Republican Primary

[Josephene]

All religions are not the same, but we have had plenty of non- and even anti-Catholic presidents in the history of our nation. There is not a religious test for office, so I find your comments to be highly disturbing.

I will follow Archbishop Chaput’s guidance on the matter from the 2008 campaign:

catholicnewsagency.com/news/catholic_leaders_respond_to_mitt_romneys_speech_on_mormonism/

“Romney, unlike Kennedy in Houston, does not separate his faith from informing his citizenship, and by extension, his vision of public service,” he wrote. "Romney, offered a more reasonable and fruitful explanation of how faith actually works in public service, regardless of one’s political party,” the archbishop explained.

Archbishop Chaput also added further comment on the role on the role of religion in politics saying, “Religious officials shouldn’t and can’t determine public policy. No sensible person would disagree with that. But that’s very different from claiming — as some people now do — that religious believers, communities and leaders should be silent in public debate or stay out of public issues.”

While none of the Catholic leaders offered their endorsement of Romney, both Donahue and Chaput mentioned that they see his Mormon faith as a non-issue.

Their comments on his Mormon faith are well summarized by Archbishop Chaput: "Catholics, like most other people, want to elect someone who has the skills, the moral character and the real commitment to the common good that will enable him or her to lead.”

Thank you for the above informative link and response .

ArchBishop Chaput is well deserving of honor and trust in his appraisal of issues and good to see his impartial suggestion to search for skills as well as commitment to common good .

'Religious officials should not and cannot determine public policy '- there in might be the red flag …in the secret power structure of Mormonism, do we know if Romney is a senior , committed official …primarily owing fidelity to them !

There also can be concerns as to how much deep commitement can be to common good , if the system has bulit in antipathy towards those who are outside of the system …

Skills level too - we are told how fear of The Lord is beginning of wisdom …

We are in the midst of those who went after moneky god idols and such and we see our financial structure in flames ! - that is one of the traits attributed to the moneky god …

Thus , the need for caution, esp. when we have candidates whose history is not unlike some esteemed , forgiven sinners of the Bible , and have professed deep desire , to want to follow paths of those who embraced real commitment to common good !

Peace !

 

[bbarrick8383]

Shutting down military bases and ceasing to deal with other nations with threats and violence is not isolationism. It is the opposite. Opening ourselves up to friendship, honest trade and diplomacy is the foreign policy of peace and prosperity. It is the only foreign policy that will not bankrupt us in short order, as our current actions most definitely will. I share the disappointment of the American people in the foreign policy rhetoric coming from the administration. The sad thing is, our foreign policy WILL change eventually, as Rome’s did, when all budgetary and monetary tricks to fund it are exhausted.

• some crazy old fool

 

[ishii]

The reports of serious illness in Mrs Romney and the continuing sternous efforts of the candidate , for campaigning also need to give us pause …

Both multiple sclerosis and issues aorund breast cancer can be adversely affecetd by stress …

and the illness , in turn, could affect the candidate’s capacity to be fully engaged , in critical matters …

Thus , his choice to continue , does it reflect more of a commitment to the Mormon church ,more so than to the wife or the country …

That to me is a huge and unreasonable leap in logic. Let’s see, Ann Romney is diagnosed with MS in 1998, then early-stage breast cancer in 2008. Are you qualified to judge Ann Romney’s health in relation to the effect a presidential campaign would have on her? Then you say “his choice to run” reflects more of a committment to Mormonism than to his wife or country?

I must say, you said earlier about the press - *"Agree with the perceptions of the influnce of the media …also called ‘the world’ …as well as the prinice of this world who is a liar whom most of such media seem to choose to serve ! " *

yet, you then proceed to do the very things that you complain the press is doing - which is to make false or misleading/questionable claims about a candidate in order to influence people to vote a certain way! You have no evidence for what you say, just hearsay and your own leap of logic. It is wrong to falsely accuse or insinuate evil intentions of people. You need to be careful.

As for me, I am fine with Romney on the Mormon issue - and so is archbishop Chaput who says Romney’s Mormonism is a non-issue.

Nice to have you back on the forums after a six year hiatus.

Ishii

 

[ishii]

bbarrick8383;8885894:

   I'm glad we went in and have done what we did. I think we've lost enough lives and have seen what nearly 20,000 injured? It's time to come home. We should be prepared financially, physically and mentally in case we need to defend ourselves again.

I agree. I would caution against a precipitous withdrawal that would cause chaos, but ultimately these countries need to stand on their own two feet. It may come as a surprise to you to know that I come down against nation-building and long drawn out wars that end up with permanent, costly bases and committments. Why are we still in Europe? Why are we still in Japan? I think that is a good question to ask. I may not agree with the extent to which Ron Paul (or you) wants to scale back our military committments and spending, but I do think we need to rethink our defense/foreign policy.

I do not believe that is what Ron Paul said, nor what I am saying. I’m saying our southern border is becoming more and more dangerous. The longer we ignore it the worse it’s going to get. We don’t have to being our troops home to protect it, we should bring our troops home to protect it.

I believe that we need to do more to protect our southern borders - not just from illegal immigration but because it represents a security problem.
bbarrick8383;8885894:

I don’t really buy into the, “we have to protect middle east oil” idea anymore. If the middle east wants to get rich they will protect it themselves.

Our economy - and our financial problems - would get a lot worse if there was an interruption of the flow of oil. We have a direct interest in protecting oil as our economy depends on it. Its not about “protecting the rich in the middle east.”
bbarrick8383;8885894:

Oil will mean nothing if we can’t afford it. We are either broke or were not, when your broke, a true conservative knows that all spending is on the table. Even military actions. I don’t want to cut military, I just want to slow things down for awhile till we can get our heads above the water again.

I agree that all things should be on the table as we look to balance our budget. But remember that a large part of the equation is economic growth. Our financial situation is a function of revenue coming from economic growth and controlling spending. Interrupt the flow of oil and you’ll see a drop in revenue such that the most drastic spending cuts won’t help.
bbarrick8383;8885894:

I don’t see Obama, Romney, Santorum probably Gingrich as well taking our financial problems serious.

Neither do I but they’re not all the same. I would put them in this order: Obama, Gingrich (lunar colony??!!) Santorum, and then Romney. Atleast Romney has experience running businesses and turning them around. He balanced the budget of Massachusetts while he was governor. The biggest mistake the Ron Paul supporters do is to say that “all the candidates are basically the same as Obama” That is nonsense.

Ishii

 

[Josephene]

That to me is a huge and unreasonable leap in logic. Let’s see, Ann Romney is diagnosed with MS in 1998, then early-stage breast cancer in 2008. Are you qualified to judge Ann Romney’s health in relation to the effect a presidential campaign would have on her? Then you say “his choice to run” reflects more of a committment to Mormonism than to his wife or country?

I must say, you said earlier about the press - *"Agree with the perceptions of the influnce of the media …also called ‘the world’ …as well as the prinice of this world who is a liar whom most of such media seem to choose to serve ! " *

yet, you then proceed to do the very things that you complain the press is doing - which is to make false or misleading/questionable claims about a candidate in order to influence people to vote a certain way! You have no evidence for what you say, just hearsay and your own leap of logic. It is wrong to falsely accuse or insinuate evil intentions of people. You need to be careful.

As for me, I am fine with Romney on the Mormon issue - and so is archbishop Chaput who says Romney’s Mormonism is a non-issue.

Nice to have you back on the forums after a six year hiatus.

Ishii

Thank you for caring enough , for attempt at fraternal correction !

If I may reciprocate , had not heard about the breast cancer issue ,till the debates …and had not heard or read much of same in media either …

Thus , it was brougt up as an issue that could have impact , in an open enquiring way such that persons who know more about same could share .

As far as insinuating 'evil 'ntentions , Romney being a Mormon , there is nothing evil on his part , for being tottally committed to same ; but for the rest, it would be good to know as to what values one is supporting !

Peace !

 

[rlg94086]

Thank you for the above informative link and response .

ArchBishop Chaput is well deserving of honor and trust in his appraisal of issues and good to see his impartial suggestion to search for skills as well as commitment to common good .

’Religious officials should not and cannot determine public policy '- there in might be the red flag …in the secret power structure of Mormonism, do we know if Romney is a senior , committed official …primarily owing fidelity to them !

There also can be concerns as to how much deep commitement can be to common good , if the system has bulit in antipathy towards those who are outside of the system …

Skills level too - we are told how fear of The Lord is beginning of wisdom …

We are in the midst of those who went after moneky god idols and such and we see our financial structure in flames ! - that is one of the traits attributed to the moneky god …

Thus , the need for caution, esp. when we have candidates whose history is not unlike some esteemed , forgiven sinners of the Bible , and have professed deep desire , to want to follow paths of those who embraced real commitment to common good !

Peace !

I can’t follow all of your post, due to your writing style, but I will address the bolded concern.

The article I linked for you was in response to a speech he gave explaining the roles of faith and governance. Romney’s values are influenced by his faith, and he isn’t going to do anything contrary to his faith. That said, he also isn’t going to legislate articles of his faith that would be contrary to our Constitution. There is no reason to be any more concerned about some “secret power structure of Mormonism” than there would be to have concern about a secret power structure of Catholicism.

You are using the exact same logic that anti-Catholics use against Catholic candidates. It isn’t acceptable against Catholics or Mormons.

 

[Fone_Bone_2001]

There is no reason to be any more concerned about some “secret power structure of Mormonism” than there would be to have concern about a secret power structure of Catholicism.

You are using the exact same logic that anti-Catholics use against Catholic candidates. It isn’t acceptable against Catholics or Mormons.

I agree.

 

[Josephene]

I can’t follow all of your post, due to your writing style, but I will address the bolded concern.

The article I linked for you was in response to a speech he gave explaining the roles of faith and governance. Romney’s values are influenced by his faith, and he isn’t going to do anything contrary to his faith. That said, he also isn’t going to legislate articles of his faith that would be contrary to our Constitution. There is no reason to be any more concerned about some “secret power structure of Mormonism” than there would be to have concern about a secret power structure of Catholicism.

You are using the exact same logic that anti-Catholics use against Catholic candidates. It isn’t acceptable against Catholics or Mormons.

Well, glad you can be that certain about Romney …while dealing with unforeseen consequences of plans that Obama is trying to implement - his anti Christian bias also should have been evident !

 

[Josephene]

Nice to have you back on the forums after a six year hiatus.

Ishii

Thank you too for the words of welcome !

Had not realised it has been that long !

Well, hope it would be only for the short term too …doing what is felt as part of needed civic duty .

firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2011/12/30/how-to-change-your-mind-2/#more-38199 - on the good from reading the Word ,each book , 20 times !

( we in The Church are blessed to hear the word in the right context of The Liturgy .)

There is also the recent message from Holy Father , on need for inner silence - might even be more beneficial , than these efforts !

God bless !

 

[ishii]

Well, glad you can be that certain about Romney …while dealing with unforeseen consequences of plans that Obama is trying to implement - his anti Christian bias also should have been evident !

Thank you for your earlier comments.

Obama’s anti-Catholic, anti-Christian policies are based on his embracing of secular leftism. The Mormon faith that Romney embraces has more in common from the standpoint of traditional judeo-christian values than you think. Again, we are electing a president not a pope.

Ishii

 

[lifeisbeautiful]

…on the fence…

 

[bbarrick8383]

Dr. Paul

 

[domandcarols]

Neither. Ew.

 

[Josephene]

’

Agree , there is God’s revealed truth in most faiths, to varying degree …

Yet , we have also been warned to be careful about the little yeast that can corrupt .

saint-mike.org/qa/fs/viewanswer.asp?QID=2078 - on the true nature of the origin of mormonism …not politically correct …

Agree too , we are not selecting the Pope but we have the option to choose someone who seems to want to follow the clear path that the Pope would like us to follow …we have seen what such efforts can do , such as in the silent fall of the Soviet Empire …and what happened when we chose not to heed …

Thus , we have been warned again by the Pope - to defend faith .

Would seem that would include choosing someone who may not have built in bias against The Church …including being a tool for propaganda , for purposes of conversion , one who might bring other policies against The Church , when there is enough power !

The options seem tough , at one level - yet …

God Bless !

 

[kitkatty]

Santorum for me. He is a good, decent and sincere man. Newt might be alright but he is just a little too wild. Now that being said I will probably vote for Santorum on primary should he still be in the running and will support the Republican nominee.

 

[brotherknight]

Here we go!!!

 

[Brendan]

Santorum. He is Catholic to the core!!

I’ve seen where he has defended several Catholic moral teachings articulately, and more importantly, correctly.

 

[bbarrick8383]

I agree. I would caution against a precipitous withdrawal that would cause chaos, but ultimately these countries need to stand on their own two feet. It may come as a surprise to you to know that I come down against nation-building and long drawn out wars that end up with permanent, costly bases and committments. Why are we still in Europe? Why are we still in Japan? I think that is a good question to ask. I may not agree with the extent to which Ron Paul (or you) wants to scale back our military committments and spending, but I do think we need to rethink our defense/foreign policy.

I think most conservatives are against nation building, I think our politicians are not.

I believe that we need to do more to protect our southern borders - not just from illegal immigration but because it represents a security problem.

I agree.

Our economy - and our financial problems - would get a lot worse if there was an interruption of the flow of oil. We have a direct interest in protecting oil as our economy depends on it. Its not about “protecting the rich in the middle east.”

Where are we protecting our oil interests?

BTW, I didn’t say protect the rich. I said if they want to get rich they will protect it themselves.

I agree that all things should be on the table as we look to balance our budget. But remember that a large part of the equation is economic growth. Our financial situation is a function of revenue coming from economic growth and controlling spending. Interrupt the flow of oil and you’ll see a drop in revenue such that the most drastic spending cuts won’t help.

If they were really serious about economy/oil flow there would be no restriction in drilling in the US. The oil companies are ready to drill, they poked 75 holes in my county alone last year and are starting horizontal drilling this year. But it’s stuck to private land.

Neither do I but they’re not all the same. I would put them in this order: Obama, Gingrich (lunar colony??!!) Santorum, and then Romney. Atleast Romney has experience running businesses and turning them around. He balanced the budget of Massachusetts while he was governor. The biggest mistake the Ron Paul supporters do is to say that “all the candidates are basically the same as Obama” That is nonsense.

I agree with Obama, as far as Romney and Gingrich, I have no idea. I don’t trust either of them. Romney’s Democrat successor said they would be facing a 1 billion dollar budget problem, so as a Democrat he raised taxes of course but…after Romney had already raised usage fees(he argued they weren’t taxes), so I don’t see things getting better there anytime soon.

You do realize that if Romney on what he use to run on there would be very, very little difference between him and Obama.

He said what he had to say to get elected in Massachusetts, I believe he’s saying what he has to say to get elected now. And I find it hard to believe anything that is coming out of his mouth. Conservatives have been kicking the dead horse about liberals believing Obama for a good while now and then turn around and support this guy?

 

[SwordofLight]

Thomas Woods (author of “How the Catholic Church Built Western Civilization”) recently weighed in on this:

youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=cu2xaEd2cmU

 

[Havard]

News article?