A vote for Satan
Some Bible-thumper named Bill Keller (who by the looks of the picture goes to John Edwards' hairdresser) has managed to make Al Sharpton look like a moderate statesman concerning Mitt Romney:
"If you vote for Mitt Romney, you are voting for Satan!" he writes in his daily devotional to be sent out to 2.4 million e-mail subscribers tomorrow.
I guess Mitt now has a lock on the death-metal vote.
"For the nearly 200 years this cult has been in existence they have strived for mainstream acceptance. They are the most devious of all the cults since they have always tried to portray themselves as 'just another Christian group' when in fact, they are no more Christian than a Muslim is! Their deception starts with their name, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. Sounds like a Christian church doesn't it? Some Mormons have recently changed their name to simply Community of Christ to disguise even better who they are in an attempt to lure people in."
OK..but RLDS/CofC have always resented the title "Mormon".
There is no excuse, no justification for supporting and voting for a man who will be used by satan to lead the souls of millions into the eternal flames of hell!"
I guess John, Son of Cain is right out too, then.
By the sounds of it, this fruitcake would vote for Hillary before Romney...which proves how mentally disturbed the Religious Right is.
Comments
Posted by: healtheland
Posted on: May 11, 2007 11:43 AM
No, Bill Keller has stated that leaving the spot blank or choosing a third party candidate should be done in that instance. Does that make him a "fruitcake", or a principled person?
Posted by: Jeffrey Quick
Posted on: May 11, 2007 12:46 PM
As a libertarian, I am of course in favor of principled stands in the voting booth, and choosing a third-party candidate is almost always better than voting Duopoly. The question is : assuming Romney has indeed repented of his more liberal viewpoints, is one willing to forego Romney's Christian-positive policies in order to not grant legitimacy to Mormonism? It's the position that Romney's religion is a dealbreaker that I consider a fruitcake position. OTOH, I probably wouldn't vote for a Moslem president, but in that case, I would expect to find things in the voting record that would break the deal before we directly factored in religion. It wouldn't be about religius belief, but based on reasonable expectations about foreign policy. Ultimately, if the guy has the policies you want, religion shouldn't be an issue, and if he doesn't have those policies, religion is irrelevant anyway. Avoiding Romney as a faux conservative is something I can understand; avoiding him because his election would legitimize his religion is something I don't understand.
Posted by: southern man
Posted on: February 5, 2008 08:45 AM
you people need a good dose of the Bible,
Biblical faith should affect every decision you make, especially one of who you elect to lead your country
read the book, "my kingdom come", it exposes the mormon plan for setting up a theocracy
Posted by: Jeffrey Quick
Posted on: February 5, 2008 10:30 AM
Southern man, I'd be inclined to agree with you...but then you say we should make a decision based on a book other than the Bible. How consistent is that?
If we really obeyed "Thou shalt not steal" and "thou shalt not kill", we'd never vote at all, because by doing so we give our assent to a government that can only exist by doing both.