This time it’s a Perry supporter who is calling Mormonism a cult, and saying its adherents are not Christians.
WASHINGTON — A Texas pastor introduced Rick Perry at a major conference of Christian conservatives here on Friday as “a genuine follower of Jesus Christ” and then walked outside and attacked Mitt Romney’s religion, calling the Mormon Church a cult and stating that Mr. Romney “is not a Christian.”
The comments by the pastor, Robert Jeffress of Dallas, injected a potentially explosive issue into the presidential campaign: the belief held by many evangelicals that Mormons are not Christians.
And it raised immediate suspicions that the attack might have been a way for surrogates or supporters of Mr. Perry, the Texas governor, who has stumbled in recent weeks, to gain ground by raising religious concerns about Mr. Romney. Mr. Jeffress similarly attacked Mr. Romney and his faith during the 2008 campaign.
The Perry campaign sought to put some distance between Mr. Perry and Mr. Jeffress, stating that the governor “does not believe Mormonism is a cult” and that Mr. Jeffress was chosen to speak by the organizers of the event, the Values Voter Summit, which was put on by the Family Research Council, the American Family Association and other evangelical Christian groups.
But in a statement, the Family Research Council president,** Tony Perkins, said the Perry campaign had approved using Mr. Jeffress to introduce the governor**. “Pastor Jeffress was suggested to us as a possible introductory speaker because he serves as pastor of one of the largest churches in Texas,” Mr. Perkins said. “We sent the request to the Perry campaign which then signed off on the request.”
Its always curious to me when religious folk use the term cult to denigrate a religion, as if they all weren’t cults at one point.
Also curious that people would conclude that Christians have an obligation to elect Christians, or Mormons Mormons, etc. Really only makes sense if your religion demands theocracy, which I’m pretty sure Christianity doesn’t.
Its always curious to me when religious folk use the term cult to denigrate a religion, as if they all weren’t cults at one point.
Also curious that people would conclude that Christians have an obligation to elect Christians, or Mormons Mormons, etc. Really only makes sense if your religion demands theocracy, which I’m pretty sure Christianity doesn’t.
This pastor went on to say that he’d vote for a non-Christian (like Romney) who lives like a Christian over a Christian (like Obama) who, according to him, doesn’t live like a Christian.
How this guy gets any tax breaks for his “church” is beyond me.
So: Christian-living Christian > Christian-living non-Christian > Non-Christian living Christian?
I came across another article covering this guy’s comments. One reported him saying something to the effect of, “would you rather have a good, moral person, or a true Christian?”
How this guy gets any tax breaks for his “church” is beyond me.
How religious organizations get tax breaks or qualify as “Non Profit” is beyond me…Then again I’m not sure I believe in “Not for profit” status for anyone. If you’re a “Business charity” you should always show that you “Gave everything away” or spent it on expenses every year and wouldn’t pay any tax anyway. If your a “Not for profit” that has huge cash reserves** **I’m not sure why those cash reserves should be treated any differently than the cash reserves/profits of Intel or Microsoft.
I find it absolutely astonishing in this day and age that:
a) the ability to be elected is at all in part predicated upon being religious and
b) even assuming that (A) is the case, that which particular religion you are is the biggest issue that the country is facing at present
It absolutely beggars belief, that a politician in the “developed” (and I use that term very loosely) world has to declare their religion, pretend that they are religious and depending on which side of the fence they fall on a social issue such as abortion may not be electable at all.
Tell it to the pastor. I’m guessing he would prefer a “good, moral” self-identified “non-religious” candidate to a “good, moral” self-identified Atheist.
Christian-living Christian > Christian-living non-Christian > Non-Christian living Christian > non-Christian-living non-Christian > “good, moral” Atheist
“It absolutely beggars belief, that a politician in the “developed” (and I use that term very loosely) world has to declare their religion, pretend that they are religious and depending on which side of the fence they fall on a social issue such as abortion may not be electable at all.”
Why does this surprise you? Look at how much time politicians have to spend declaring their affiliation with a party platform set of beliefs, pretending they are conservative/liberal, and depending on which side of various partisan issues may not be electable at all.
Interesting commentary by Romney on those remarks. Apparently he doesn’t take kindly to critique of his religion (or any religion, presumably):
Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney told social conservatives Saturday “poisonous language has never advanced our cause” as both he and rival Rick Perry grappled with a flare-up over religion.
but nonsensical broadsides at non-belief is fair game.
"Freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom. Freedom opens the windows of the soul so that man can discover his most profound beliefs and commune with God. Freedom and religion endure together, or perish alone.
I can only imagine his response had the pastor said “Freedom requires traditional Christianity just as traditional Christianity requires freedom. Endure together, or perish alone…”
And so it begins. The Mormon thing is going to be a huge monkey on Romeny’s back and he is going to have to really pull out something special to get passed it. The simple fact is that a lot of people do not like the LDS church and even though there are laws that allow someone to hold office not matte what their religious beliefs, an incredibly important thing in my opinion, the public isn’t held to those laws. The nation is not ready for a Mormon president.
I am going to do something I hate but I feel the need to do it. Romeny is my man going into the elections. My vote will not make a difference but I grew up with this kind of hate so my ex-Mormon ass is going to support the Smithite.
Tell it to the pastor. I’m guessing he would prefer a “good, moral” self-identified “non-religious” candidate to a “good, moral” self-identified Atheist.
Christian-living Christian > Christian-living non-Christian > Non-Christian living Christian > non-Christian-living non-Christian > “good, moral” Atheist
Where do non-living Christians fit into the mix? You know, if you have to decide between an atheist and a zombie.