Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
TOP NEWS   LeftArrow - Townhall.com   RightArrow - Townhall.com  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
Kathryn Jean Lopez :: Townhall.com Columnist
A Mormon Can Be President
by Kathryn Jean Lopez
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Who should McCain select as his running mate?






Mitt Romney's religion keeps coming up on the presidential campaign trail. He seems, at times, a little annoyed that this is the case. I am, too. Any American or admirer of the constitutional system would also be.

Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts, is a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. That fact alone could keep commentators in business. "Are they Christians?" "Was the Garden of Eden really in Missouri?" "And about the undergarments ..."

What all these questions have in common is that they have nothing to do with the presidency of the United States.

When a radio talk-show host pushed the theology questions a bit too far this summer, Romney responded: "I'm not going to have a conversation about what my church views are because ... that's not the nature of the office I'm running for."

Commentators suggest he give a speech on his religion, comparing it to John F. Kennedy's 1960 speech to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association. However, Romney's not likely to pull a Kennedy by defensively distancing himself from his religion. As Romney said to a colleague of mine in November, "I know there are some people hoping that I will simply declare in some way that my church is all well and good, but that I don't really believe it and I don't try to follow it. That's not going to happen. I'm proud of my faith. I love my faith. It is the faith of my fathers and mothers. I do my best to live by its teachings. And it in every way would teach me to follow the Constitution and follow the rule of law and recognize that my duty is to my country."

That is the American answer to the question about whether one's religion indicates one's fitness to lead this nation. We have no established religion, and we have no religious tests in our constitutional system. Romney's religion is a topic for religious conferences, not for talk shows. And it certainly should not keep a man from the White House.

An early November poll from The Wall Street Journal/NBC indicated that only 38 percent of respondents thought America is ready for a Mormon president. But this race has not gone national yet, and once the American people get the chance to meet Romney, they will see him as the qualified candidate with executive experience that he is.

Not everyone agrees, though. As one evangelical associated with another campaign tells me, "Sadly, I believe that many people ... will not vote for Romney simply because of his religion."

While there is a lot to quibble about with John F. Kennedy's speech, he was prescient about one thing: "For while this year it may be a Catholic against whom the finger of suspicion is pointed, in other years it has been, and may someday be again, a Jew -- or a Quaker -- or a Unitarian-- or a Baptist."

It is that realization that won Nancy French over. Now an official "Evangelical for Mitt," French was originally staunchly against a Mormon for president for theological reasons. Ultimately, she realized, "People of faith united are much stronger than we would be if we splinter and fight amongst ourselves."

If you are not going to support Republican Mitt Romney for president because you don't think he is the guy to win the war on terror, that is your call. If you are pro-life and you do not buy his abortion conversion story, it's a free country. But if you are not going to support Mitt Romney for president because he is Mormon, or because you think he will not be elected president because he is a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, say your prayers for America.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Kathryn Jean Lopez, editor of National Review Online, writes a weekly column of conservative political and social commentary for Newspaper Enterprise Association.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Subject: Paul was not alone.
Prophets have always been persecuted.

Acts 7:52 "Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? And they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers?

Angels do assist Christ in His work.

Acts 5: 52 "Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it."

The Lord always brings forth His works through revelation and angels. He also appoints witnesses to testify of His reality. Even Saul who became Paul knew this.

Stephen's testimony of the resurrected Christ.
Acts 7:55-56 "...Behold I see the heavens opened and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God." The Son of man was Jesus Christ born in the flesh and resurrected with a perfect body of flesh and bone.
God mentioned here was God the Father - standing on the left-hand side of Christ.

Peter was also commanded to take the gospel to the Gentiles.
Acts 10:42-48 "While Peter spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word....because that on the gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost...."

Talent Scout - another statement you made was false.


Paul as missionary #1 and Peter?
Talent Scout - No other man was appointed by Jesus to teach the NT truths to the Gentiles except Paul? One man for a certain mission?

Paul was not alone....

Peter testified...
Acts 10:39 "And we are witnesses of all the things which he did both in the land of he Jews..."
Acts 10:40 "Him God raised up the third day and shewed him openly;"
vs. 41 "Not to all the people but to witnesses chosen before of God, ....
vs. 42"And He commanded us to preach unto the people and to testify that it is he which was ordained of God to be the Judge of quick and dead."

Obviously, Christ chose others to preach unto the people. Paul has more of his words recorded, that is true. Does that mean that others chosen of Christ did not record their words because they were not compiled into our present day New Testament?
(Food for thought..)

Paul also knew that he was not authorized to teach certain principles without consulting with the other apostles.
Acts: 15:6 "And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter...."

Paul also knew that the Holy Ghost had the power to instill the truth into every apostles heart and mind.
Acts 15:9 "And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith."
Unity of faith.

Acts 5:32 Paul would learn this truth as well - that apostles also testified that...
"And we are his witnesses of these things; and so is also the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to them that obey him."

Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily dose of conservative columns, editorial cartoons, talk radio, news, and more!
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.