Results 1 to 15 of 35

Thread: Romney and the Mormon Cult

Hybrid View

  1. #1

    Romney and the Mormon Cult

    Is the Mormon Church a cult? Well let's see. What is the definition of cult?

    Cult
    (kŭlt)
    n. 1. a. A religion or religious sect generally considered to be extremist or false, with its followers often living in an unconventional manner under the guidance of an authoritarian, charismatic leader.
    b. The followers of such a religion or sect.

    2. A system or community of religious worship and ritual.
    3. The formal means of expressing religious reverence; religious ceremony and ritual.
    4. A usually nonscientific method or regimen claimed by its originator to have exclusive or exceptional power in curing a particular disease.
    5. a. Obsessive, especially faddish, devotion to or veneration for a person, principle, or thing.
    b. The object of such devotion.

    6. An exclusive group of persons sharing an esoteric, usually artistic or intellectual interest.




    OK so under those definitions most organized religion can be considered Cults. But I personally feel that the Mormon Church is right up there on that list. I bring it up because of the whole Romney deal.
    Mormons pledge themselves to their church and promise to hold Mormon values above all else, even secular. So if Romney gets in (he doesn't stand a chance, but still) who will he be the most loyal to? American Taxpayers? The Mormon Church? or the 1% he already goes to bat for day in and day out? Where are this mans priorities.

    Here's my problem. If he is honest and true to his religion then he MUST hold us all to Mormon values. If he isn't honest about his faith and his church and does NOT put the Mormon Church first then who will he be loyal to? Can he be loyal to anyone is he lies to himself and his family by not obeying the Mormon Values?

    Where does The Waffle stand and does he even deserve a chance after so much backpeddling and inconsistent rhetoric?

    Does anyone here think StinkMitt even has a chance at winning the election?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Diego, CA.
    Posts
    1,162
    The problem with it is that from almost any perspective you can paint any of the major religions as a cult...they are almost all ruled by men or dominated by them and are used to control the flocks.

    Using the definition you listed, Catholicism would fall into that definition, its ruled by Pope (God's sole representative on earth) it's priests have been committing sex crimes against children, they worship idols, and expect money from its followers.

    It reeks of David Koresh but on a grander scale. My point is be careful who you are about to judge lest you be judged by someone else's perspective. You can't paint a whole religion and its people with a broad brush. Most people don't know much about Mormonism outside of it...lots of misinformation and there is even more diversity within the religion itself.

    It's a brave thread though...I'm pretty sure when Kennedy was running for office, some of this same discussion was taking place.
    "if its ok for shaolin wuseng to break his vow then its ok for me to sneak behind your house at 3 in the morning and bang your dog if buddha is in your heart then its ok"-Bawang

    "I get what you have said in the past, but we are not intuitive fighters. As instinctive fighters, we can chuck spears and claw and bite. We are not instinctively god at punching or kicking."-Drake

    "Princess? LMAO hammer you are such a pr^t"-Frost

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Canada!
    Posts
    23,110
    All churches, temples and mosques are used by cults by definition.
    All organized religion is a cult, by definition.

    Be they mormons, jews, muslims, buddhists, anglicans (episcopalians) catholics or otherwise.
    All the people involved in that are engaged in cult practices.

    Mormons aren't any different in that sense, they are just more modern than the old ones.
    Kung Fu is good for you.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    22,250
    Cult, sect, all the same thing really like has been said.
    There really hasn't been an example of Romney's faith influencing his politics in a way that is different thasn any other candidates.
    Sure the Morman religion has some distinct things that are different and perhaps make people uncomfortable but that is for the individual voter to decide in regards to Romney.

    I think that term cult tends to make on thing of a small, closed to the public, religious group with some practices that may be viewed as "questionable" and perhaps even "disturbing" but even to that view all religions, heck in all ideologies are cults.

    I disagree with the term "false" being used to describe a cult because that would require a "judgment" called that very few are qualified to make.
    Psalms 144:1
    Praise be my Lord my Rock,
    He trains my hands for war, my fingers for battle !

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Canada!
    Posts
    23,110
    The bigger issue with Romney is his complete disconnect from the common man. That guy functions at the 80,000 feet level, where the oxygen is really thin...

    He is surprisingly unaware of the plight of the common man.
    Would make a useless leader simply on that point alone.

    SR- the word "false" should be replaced with non-evidential. I think anyone can make the observation that the evidence is lacking without making the outright call of "False".
    Kung Fu is good for you.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    IL
    Posts
    998
    If anything, Romney fits the definition of AntiChrist far more relaibly than President Obama. Romney has the backing of the Corporate Aristocracy and despite his flipflops, he is still pursued, courted and counted as one of 'THEM' while Obama is not, does not and he usually tells it like it is instead of sugarcoating reality.

    Keep in mind, all elected officials are liars to x degree but it is better to be a peoples' candidate than a candidate set up by a committee and have citizens choose the choice of said committee!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    DengFeng
    Posts
    1,469
    Were always so careful to respect other peoples religious beliefs these days and publicly we try not to judge people for it. But there are beliefs which are so ridiculous that it is a necessity for the future of our society that we do judge people on them, because these people need to be kept away from things like scissors and children and the nuclear football.

    Is mormonism SO ridiculous that every one who adheres to it is by extension also ridiculous? I have no idea, like Lucas everything I know about it comes from south park.

    It would be really funny if at the end of it all, it turned out the mormons were right....

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Midgard
    Posts
    10,852
    I'm Mormon and you guys offend me. I'm off to read my golden tomes to my wives, and pay homage to the late great Rodney Dangerfield.
    For whoso comes amongst many shall one day find that no one man is by so far the mightiest of all.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    VAN.B.C.
    Posts
    4,218
    Quote Originally Posted by Syn7 View Post







    Here's my problem. If he is honest and true to his religion then he MUST hold us all to Mormon values. If he isn't honest about his faith and his church and does NOT put the Mormon Church first then who will he be loyal to? Can he be loyal to anyone is he lies to himself and his family by not obeying the Mormon Values?

    I'm pretty sure Mormon's heard of ww1 and ww2 they ain't trying to have a third one...he'd be loyal to the "defense of the nation" anyone who's anyone knows if you bring your faith into politics someone will shoot you.

    http://lds.about.com/od/mormons/a/church_membership.htm

    ^it's only 14 million Mormons lol

  10. #10
    Mitt Romney isn't just a presidential hopeful who also happens to be part of the Mormon church. He was a bishop which is way at the top in that church. Like being a cardinal in the Vatican. He isn't just some civilian. He's a born wealthy religious leader. That sh1t is scary to a whole bunch of people. I hope he gets the nomination coz I think he's easy to beat.

    Honestly tho, I think Santorum will take the nomination at the convention in June or July, whenever it is.

    There will be no clear cut winner in delegates and the deals will start being made at the convention.

    I s'pose it's possible that all 3 end up in that administration (if they win, that is). Like how Hillary used her leverage for a top job. None of those 3 will be VP candidates tho. One will be POTUS and the rest will have higher jobs in that scenario.

    But yeah, I call Santorum. It's a scary thought, but it's what I think will happen given the current political climate.

    I don't think he can beat Obama either tho.

    I think dems need to start paying more attention to primary races in their areas and start challenging the establishment democrats and get some real ones in there. It's unfortunate that yall are stuck with a spineless wimp like Obama for another 4 years. Better than a Santorum or a Romney or a Gingrich. Ron Paul would be waaaaay better. I agree with at least 1/3 of what he believes and that is more than almost any other republican. Certainly as far as the ol' skoolers are concerned.

    Already the republicans ALONE have spent double what both democrats and republicans COMBINED spent on the 2008 primary. DOUBLE, and there's a few months left?

    As of a few days ago Obama had raised 42% of his donations from small donors. That means $200 or less. Paul raised 46% from small donors. Gingrich 48% and Santorum 49%. This shows grass roots support for these guys, at least in some areas. Romneys small donors amount to 10% of his total. In fact 97% of Romneys super pac money came in donations of $25k or higher. That is why this man is not good for America. He will be expected to make returns on these donations(retainers are what they really are).

    The supreme court made a very VERY poor ruling in 2010 when they opened the door for super-pacs.

    There is a very strong movement with massive financial weight behind it that is fighting corporate donations. They say that any corp that gives from the corp treasury thru other names trying to stay secret, they will be outed and they will feel it. They can make transparent political donations from their political funds. One of the organizations is called CAPS(Coalition for Accountability in Political Spending) and they have some serious weight. Check em out.

    http://caps.nationbuilder.com/join_us?splash=1

    Also there is the WolfPac, check it out. All these guys are doing whatever they can to keep big money out of politics. Eventually an ideal accomplishment would be fully public funded elections with ZERO private moneys.

    http://www.wolf-pac.com/


    these are just a few examples. There are a bunch of groups coordinating and really starting to make way. Stay up, it's coming.

    Canada too. Same problem. There are people working on it, but we aren't as tough as CAPS yet.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •