im a slightly-lapsed evangelical, and huck scares the CRAP out of me. and what scares me most is that i know so many evangelicals form my christian undergrad that are supporting him just because he was a minister and he's funny. people who were actually into the ISSUES of politics at one point, blinded by identity politics. sad.

Mormons: too kooky for the Christians and too Christian for everyone else.

Seriously, I actually have a Mormon friend and he's no different than anyone else. I suppose you can say that about every other religion, but that doesn't fill newspapers, does it?

It's an official temple, I believe! But missionaries are usually further afield out of Mormon territory. And have impeccable Leave it to Beaver haircuts.

I'm not really open to conversion, but, it's true, Mormons are generally great folk and, better yet, not too big on the apocalyptic stuff. They basically think all the sinners get another chance after the end. Which means I can eff up my whole life and STILL climb aboard the saved train once there is irrefutable, post-death proof of Mormonism's correctness. It's a religion with a money back guarantee.

Marco nailed it with that first line.

Mitt?

Pass.

Pass

If you've got a better idea, now is the time to share with the class.

Well, Romney's certainly better than McCain or Huckabee. But he's a liberal. Outside of Fred I don't see a lot for conservatives to like this year. If we had a conservative congress I wouldn't worry much, but we haven't had that since they ran Newt out. At the time I thought it was just the Democrats that wanted to be rid of him. Now I'm not so sure.

Romney went to Michigan the other day and promised billions in government "partnership" with the auto industry. I wonder how much of my "partnership" he's prepared to spread around to be president.

Unless things turn around in a hurry, the next four years are gonna be a whirlwind of new bipartisan taxes and spending. Maybe the moRons are right - I should buy gold.

As a self-proclaimed liberal, and almost entirely Democratic voter - i will say Mitt is really not that scary. His Mormanism doesn't play a part to me, because unlike the others on the campaign trail, he's not promising to legislate his morality into the COnstitution (i.e, Huck), and he's an extremely intelligent and and educated businessman.

In this election cycle, the "SMART" factor outweighs just about everything else. And of the GOP crop (and the Dems too) Mitt is definitely top in that category.

Huckabee is downright frightening.

With the steps needed to amend the Constitution and the fact that Pres. Huck would likely be working with a Democratically controlled Congress, I don't see how he would be able to get the ball rolling.

I'm not a christian and as of now I still believe in Huck...all this stuff people are talking about is distorting and a misrepresentation.....the whole thing with the constitution is window dressing...he was pandering to the evangelicals in SC...it'll never pass anyway.

I find the Huck bashing amusing, especially when the next comment is to support the ultimate panderer, Mitt....can you trust anything Mitt says?...you may not like Huck, but I think he's genuine in what he believes.

Let's see how Mitt does in the heartland without daddy's name before we hand him the keys. I don't think he is going to be doing well in SC and I think it's fair to say that SC is a lot closer to the GOP base than the Beltway and the Upper East Side chatting class.

Larry has a point. Mitt was for liberalism before he was against it. That didn't help Kerry and it's not going to help Mitt.

And that's not even to mention the whole issue of faith. Huck is a lot closer to the American mainstream on religion than Mitt is. I think if Mitt gets the nod, we'll be hearing a lot about Kolab, the many wives of Jesus and how one day we can become Gods ourselves. We know who the dirtiest players in the game are and what they can do. What they are doing to Obama is not even close to what they will do to Mitt. And I think a lot of people will be going fishing on a nice day in November in Virginia, Ohio, Indiana, Kentucky, Florida, New Hampshire, Iowa, New Mexico, Nevada, North Carolina, Arkansas, Missouri if comes down to Hillary and Mitt.

So Larry, if Huck is so genuine about his beliefs why doesn't he go ahead and freely admit that he supported illegal aliens to get state funding to go to college? Or other liberal positions that he smooth over during the debates?
I'll give you that Huck is a charmer, and Mitt really needs to learn how to deliver the message better. But Mitt is first and foremost a Fiscal Conservative and quite a smart guy, I don't understand why he trying to remodel himself as a Social Con.?

Karol - remember the conversation last summer about Mitt? :)

If you've got a better idea, now is the time to share with the class.

McCain/Huckabee '08. That's picking from the frontrunners. If it still matters by March 4th, I'll probably vote Rudy.

The only thing I've got against McCain is his age.

Now that I'm instantly popular...

Mitt definitely reminds me of john kerry...he's the republican version of Kerry...he was for it before he was against it...right on....fitting that they're both from Mass.

regarding huck and immigration...he freely admits to his immigration positions in Arkansas...I see his position on not punishing kids for the sins of the parents....but I can understand someone disagreeing with him.

all the candidates have flaws.

A Wonkette link...well la-dee-da...

"Growing up in Brooklyn, I didn't meet many Mormons, none in fact, so I found it pretty informational."

There's a very good reason for that (if I'm not mistaken, we grew up not far from one another).

They really aren't much of a presence there.

They don't prosyletize in the Jewish areas by directive, generally are not traditionally well received in the Catholic parishes south and east, and do get harassed by very zealous preacher types (although, there are a few Mormon-run childrens' programs and a care facility in the area east of Flatbush Avenue and Kings Highway) that I believe are targeted to Caribbean and West Indian communities.

I've known a few in business and, while I'm not sure I've seen the happiness and contentment Shawn speaks of manifested, they really seem like mainstream WASP types, except they are quieter and don't drink.

"im a slightly-lapsed evangelical..."

Brent, does it work that way? I was always under the impression that once you accepted Him, you were IN, and nothing you could do or not do would jeopardize your salvation....

And I'm not frightened of Huckabee. I believe he sealed his own fate when he declared the Constitution needed to be realigned with the Bible.

Evangelicals do not always vote monolithically as folks have been led to think, and not as other faith communities do. I believe many if not most evangelicals are fully aware that they are voting for a worldly leader, and not one of the spirit realm.

What I would think WOULD be a concern for anyone worried about Huckabee is the prospect of him being tapped as veep, and, if you are supporting a candidate for whom Huckabee will be chosen to serve in that capacity, you need to make it known that you will change your vote based on that choice, and you'll refrain from voting entirely if that candidate becomes a nominee (you don't have to mean it, but you should make your feelings known, now, while it may still make a difference).

I believe the way some on the right feel about Huckabee on your side is very similar to the way we on the left feel about Hillary.

I don't see how he's remotely comparable to John Kerry, Massachusetts politician label aside.

Romney created several thriving corporate enterprises-Kerry owns a bike store, which he probably props up with the money he inherited from Heinz's moneybags widow.

Romney has a string of accomplishments to his name, whereas Kerry's only accomplishment has been to be re-elected-by absurdly low margins-in the most liberal, Dem-heavy state in the union.

Kerry is stiff, boring and unlikeable, whereas Romney-whatver his flaws-has a generally agreeable, warm personality.

I don't see how he's remotely comparable to John Kerry, "Massachusetts politician" label aside.

Romney created several thriving corporate enterprises-Kerry owns a quasi-obscure bike shop, which he probably props up with the dowry he inherited from Heinz's moneybags widow.

Romney has a string of accomplishments to his name, whereas Kerry's signature accomplishment to date is to be re-elected-by absurdly low margins-in the most liberal, Dem-heavy state in the union.

Kerry is stiff, boring and unlikeable, whereas Romney-whatver his flaws-has a generally agreeable, warm, engaging personality.

Drats!

Stupid duplicative posts.

I curse you.

I might consider him if he looked more like Bill from Big Love. ;-)

I don't think Mitt has a chance in Hell in the Heartland. Why? Because there are still an amazing number of people who will not vote for him simply due to his religion.

If I had a dollar for every time I've heard "But he's a Mormon..." from _otherwise rational people_ in the last couple of months, I'd be rich. Sorry, but where the GOP rubber meets the road of democracy, people are prejudiced--and no matter how many speeches Mitt gives, it's not going to change.

Personally, I think it's a crock of sh*t that people are like that. I have my own reasons for disliking Mitt, but the fact remains if people claim to be for family values and religiously open, I can't even see why this is a discussion. Mitt has been married to the same woman, has actually walked the walk of his faith, and apparently ran Mass. as well as any socialist nation can be run...yet people want to talk about McCain (oh where do I begin), Rudy (any man who can't follow his marriage vows probably shouldn't be handed the keys to the country), and Huckabee (once again, not enough space).

Bottom line, the GOP better hope Her Inevitability gets the nom, as there ain't much to make someone get out and vote.

"They basically think all the sinners get another chance after the end. Which means I can eff up my whole life and STILL climb aboard the saved train once there is irrefutable, post-death proof of Mormonism's correctness. It's a religion with a money back guarantee."

WHAT?!?

As a lifelong member on my way out, I can tell that you know NOTHING about Mormonism. Or maybe you've only been exposed to the "lite" version they're trying to sell now.

I will agree with you that this man-made religion is basically Universalism repackaged, but not everyone is saved in the end. Since day one it was pounded into my head that those who leave the church are banished in the afterlife to "outer darkness" with Satan and his minions FOREVER. Also, if you have the opportunity while living to join, and you refuse to, you don't get a second chance when you die. This is all documented and taught on a regular basis but I don't expect the casual observer to know these things. So it is frustrating to hear non-members talk so glowingly about an organization they know very little about.

One more thing. As for your gushing about their wonderful lifestyle: It's a REQUIREMENT, as in you won't make it to the highest kingdom after death if you don't put on this "we're so happy and successful because we're members of the only true church" act. I was told growing up that it was my responsibility and destiny to help convert the world to Mormonism by my perfect example of perfect behavior at all times. And if I didn't then I would be held responsible in the afterlife for those I missed converting. Why do you think Utah ranks highest in the nation for anti-depressant use?

"Not-all-that-strange religion"? Didn't you see that South Park episode?

Hey Marsha,

I certainly wouldn't presume to think myself qualified to tell a life-long Mormon anything about Mormonism. Sorry for whatever I got wrong, all of which was relayed to me either by Mormons in good standing or earnest missionaries. And it sounds like you've had a bad go of it with the church, which I'm sorry to hear. As I think I made clear, I'm not a booster for the church or encouraging anyone to convert. I've been to enough bad places to know "outer darkness" already exists over a good deal of this planet and I'm convinced if there is a supreme being it is 100 percent totally disinterested in human life or revels in cruelty.

That said, I grew up with many Mormon friends from many Mormon churches. I have benefited greatly from Mormon charity. I frequently attended church with them and got to know many young missionaries. Honestly, never once in church, never once in conversation with missionaries or church representatives, never once in many, many after church classes did I ever hear anything approaching the descriptive horrors you had thrown your way. Never. Not that I doubt you in the least. Maybe I just didn't get close enough. My experiences with Mormons have been entirely positive.

As for stupid and/or obtuse lifestyle requirements...that's the core of every religion, Marsha. Mormons are more zealous in following it, I believe, because the church has so many converts. Converts got the fire in the belly. I have some born-again evangelicals in my family. Trust me when I say dealing with Mormon converts is a lot easier, a lot less contentious, and carries a lot less scary conversations about the apocalypse....again, in my experience.

I think that the issue here is, once again, that we're discussing a basically religious test for President. Haven't we gotten beyond this? I'm sorry, but there's only one religion that I wouldn't vote for President, and that's Satanist. Why? Because that's someone who A. believes that there is good and evil and B. is rooting wholeheartedly for the latter. Sorta like someone who can't even keep his vows to his wife, rooting for _EVIL_ sorta indicates that a person isn't the most moral of individuals. Other than that, I gives a da*n what someone's faith is, as long as they actually practice it faithfully (rather than just the parts they like) and remember that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land.

I can't believe GOPers are even having this discussion...oh, wait, yes I can. I hope around January 2009 it sinks in to people (regardless of who wins) of the Elephant Party that just because someone goes to church every Sunday doesn't mean they're necessarily better qualified than someone who goes to a temple, mosque, renovated garage, etc.. But, hey, I just work here.

Mormons, like Iranians, don't have a homosexuality issue for almost the same reasons. While a few Mormon gays do come out Mormon, and more escape, it appears many are tortured.

However, this would probably be seen as a good thing to many of your readers.

Tortured? Do you have any evidence to back up that claim?

I think he means "tortured" in the metaphysical sense of the term.

I doubt they have death camps for homosexuals and lesbians in Provo.

Then again, I've only visited six or seven states along the New England/Metroliner corridor, so WTF do I know?

Thanks for responding, Shawn. Sorry if I sounded a little cranky but I've just recently found out that I've been lied to my whole life.
I would like to clarify something though. When I say the Mormon lifestyle/perky personality is a requirement for exaltation (mormon version of salvation), I mean it literally. Mormon temple attendance and perfectly following the list of required behaviors is the key to their heaven. The focus of a mormon's life is to obtain and then keep a current temple recommend (pass) by answering questions in an interview with their bishop about whether or not they are following this list which includes, in part: mandatory tithing, mandatory attendance at all meetings (Sunday, mid-week, and any others), absolutely never any coffee, tea, or alcohol, and on and on...
So, as far as I know, Christians (for example) aren't required to do anything other than have faith in Christ and try to live a good life to make it to heaven, correct? In my experience, I was trying to be super obedient to all the mormon rules (and make sure all non-members I came in contact with would notice) because I had to, not because I wanted to.
I'm sure the mormons you know are great people. The majority are, but they are also woefully ignorant about the real history of their church and the attempts by their leaders to whitewash and cover it up. They still believe the happy little myth as it has been presented to them.

And just to illustrate my point, I encountered the following post only minutes ago on exmormon.org from someone I've never met, hundreds of miles away:

"The other day I was talking to my eldest sister, whom I'm not particularly fond of, but she is my sister. And she started yelling at me for joining the "exmormon" group on facebook. She went on about how it's my "duty" to be a good mormon, how I'm not an exmormon, how since I was born into the covenant I couldn't leave it. I responded that yes, actually, I CAN leave it, and had decided to turn in a resignation letter. She was stunned to silence.
At 32, her next move was to threaten to tell our mother."

This is probably a frivolous question, but what's up with the injunction against caffeine?

I've never heard of that rule in any other religion, to the best of my knowledge.

Marsha's experience in the Mormon Church is so sad. I feel badly that she feels as if half of her life has been lived under false pretenses.
I too am a life-time, active member of the church, and several of my closest friends and family members have left the church, for various reasons. While I am sad that we don't have the common bond we once shared, I am still close to each one of them. They know I don't condemn them for leaving, and I think they respect me for my convictions.

Here is where Marsha is absolutely INCORRECT, and it amazes me that a life-time Mormon has no better knowledge of church doctrine than she does. The only person who is "banished to outer darkness" is one who denies his testimony of the Church's message, AFTER it has been confirmed to him by the Holy Ghost.

I have no doubt that thousands of people have joined the Mormon Church without being completely converted. There are wonderful things about the church that people are attracted to, and many join for reasons other than a burning testimony of Joseph Smith, the Book of Mormon, and the story of the Restoration. For many of them, the witness of truthfulness comes later, sometimes years later. For others, including Marsha, the testimony "waxes and wanes', or never comes at all, and they leave the church. Only God knows whether or not a person had a true witness of the truthfulness of Mormonism, therefore, no one makes the judgements Marsha talks about. I fully expect that my "ex-mormon" friends and family will have other opportunities to accept or reject the message of Mormonism.

Marsha's claim that people who have a chance to join the church while living, but choose not to, will not get another chance and are banished to hell is FALSE. She is correct in saying that not everyone will be saved in the end, but all churches teach that at some point in time, each person must take a stand and accept Christ. She is wrong in her assertion that we somehow know who will, and who will not, be saved.

Furthermore, no Mormon I know looks upon ex-mormons with anything more than a sincere hope that they will one day be reconciled with the church they once loved.