RE: Billy Graham & Mitt Romney 2012

Tychicus
Posts: 76
Joined: Sat May 29, 2010 2:55 am

Re: RE: Billy Graham & Mitt Romney 2012

Post by Tychicus » Fri Oct 26, 2012 6:36 pm

If religion doesn't matter, then a Muslim that wants Sharia (sp) law should be just dandy as our President.
(I'm not referring to Obama. I don't know if he is Muslim or not, he just seems to like them.) He refers to the "Holy" Koran
and last time I looked, my Bible says "The Holy Bible" on the cover, but he does not use that term.

If Billy Graham had endorsed Obama, almost everything Graham ever preached would have to be called into question.
Seems like you are saying that Romney is a better Christian than Obama.

Lots of Christians have expressed that view. In fact it is often expressed more forcefully (not saying you go to this extreme, but many do). The message is essentially that Obama is the Devil, or at least someone out to ruin this country, and that Romney is God's man to save "Christian America". That is why it is so important to to understand that Romney is at least "almost Christian" and why Billy Graham's "endorsement" is so important.

In other words, the difference between Mormon Romney and a disciple of Jesus is miniscule compared to the difference between Romney and Obama. If you believe this message, it will affect your theology.
Last edited by Tychicus on Sat Oct 27, 2012 6:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Singalphile
Posts: 903
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 12:46 pm

Re: RE: Billy Graham & Mitt Romney 2012

Post by Singalphile » Sat Oct 27, 2012 12:24 pm

I wrote:
A politician's professed religion is not relevant to me. You just determine what you think they will do in office (not what they will believe) and then pick the one that more closely matches what you will do.
Matthis wrote:
If religion doesn't matter, then a Muslim that wants Sharia (sp) law should be just dandy as our President.
I think it matters what the person will do whether he really wants to or not. I don't see how it matters why he will do it. Trying to enact Sharia law would be an example of what a president might do. In certain countries, a non-Muslim politician or person might also vote for some kind of Sharia law just b/c it's the popular stance.

I do think that "religion" matters, and it would be great to have politicians who trust in God and pray and study the Bible and try to obey Jesus and live by the Spirit every minute. Same goes for plumbers, salesmen, and software developers. I heard the late Jerry Falwell speak once about political elections back in... maybe '99-'00. His statement, as I recall it, was that we're not electing priests or spiritual leaders or pastors; a politician's job is essentially a secular job.
... that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. John 5:23

User avatar
kaufmannphillips
Posts: 585
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 8:00 pm

Re: RE: Billy Graham & Mitt Romney 2012

Post by kaufmannphillips » Sun Oct 28, 2012 2:31 am

steve wrote:
As for Romney making Mormons more likable to the general public...I'm not sure he is the one who is most likely to charm the nation. Most people in pols see to find him stiff and not particularly personally appealing. I don't think he is as conservative as most evangelicals hope he will be, and it may be that his only real appeal is the Anyone-But-Obama factor.
I don't imagine a Romney White House would recreate a '60s "Camelot." But if the political polarization and contentiousness of recent years were to continue, some folks on one side of the fray might regard a President Romney as a sainted warrior. Consider the near-apotheosis of GWBush by some persons during his presidency.
MMathis wrote:
If Billy Graham had endorsed Obama, almost everything Graham ever preached would have to be called into question.
In the eyes of some, support for Romney will call Graham's preaching into question. So, should Graham wade into this at all? If his eminent calling is to be an evangelist - reaching lost souls with the gospel - should he risk alienating a sizable part of his potential audience in this way?
Singalphile wrote:
I do think that "religion" matters, and it would be great to have politicians who trust in God and pray and study the Bible and try to obey Jesus and live by the Spirit every minute. Same goes for plumbers, salesmen, and software developers. I heard the late Jerry Falwell speak once about political elections back in... maybe '99-'00. His statement, as I recall it, was that we're not electing priests or spiritual leaders or pastors; a politician's job is essentially a secular job.
Whether we like it or not, we are electing spiritual leaders. The spirit that an elected official brings to their leadership will naturally seep into society - be it a spirit of civility, a spirit of integrity, a spirit of industriousness, etc. There is no such thing as leadership without spiritual reverberation.

Also, more discussion of the Graham story here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/2 ... 04023.html

Singalphile
Posts: 903
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 12:46 pm

Re: RE: Billy Graham & Mitt Romney 2012

Post by Singalphile » Sun Oct 28, 2012 12:50 pm

k-s wrote:
Whether we like it or not, we are electing spiritual leaders. The spirit that an elected official brings to their leadership will naturally seep into society - be it a spirit of civility, a spirit of integrity, a spirit of industriousness, etc. There is no such thing as leadership without spiritual reverberation.
I meant "spiritual" in the more specific sense of "religious", not in the sense that you seem to mean ("a spirit of industriousness", etc.). Anyway, some person who I've never met, who I only see when the cameras are on, who doesn't know I exist, and who gives some speeches and signs his name on some documents every so often is not actually my leader in any sense.
k-s wrote:
So, should Graham wade into this at all? If his eminent calling is to be an evangelist - reaching lost souls with the gospel - should he risk alienating a sizable part of his potential audience in this way?
No and no, IMO. More about that in the The 2012 Election thread probably. Of course, a statement opposing abortion and marriage redefinition from a Christian should hardly surprise anyone.
k-s wrote:
Consider the near-apotheosis of GWBush by some persons during his presidency.
I missed that, despite being in the seemingly prime location for it. I remember Bush=idiot/monkey/hitler/murderer/worst-president-ever from the left and Bush=moderate republican/lesser-of-two-evils from the right. I remember praying for Bush... and Clinton, TX Gov. Perry, and Obama, too.

As I mentioned earlier, I think political liberals are more likely to think of politicians as any kind of societal leaders or "standard-bearers" or even to "identify" with them. I think you're assuming it's the same on the right, but I don't think so, and almost every one I know is politically conservative. I think conservatives think of governors/presidents/representatives (i.e., the state) as guys and gals who work for us who we just want to do a few well-defined things and otherwise stay out of mind and sight and the way.

Some strange near-apotheosis (Note to self: Nice word. Must remember.) can be found (here, here, here, and the like), but thankfully it's not widespread, imo, and I think that that kind of activity and thinking exists to a lesser extent and degree among political conservatives simply b/c a person's fundamental view of the government's role and importance is often what makes him a political lefty or righty, which I think supports my point that I don't think it matters very much to the large majority of republicans or even "independent" voters what Romney's professed religion is, despite the fact that those on the right in the U.S. are probably a bit more likely to say that they're religious. Here's a kind of interesting Gallup poll/article about this stuff.

I'm not sure what you think about when you think of your prime minister, governor, representative, or president. If it's someone you generally agree with, do you think of his religion whenever you hear about him, and do you find yourself somehow more sympathetic to that religion?
... that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. John 5:23

User avatar
kaufmannphillips
Posts: 585
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 8:00 pm

Re: RE: Billy Graham & Mitt Romney 2012

Post by kaufmannphillips » Sun Nov 11, 2012 3:25 pm

Singalphile wrote:
I meant "spiritual" in the more specific sense of "religious", not in the sense that you seem to mean ("a spirit of industriousness", etc.). Anyway, some person who I've never met, who I only see when the cameras are on, who doesn't know I exist, and who gives some speeches and signs his name on some documents every so often is not actually my leader in any sense.
Oh, you'd be surprised. Humans are social animals. Influence seeps through society.
kaufmannphillips wrote:
Consider the near-apotheosis of GWBush by some persons during his presidency.

Singalphile wrote:
I missed that, despite being in the seemingly prime location for it. I remember Bush=idiot/monkey/hitler/murderer/worst-president-ever from the left and Bush=moderate republican/lesser-of-two-evils from the right.
So you missed that. I listened to right-wing-radio quite often during the Bush era (three hours a day is all Sean Hannity asks), and they get callers from all over.

I am, perhaps, uncommonly sensitive to vocal tone when people speak. The sentiment that infused some speakers' voices when they spoke Bush's name went way beyond "RINO I settle for." I also am sensitive to the way people speak the word "money." Such dark love.

But I find both Bush Derangement Syndrome and Obama Derangement Syndrome to be objectionable and unhelpful.
Singalphile wrote:
Some strange near-apotheosis ... can be found (here, here, here, and the like)...
I will stipulate that people of various political inclinations may love their political icons inordinately.
Singalphile wrote:
As I mentioned earlier, I think political liberals are more likely to think of politicians as any kind of societal leaders or "standard-bearers" or even to "identify" with them. I think you're assuming it's the same on the right, but I don't think so, and almost every one I know is politically conservative. I think conservatives think of governors/presidents/representatives (i.e., the state) as guys and gals who work for us who we just want to do a few well-defined things and otherwise stay out of mind and sight and the way.
Two words: Ron Paul.
Singalphile wrote:
Some strange near-apotheosis ... thankfully it's not widespread, imo, and I think that that kind of activity and thinking exists to a lesser extent and degree among political conservatives simply b/c a person's fundamental view of the government's role and importance is often what makes him a political lefty or righty...
One can find a great deal of skepticism toward government and politicians on the American left, too. For many persons on the right and the left, it's a topical thing - when and where one distrusts government activity. Most people are not all out for minimal government or for maximal government.
Singalphile wrote:
I don't think it matters very much to the large majority of republicans or even "independent" voters what Romney's professed religion is, despite the fact that those on the right in the U.S. are probably a bit more likely to say that they're religious. Here's a kind of interesting Gallup poll/article about this stuff.
It may play little to no role in their decisions as voters - unless, perhaps, they had two near-carbon-copy candidates, only one of whom was Mormon.

That doesn't mean that there would be no reverberations from having a high-profile Mormon ally (though the point is less relevant now, in the wake of the election). "The enemy of my enemy is my friend," as the saying goes, and friendships frequently change their participants. A person who has never had a gay friend may view and engage the issue of homosexuality quite differently than a person who has several gay friends, for example.
Singalphile wrote:
I'm not sure what you think about when you think of your prime minister, governor, representative, or president. If it's someone you generally agree with, do you think of his religion whenever you hear about him, and do you find yourself somehow more sympathetic to that religion?
If I know the individual's religion (very often I don't), and if I am aware of how that religion has contributed to his/her approach to the issues we agree about, then that may redound to the positive when it comes to my opinion of the religion.

Singalphile
Posts: 903
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 12:46 pm

Re: RE: Billy Graham & Mitt Romney 2012

Post by Singalphile » Sun Nov 11, 2012 4:33 pm

I see your points, k-s I have no major objections. Thank you for the responses. It's interesting to read a different perspective.
... that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. John 5:23

User avatar
kaufmannphillips
Posts: 585
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 8:00 pm

Re: RE: Billy Graham & Mitt Romney 2012

Post by kaufmannphillips » Sun Nov 18, 2012 8:21 pm

According to a recent article on Franklin Graham:

:arrow: The political newspaper ads were Franklin's idea, but Billy signed off on them. Both Grahams were involved in the process of drafting the ads.

:arrow: Franklin is interested in speaking to moral issues, but not in speaking to economic issues like taxing rich or poor people more.

:arrow: Franklin was not responsible for removing the website reference to Mormonism as a cult, but he agrees with the removal, and the reference will not return to the website.

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/1 ... lief-blog/

Post Reply

Return to “Latter Day Saints (aka Mormonism)”