“I don’t know how many people are converted to a particular religion at the mere sight of a cross. We’re dealing with kids here, not vampires, and so long as they aren’t being handed religious literature, or being preached to about biblical texts, I really don’t see the big deal.”

–Sean Braisted regarding the use of church facilities for public school graduation ceremonies.   Read more of his thoughts on the matter here.

Well, as long as they’re from Mars or Alpha Centauri, that is.

VATICAN CITY (AP) - “The Vatican’s chief astronomer says that believing in aliens does not contradict faith in God.

The Rev. Jose Gabriel Funes, the Jesuit director of the Vatican Observatory, says that the vastness of the universe means it is possible there could be other forms of life outside Earth, even intelligent ones.

In an interview published Tuesday by Vatican newspaper L’Osservatore Romano, Funes says that such a notion “doesn’t contradict our faith” because aliens would still be God’s creatures.

The interview was headlined “The extraterrestrial is my brother.” Funes said that ruling out the existence of aliens would be like “putting limits” on God’s creative freedom.”

Bigfoot is apparently going to be OK, too, by these standards.

H/T Sharon Cobb

In a thread about homeschooling (here) that eventually narrowed to a discussion of Evolution, Tman linked to a fascinating essay by famed atheist and brilliant thinker–the late Stephen Jay Gould.

I am not well-versed in science or scientific terms, but I do like me some logic. And I’ll admit that I only occasionally bury my head in this stuff . . . and why? Because every time I am lured to the siren song of Evolutionists I get close to the rocks, examine their claims in depth and realize “hey, they’re just jerking me around” and/or “there’s a man behind the curtain!” Here are a couple of the things that are incredibly lame arguments (though arguments compelling–I suppose, to someone intent on wiping out “pseudo-science” used to oppress mankind or advance racism and/or sexism . . .)

One whopper referenced by Tman and laid out there by Gould early in his piece:

Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world’s data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts do not go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein’s theory of gravitation replaced Newton’s, but apples did not suspend themselves in mid-air, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from apelike ancestors whether they did so by Darwin’s proposed mechanism or by some other, yet to be discovered.

Gould then proceeds to give us all the arguments of why we should draw his inferences to arrive at the “fact” of macro-evolution. Sorry if some of us aren’t as convinced that apes begat humans as we are that apples fall “down.”

A quotation included in Tman’s last comment at the other thread states:

“IC [or Irreducible Complexity, a key principle of Intelligent Design] is supposed to be important because it cannot evolve. But it can evolve, in the same ways that anything else does. Not one of the impressively complex biochemical systems said to be IC by IC/ID proponents has been shown to be in fact IC and several are known not to be. The known cases of IC are simpler and their evolution is understood.”

The problem with this argument is that it acts as if the believability of all random occurrences are created equal. Certain examples of evolution have been observed and certain are highly likely, but that doesn’t mean that all or any purported example of evolution is reasonable.

Lastly, Tman’s quote says,

Although the subject is religiously motivated, proponents have focused on bacterial flagella as the last hope for a highly complex IC [Irreducible Complexity] system. This has the unintended consequence of making The Designer (aka God) responsible for serious diseases.

. . . .

This makes ID rather questionable as a public school lesson. Gap theology is bad enough at best, and always has the problem that the gaps keep getting smaller. This new version of it is especially bad. Darwin did theologians a favor by freeing them from this sort of thing.

Well, maybe in the eyes of that writer, but any student of the Bible knows that it teaches that God is culpable–based on His omniscience and omnipotence, for disease.

~Mark Twain

I got an e-mail about the other day from the PR person for a film that has been making the rounds of public television stations. Here are the details:

The POWER of FORGIVENESS will be shown on Nashville’s WNPT-8 on Friday, March 28 at 8:00 p.m. The film is released nationally on Public Television through American Public Television (APT) and is a production of Journey Films. Best Documentary 2007, Sun Valley Film Festival

The one-hour film is a collection of seven short stories showing the limits, difficulties, healing qualities and unforeseen effects an act of forgiveness can have in people’s lives. It includes stories on The Amish, Ground Zero, Northern Ireland, and Nobel Laureate Elie Wiesel, plus reflections from renowned Buddhist teacher Thich Nhat Hanh, and best-selling authors Thomas Moore (Care of the Soul) and Marianne Williamson (The Gift of Change).

Other highlights:
- A celebrated forgiveness expert has his theories put to the test after his mother’s brutal slaying
- Latest clinical research shows a link between forgiveness and lower blood pressure, other health benefits
- Equally revealing stories of people who cannot forgive or find relief from anger, grief and resentment

I’ve included more information from the e-mail after the jump…
Read the rest of this entry »

Last night’s Nightline on ABC had a lead story about “Biblically correct tours” of science museums (read or watch the video). In particular, the Denver Museum of Nature & Science. The tours are designed primarily for homeschooled children’s field trips–the homeschoolers whose curriculum focuses on education that is Bible-friendly.

In all my years in the Methodist church, I really didn’t learn a whole lot about the Bible as a text. I never studied it (this will keep me from ever being a contestant on Jeopardy!, I believe). My remembrance is a focus on the parables and teachings of Jesus which were meant to make us think and all be better people. So it was quite a surprise to me when, as an adult, I discovered people who felt that all people on Earth who were not “saved” would go to hell. And that the Earth really was created in six days. And that “science” was really “science fiction.” And watching this story on Nightline surprised me even more. There was no death before Adam and Eve? And that Adam and Eve walked the Earth with the dinosaurs? I guess they have, at least accepted the fact that there were dinosaurs, which could be a sign of progress.  

Now don’t get me wrong–I believe in God. But I was kinda thinking that most people believed that God sort of planted the seeds of creation and let it grow–pruning and fertilizing and mulching at times (if you will), but not just within the last 6,000-10,000 years. But, frankly, I’ve always decided to keep my religious beliefs and my scientific knowledge separate. I’ve never really had any problem with any of the conflicts. But wouldn’t you know that in this great country of ours, there are people out to make a buck to try to synthesize the two.

Carter asked the children, “Is evolution a religion?” and they replied “Yes.”

“Yes it’s a religious belief,” Carter said. “It’s a philosophy.”
…
Out on the museum floor, Jack and Carter stopped the group in front of a window display that contains samples of sandstone that have ripples created by water and fossils of ancient life. Bill Jack asked his group, “How do they date the fossil? By the layer in which they find it. They date the layer by the fossil and the fossil by the layer,” he said. “That’s circular reasoning.”

In the next moment he stepped past and turned his back to a display on radiometric dating, the method by which scientists determine the age of rocks through the rate of decay of their natural radioactivity.

When later asked why he skipped the display, Jack said simply, “We can’t cover everything.”

What do you think?

It wouldn’t bother me if you didn’t claim the cross of Christ even as you do these things. But you do.

Please, I’m begging you. This is your opportunity to be better. To do better. To love even the Muslims–who are indeed loved by Christ. Please stop squandering the power of the Cross on your earthy glory.

More at Just Another Pretty Farce…

Glen Dean has critiqued “populism” in a post at TenneseeFree.com (”Populism threatens liberty in a republic”). One passage that stood out to me was this one:

Another thing that will help this nation and preserve liberty is a spiritual awakening. I am not talking about religion, but spiritual growth. The more people become generally happy and joyous, and free of anger and resentment, replacing those emotions with love and tolerance, the less likely they are to be stirred up by the negative message of populism.

This was sort of an aside about the issue of “populism,” but it reminded me of an article I read recently (sorry, subscription required for entire article). The article, entitled “New Neighbors” was going to be the anchor to a post challenging Religious Conservatives on how they view John McCain on immigration (stay tuned for that one). Nevertheless, it emphasized for me the importance of appealing to reason and the “better angels of our nature,” if you will. (I’m picturing Abe Lincoln–who made that phrase famous, with the “better angel” on one shoulder and the, uh, “worse-r angel” on the other shoulder).

Anyway, I think we need to hold politicians to account for their appeals. I know, I know; some of you (”William”?) are going to accuse me of not holding the criminals (aka “Bush administration appointees,” all of them) to account these past few years,* but I’m talking about fundamental stuff–the kind of stuff we get in fundraising mail pieces and read on partisan websites or hear on the radio. All Americans benefit if we accept that accountability begins at home. Let’s expect more from our leaders. Yes we can.

*aside: Jonah Goldberg had an interesting insight about Dubya’s purported fear mongering after 9/11 by noting that he prominently urged Americans to “go shopping.” (also here).

Two seeming examples of the divide on acceptable campaign rhetoric: David Oatney and Brendan Loy have a different perspective on McCain’s “B. Hussein Obama” opening act.

Update: Mack at Coyote Chronicles weighs in (though I think he’s dreaming in his assertions about generational appeal or the general decline in popularity of Talk Radio–not to mention his characterization of it).

Kat Coble and AuntB and Elizabeth at “Pith in the Wind” and Gavin (and others I’m sure–please let me know in the comments) are posting about the recent Nashville Scene report that the Southern Baptist Convention (”SBC”) seems to be punting rather than deal with the issue of sex abusers within the SBC.

This is a tough subject. I have ZERO sympathy for sex abusers. And as far as criminal justice is concerned, you likely haven’t seen a less sympathetic person than me. (Some of you are nodding your heads). On the other hand, I can sympathize with the SBC in this context. The SBC isn’t like the United Methodist Church or the Catholic church (or any other large denomination, frankly) so comparing what other denominations can do or have doesn’t seem fair. The reality is that the SBC could be the biggest, most powerful loosely affiliated organization in the history of the world. The organization represents a subtle balance between orthodoxy and autonomy, and I’m not sure where maintaining a database and investigating complaints and refereeing disputes and expecting compliance squares with autonomy. Indeed, the Scene article is entitled “What Would Jesus Say?” but this really isn’t an issue of what the SBC should say, it is about what they will do, and maintain, and enforce. As a lawyer, I also think the SBC’s reticence could fairly be about how implementing proposals advocated by the SBC’s detractors could force the SBC to assume liability without a means to manage their liability, given the way that the SBC is “organized.”

Unlike the federalist-circumventing tactic of our nation’s speed limit laws or DUI laws which are imposed through the carrot and stick of DOT money; unlike the disciplinary or leveraging tool of denominational ownership of church property, there doesn’t seem to be a way to impose something from the top down in the SBC, given the nature of their organization and given the proclivities of so many of the leaders in the member churches.

I won’t pretend that I do not have a reflex to believe the best about the SBC–the things that make them so controversial in the blog universe (which tilts left) endear it to me. And I won’t pretend that I am rather disinclined to believe the best about groups Kat Coble termed “tortseekers.” That being said, I will admit that this situation gives me pause. While infidelity or taking advantage of one’s position as a pastor may be issues properly resolved within a church body (or perhaps a denomination, which doesn’t include the SBC), I don’t believe that crimes are “issues” or “conflicts” that should be kept quiet or in-house. Hopefully churches, especially SBC churches that have no other available filter, are doing criminal background checks on prospective hires.

For a whole host of reasons, the SBC is on the Scene’s naughty list. And holding up a couple of pastors (or former pastors) who turned out to be abusers and who happen to have been seen with current leaders within the SBC at one time or another is not the same as demonstrating that the SBC is shuffling sex abusers around the org like priests or public school PE teachers. For the time being, I think I’ll direct my outrage at the sexual perpetrators.

Update: Glen Dean describes why he would label the Nashville Scene story is a hit piece.

From Kristina of Sparkles Plenty, we get a glimpse into her “hairy” past.

[…]the art of hair design is not something universally shared. Like most everything, some people have a gift for it and some don’t. Unfortunately for me, my mother was under the grossly incorrect assumption that she was skilled in this particular area. This misapprehension, coupled with her unfathomable affection for Lilt home perms, is why I spent a good chunk of my high school sophomore year bearing a frightening resemblance to Roseanne Roseannadanna.

I remember really wanting to have a girl so that I could do her hair the way I wanted to. Well, it was a case of be careful what you wish for because I got the little girl I so wanted but she didn’t want to have nothing of me “doing” her hair. Bows and barrettes were discarded and abandoned mere moments after placing them in her hair. Ponytails were freed and even though there were times she would beg me to braid her hair, the braids were a tragic shell of their former twisty selves by lunchtime. Hmmm…maybe a perm would look nice…nah! I spent a large part of my third grade year looking surprisingly like Little Orphan Annie. Not sure why my mom consented to me getting a perm when I already had curly hair.

But I digress…the really fun part of Kristina’s post is how all of this hair angst relates back to Mormonism and it’s failure to be a mainstreamed religion. A flaw that not even Mitt Romney and his faboo hair could correct. It’s a bit of a stretch but I think she may be onto something.

Kevin has written a masterpiece in which he examines our spiritual beliefs, and how we deal with both the good and bad events of our lives…

Tuesday night a storm, with high winds and several tornadoes, ripped across parts of the United States, killing many people and destroying a great deal of property. Much of that happened in my home state of Tennessee. Actually, one of the tornadoes was in line to tear through Nashville, the city I live in. But for whatever reason, it skipped over us.

People in this part of the country can be deeply biblically religious, and they will either give thanks to God for being spared from the storm’s devastation, believing their faith saved them, or they will call on God for the strength to carry on after suffering greatly, as the storm devastated their lives. There will be some who will lose their faith in God because He did not protect them, as they felt He should. And, they may chose to no longer believe in God, and may carry a heart of anger towards God for the rest of their lives.

But, is any of this really about God? Is it really about us humans?

In my own life, I wrestle with these questions myself. I used to think that if you dare even question the “divine plan” of our lives, it was a sin. However, I now believe that questioning “God” is healthy, and it can deepen your spiritual journey as you work out your own, personal beliefs.

Go read Kevin’s thought-provoking post here.

Glen over at Tennesseefree.com echoes an assertion by SouthernBeale (here) that not all Christians are Conservatives. Of course, that all depends on how you define “Conservative” and “Christian,” doesn’t it?

Coincidentally, I received notice of a “Barna Group” web release today (Born again voters no longer favor Republican candidates). From the piece:

One of the most reliable constituencies of the Republican Party in recent years has been born again Christians. A new national survey of likely voters conducted by The Barna Group, however, shows that the Republicans have lost the allegiance of many born again voters. The November election is truly up for grabs - and if the election were held today, most born again voters would select the Democratic Party nominee for president, whoever that might be.

But then there’s this:

Evangelicals Remain Strongly Conservative Republican

A subset of the born again population - evangelicals - has remained firmly committed to conservative ideals and, to a lesser extent, to the Republican Party. Across the nation, 43% of registered voters are aligned with the Democratic Party and 24% are registered as Republicans. Among evangelicals, though, 56% are registered Republicans and just 22% are Democrats.

Ideological leanings reflect a similar disparity. Among all voters, half say they are somewhere in the middle of the ideological spectrum on most issues, with 29% describing themselves as mostly conservative and just 14% claiming to be mostly liberal. Yet, among evangelicals, three out of every four (72%) describe themselves as mostly conservative and a mere 2% say they are mostly liberal. Just one out of four evangelicals (24%) says they are in the ideological middle ground.

If the election were held today, only 45% of evangelicals say they would support the Republican nominee for president, and 11% would support the Democratic representative. Most significant is that a whopping 40% of evangelicals are undecided. This is extraordinary, given that 62% of evangelicals voted for the Republican candidate in 1992, 67% did so in 1996, along with 67% in 2000 and 85% in 2004.

Southern Beale has written a post this morning that has me shouting, “Amen!”…

The media has long perpetuated the myth that all Christians (especially Evangelicals) are Republican. […]

[…] the media has already decided on the storyline: Christian = Republican. Why present any views that differ from that? Why, in an exit poll, would anyone want to ask Democrats if they are Christian? We all know that all Christians are Republican! […]

The National Election Pool conducts state and national exit polls. It consists of representatives from the corporate media: ABC, CBS, CNN, FOX, NBC and The Associated Press. The exit poll questions asked, according to the article, are “what the polls’ “journalist clients” feel is most important for their articles.” In other words, the corporate media comes up with exit poll questions based on stereotypes they’ve created about the two political parties. And I think these stereotyped views are evident in the corporate media’s day-to-day political coverage, too.

I’m not the only one. Evangelical leaders have complained about this disparity in exit polling, but their complaints have fallen on deaf ears. Sorry, folks, the story has already been written:

In the meantime, the nine unhappy evangelical leaders fear a kind of vicious circle. Is “an outdated script” about religion and Republicans, in Mr. Dean’s phrase, unduly influencing the exit poll questions, the answers that are in turn influencing reporting and analysis by reporters, newscasters and pundits, which in turn influence future poll questions. Is campaign coverage and discussion being diverted from new developments among both evangelicals and Democrats?

Of course it is. And it’s not just the media’s assumption about Christians. It shows up in a whole variety of other places.

Beale elaborates. Go check it out.

Meantime, show of hands…how many of you out there consider yourself Christian and are planning to vote “outside of the box” Tuesday?

Thoughts?

It would be interesting to have a Linked In Answers or Yahoo Answers in the area of a) non-profits b) spirituality/philosophy/faith. For non-profits it could be hosted at Net Squared–with a Facebook application for current zeigheist of questions.

I also think Beliefnet is interesting and its social aspects are massively expanding, but I wonder if a more robust video.

From Compassion in Politics. 

I wonder if it’s something in the water. 2008 is shaping up to be the year of “worship” blogging.

Slarti

o say that Nashville has a thriving praise and worship scene is an understatement. There is some real worship going on out there, in little churches dotted across our city, if you look past the megachurches. And even there, you can find worship.

Patrick

So one of the things I’m doing today at work is looking for blogs written by worship leaders. Here’s what I’ve found…

* They’re all at churches that are named something like “Generic Church of the Agape.” Nobody has a denomination in their name.
* Some don’t blog about worship much.
* And some do.
* Lots play video games, some of which they won at church.
* Some have deep thoughts, and actually solicit feedback.
* Some share lots of set lists.
* They all have cute babies.

“We’re not electing a theologian-in-chief, but a commander-in-chief.”- Richard Land

Sarah Moore admits to initially being sucked into the Huckabee hype. Thankfully though, she has come to her senses and taken a second look.

The Huckster’s message seems to be “I am a Christian, a Baptist minister, so vote for me.” Sarah, like most of us horrible evangelicals, doesn’t buy into that nonsense.

I am not going to vote for a candidate because he is a Christian, and I’m not going to exclude a person who professes no faith at all. Same goes for the labels of black, white, man, woman, gay, straight, young, old, etc. I agree with Rush … playing identity politics is no way to determine the best person for the job.

Amen to that! The very idea that Huckabee would use religion to manipulate Republicans to support his liberalism is appalling. As for that Christmas ad, it’s not very Christian to lie Brother Huckster.

If you are a Republican and thinking about voting for Mike Huckabee, ask yourself this question, “Was Jimmy Carter a good president?”

More from Ned Williams, who doesn’t seem to question the Dick Morris article stating that Huckabee really is a fiscal conservative.

Remember all the fuss about The Golden Compass? Well, a local rightie and religious guy went to see the controversial film, and has reported back with his findings.

What in heaven’s name is there in this film to object to? Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for a good boycott when it’s needed. I’m even a multi-task capable boycotter. I stayed away from all things French until they recently elected Sarkozy as their President. All of that while maintaining my years long commitment to not see ‘The Last Temptation of Christ’ or ‘Brokeback Mountain’. My family homeschools our 5 children and none of them has ever spent even 30 seconds in a public school as a student. I can do Politics, Religion and even toss in Education and not even break a sweat. … Most atheists, once having come to the conclusion He does not, become just as dogmatic in defense of their untenable conclusion as any Christian is of the premise that He does. I suspect Pullman falls into this group. At its root, atheism is as “religious”, as “Christian”, a position as any other addition of men to the revelation of God. As such, it’s doomed to the same inglorious end at His glorious appearing.

Thinking God’s existence is a bit too settled a matter to be called into question because a writer penned a scene that ends “… this is where I kill God” …

He’s got a lot of detail over at his blog about the movie and the books–which he is now reading. Frankly, I read the books and didn’t like them because they are dark and depressing. The God stuff bothers me not one jot.

I always wanted to open a used book shop. That’s sort of my fantasy when-I-retire job.

Aunt B. also dreams of funky retail, but her angle is slightly different than mine. She wants to open an occult shop, because she feels the need in Nashville is great, and the options are sorely lacking.

As previously noted, there are any number of problems with the woo-woo shops in Nashville. One, they’re all hung up on making sure that you know that they’re all feel-good, safe places to hang out and buy crystals and talk about aliens. Two, they’re not occult shops so much as New Age shops. They smell like hippie incense. The kids working behind the counter are all so young, why bother to ask them for help with anything? I don’t trust that the herbs are what they say they are.

I’ll never forget one afternoon a year and a half ago we were browsing in BookMan/BookWoman and some hippie-incense guy came running in, breathless. He begged the bookstore clerk for directions to the nearest place to get a reading. There was apparently some aura-cleansing emergency that simply could not wait. But then he stood around the shop essentially begging for approval from the store clerk and the other shoppers–as though we were supposed to praise him for how COOL he was to actually be into readings and aura-cleansing. It was bizarre.

Anyway, I hope that her creepy evil occult shop will be available to provide readings for dudes like this so they don’t have to slum it at Magic Journeys.

Like Sean Braisted (see the comments), I too am rather bumfuzzled as to what, exactly, a “pseudo-Muslim” might be.

But I’ll go with it. I have–as some have noticed–a Jewish-sounding last name. It is actually Swedish, for the record, but that is always a pain to explain to people. From now on, I am simply going to describe myself as a “pseudo-Jew.” Yes! Christmas and Hanukkah!

NOTE: Links don’t seem to be working for some reason. Just go here: http://www.news2wkrn.com/vv/2007/12/11/the-electoral-bellwether-of-white-pine/#comment-18662 .

Here in the buckle of the Bible Belt, us church-going types like us some prayer requests.  We care about our bretheren and sisteren and one of the ways we show that is by saying stuff like “I’m praying for ya.” 

Now, most are pretty sincere about that, however, there’s some folks round these parts that are really a little more into the details of the prayer need, as opposed to the need itself. It’s a fine line to walk, the line between “Prayer Requests” and good ol’ fashioned gossip. God’s people struggle with that. Probably because we’re just plain old mortals and stuff.

I worked for 10 years at a rather large, Christian company that had (and still has) daily “Prayer Chain” emails that go throughout the company to those who wish to receive them.  There’s non-Jesus-y companies that have similiar email lists as well.  I think they all originate from good intent, but, I tell you what, I’ve seen more personal details that are so not necessary in Prayer Request emails and in Sunday School through the years. I’m talking stuff like “Please pray for my mother.  She has diarrhea really bad” and “Please pray for my upcoming Pap Smear”.  Where I used to work, my Shishter and I would immediately email each other when a funny one would come across (I know…we are bad, bad people) because, I mean, for the love of Ernest Angeley….some things are not meant for public broadcast (except Mr. Smiff’s and my physicals, of course).

Matt has made a HI-larious video about things you might not want to do in Sunday School.  (I tried to embebbidebed it here but it wouldn’t let me)Everytime I watch it, I laugh even more.  I love this video, too, cause it has people I know in it. 

Gavin Richardson:

i thought it eerie that there were all these large gun toting police men around the new life church to give sustained feeling that people are now safe.

can the implement that sustained the terror really be the same implement that brings peace? or is it the hearts of the person that are the difference?

Art Ruch:

Not that it would bring back those lost lives if they were… But I want to know “why”. I want to know what went so badly wrong with a human being’s mind that he would shoot people at a place of worship and a mission training center.

Slarti’s kids had quite a revelation as they rode past a Hindu temple last week:

Now, my kids, being MY kids, think that if you have a religion, that religion must have praise songs. (This is quite gratifying to me). So, they proceeded to write their own version of Hindu praise songs. But, somehow they lost their way; at first they sang songs listing the virtues of various animals, but before I knew it, the subject of the songs had changed to how wonderful those animals tasted, grilled with BBQ sauce.

I always love Slarti’s gently humorous accounts of family life, and as always, this one ends with a sweet reflection:

See, that’s what’s wonderful about having kids in the tween ages. They are smart, very smart, but they still have the joy and innocence of childhood.

Read the rest of the story–as well as a surprise ending involving Santa and a hidden camera–here.

Y’all are like Lays Potato Chips…writing such great stuff, I couldn’t have just one…

Religious tolerance does not entail a proclamation of your beliefs about Jesus Christ without being followed by a question: “What are your beliefs? For without knowing them, I cannot challenge my own.”

–Freddie at Liberadio(!)

Mitt Romney gave a speech yesterday discussing his religion and its impact on his chances for the presidency of the United States. Many of us have a lot to say about that–as you may imagine.
Ned Williams

This speech had the tone and substance of one delivered by a person who is already President and who addresses all Americans and no opponents.

For folks who believe that what you believe is more important than simply believing, Romney’s effort, in sections of his speech, to minimize religious distinctions and commend belief for belief’s sake is not impressive. However, I think those same people will appreciate Romney’s courageous defense of “Faith’s” role in America. I guess time will tell.

David Oatney

I have no problem whatsoever casting a vote for a Mormon, and Romney’s Mormon faith plays no factor in my choice whether or not to vote for him. Whether he has been true to certain basic principles of his faith does play a part in that decision.

Aunt B.

Romney speaks out of both sides of his mouth. He wants to shield himself from having to address some tough questions about Mormonism by hiding behind how he shouldn’t be subjected to a religious test, while at the same time he’s saying that one must believe in God to be a good American. If there’s a question of how you’re only an American by virtue of your proper religious belief, that is a religious test.

And, sure, right now it’s all about including all of the monotheists, but what about the Buddhists and the Hindu and the Pagan and the religions of the African diaspora and the indigenous beliefs of the people who were here first?

I mean, seriously.

He wants to be the President of all of us and he doesn’t think we can be good Americans?

Katherine Coble

’m not abstaining from voting for Romney because of his Mormonism. On the list of reasons not to vote for the man, “Follower of LDS” doesn’t even register. But, frankly, the thought of a president who adheres to a faith which believes it can control the will and choice of others does give me pause.

Nathan Moore

I haven’t seen it, but I just finished reading the text. I thought it superb, especially the conclusion

Say Uncle

Anyway, to all you folks out there arguing about how silly one religion is compared to another, step back a moment. Let’s take a 30,000 foot view of things. You can’t really criticize one religion as silly for believing that billions of people were brought to earth in DC-10s or that God lives on another planet. And then tell me with a straight face that whatever particular magic your God did was real. Just saying.

I’m not voting for Romney (if I vote for President at all in this election), but my dislike of him has nothing to do with his Mormon faith. Although I am personally not a fan of a lot of what I know about Mormonism.

According to Joltin’ Django at Nigh Seen Creeder, when Romney talks about religion in his upcoming speech it won’t be to demystify Mormonism for the voters.

I do not agree with Gov. Romney’s decision. But what can I do? I’m simply one the lowest of low-level flunkies in the Romney for Prez campaign.

There are a lot of resources which will provide answers about all facets of the Mormon faith. However I don’t think I should link to any of them because I have a decidedly strong opinion about their teachings and beliefs unlike my opinions on any other religion except Scientology. So I’d very likely link you to something that wouldn’t give fair and unbiased information.

Of course, I’m not not-voting-for-Romney because of the Mormon thing but because of his stance on medical marijuana.

It does seem, however, that many people do view Romney’s religion as the prime reason to withhold their votes.

newton dominey wrote a fantastic post last night which sums up a lot of what I think about life. Especially life as a Christian.

i try very hard to follow Christ in almost everything i do (i won’t claim to try hard to follow Him in everything i do). i still drink too much, curse when i shouldn’t, like to look at pretty women, get jealous and angry and i don’t go to church as much as i want to (i have a hard time shutting it down on saturday nite, meaning i have a hard time starting it up on sunday morning). that said, i try my best to always follow the golden rule, try to reflect Christ to almost everyone i meet, and do my absolute best to be a good steward of all of the blessings i receive.

this has been an interesting process i’ve been going through. it’s been hard, exciting, scary, confusing and nervewracking. still, the whole thing has taught me so much about myself, my faith, my wife, my family and my friends that if it blows up right now i’ve been blessed. hell, if it blows up six months from now i’ve been blessed.

I have a hard time trying to explain to people how I can feel blessed even when the world is down around my ankles. But I mostly do.