Time Magazine on Mitt Romney


Time Magazine has an article on its web site about Presidential hopeful, Mitt Romney titled, “What Romney Believes.” While the article does not get into the religious beliefs of Mitt Romney, it does get into some of the moral flip flops that he has made in his past in order to gain the support of the voters he is trying to reach.

Isn’t it interesting how the Mormon Church has done the same thing in it’s past? Here are a few changes;

      • In 1890 the Mormon Church issued what has been known as “The Manifesto.” This statement condemns polygamy and was necessary to institute in order for Utah to be admitted into the Union as a State.
      • There once was a time when Mormons downplayed the term “Christian” and instead wanted to be known as Mormons. Now, in an attempt to be accepted, they claim to be Christians.
      • In 1978 the LDS Church changed it’s doctrine regarding blacks holding the priesthood. Because of outside political pressure, blacks are now accepted.
      • In 1990 the Mormon Church made significant changes in their temple ceremonies because it became known that those rituals included blood oaths and the mockery of Christian clergy.

      Is Romney just following the example of his Church or does he really flip flop on important issues? Either way, it makes me uncomfortable to think about a man running for the Presidency when he changes back and forth. I can’t help but ask the question, what is he promising now that will change once he gets the position he desires? A wise man once said;

      But let your statement be, ‘Yes, yes’ or ‘No, no’; anything beyond these is of evil. (Matthew 5:37)

      Print Friendly
      Facebook Twitter Email

      4 Comments

      1. Keith, have you read anything from “Evangelicals for Mitt?”http://evangelicalsformitt.orgThey beg to differ on Mitt’s supposed “flip-flops.” :-)In a nutshell, campaign rhetoric from 1994 is one thing (against Ted Kennedy in Massachussetts); Romney’s actual record is quite conservative. Romney was a stake president, so I’m quite sure he’s always been anti-abortion; he (understandably) emphasized states’ rights to self-determination when he ran against Teddy in the mid 1990s; hence the charges of “flip-flopping.”While I’m sure many evangelicals would not ideally want to vote for a Mormon (and thus aid in “legitimizing” Mormonism), don’t you think that many/most would vote for a Mormon over Hillary Clinton? Romney’s surging in the early states (Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire), and I think he’ll do well in South Carolina (McCain and Guiliani are more unpalatable to evangelicals than Mitt). It will be an interesting ride!

      2. I’ve seen Evangelicals for Mitt before and you are right, I’m sure most Evangelicals would rather vote for Romney than Clinton. But that is either or thinking. If my convictions would not allow me to vote for Romney, there are other parties to consider. I think McCain and Guiliani are jokes for republicans. I’m hoping Duncan Hunter or Fred Thompson throw their hats into the ring. Either of them would be STRONG conservatives.As for Romney not doing flip-flops and the like, explain his “I’ve been hunting all my life” comment. As you can probably tell from my blog, this gun stuff is pretty important to me. 🙂

      3. Keith wrote:”As for Romney not doing flip-flops and the like, explain his “I’ve been hunting all my life” comment. As you can probably tell from my blog, this gun stuff is pretty important to me. :-)”That’s kind of the point. While his hunting experience does turn out to have been much less than he first represented it to be, there’s no need to worry that he would pry your guns from your “cold, dead hands” anytime soon. His actions as governor respecting the 2nd ammendment were solidly conservative (as were his actual actions regarding abortion, stem cell research, gay marriage, etc.; whatever campaign rhetoric he may have engaged in).I like Duncan Hunter as well, but he’s unfortunately nowhere on the radar screen. I honestly can’t understant the hulaballoo over Fred Thompson. His “flip-flops” are much more egregious than Mitt’s, yet he’s somehow regarded by many as some sort of conservative Messiah. I’m not sure whether trying to bypass paying his dues through the primary/caucus and debate gauntlet will ultimately hurt or hinder any aspirations he has, but if he throws his hat into the ring in earnest, Mitt’s flip-flops will compare favorably.Like I said, it will be an interesting ride, win, lose, or draw. For the first time in quite some time, there is no incumbent vice president running, so the field is *wide* open. Hillary will have to earn her nomination as well, in an interesting Democratic primary/caucus gauntlet.

      4. McKay said, “While his hunting experience does turn out to have been much less than he first represented it to be, there’s no need to worry that he would pry your guns from your “cold, dead hands” anytime soon.”You’re missing the point. He lied in an attempt to get my vote. Yeah, yeah, I know. He’s a politician. But, he’s a MORMON politician and I expect more from him because of it. The first part of the 13th article of faith states, “We believe in being honest, true…”

      Leave a Comment