon President (after all, Mormonism is the most successful American home-grown religion, and has all the hallmarks of the Carrie Nation/Shelbyvillian era it sprang up in) than I do with a President who'd let his religious beliefs influence his domestic and foreign policy decisions.

But then again, notice how no one had a problem when evangelical George W. Bush claimed Christ was his favorite political philosopher (I must have missed the parable about "Let ye level the country, so a new garden may bloom") - it's only when the "creepy cult" has a believer - y'know, a heretic - running that suddenly religion in politics becomes a problem.

Edited at 2007-12-07 03:59 pm (UTC)
Dec. 7th, 2007 04:10 pm (UTC)
Right, exactly -- that's what kills me, is that the people sporting this objection are TOTALLY FINE with having a crazy evangelical in charge, as long as he wears the right hat.
BLANK - archaica - Dec. 7th, 2007 04:22 pm (UTC) - Expand
BLANK - cmdr_zoom - Dec. 8th, 2007 09:45 pm (UTC) - Expand
(Deleted comment)
Dec. 7th, 2007 04:06 pm (UTC)
Oooh, that sounds like a fun game! Let's go!

1) Above, supporting Edwards because his wife has cancer.
2) Supporting Obama because he smokes, and thus he AND his wife MAY get cancer.
3) Supporting Obama because he smokes, and he might repeal smoking bans at the peeler bars.
4) Supporting Hillary because it'll mean a president you can whack off to.
5) Supporting Hillary because it'll bring back Bill Clinton, a president you could whack off to.
6) Supporting Ron Paul because you admire the "spunk" of grassroots campaigns.
7) Supporting Ron Paul because you admire graffiti artists.
8) Supporting Ron Paul because of the backwards "Love" in "revolution"
9) Supporting Rudy Giuliani because of the "Love" he apparently felt for several women simultaneously.

Now you guys go!
BLANK - anne_jumps - Dec. 7th, 2007 04:15 pm (UTC) - Expand
BLANK - tritium - Dec. 7th, 2007 04:23 pm (UTC) - Expand
BLANK - tritium - Dec. 7th, 2007 04:30 pm (UTC) - Expand
BLANK - ludickid - Dec. 7th, 2007 04:24 pm (UTC) - Expand
BLANK - tritium - Dec. 7th, 2007 04:32 pm (UTC) - Expand
BLANK - blue_straggler - Dec. 7th, 2007 05:32 pm (UTC) - Expand
BLANK - johnnylemonhead - Dec. 7th, 2007 05:48 pm (UTC) - Expand
BLANK - johnnylemonhead - Dec. 7th, 2007 04:33 pm (UTC) - Expand
BLANK - deanarae - Dec. 7th, 2007 04:46 pm (UTC) - Expand
BLANK - johnnylemonhead - Dec. 7th, 2007 04:54 pm (UTC) - Expand
BLANK - picodulce - Dec. 7th, 2007 05:15 pm (UTC) - Expand
BLANK - picodulce - Dec. 7th, 2007 05:17 pm (UTC) - Expand
(Deleted comment)
BLANK - picodulce - Dec. 7th, 2007 05:46 pm (UTC) - Expand
Dec. 7th, 2007 04:01 pm (UTC)
I love the people who hate Mitt Romney b/c they also hate Catholics and I LOVE feeling victimized.
Dec. 7th, 2007 04:10 pm (UTC)
Try being an atheist one of these days. HA HA, no, I'm kidding.
Dec. 7th, 2007 04:02 pm (UTC)

Hmm ... a Michaelmas in the stocks might cure you of your Continental philosophizing.
Dec. 7th, 2007 04:11 pm (UTC)
Great. Now I have to flee to Switzerland.
BLANK - thebitterguy - Dec. 7th, 2007 04:23 pm (UTC) - Expand
Dec. 7th, 2007 04:02 pm (UTC)
To be fair, the article attributes the term to the Evangelical Right, it's not like Falwell came out and said as much.

That it's the essence of the complaint, sure, no argument there. Still, I'd neither fume nor froth until I heard'em say it themselves.
Dec. 7th, 2007 04:11 pm (UTC)
It would be awesome if someone showed up at a Romney rally ringing a bell and hollering "UNCLEAN! UNCLEAN!"
Dec. 7th, 2007 04:05 pm (UTC)
- people vote for candidates for all sorts of ridiculous reasons, and the idea that they vote for them based on "policy" "political leadership" or "intelligence" seems like kind of a myth, even though people seem to know less than our predecessors.

- the evangelical christians have a right to not vote for a guy because he doesn't espouse their values. just as i have a right not vote for someone because he's a goddamned moron-- that is not part of my value system.

- as long as the evangelicals don't con other people into supporting their candidate (mike huckabee? yaaaaaaawwwwwwwnnnnnn. and they hopefully won't get behind giuliani, who people believe is a good leader, just a wee bit flawed, it seems from polls and anecdotes), they can continue to fracture the republican party with their agenda. i'm all for that. they should get Huckabee on the third party ballot, that would be the tits.

- Romney is milquetoast. i can't see him getting the nomination anyway. and if he does, i see him getting his ass served by a dem.
Dec. 7th, 2007 04:13 pm (UTC)
the evangelical christians have a right to not vote for a guy because he doesn't espouse their values.

Yeah, but what values of theirs doesn't he espouse? It seems like they're in total lockstep with the guy, except insofar as he's part of a group of apostates. Is it the special underwear? What?

I'm not saying they don't have the RIGHT to do this. I'm just saying it's idiotic.
BLANK - picodulce - Dec. 7th, 2007 04:19 pm (UTC) - Expand
Dec. 7th, 2007 04:13 pm (UTC)

Maybe not, but that's what the Dominionists are voting for.
Dec. 7th, 2007 04:14 pm (UTC)
They should just vote for a Pope, then.
BLANK - harmfulguy - Dec. 7th, 2007 04:50 pm (UTC) - Expand
BLANK - reticent_lass - Dec. 7th, 2007 11:30 pm (UTC) - Expand
Dec. 7th, 2007 04:23 pm (UTC)
Given how much crap Kennedy got for being Catholic, and how much of an issue that was, I was surprised that Romney would get any support at all. I was doubly surprised to find out that a lot of Christians, who are openly opposed to Mormonism, counted themselves as supporters of Romney. At least those people are supporting him for reasons of policy or values though, instead of simply toeing the party line.

Frankly, I'm pretty fed up with how much religion plays a part in our government, a government that's supposed to have clear separation between itself and religion. I mean, it's in the constitution! The founding fathers really couldn't have been more clear than they were.

It absolutely irritates the living shit out of me when people defend their view point that "the founding fathers were Christian. Our country was founded on Christian ideals. PILGRIMS!"
Dec. 7th, 2007 10:57 pm (UTC)

Frankly, I'm pretty fed up with how much religion plays a part in our government...

hear, hear!
Dec. 7th, 2007 04:45 pm (UTC)
All the coverage his "WAIT! Religious people! I'm just like you! See?" speech has been getting has been making me sick and violently ill and more anti-religion than I've ever been (or at least since I was a freshman in high school). KEEP religion out of my goddamned government. And actually, there's no way Mitt Romney can be a Mormon and claim he won't take direction from his leaders. To question or disobey Mormon leaders is grounds for excommunication, so he's a doubleplusliar.

stoney321 has some badass entries about all the WTF MORMONism, as an ex-mormon with some pretty hefty ties. Check out her entries tagged with "mormon."

Dec. 7th, 2007 05:03 pm (UTC)
But which one had got the cutest pets and most wayward daughters? (Or vice versa, if you're that way inclined.)
Dec. 7th, 2007 07:41 pm (UTC)
So . . . Mitt Romney weighs the same as a duck?

By the way, are you familiar with one E. Y. "Yip" Harburg, writer of superb song lyrics (Lydia the Tattooed Lady, Somewhere Over the Rainbow, and about 600 or so more) and avowed agnostic? He wrote this:


Poems are made by fools like me,
But only God can make a tree;

And only God who makes the tree
Also makes the fools like me.

But only fools like me, you see,
Can make a God, who makes a tree.

Dec. 7th, 2007 08:34 pm (UTC)
Here's what's hilarious to me about Romney and the evangelicals: they're rejecting the most moral guy in the bunch. They love George Bush, the recovering alcoholic coke head who smiles when he talks about bombing people, but that's okay because he's the right kind of Christian. They'll stomach Giuliani even though he's been married more times than I can count, is estranged from his kids and likes to dress up as a woman. But still, he's the right kind of Christian. They even like Newt Gingrich, who was cheating on his wife while trying to impeach Clinton for, you know, cheating on his wife.

And yet, the guy who married his high school sweetheart, who lives the all-American life, who frickin' rescued people from drowning, well, he's just evil because he believes in the wrong kind of crazy.

I don't support Romney but that's because I disagree with his policies. But I do think, aside from the political cravenness he's been wearing like a glittery dress these past few months, he's an upstanding individual. I've met him. I've met his wife. I've met friends of his. He's a good, decent guy. The kind of guy you wouldn't mind having as a neigbor. But nope, those high-minded seekers of morality are going to pooh-pooh him for having a weirder religion than theirs.

Whatever. The electorate is crazy anyway. I don't know why this should surprise me.
Dec. 8th, 2007 09:56 pm (UTC)
Best (serious) comment on the thread, IMO. Thanks for posting.
Dec. 7th, 2007 11:06 pm (UTC)
saw this metaquoted
i just wanted to say: THANK YOU!!!

i was starting to worry that i was the only one thinking that all of this religious judgement of politicians was whack.


flavored with age
Gun-totin', Chronic-smokin' Hearse Initiator
Ludic Log


Leonard Pierce is a freelance writer wandering around Texas with no sleep or sense of direction. If you give him money he will write something for you. If you are nice to him he may come to your house and get drunk.

Latest Month

December 2016


Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Tiffany Chow