h1

Are Christians Bigots If They Can Not Support Mitt Romney Because He Is A Mormon

Are Christians Bigots If They Can Not Support Mitt Romney Because He Is A Mormon

Also Click Here To See 7 Questions That Christians Should Ask Themselves Before Voting For A Mormon  

Some say yes.  Have you heard the talking points all over the media lately.  The “anti-Mormon bigotry of some” etc..  I have read or heard pundits lament that there is so much anti-Mormon bigotry.  Comments like these have come from the conservative media outlets.  I have heard Dick Morris, Sean Hannity, Micheal Medved and others all talk about the disgrace and un-America anti-Mormon bigotry of some.  On my Oct. 19th blog commentary located at Rett Hatcher & Company, I wrote, “A Pashionate Responce to Mark Demos and Bob Jones III: Why Evangelicals Cannot Support Mitt Romney” there I stated my disappointment with Bob Jones III and Mark Demos for endorsing a Mormon and I explained that the theological differences are not trivial and should not be overlooked.  I had a couple of response’s that stated that I was a bigot.  To be sure my comments were pointed and I understand how a Mormon would be offended though that was not my goal.  But the question is, are Christians bigots if they cannot support Mitt because he is a Mormon.  In the days ahead, I will be posting more on this subject.  For now read this compelling article from a former Mormon who openly says that he will not vote for Romney because he is a Mormon.  CLICK HERE to read “Why I As A Former Mormon Would Not Vote For Mitt Romney” published by the Free Republic. 

 

 What Mormonism Teaches About Following Their Living Prophet

Also check out the following link to the text of a speech concerning the role of the living Prophet who is the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. 

I am sorry to say it, but the position of the LDS “Church” is very scary and requires complete devotion to a man.  This is one of many reasons why Mormonism is considered very cultic. 

Many are just ignorant of what Mormonism teaches.  This fact is a testament to how well Mormonism has succeeded in its add campaign and door to door work in trying to present Mormonism as a legitimate representation of Christianity.  I am afraid that many who are crying “bigotry” are simply ignorant of the nature of Mormonism.  They would not cry “bigotry” if some were opposed to a person running for President if he were a member of David Koresh’s cult the Branch Davidians.  There is just a lot of ignorance in the main stream media and even with conservative political pundits about what Mormonism teaches.  Below are a few disturbing summary points taken from Ezra Taft Benson, the 13th Prophet and President of the Church of Latter Day Saints.

# 1  The Living Prophet is the only man who speaks for the Lord in everything.

# 2 The Living Prophet is more vital to us than the standard works.

# 3 The Living Prophet is more important to us than a dead Prophet.

# 6 The Prophet doesn’t have to say “Thus saith the Lord” to give us scripture. 

# 9 The Prophet can receive revelation on any matter, temporal or spiritual.

#10 The Prophet man be involved in civic matters.

#14 The Prophet and the Presidency - the living Prophet and the First Presidency - follow them and be blessed, reject them and suffer.

… If we want to know how well we stand with the Lord, then let us ask ourselves how well we stand with His moral captain.  How closely do our lives harmonize with the words of the Lord’s anointed-the Living Prophet the President of the Church of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.   

To see this for yourself and see what the role of the Mormon Prophet is, check out the complete article entitled Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophetlinked from BYU.

Also, to read a pdf of a brief summary of the 14 Fundamentals, CLICK BELOW.

 summary-of-role-of-mormon-prophet-pdf.pdf

61 comments

  1. Huckabee would not agree with you. Huckabee has very directly stated “I’ve stayed away from talking about Mitt Romney’s faith and I told him face to face, I said ‘I don’t think you’re being a Mormon ought to make you more or less qualified for being a president” (http://desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071212/NEWS09/71212060/1056)

    Perhaps you need to find a new candidate to support because Hackabee does not share your views. He clearly believes and has stated that you should not vote against someone because of their religious background which is precisely what this site is promoting.

    Free speech allows you to say these things, and I won’t hold them against you. It’s your right to speak as you wish, but I would suggest that you need to find a new candidate to support because Huckabee’s views are clearly not in line with your views.

    Respectfully,

    John


  2. The word is BIGOT!!!! LEARN TO SPELL.

    The answer is yes! Those who won’t vote for Romney solely on grounds that he is not a Mormon, should be considered bigots.

    Want to try calling Mormonism a Cult? Well, the Mormon Church stays out of politics, does not endorse any candidate, nor does it ever try to influence its members on who to vote for, but only encourages its members to vote responsibly. The encourage freedom.

    Now look at what you pastors are doing—trying to influence your flock to think in a certain manner, to vote for a particular candidate, basically trying to influence others to vote on grounds that are irrelevant. That sounds cultish to me!

    The fact is you pastors are threatened by the Mormon Church because you know people will look into it, and you are afraid of losing your flock, and there income. Shame on you. What you are doing is simply dividing this nation and encouraging others to hate.

    Want to talk about ignorance? Remember that Christ said “By their fruits, ye shall know them”. The Mormon’s reputation of living honest, clean, moral, and charitable lives, how can anyone think their living comes from teachings that are evil. That PURE ignorance!


  3. Mormon leaders encourage Mormons to study out political candidates for themselves and decide for themselves who best will keep America free. Evangelical leaders ask their followers to blindly vote for the candidate they endorse without regard to policies. Which one sounds more like the cult?


  4. The followers of Moses would sure as EDITED say the same things about Moses, during his time. Therefore, are you saying it’s scary how obedient some of the followers of Moses, and other prophets are?

    Why is it wrong for the followers of Gordon B. Hinckley to hold him to that esteem?

    Can I quote from the Mormon Doctrine & Covenants about the relationship between church and state: D&C 134:9: “We do not believe it just to mingle religious influence with civil government…”

    Therefore, Romney is under no religious influence of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.


  5. The fact is you pastors are threatened by the Mormon Church because you know people will look into it, and you are afraid of losing your flock, and there income. Shame on you. What you are doing is simply dividing this nation and encouraging others to hate.

    Hey Frederick…THE WORD IS THEIR, NOT THERE…LEARN TO SPELL…


  6. Comical take. You suggest that voting for Mitt would be dangerous because he might be controlled by Salt Lake–there is no evidence to suggest such control in his past and this is directly contrary to his declaration in his latest speech. Then, you endorse Huckabee, ignore his long record of prematurely releasing felons from prison almost exclusively on the recommendations of respected pastors. Based on their histories, it is obvious that Mike is more likely than Mitt to be the puppet of a religious organization. But, maybe you like that since you buy into Mike’s particular organization?

    And yes, by definition anyone who cannot vote for a candidate based on his Mormonism is a bigot. “Bigot: a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.” “Intolerant: not tolerating or respecting beliefs, opinions, usages, manners, etc., different from one’s own, as in political or religious matters; bigoted.” These are the first definitions for these two words from http://www.dictionary.com; Other dictionary sources give near-identical definitions. The term bigot originated from discrimination against a new/weird religion in France; the definition expanded in recent centuries.

    You don’t avoid being a bigot just because you can explain that the religion is even more weird/inappropriate than people realize. I’m confident that you’re a bigot. That’s unfortunate, but I’m hopeful that you’ll find the courage to change.


  7. Two LDS principles you might think about incorporating:
    *We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.
    *We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.

    What law might that be?
    Article VI of the Constitution; “no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”
    That statement is an admonition to all of the nation’s citizens to demand in candidates for office all manner of qualification but none based on religion.


  8. In responce to the quotation of the following…

    Article VI of the Constitution; “no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”

    It is true that the Federal Government itself is not to require a religious test for a candidate to hold office. I enthusiasiticly agree with the Constitution. I do not want the Federal Government through court justices or anyone else to administer such a test. It would be a nightmare.

    However, to quote Article VI is bait and switch and is completely irrelevant. Mitt Romney quoted it in his speech at Texas A&M and not one journalist that I have heard or seen called him on it. Article VI is not even relevant to our discussion.

    I agree with Article VI. But Article VI does not preclude my individual rights and personal freedom of religion. Article VI, does not prescibe or dictate to individuals. Gov. Romney and others use Article VI and then say that a person should not be choosen or rejected because of his religion, as if that were what Article VI mandated upon a free people.

    Gov. Romney nor anyone else has any right to mandate to anyone else what criteria they should or should not use in choosing a candidate for President. On this website, I am making the case to a free people by appealing to their own concience that they should not vote for a Mormon. But I do not seek to make it a law nor do I not seek to confuse people as if there was already such a law in the Constitution.

    If I choose not to vote for Romney only because I did not like the fact that he came from Boston that would be my right to do so. If someone votes for Hillary just because she is a woman, that would be their right as well. I think these last two examples would be poor reasons to choose a candidate, but I would say a person has that right and that there is no law against it. It is wrong to use Article VI to try to confuse the issue as if there was a law against choosing a candidate based upon an individuals personal evaluation of the cadidates religion. It is to misslead people to think that somehow they are not to believe that religion is a legitiment issue for a person to consider when selecting a candidate for President. It is completely bait and switch to use Article VI in that way and to try to do so is to insult my inteligence.

    The only thing Article VI does is limint the power of the Federal Government and declares that there is no formal religious test to hold national office as would be conducted by the Federal Government. At the time of this amendment, however every state in the union had a religious test to hold office in their respective states. This is another issue and would take a history lesson, but I will point out that the 13 states required that a person be a Christian to hold office. You can check that out for yourselves. But the Federal Government would have had difficulty with the various Christian denominations in the 13 states if it had one religious test.

    However John Jay, the first Supreme Court Justice of the U.S. said that Christians should ONLY elect Christians as their leaders. These sentiments were also shared by other founders and there are documentions of their statements that I hope to bring to this blog soon.

    If Article VI meant that I as an individual could not evaluate a persons religion when I consider a candidate for President, then Article VI would be limiting my freedom of religion and would be used by thought police who would try to determine my motives for choosing a candidate. This would be a total attack on my personl liberty to limit my freedom of religion. It would limit my exercise of concience and conviction when it comes to how I vote. Also, to say that I should not share my religioius convictions to others would be to limit my freedom of speech. Article VI does none of that and it would be next to impossible to enforce if it did.

    The press should call Mitt Romney on his wrong use of Artcle VI. It is a bait and switch tatic if ever it has been done. I think that many people who use the argument may be honestly confused themselves however. Hopefully this will clear up that matter.

    Even if you disagree with my convictions, surely you must agree that Article VI would not limit my right to select a candidate and vote according to my religious convictions. Let us stop confusing everyone by wrongly using Article VI in the debate.


  9. Sherwood: There’s more to Article VI than you realize.

    While any constitutional lawyer would agree with you that “Article VI does not preclude my individual rights and personal freedom of religion,” few indeed agree with you that the intent of Article VI only extended to governmental tests of candidates. The bulk of those who have written on subject see Article VI as, at the very least, an admonition to the people to not vote based on religion. And few indeed would agree that the founders viewed religion as “a legitiment issue for a person to consider when selecting a candidate for President.” However, you are right that Article VI does not grant any state regulation of a man’s continence (thank heavens). This leaves the door open for men to vote contrary to the recommendations of the founders. Clearly the founders would have known religion would be a factor in people’s minds when choosing a candidate. But saying they saw it as a legitimate issue is untrue.

    As you mentioned, 1787 was a different time. Many states had a religious test. Those same states also required you to be a multi-millionaire (equivalent from that time) to be eligible for legislative or executive office. These requirements disappeared when the constitution was ratified because the founders were forming a “more perfect union.” While it is true that everyone at that time believed in God, some of the founders were not even close to being “Christian” according to the strict definition established by modern Evangelicals/ancient creeds. Thomas Jefferson was very clearly NOT a Christian according to modern Evangelical standards.


  10. While it is true that Article VI is not applicable to private citizens, it is clearly indicative of the intent of the Founders that one’s faith not disqualify an individual from the presidency.

    From Michael Novak’s article “Faith of out Fathers: “Some of the Founders were uncertain about the divinity of Jesus and how to think of it—as Christians have always been since the beginning (not only in individual hearts, but also in great public debates and Councils of the Church). That Jesus Christ is both God and man is central to Christian faith; and yet how to understand that is not easy. Here is a letter to the President of Yale from Benjamin Franklin, undoubtedly one of the three or four least orthodox Christians among the top one hundred Founders:

    “‘I believe in one God, creator of the universe. That he governs it by his Providence. That he ought to be worshiped. That the most acceptable service we render to him is doing good to his other children. That the soul of man is immortal, and will be treated with justice in another life respecting its conduct in this. These I take to be the fundamental principles of all sound religion, and I regard them as you do in whatever sect I meet with them.

    As to Jesus of Nazareth, my opinion of whom you particularly desire, I think the system of morals, and his religion, as he left them to us, the best the world ever saw, or is likely to see; but I apprehend it has received various corrupting changes, and I have, with most of the present dissenters in England some doubts as to his divinity; tho’ it is a question I do not dogmatize upon, having never studied it, and think it needless to busy myself with it now, when I expect soon an opportunity of knowing the truth with less trouble.’” http://www.michaelnovak.net/Module/Article/ArticleView.aspx?id=205

    Given the various views of the Founders or religion generally, it is clear that the underlying intent evidenced by Article VI is that this nation not impose a religious test upon it’s leaders. Although it may be legal to discriminate based on religion, that doesn’t mean that it is right to do so. That is the point the Gov. Romney makes by mentioning Article VI.


  11. Sherwood: I noticed you also failed to address the many legitimate points criticizing your article by others as well as myself. Your assertions have been questioned, but you skipped the criticisms. Posting a misunderstood view on Article VI doesn’t make the previous criticisms go away.


  12. Slick-Willy
    As to your last post again you are right. Please give me some time. I need to do some other things and I will try to respond thoughtfully latter tonight. I think the quality of the discussion is good and others have made good points.

    Thank you for your contributions. I will respond this evening I trust.


  13. Sherwood Haisty - you are correct that Article 6 only limits the Government from religious discrimination during an election. Fortunately, for you, it is not a crime to be a bigot. In this great nation, you are free to discriminate by gender, race, age and religion and even hair color when you decide who to vote for. As for me, I am voting for Romney not because he is a upper class white 60 year old mormon male (with a touch of gray hair), but because he is the most qualified, the most competent, shares my values and has the most integrity.

    Rather than imagine what might possibly happen if a Mormon was elected to a public office - why not investigate what has actually happened? There have been dozens of LDS Governors, Senators and Congressmen. There are about 16 Mormons serving in the US Congress today. And certainly, Romney’s own record as Governor will illustrate how his religion has influenced his service so far.

    Unfortunately, no one bothers to offer any REAL examples (it is not as if Mormons have perfect records) - just fear mongering. It is shameful and un-American.


  14. Or, for example, the rather incendiary charge that Mormons believe that Jesus is the spirit brother of Lucifer, which I think is designed to inflame not to inform. People are never given the theological context in which that proposition makes some sense and they are never really told what the alternative is. It has always seemed to me rather odd to say that one view is blasphemous but the other view is not blasphemous. You see, it is one thing, as some of you have heard me say, to believe that Satan or Lucifer is the spirit brother of Jesus, the Son of Heavenly Father went wrong. That’s an explanation, maybe, of evil in one sense. We don’t typically hold parents responsible if they raise their children well and the child simply takes a bad turn–becomes a serial killer or something like that. On the other hand, if the parents raise the child to do what he ends up doing, we regard the parents as morally culpable.

    More comparable to what I see as the traditional theological view is that Jesus is the Son of God but Lucifer is the creation of an all-powerful, all-knowing God. He knew exactly what he was doing. He knew exactly what would happen (because he sees the future perfectly), and created Lucifer out of nothing. That seems, to me, to create at least a dilemma, a little problem, called a problem of evil. Because then God knowingly is leading down the path that will lead to Auschwitz and the Killing Fields of Cambodia. And I’m not sure that’s a real improvement over the Latter-day Saint view. It just seems to me that if you are going to look at theological problems that you perceive with one view, you have to acknowledge that there are some real dilemmas connected with the other view as well.


  15. Huckleberry is a lightweight, and will get eaten alive by the dems. See Drudge Report of 12/12.


  16. The interesting thing about recently reported discussions of Huckabee’s extensive theology training is the fact that he keeps claiming (falsely) that he knows little about Mitt Romney’s religion. In all Huckabee’s study of religion, did he never take a comparative religion class? Did he never read a book about Mormonism? At all the religious conferences he attended, including the Baptist convention in Salt Lake City, did he never hear speeches about Mormonism? What did he do with all the rabidly anti-Mormon literature he has received over the years? In his years as a preacher did he never prepare and deliver a sermon on the so-called evils of Mormonism? Hasn’t jhe checked out this web site? Hasn’t he done any opposition research on Romney? OR IS HUCKABEE JUST ANOTHER LYING POLITICIAN?

    Huckabee’s whole campaign is dependent on his support from evangelical ministers. Take a look at this web site. They are anti-Mormons bigots who love to debate doctrine and who would never vote for any Mormon. Huckabee’s phony claims of ignorance and tolerance are belied by the intolerance of his most crucial supporters. We will never see Huckabee condemn the extreme anti-Mormon rhetoric of these pastors because they are doing his work so well. His stealth anti-Mormon campaign as a self-proclaimed “Christian leader” depends on their open bigotry being spread to their congregations.

    Does any pastor on this site really believe Huckabee when he says he’s ignorant of Romney’s faith? How about a straight answer, huh?

    If Huckabee really believes (as he publicly states) that Romney’s faith is no reason to vote against him, why do “Christian” pastors on this site disagree with their leader? I guess they know Huckabee’s tolerance is just a necessary facade for public consumption. Huckabee doesn’t really believe it any more than the pastors on this site.

    I guess these pastors think it’s ok for Huckabee to lie because the end justifies the means, right? I just wonder what else Huckabee is willing to lie about.


  17. The answer to your question Mr Haisty, is an easy one: Yes. Christians are bigots if they can’t vote for Romney cuz he’s a Mormon. It’s a simple question, and a simple answer….


  18. Sadly, the evangelical community has made this a Baptist vs. Mormons race. Too bad that they’ve chosen the Presidency as their battle zone!! Considering all that’s at stake - the economy, foreign policy, crime, etc, all of which Huckabee has proven to be very ignorant - why don’t you take your battle to the pulpit??? Why drag the United States down the drain with this vendetta?? You may think you rule the Republican party - speaks of an “arrogant bunker mentality…” doesn’t it?? But the country will revolt against your arrogance and manipulation and you will do more harm to your cuase than good. Pull your head out guys….


  19. Right on, Kermit. Huck supporters, giddy with the recent ascendancy of “one of them”, need to wake up and smell the coffee. The rest of the Christian Right and the thinking arm of the Republican party are shaking in their boots at the spector of a Huck candidacy, convinced he would be a disastrous president. Listen to them. They are trying with all they have to pursuade the Huckabites to come to their senses. A vote for Huck is, in the words of people who understand the whole picture, political suicide for the Right, especially the Religious Right. Your mindless fervor plays into all the worst stereotypes re: so-called Christian Conservatives. There’s more to being a good president than being a good “Christian. Slow down, take a breath and THINK how Huckabee in the general election will hurt the Conservative Movement…decades without end. Blind zeal for the ethically and educationally-challenged, less-then-truthful Huck and blind dismissal of a smart, capable, pro-life Mormon is blatant bigotry that will come back bite us all. Huckabites have the power of numbers. Please don’t allow yourselves to become so intoxicated on that power that you become blind to the many reasons why Huck should not be president of US–and will never be. There are forces on both sides of the aisle that will let that happen. Thank God.


  20. Will NOT let that happen. Oops.


  21. One thing Evangelicals need to keep in mind is that the creeds of traditional Christianity differs greatly than what was practiced by the original Christian practices and beliefs set up by Christ and by the original apostles, that’s where latter day saints are focusing their scholarly efforts. With the use of the Dead Sea Scrolls the Gnostic Gospels and other ancient biblical texts.

    I interesting article which I read from “two evangelical critics of the LDS Church, Carl Mosser and Paul Owen, which wrote in their article, “Mormon Scholarship, Apologetics, and Evangelical Neglect: Losing the Battle and Not Knowing It?” (published in Trinity Journal, Fall 1998, pp. 179-205)”. Find this article and read it take the advice from these well educated men. Do proper research; Give the full context of the doctrine. It is unwise to take the doctrines people hold dear to their heart and twist them and package them as something evil. It only backfires on those who create such propaganda. You can’t take a small piece of the whole and make a well educated, spiritual, decision about it. Critical thinking takes into account all available information about the subject.

    The way I see it, God is an unchanging God who has always used prophets to communicate his will to men on earth i.e. Adam, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Isaiah and the Apostles of the New Testament era. Jesus Christ being the only begotten Son in the flesh of the Eternal God, Jesus being the Savior and Redeemer of all humanity. All of these men were not popular by the majority in their day some were seen as heretical, other martyrs for the cause of righteousness, it’s no different today. “Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets” Amos 3:7.
    The day will come when future discoveries of ancient biblical texts and continuing scholarly studies from many universities around the world will show that the creeds of men will falter and truth will prevail.

    Let’s find points of commonality and work together with those in mind and we can make this a far better country based on shared values and not difference in religious doctrine. They’re will never be an end to the religious debate and criticism of one another until the Day of Judgment when God in his Infinite Love, Mercy and Justice will sort us all out.


  22. Christians as a whole are not Bigot’s only the unenlightened, uneducated and those who choose to live in ignorance become bigot’s. I have friends of many faiths, it not our religious differnces that make’s us friends, its what we have in common. People shouldn’t make they’re decisions based not on religion, but on values and commonalities of the person running. Romney as an American would be good for this country because of his values and is economic genius. He could do alot for this country domestically. McCain Should run as VP for Romney Those two working together if could solve alot of problems we are facing globally and domestically. I know they have issues with one another but I think they could work well in fixing this country. Even the other way around I think if Mcain was nominated to represent the republican party he would be smart to make Romney his VP.


  23. What are Evangelicals doing? Stop the hate. Stop the anti-Mormonism. It is rampant among your people. Stop the anti-semitic feelings. Are you not ashamed, is this America or Germany circa 1930’s?

    Watch this before you vote:

    http://www.articlevithemovie.com/trailer.php


  24. Your list about why the Mormon prophet is so “scary” really also applies to the Catholic Pope. Are the originators of Christianity then not Christian just because they believe they have a special connection to God through the Pope?

    Everything looks obsurd to those on the outside looking in. You and your beliefs sure look obsurd to me - but I’ll bet you’re sure you’re right. No one understands the Mormons like the Mormons, and I’m sure their positions would at least seem reasonable if we truly took time to understand them.

    “By your fruits ye shall know them”, and their fruits just aren’t that bad, even if what got them there seems hoaky to us.


  25. Mike,
    I do not accept Catholicism as Christianity!!! We are not the same!
    Christians do not think we have any special connection to God through anyone (EXEPT JESUS)!!!
    I would agree that the pope it defiantly too idolized!


  26. Mike Huckabee is the scariest candidate on either side of the aisle, and here’s why: He would use the great sword of religion to divide this country into the “worthy to receive” and “unworthy to receive”. We do NOT NEED A DIVIDED Republican party, let alone a divided country. How DARE anyone tell someone that they are not Christian when they claim to be?? How dare you do that?? Because of your arrogance and ignorance. PLEASE!!! If that is your belief system - fine… but DO NOT DESTROY OUR COUNTRY WITH THIS CANDIDATE!!! He cannot win against ANY Democrat because he has divided this party, and millions - including myself - will leave in droves.


  27. Mr. Haisty,

    John Jay fought for government-enforced mandates preventing Catholics from holding office, yet you cite him as an authority to help us “understand” article VI.

    You said, “However John Jay, the first Supreme Court Justice of the U.S. said that Christians should ONLY elect Christians as their leaders.”

    Did he say that? Yes, and much, much more…
    -In New York, Jay argued for a prohibition against Catholics holding office.
    -In February 1788, the New York legislature under Jay’s guidance approved an act requiring officeholders to renounce all foreign authorities “in all matters ecclesiastical as well as civil”, an “anti-Catholic” act designed to bar Catholics from holding public offices.

    I do not question whether or not John Jay held the views you have stated, but I certainly question why such obvious bigotry is still seen by some as an acceptable point of view.

    You tout his credentials as “the first Supreme Court Justice”, but are you really willing to accept the authority of a man who believed in government-enforced religious tests against Catholics as being revelant to our understanding of article VI?

    -John


  28. Huckabee Defends Romney on His Faith, Faults Him on Economics

    By Julianna Goldman

    Dec. 28 (Bloomberg) — Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee said it would be wrong for caucus voters in Iowa to withhold support from rival Mitt Romney because of his Mormon faith,….

    “I don’t think a person’s faith ought to be a plus or minus,” Huckabee, a former Arkansas governor, said in an interview with Bloomberg Television’s “Political Capital with Al Hunt,” scheduled to air today. “I would not want to think that people vote for me only because I’m a Christian.”


  29. Sure, Huck gives the most tepid public lip service to the notion voters should not withhold their vote because of Mormonisn, all the while benefitting immensely by the despicable under-the-radar anti-Mormon email deluge encouraged by evangelical pastors. The honorable thing for both Huck and his pastors to do would be to make a loud, unequivocable denunciation of such tactics…since they are, after all, the “Christian” leaders. Anti-Mormonism in the name of Christ in order to win an election dishonors the name of Christ as well as that of the offending candidate. If Huck cannot win the nomination based on the content of his character and his own abilities, then so be it. Let him compete with Mitt man to man. Too bad Huck’s followers don’t believe he can win in a clean, above-board race…even with God on his side.


  30. Wednesday, January 02, 2008
    An Open Letter From An Arkansas Evangelical
    Posted by: Hugh Hewitt at 5:41 PM
    In the in-box:

    A Plea from Arkansas: Christian Conservatives Need to Take a Closer Look at Mike Huckabee’s Record as Governor
    by David Thompson

    As a conservative, evangelical, politically-active father of four in Arkansas I believe it is imperative for like-minded voters to become more familiar with the Mike Huckabee that just completed 10 years as our governor. I realize it’s sometimes hard to know what to believe during a campaign, so I’ve tried to include links to published stories, with most coming from years past when the events noted were taking place.

    For those who don’t know much about me, I attend a very conservative evangelical church in Central Arkansas that includes some other politically active members (past/present elected officials, lobbyists, candidates, etc), and our family currently homeschools our young children. Since 1996, I have been heavily involved in numerous Republican campaigns in Arkansas at all levels (even managing a few). I have also served as vice chairman of the Republican committee in Arkansas’ largest county. Yet I don’t know of a single person in these circles who is supporting Huckabee for President - although I do know many that are definitely not supporting him. Of course, this is anecdotal evidence, but consider that Huckabee just finished serving 10 years as our governor (and I am sure there are many Republicans in Arkansas who are supporting him - I just don’t know them). The truth is, most conservatives in Arkansas had written him off long before his Presidential bid.

    That said, here are 7 key reasons I cannot in good conscience support Mike Huckabee as the Republican nominee for President. This is based on his record here and is not a personal attack - I cannot speak for his or anybody’s motives. This list is not the result of intense research - it’s based on what I know and have experienced first-hand as a politically-active conservative Arkansan. It’s a list I could have given you 6 months or even 2 years ago. And I am not attempting to echo or give validity to any criticism he is now receiving nationally (and I don’t think ALL of it is fair). This is the Mike Huckabee we know.

    1) Governor Huckabee did lasting damage to the Republican Party and conservative movement in Arkansas.
    It’s hard to go after Democrats with a conservative message when your Republican Governor is out front releasing violent criminals, providing state benefits to illegals, pushing tax increases, expanding government spending and programs, and constantly walking an ethical tight-rope (more on each of these items to follow). This tied our party’s hands - many conservatives got frustrated, apathy set in, and some quit the fight. In addition:
    Huckabee insisted on having “his people” controlling the Republican Party campaign organizations that are set up in Arkansas each election cycle. He also insisted that his guy remain as state party chairman when party leaders planned to make a change. The mismanagement and ineptness that followed was so great that the Republican Party plunged into debt and the Federal Election Commission levied the the largest fine ever against a state political party following an investigation of the 2000 and 2002 election cycles. Obviously, this set back the Republican Party of Arkansas for years.
    When Huckabee started his first full term in 1998, Arkansas had just elected a Republican Governor, Lt. Governor, U.S. Senator, and 2 Republican Congressmen. Upon his leaving office in 2007, Republicans now hold no statewide offices, have no Republicans in the U.S.Senate, and only one Republican Congressman remains.
    It was often said during Huckabee’s term that Arkansas had 3 parties: Republican Party, Democrat Party, and the Huckabee Party.
    “He destroyed the conservative movement in Arkansas, and left the Republican Party in shambles.” - Phyllis Schlafly, president of the national Eagle Forum
    “His support for taxes split the Republican Party, and damaged our name brand.” – Former Arkansas State Representative Randy Minton (R)
    “I think if they knew [his record] it would totally de-energize them . . . his policies are just wrong.” – Former Arkansas State Senator Jim Holt’s (R) warning for conservatives around the country who think they have found their candidate in Mike Huckabee.
    2) Governor Huckabee’s non-stop clemencies continually hindered the work of criminal prosecutors and miffed Republicans. The numbers are staggering - over 1,000 clemencies and commutations of criminals as governor. Most people now are familiar with his push to parole convicted rapist Wayne Dumond, who went on to rape and murder a Missouri woman less than a year after his release. But there are many more troubling facts regarding Huckabee’s pattern of releasing violent criminals. While I cannot speak for Huckabee’s motives, it seems clear that he used poor judgment and was reckless with this executive power.
    Huckabee released more criminals than the combined total of every border state to Arkansas (made up of Texas, Oklahoma, Missouri, Tennessee, Mississippi, and Louisiana) - even though the combined population of these states is 16 times higher than Arkansas’. He also issued more than double the clemencies of his three predecessors combined.
    In many cases, Huckabee’s actions set loose savage criminals convicted of grisly murders over the passionate objections of prosecutors and victims’ families. This American Spectator story details some of these violent cases and explains the resulting difficulties they presented prosecutors working with other victims and their families.
    Huckabee and his appointees ignored the laws on the books, including the requirement to notify victims’ families and explain the reasons for those clemencies. He said to fully explain his reasoning would cost millions of dollars and “take money away from education and Medicaid and other things.”
    A 2004 investigative article by the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette found that prisoners had a better chance of being granted clemency by Huckabee if they had a mutual acquaintance, labored at the governor’s mansion under a prisoner work program, or a minister intervened on their behalf. Prosecutors say Huckabee was more inclined to release or reduce the sentences of prisoners if he had direct contact with them or was lobbied by those close to him.
    He often refused to learn the facts of the cases (sometimes not even reading the murderer’s own confession), made no attempt to get the police/prosecutor’s case files, or even get input from the victims’ families before making his decision.
    The clemency granted to one multiple DUI offender was likely tied to large political contributions from the offender’s family, including a soft money political organization run by Huckabee’s people.
    Good summary article
    “Last January, after Mississippi Gov. Ronnie Musgrove, a Democrat, lost his re-election bid, he issued 16 clemencies, and there was a huge outcry. That’s how many Huckabee averages per month.” – Arkansas Leader, (August 11, 2004)
    “He seems to believe that granting clemency to murderers, rapists, drunk drivers and other convicted criminals is a part of the everyday affairs of the governor’s office rather than something that he should approach cautiously and selectively.” – Robert Herzfeld, Saline County Prosecuting Attorney during Huckabee’s tenure
    “I know some of the people that Huckabee let loose have reoffended. Some of them we’ve caught and some of them we haven’t caught……I used to be able to tell the families of victims, in all good faith and candor, that it was a rare event when a governor commuted a sentence and let a murderer back out, or a rapist back out or a child molester back out. But I can’t do that anymore.” - Larry Jegley, longtime Pulaski County Prosecuting Attorney
    “I felt like Huckabee had more compassion for the murderers than he ever did for the victims.” - Elaine Colclasure, co-leader of the Central Arkansas chapter of Parents of Murdered Children.
    3) Governor Huckabee’s pattern was to ignore immigration laws, often in the name of Christianity.
    Huckabee opposed immigration enforcement as governor on a number of fronts. Immigration enforcement groups call Huckabee’s record on immigration “a disaster” and reference him as they guy who “scares the heck” out of them.
    In 2001, Huckabee’s human services liaison Robert Trevino pushed for legislation to provide driver’s licenses for illegals. It was understood by legislators that he acted with Huckabee’s blessing.
    In 2001, Huckabee opposed a measure to require proof of citizenship to vote.
    In 2005, Huckabee supported a bill that offered illegal immigrants in-state tuition rates and made them eligible for the same merit-based scholarships to Arkansas state colleges and universities as legal citizens. The bill would have violated federal law and was not enacted by the legislature.
    In 2005, he opposed a bill that denied some state benefits to illegals and required proof of citizenship to vote (patterned after Arizona’s Prop 200 that has been successful in curtailing illegal immigration in that state). In this story, Huckabee called the measure “un-American….inflammatory….race-baiting and demagoguery.” He added that the bill “inflames those who are racist and bigots and makes them think there’s a real problem. But there’s not.” He then singled out State Senator Jim Holt, also an openly professing Christian, saying, “I drink a different kind of Jesus juice.”
    In 2005, Huckabee criticized federal agents for a recent crackdown on illegals, saying that it wasn’t fair to the innocent family members of those targeted in the operation. (No word on whether he also opposes raids on other law-breakers who might also have innocent family members affected by the fruits of their illegal activity.)
    In 2005, Huckabee promoted an “open door” policy on immigration as he addressed the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) national convention in Little Rock. LULAC is a left-leaning group that opposes virtually all measures of immigration enforcement.
    “He was an absolute disaster on immigration as governor. Every time there was any enforcement in his state, he took the side of the illegal aliens.” - Roy Beck, president of NumbersUSA, a group that played a major role in rallying the phone calls that helped defeat this year’s Senate immigration bill.
    “I would hope he could be trusted to secure the borders, but given his track record in Arkansas, I don’t see the conservative he has portrayed himself to be in Iowa.” - Jake Files, a former Arkansas state representative and current chairman of the Sebastian County Republican Party

    4) Governor Huckabee was no friend to fiscal conservatives in Arkansas.
    Huckabee’s record on taxes, government spending, and growing government programs was miserable. Basically, when the economy got tough, Huckabee expected families like mine to tighten our budgets in order to help state government meet its spending whims.
    In 2003, Huckabee called a special session of the legislature to push for a tax increase to make up for spending shortfalls. This led to his signing HB1039, an across the board income tax and tobacco tax increase. Huckabee even refused to consider a Republican proposal to cut spending and use general improvement funds (i.e., legislative pork) to make up for the budget shortfall. Ironically, the same day Huckabee was practically begging the Arkansas legislature to raise taxes (here’s the video), President Bush was also in Little Rock to push for his tax cut plan. (Note: When asked about this video recently, Huckabee gave a misleading response to Fox News, blaming his tax increase plea on a court order. This prompted State Representative Johnny Key, the current Republican Leader in the Arkansas House, to send out a letter correcting the accuracy of Huckabee’s statement.)
    If that weren’t enough, Huckabee called a 2nd special legislative session in 2003 to pass a nearly one-cent state sales tax increase. The measure also expanded the sales tax to include previously exempted services (for more information and context, see reason #6 below).
    During Huckabee’s term, Arkansas showed a net tax increase of $505 million, and the average Arkansan’s tax burden grew from $1,969 to $2,902. Governor Huckabee raised more taxes in 10 years in office than Bill Clinton did in his 12 years.
    During Huckabee’s 10 years as governor, state spending more than doubled (from $6.6 billion to $16.1 billion), higher education and public schools got big increases, as did social services. Meanwhile, the state added about 8,000 full-time workers to its payroll during that period, a 19% increase (according to the Bureau of Legislative Research).
    The conservative Cato Institute gave Huckabee an “F” for his final term as governor on its Fiscal Policy Report Card, saying, “Huckabee’s leadership has left taxpayers in Arkansas much worse off.” His grade was lower than 15 of the 21 Democrat Governors. His overall grade as governor was a D.
    “The main reason for the drop was his insistence on raising taxes at almost every turn throughout his final term.” – Cato Institute explaining why Huckabee had dropped from a “D” to an “F” on their Fiscal Policy Report Card.
    “[Huckabee] says he’s pro-family. If you’re raising taxes on the families of Arkansas, causing wives to go out and get jobs to make ends meet, that’s not pro-family.” - Former Arkansas State Representative Randy Minton (R)
    “In the past, he blamed Democrats for raising taxes…We voted for them, but he proposed them.” - Arkansas State Senator John Paul Capps, a Democrat
    5) Huckabee left a long trail of ethics questions while Governor of Arkansas
    This is an area where I think Huckabee does receive some unfair criticism. Some of the ethics charges against him were frivolous and politically motivated. However, it has been concerning for some time just how much the governor accepted in gifts and how he was seemingly always pushing ethical limits.
    During his tenure, Huckabee accepted 314 gifts valued overall at more than $150,000, according to documents filed with the Arkansas’ Secretary of State office.
    The Huckabees set up wedding registries at local department stores as Mike was leaving office – even though they had been married for 30 years. State ethics laws prohibited Huckabee from receiving gifts of more than $100……but there was an exception for wedding gifts.
    Judicial Watch, a non-partisan group dedicted to fighting government corruption, listed Huckabee among their Ten Most Wanted Corrupt Politicians of 2007. Huckabee was one of only three Republican politicians to make the list.
    6) Huckabee’s education record shows him to be an advocate of the “status quo”
    The New Hampshire chapter of the National Education Association (NEA) has endorsed Hillary Clinton and Mike Huckabee for the upcoming Primary elections. This is the first time in memory that they have recommended a Republican (in 2004 they endorsed Howard Dean). They likely chose Huckabee because:
    Huckabee has consistently opposed virtually all proposals for education reform, including school choice vouchers.
    The former president of Eagle Forum of Arkansas said Huckabee “continued the Hillary Clinton education plan” as our governor.
    When the Arkansas Supreme Court ruled that Arkansas’ public school funding was “inequitable,” Huckabee took the ruling as a mandate to raise taxes in order to once again increase school funding…which he did. (To his credit, however, he also used the opportunity to consolidate some of the school districts in the state - although rural legislators severely watered down the proposal.)
    7) Huckabee has very little support for his Presidential bid here in Arkansas
    For the most part those in his party who know him best are not supporting him.
    In October, a University of Arkansas poll showed that, among all Presidential candidates in both parties, only 8% of Arkansans said they were supporting Mike Huckabee.
    That same week, the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette reported that only one-third of Republicans in the Arkansas Legislature said they were supporting their former governor’s Presidential bid.
    After this story, the Huckabee campaign published a list of supporters in his home state. The Arkansas News Bureau then reported that as some of the names on Huckabee’s Arkansas endorsement list were used without permission and had to be removed.
    This is purely anecdotal, but despite my involvement in Republican politics, I am unaware of any of my Republican friends who are supporting Huckabee. I have seen maybe 3 Huckabee for President bumper stickers – and I live in Republican west Little Rock and work 2 miles from the state capitol where Huckabee just completed over 10 years as Governor (my wife says she saw her first sticker today…..guess he’s picking up steam here!).
    “…if Huckabee didn’t have things sewn up with Republicans back home, what kind of message did that send?….The truth is that Huckabee hasn’t had that much support from former and current Republican legislators.” - David Sanders, conservative columnist for Arkansas News Bureau (November 11, 2007)
    Conclusion:
    I realize the Republican Presidential field does not leave true conservatives with much to get excited about. However, it is unlikely I will support Huckabee over any of the Republican frontrunners because of his liberal record, his questionable judgment, and his reckless use of power while Governor. Now is not the time for Republicans to compromise on core conservative values. More importantly, we need a leader with a history of using strong judgment as our nation continues to lead the world in the War on Terror.

    Two final questions:
    1) Given the many vulnerabilities in his record, what is the likelihood that Huckabee would win in a general election? Democrat National Committee officials have already been quoted as saying that they see Huckabee as “easy kill” and refer to him as “the glass jaw — and they’re just waiting to break it.” The DNC has issued over 200 attack press releases on Republican candidates - only 4 on Huckabee, the last one coming 10 months ago.
    2) Does his record as governor represent someone who should be given greater power and responsibility? Is he Commander and Chief material? Leader of the free world? National Review recently expressed concern, and Huckabee raised eyebrows with recent comments critical of U.S. Foreign policy and our role in the world - he was essentially repeating the Democrat talking points!

    Feel free to pass this letter on or contact me if you have any questions about anything stated here. I have tried very carefully to be fair, accurate, and to stick to facts from Huckabee’s record. But it’s certainly possible I made a mistake somewhere or worded something poorly. I would be more than happy to further dialogue on any of these issues.

    Sincerely,
    David Thompson
    Little Rock, Arkansas


  31. I’ve read through a portion of your web site and it deeply troubles me. For people who claim that you are Christian, you do not act or speak very Christ like. I would never vote or not vote for a person because of their religion. Politics are the realm of ideas with government, not churches. To vote or not vote based on religion would be tragic and people who justify their decisions based such are no better than the Taliban. Mike Huckabee is a bigot by definition and his actions in the election have illustrated this fact. I attend an Evangelical Church, but I will never vote for Mike Huckabee for this reason and also because he is not actually a conservative. Mike Huckabee is an evangelical and a bigot, but that appear to be enough for you.


  32. BIGOT - a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.

    Christian bigots, sometimes referred to as Christian Fundamentalists, will flat out tell you that if you do not believe as they do, that you are going to suffer damnation in an eternal and torturous hell.
    Christian bigots will tell you that Catholics, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus and everyone else who do not conform to their belief are headed straight to their hell.
    Christian bigots are loathsome, self righteous, dispicable beings who’s mentality is the template of thought that has spawned murdurous slaughter of humanity through the ages.


  33. Dont all religions say that all other religions are not going to heaven?


  34. Original comment deleted for extremly foul language.

    Aaron, you are admonished to read the following verses…

    Colossians 3:8
    (8) But now ye also put off all these; anger, wrath, malice, blasphemy, filthy communication out of your mouth.

    Ephesians 5:3-4
    (3) But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints;
    (4) Neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not convenient: but rather giving of thanks.


  35. It makes just as much sense to vote for someone just because of their religion (Huckabee) as it does to not vote for them because of their religion (Romney). Of course your a bigot if you don’t vote for someone JUST because of their religion. Thanks for making this clear Pastor. You have done a great job pointing this out.


  36. Let me get this straight. We should not support Huckabee because “he can’t win” and we don’t like his stance on immigration and taxes. But we should support a bigot-Ron Paul or someone who belongs to a church that teaches that good men and women will be Gods.

    Wow.

    By the way, lest you think I’m making stuff up on Romney, here’s some facts for everyone to check out:

    THE MORMON PROPHECY AND MORMON BELIEFS

    Do the people on this site know about Kolob?
    Let me help out those who don’t:
    In the Latter Day Saint movement, Kolob is a star or planet mentioned in the Book of Abraham as being nearest to the throne or residence of God. The literal existence and the exact nature of Kolob is a controversial topic in Latter Day Saint movement theology, as is the Book of Abraham, which has not been canonized by the Community of Christ and several other denominations. However, the idea of Kolob has had an influence in the theology and culture of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church).

    So what? Well, here’s how that fits into Mormon theology:

    “If You Could Hie to Kolob” is a Latter Day Saint hymn that was written by William Wines Phelps, a prominent early Mormon. The music is taken from a well-known folk tune known as “Dives and Lazarus”. It is hymn number 284 in the hymnal for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

    The hymn reflects doctrines unique to Mormonism, such as the eternal nature of spirit (including man’s spirit) and matter. It also conveys doctrines elaborated by Joseph Smith, Jr., the first Latter-day Saint prophet, about the plurality of gods and eternal progression. The word hie means To go quickly; hasten.

    Lyrics

    If you could hie to Kolob in the twinkling of an eye,
    And then continue onward with that same speed to fly,
    Do you think that you could ever, through all eternity,
    Find out the generation “If You Could Hie to Kolob” is a Latter Day Saint hymn that was written by William Wines Phelps, a prominent early Mormon. The music is taken from a well-known folk tune known as “Dives and Lazarus”. It is hymn number 284 in the hymnal for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

    The hymn reflects doctrines unique to Mormonism, such as the eternal nature of spirit (including man’s spirit) and matter. It also conveys doctrines elaborated by Joseph Smith, Jr., the first Latter-day Saint prophet, about the plurality of gods and eternal progression. The word hie means To go quickly; hasten.

    [edit] Lyrics

    If you could hie to Kolob in the twinkling of an eye,
    And then continue onward with that same speed to fly,
    Do you think that you could ever, through all eternity,
    Find out the generation where Gods began to be?

    Or see the grand beginning, where space did not extend?
    Or view the last creation, where Gods and matter end?
    Methinks the Spirit whispers, “No man has found ‘pure space,’
    Nor seen the outside curtains, where nothing has a place.”

    The works of God continue, and worlds and lives abound;
    Improvement and progression have one eternal round.
    There is no end to matter; there is no end to space;
    There is no end to spirit; there is no end to race.

    There is no end to virtue; there is no end to might;
    There is no end to wisdom; there is no end to light.
    There is no end to union; there is no end to youth;
    There is no end to priesthood; there is no end to truth.

    There is no end to glory; there is no end to love;
    There is no end to being; there is no death above.
    There is no end to glory; there is no end to love;
    There is no end to being; there is no death above.
    Or see the grand beginning, where space did not extend?
    Or view the last creation, where Gods and matter end?
    Methinks the Spirit whispers, “No man has found ‘pure space,’
    Nor seen the outside curtains, where nothing has a place.”

    The works of God continue, and worlds and lives abound;
    Improvement and progression have one eternal round.
    There is no end to matter; there is no end to space;
    There is no end to spirit; there is no end to race.

    There is no end to virtue; there is no end to might;
    There is no end to wisdom; there is no end to light.
    There is no end to union; there is no end to youth;
    There is no end to priesthood; there is no end to truth.

    There is no end to glory; there is no end to love;
    There is no end to being; there is no death above.
    There is no end to glory; there is no end to love;
    There is no end to being; there is no death above.

    That’s in the LDS Hymnal. The last time I remember the Bible does not teach that we are Gods. I thought that the Christian Creeds, so disregarded by the LDS Church as false, teach that a belief in plural Gods is a heresy.

    So, do the people on this site who are LDS and who are calling the folks who disagree with the 7 Points brought up on this site believe:
    Exaltation means to live the life that God lives and to obtain the co-equal position of godhood. It is the same as eternal life which is to live God’s life who is Eternal Man. Exaltation includes having the power, dominion, and the power of eternal increase or having eternal children just like the Father in heaven. Although the exact meaning of this has not been defined, most Latter-day Saints speculate that this signifies they may enter the Celestial Kingdom and dwell in God the Father’s presence. In the Doctrine & Covenants is found a scripture that describes those who are exalted will become gods.[1] Though Exaltation is not limited to Latter-day Saints, saving ordinances are believed to be prerequisite for all who enter the Celestial Kingdom. To enter the presence of the Father signifies that one has become a co-inheritor with Jesus thus becoming like the Father and the Son.

    Is this what Doctor JD, Dave and everyone else here believes about salvation? Because that is what the LDS Church believes.

    And if Romney is a good Mormon, that’s what he believes too. YE SHALL BE AS GODS.

    Now add that idea to this one:

    an article in the BYU Studies indicates that Smith did give such a discourse and that it was copied down by a faithful Mormon:

    Since, by 1840, there was not yet a procedure in the Church for systematically reporting all of Joseph Smith’s speeches, many of his addresses were never recorded, and others were preserved only unofficially in the personal writings of lay members.3 In addition, the longhand reports recorded at the time were subject to inherent limitations because of the absence among Church members of sufficiently developed shorthand skills to permit verbatim reporting during Joseph Smith’s lifetime. This accounts for the existence of some reports of Joseph Smith speeches that are not referred to in the Prophet’s History. The Martha Jane Knowlton report of July 1840 is of this genre. …

    The July 1840 context suggests that Joseph Smith’s comments about the U.S. Constitution were given not long after his return from Washington, D.C., where his appeal for redress for the wrongs heaped upon his people in Missouri had fallen upon deaf ears. The address also gives significant insight into the marvelous anticipations and hopes the Prophet had for Nauvoo in its beginning phase. But, as one looks at the city from a later perspective, it is evident that the prophecies about Nauvoo, like Jackson County before it, were contingent upon human conditions and failings. … The discourse as reported by Martha Jane Knowlton is as follows:

    “A few Item[s] from a discourse delivered by Joseph Smith July 19 - 1840….

    “We shall build the Zion of the Lord in peace untill the servants of that Lord shall begin to lay the foundation of a great and high watch Tower and then shall they begin to say within themselves, what need hath my Lord of this tower seeing this is a time of peace &c. Then the Enemy shall come as a thief in the night and scatter the servants abroad. When the seed of these 12 Olive trees are scattered abroad they will wake up the Nations of the whole Earth. Even this Nation will be on the very verge of crumbling to pieces and tumbling to the ground and when the constitution is upon the brink of ruin this people will be the Staff up[on] which the Nation shall lean and they shall bear the constitution away from the very verge of destruction.” (The Historians Corner, BYU Studies, Vol. 19, No. 3, p. 391-392)

    Another reference to this prophecy is found in the book, Words of Joseph Smith:

    The History of the Church account is an amalgamation of the reports in the Joseph Smith Diary and the Nauvoo Neighbor. The report by Levi Richards is here published for the first time. A reminiscent account of this discourse by James Burgess contains the essential details found in the other three accounts published here, and adds that the “Constitution and Government would hang by a brittle thread.”

    In the month of May 1843. Several miles east of Nauvoo. The Nauvoo Legion was on parade and review. At the close of which Joseph Smith made some remarks upon our condition as a people and upon our future prospects contrasting our present condition with our past trials and persecutions by the hands of our enemies. Also upon the constitution and government of the United States stating that the time would come when the Constitution and Government would hang by a brittle thread and would be ready to fall into other hands but this people the Latter day Saints will step forth and save it.

    General Scott and part of his staff on the American Army was present on the occasion.

    I James Burgess was present and testify to the above (James Burgess Notebook, Church Archives). (Ehat & Cook, Words of Joseph Smith, 6 May 1843 Note, p. 279)

    In the book, Discourses of Brigham Young, an edited collection of President Young’s sermons from the Journal of Discourses, we read:

    How long will it be before the words of the prophet Joseph will be fulfilled? He said if the Constitution of the United States were saved at all it must be done by this people. It will not be many years before these words come to pass. 12:204.

    When the Constitution of the United States hangs, as it were, upon a single thread, they will have to call for the “Mormon” Elders to save it from utter destruction; and they will step forth and do it. 2:182.

    DO YOU BELIEVE THAT MITT ROMNEY SHOULD GO INTO THE OFFICE AS THE MOST POWERFUL MAN IN THE WORLD WITH THE MENTALITY THAT TEACHES HE IS A GOD IN THE MAKING WITH THE BACKGROUND PROPHECY THAT A MORMON AND MORMONISM IS DESTINED TO SAVE THE WORLD?

    Do you feel okay with that? I don’t.

    All you Christians on this site, including the LDS members who say they believe they are just as Christian as Baptists. Methodists, etc, DO YOU BELIEVE THAT GOD LIVES ON KOLOB AND THAT ALL OF US ARE GOING TO WORK TOWARDS EXALTATION AS GODS?

    I don’t think that is standard Christian teaching. And if you find that “uncomfortable” then I think you have every right to say so. If that makes you a bigot, then so be it. I stand guilty as charged.


  37. AN EVANGELICAL PASTOR IN UTAH?
    by Dr. Myke Crowder
    01/21/08 2008

    AN EVANGELICAL PASTOR IN UTAH?

    By Rev. Dr. Myke D. Crowder

    December 27, 2007

    How can an evangelical vote for a Mormon? Media organizations and pollsters have fixated on this question for much of this year, thanks to the presidential candidacy of former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney. So let me give my answer and then explain.

    As a minister with the Evangelical Church Alliance, America’s oldest association of evangelical clergy, I will cast my vote for Mitt Romney with full confidence in both his character and ability to lead our nation in the direction I believe we evangelicals can be comfortable with. Nothing rare here; I am hardly the first evangelical to voice support for this Mormon candidate for the highest office in the land.

    What might set me apart from most of my evangelical colleagues is this: I have spent the past two decades serving as a pastor just 18 miles north of the Mormon Temple in Salt Lake City. I know a thing or two about voting for Mormons, as there is only rarely an alternative in this state which serves as world headquarters to the Church of Jesus Christ of Ladder Day Saints (LDS). Above all I have learned and confirmed that their values mirror ours as evangelicals, and voting for elected officials is more about values, character and policy than it is about religious affiliation. As syndicated columnist Cal Thomas, himself an evangelical, has written, “I care less where my ambulance driver attends church than that he knows the quickest way to the hospital.”

    Mormons account for 62 percent of the 2.5 million people living in Utah and hold virtually every elected office in the state. While some of my fellow evangelicals across the country have noted they could not vote for a Mormon, I have only voted this way for 21 years and have appreciated their conservative ideologies and policies as well as their strong commitment to the family values I hold dear. Perhaps this explains why Utahans are less likely than average Americans to smoke, abuse drugs, die of cancer, or give birth as a teenager. These are values evangelicals generally applaud, and attempt to model under an evangelical worldview. Our fight as evangelicals in the political arena is not against Mormons, who generally line up with our moral and social values and preferred policies, but with political and religious liberals who generally want to cleanse the public square of all faith and morality. In the battle for the traditional family in America, Mormons have been our friends for decades, not our enemies.

    Furthermore, despite fundamental doctrinal differences, Mormons have not been anti-evangelical (something that cannot be said even of all Southern Baptists), but have been very supportive of our ministry right here in their back yard. Our church has grown from 50 people to 2,600, and 700 students are enrolled in our Layton Christian Academy.

    The way some evangelical pastors talk about Mormons suggests they not only couldn’t vote for one; they couldn’t accept a call to a pulpit in Utah because of their disdain for this religion. What a shame! How do we expect non-evangelicals to vote for “one of our own” when we can’t exercise the same kind of intellectually-thoughtful support across the theological aisle? The “born again” Jimmy Carter wasn’t elected by evangelicals alone and neither will Mike Huckabee or anyone else be. Expecting what we won’t practice ourselves seems to me to smack of hypocrisy.

    Some worry a Mormon administration would not be friendly to evangelicals. Wrong. It was the city bishops who allowed us to use their gymnasiums when we were starting a Christian school and didn’t have such facilities yet. Elected Mormons like Senator Orrin Hatch, Rep. Rob Bishop, former governors Norm Bangerter and Mike Levett have all attended our church services and shared genuine enthusiasm for our ministries here. Their records of public service would make evangelicals proud in any state. In fact, contrary to some perceptions, the evangelical community in Utah has experienced tremendous growth while LDS membership has declined slightly.

    Voting for a Mormon does not validate the Mormon religion any more than a vote for John F. Kennedy validated the Catholic Church or a vote for Bill Clinton was an endorsement of the Southern Baptist Convention. Yet, what if tens of millions of non-evangelical Americans increasingly decided, “I would never vote for an evangelical; those people are narrow-minded hypocrites!” In other words, this primarily theological test works both ways and evangelicals may find ourselves on the short end of this analysis more often than we may already be.

    This is precisely why we must evaluate candidates for public office, and especially for president, not on the basis of their church attendance, but on character, integrity, values, their public life and private behavior, their families and their vision for our country. So, while an evangelical pastor and a Mormon businessman-governor-presidential candidate may seem like strange bedfellows, I assure you, we are political and values soul mates.

    Rev. Dr. Myke D. Crowder is Senior Pastor at Christian Life Center in Layton, Utah, and a member of the executive council for the National Clergy Council in Washington, DC.


  38. Around noon today, Dr. Dobson talked to national talk-show host Dennis Prager. While he made it clear he was not endorsing anyone, he did say he would vote for former Gov. Mitt Romney — a Mormon — if he wins the Republican nomination:

    “My theology is very, very different, obviously, and I would not find myself in agreement with the ways he sees Scripture, and, of course, their own interpretation and extension of Scripture. I’m not in any way minimizing that; it’s a very important issue.

    “I think we’re facing such a point of crisis in our country, that we’re going to have to have the strongest leadership we can. And I think I could deal with that in the polling booth.”


  39. Excellent site. I completely agree. I have had my share of hostile encounters with Mormons over the net on various blogs and testify to their unchristian attitudes and doctrines. Calling Mormons “Christians” is a REALLY BIG stretch of the word and its meaning. I think the really big issue here that a lot of people don’t like to discuss is the definition of Christian faith. Despite what many people would say, the definition of Christian is not completely subjective. I feel that the vast majority of non-mormons who would describe Mormons as Christians do this because they are either not Christian themselves or are unaware of the huge doctrinal gulf between Mormonism and Christianity. I’m not going to discuss those differences (they are so great I wouldn’t know where to start), but the effect is to set a clear and undeniable difference of identity between Mormonism and Christianity. I would say that Mormonism is as dissimliar to Christianity as Christianity is to Voodoo.

    What I think so very humerous (or sad) is the common Mormon attitude toward Mitt Romney. It does seem that the vast majority of Mormons are willing to blindly support Mitt Romney. I know actually know a middle aged Mormon in my office who has been a die-hard Democrat all his life (he drives a truck with campaign stickers from the last five Democratic Presidential campaigns!) who just suddenly and out of the blue switched to a Republican candidate. That’s right, he’s a Mitt Romney fan. As I recall, Romney was harping on how wrong it was not to support a candidate because of their religious beliefs. After seeing the primary results in Nevada and Utah the reverse is apparrently not true. Apparently it is OK to support a candidate solely because of their religious affiliations. After seeing that, their is no concievable way that I could vote for Mitt Romney under any circumstances. Hypocrisy is something that I simply cannot tolerate. Romney scored over 90% of the Utah primary. I don’t think that any Mormon can dare claim those are political votes. Even in the other candidates home states, results that lopsided were never achieved. Huckabee scored little more that 62% in Arkansas his home state, which is as evangelical as they come (I live in Little Rock). In Arkansas their is literally a church on literally almost every street corner.


  40. Wow! The hate filled bigotry here is amazing. So this is what being a Christian means. To hate? Very sad.


  41. James,

    Pot calling kettle black.

    You’re no different than the Mormons you put down.

    You blindly won’t vote for someone because of their faith, not the issues.

    Huckaboo came no where close to a majority in any other state than Arkansas. Big time home cooking for the squirrel eater.

    Thank goodness there are some more intelligent, rationale evangelicals like Dr. Dobson.

    Thanks to the Huckster, we will have the most liberal republican candiate ever. Long live McAdulterer. Good job, evangelicals.


  42. My comments are relevant to the current conversation but were actually prepared in response to “The Biblical Case Against Voting For A Mormon for President: Why Christians Who Support Romney Actualy Violate Scripture.” That page still exists, but suddenly–as of this morning–all the comments have been removed. (I have a copy of them, though, in case anyone is interested.)

    My response (to Pastor Haisty’s argument that, according to John the apostle, Christians should not wish someone who believes in a “false Christ” well and should not welcome such a person into their home or any “house” that in some sense belongs to them):

    (1) Even those who believe in absolute scriptural inerrancy must grant that, as human beings, we are seeking to understand the text (of which none of us, by the way, has the autographs from the hands of the apostles). Always, I believe, that understanding must take place in the light of Christ–that is, in harmony with “the mind of Christ” and with “the meekness and gentleness of Christ,” in a manner Christ himself would approve of, and with Christ’s direct words taking precedence and all other things being interpreted so as to be compatible with Christ’s words.

    (2) With that in mind, John’s counsel not to wish unbelievers or antichrists well cannot be properly understood as contradicting Christ’s teaching to love your enemies, bless them that curse you, and pray for them that despitefully use you. And so I agree with those that have said John means we should not wish unbelievers or antichrists well in their false or destructive endeavors. But a Christian can–in fact, must–wish them well in general, in the sense of desiring their ultimate happiness and salvation. I think we can even wish for their immediate prosperity–that they will be safe, happy, and successful in any good endeavors–insofar as that is not incompatible with their salvation. But I suppose in wishing anyone well, in a temporal sense, we ought to add, “God willing,” since God of course knows what is best for all of us and when adversity might do us more good than success.

    (3) Extending the idea of not welcoming an unbeliever or antichrist into one’s home so that it applies to any “house” that in some sense you have a part in could lead to horrific consequences. It could be used to exclude Mormons (or others deemed non-Christian) from shelter or care in any kind of hospital, homeless center, residence, or other facility supported in whole or in part by public funds or by any other contributions you have made. It could be used to exclude them from any role in government or public life. I doubt that’s what John had in mind.

    (4) What the pastor says about Mormons has, in the past, been said about Roman Catholics. From the Reformation onward, some Protestants have explicitly identified Catholics as antichrist. Should what the pastor says about Mormons be applied to Roman Catholics? Should it be applied to Jews? (You could argue, for instance, that Joe Lieberman’s view of Christ [="the Messiah"] is not only defective but false in fundamental ways.) How about other Protestants who do not believe literally in the historicity of Christ, or in his divine Sonship, or in his resurrection, or in the virgin birth, or in his miracles? That would include plenty of Episcopalians, Methodists, Presbyterians, and others (not to mention Unitarians)–including not only some nominal members with little interest in theology but, in some cases, ministers and theologians themselves. Should John’s counsel be applied in the same way to them? Does that mean that, with each presidential candidate, we should seek to examine carefully if their view of Christ is biblical (not whether they BELIEVE it is biblical, but whether WE believe it is biblical) and then counsel others not to vote for candidates if they don’t meet the standard? If the answer is “Yes” (as the pastor’s logic would demand), why not treat all the candidates equally and put them all to the test? There could then be a “Biblical Case” against voting for Giuliani, or McCain, or any number of others–perhaps even Huckabee himself, if he should happen to fail the test.

    (5) As for who counts as a Christian, I believe the best test (as someone else has noted) is that given by Christ: “By their fruits ye shall know them.” It’s difficult to apply this to large groups of people, since, in any group I’ve discovered, there is great variety. But we can perhaps make a stab at testing a professed Christian by his fruits. And what should be those fruits? “Love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance.”

    With that in mind, I believe that, while there may be many grounds on which to determine that people are believing in a “false Christ,” the one that matters most is whether believers show in their own words and actions evidence of “the mind of Christ.” If not, then even if all of their statements about Christ are theologically correct, their real knowledge–their personal and spiritual knowledge–of Christ must be defective. When Jesus said, “This is life eternal, that they might know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou has sent,” I’m confident he meant knowing the Father and the Son in a personal and experiential sense, not in a merely theoretical, abstract, propositional sense.

    Besides the statement “by their fruits,” Jesus gave at least three other tests of discipleship I can think of: obedience to the Father (”Not everyone that saith unto me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ . . . but he that doeth the will of my Father”), love (”By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another”), and care for others (”Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me”). Interestingly the “doing” specified in this last standard is comfort and service–feeding, clothing, visiting–not correcting people’s theology. I would be most confident in identifying as a believer in the “true Jesus” someone who meets these standards.

    (6) But perhaps, as I believe Governor Huckabee himself has suggested, there is a danger in trying to figure out who the true Christians are out there, when we are told, “Let a man examine himself.” Each of us needs to look in our own hearts. Each needs to ask, “Am I a true Christian–a follower in word, deed, and heart of the Son of God?”


  43. Okay, I put down actual quotations concerning the Mormon doctrine on exaltation and Godhood and the Mormons saving the country and yet everyone ignores that posting and argues about whether Mormons are being picked on by real Christians. This shows me that people are NOT interested in facts, even ones stated by the “picked on” themselves. People just want to vent. Hey, everyone, look up Kolob under the LDS Hymnal. Look up Mormons and Hang By a Thread. Google both. Then Google the words, “White and delightsome” and the Book of Abraham and the Book of Mormon and follow the thread. Then ask yourself once again if this is someone people should vote for.

    PS: Hey, It doesn’t matter though, thank God, BECAUSE ROMNEY QUIT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! PTL. Go Huckabee, GO!!!!


  44. A Plea from Arkansas: Christian Conservatives Need to Take a Closer Look at Mike Huckabee’s Record as Governor
    by David Thompson

    As a conservative, evangelical, politically-active father of four in Arkansas I believe it is imperative for like-minded voters to become more familiar with the Mike Huckabee that just completed 10 years as our governor. I realize it’s sometimes hard to know what to believe during a campaign, so I’ve tried to include links to published stories, with most coming from years past when the events noted were taking place.

    For those who don’t know much about me, I attend a very conservative evangelical church in Central Arkansas that includes some other politically active members (past/present elected officials, lobbyists, candidates, etc), and our family currently homeschools our young children. Since 1996, I have been heavily involved in numerous Republican campaigns in Arkansas at all levels (even managing a few). I have also served as vice chairman of the Republican committee in Arkansas’ largest county. Yet I don’t know of a single person in these circles who is supporting Huckabee for President - although I do know many that are definitely not supporting him. Of course, this is anecdotal evidence, but consider that Huckabee just finished serving 10 years as our governor (and I am sure there are many Republicans in Arkansas who are supporting him - I just don’t know them). The truth is, most conservatives in Arkansas had written him off long before his Presidential bid.

    That said, here are 7 key reasons I cannot in good conscience support Mike Huckabee as the Republican nominee for President. This is based on his record here and is not a personal attack - I cannot speak for his or anybody’s motives. This list is not the result of intense research - it’s based on what I know and have experienced first-hand as a politically-active conservative Arkansan. It’s a list I could have given you 6 months or even 2 years ago. And I am not attempting to echo or give validity to any criticism he is now receiving nationally (and I don’t think ALL of it is fair). This is the Mike Huckabee we know.

    1) Governor Huckabee did lasting damage to the Republican Party and conservative movement in Arkansas.
    It’s hard to go after Democrats with a conservative message when your Republican Governor is out front releasing violent criminals, providing state benefits to illegals, pushing tax increases, expanding government spending and programs, and constantly walking an ethical tight-rope (more on each of these items to follow). This tied our party’s hands - many conservatives got frustrated, apathy set in, and some quit the fight. In addition:
    Huckabee insisted on having “his people” controlling the Republican Party campaign organizations that are set up in Arkansas each election cycle. He also insisted that his guy remain as state party chairman when party leaders planned to make a change. The mismanagement and ineptness that followed was so great that the Republican Party plunged into debt and the Federal Election Commission levied the the largest fine ever against a state political party following an investigation of the 2000 and 2002 election cycles. Obviously, this set back the Republican Party of Arkansas for years.
    When Huckabee started his first full term in 1998, Arkansas had just elected a Republican Governor, Lt. Governor, U.S. Senator, and 2 Republican Congressmen. Upon his leaving office in 2007, Republicans now hold no statewide offices, have no Republicans in the U.S.Senate, and only one Republican Congressman remains.
    It was often said during Huckabee’s term that Arkansas had 3 parties: Republican Party, Democrat Party, and the Huckabee Party.
    “He destroyed the conservative movement in Arkansas, and left the Republican Party in shambles.” - Phyllis Schlafly, president of the national Eagle Forum
    “His support for taxes split the Republican Party, and damaged our name brand.” – Former Arkansas State Representative Randy Minton (R)
    “I think if they knew [his record] it would totally de-energize them . . . his policies are just wrong.” – Former Arkansas State Senator Jim Holt’s (R) warning for conservatives around the country who think they have found their candidate in Mike Huckabee.
    2) Governor Huckabee’s non-stop clemencies continually hindered the work of criminal prosecutors and miffed Republicans. The numbers are staggering - over 1,000 clemencies and commutations of criminals as governor. Most people now are familiar with his push to parole convicted rapist Wayne Dumond, who went on to rape and murder a Missouri woman less than a year after his release. But there are many more troubling facts regarding Huckabee’s pattern of releasing violent criminals. While I cannot speak for Huckabee’s motives, it seems clear that he used poor judgment and was reckless with this executive power.
    Huckabee released more criminals than the combined total of every border state to Arkansas (made up of Texas, Oklahoma, Missouri, Tennessee, Mississippi, and Louisiana) - even though the combined population of these states is 16 times higher than Arkansas’. He also issued more than double the clemencies of his three predecessors combined.
    In many cases, Huckabee’s actions set loose savage criminals convicted of grisly murders over the passionate objections of prosecutors and victims’ families. This American Spectator story details some of these violent cases and explains the resulting difficulties they presented prosecutors working with other victims and their families.
    Huckabee and his appointees ignored the laws on the books, including the requirement to notify victims’ families and explain the reasons for those clemencies. He said to fully explain his reasoning would cost millions of dollars and “take money away from education and Medicaid and other things.”
    A 2004 investigative article by the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette found that prisoners had a better chance of being granted clemency by Huckabee if they had a mutual acquaintance, labored at the governor’s mansion under a prisoner work program, or a minister intervened on their behalf. Prosecutors say Huckabee was more inclined to release or reduce the sentences of prisoners if he had direct contact with them or was lobbied by those close to him.
    He often refused to learn the facts of the cases (sometimes not even reading the murderer’s own confession), made no attempt to get the police/prosecutor’s case files, or even get input from the victims’ families before making his decision.
    The clemency granted to one multiple DUI offender was likely tied to large political contributions from the offender’s family, including a soft money political organization run by Huckabee’s people.
    Good summary article
    “Last January, after Mississippi Gov. Ronnie Musgrove, a Democrat, lost his re-election bid, he issued 16 clemencies, and there was a huge outcry. That’s how many Huckabee averages per month.” – Arkansas Leader, (August 11, 2004)
    “He seems to believe that granting clemency to murderers, rapists, drunk drivers and other convicted criminals is a part of the everyday affairs of the governor’s office rather than something that he should approach cautiously and selectively.” – Robert Herzfeld, Saline County Prosecuting Attorney during Huckabee’s tenure
    “I know some of the people that Huckabee let loose have reoffended. Some of them we’ve caught and some of them we haven’t caught……I used to be able to tell the families of victims, in all good faith and candor, that it was a rare event when a governor commuted a sentence and let a murderer back out, or a rapist back out or a child molester back out. But I can’t do that anymore.” - Larry Jegley, longtime Pulaski County Prosecuting Attorney
    “I felt like Huckabee had more compassion for the murderers than he ever did for the victims.” - Elaine Colclasure, co-leader of the Central Arkansas chapter of Parents of Murdered Children.
    3) Governor Huckabee’s pattern was to ignore immigration laws, often in the name of Christianity.
    Huckabee opposed immigration enforcement as governor on a number of fronts. Immigration enforcement groups call Huckabee’s record on immigration “a disaster” and reference him as they guy who “scares the heck” out of them.
    In 2001, Huckabee’s human services liaison Robert Trevino pushed for legislation to provide driver’s licenses for illegals. It was understood by legislators that he acted with Huckabee’s blessing.
    In 2001, Huckabee opposed a measure to require proof of citizenship to vote.
    In 2005, Huckabee supported a bill that offered illegal immigrants in-state tuition rates and made them eligible for the same merit-based scholarships to Arkansas state colleges and universities as legal citizens. The bill would have violated federal law and was not enacted by the legislature.
    In 2005, he opposed a bill that denied some state benefits to illegals and required proof of citizenship to vote (patterned after Arizona’s Prop 200 that has been successful in curtailing illegal immigration in that state). In this story, Huckabee called the measure “un-American….inflammatory….race-baiting and demagoguery.” He added that the bill “inflames those who are racist and bigots and makes them think there’s a real problem. But there’s not.” He then singled out State Senator Jim Holt, also an openly professing Christian, saying, “I drink a different kind of Jesus juice.”
    In 2005, Huckabee criticized federal agents for a recent crackdown on illegals, saying that it wasn’t fair to the innocent family members of those targeted in the operation. (No word on whether he also opposes raids on other law-breakers who might also have innocent family members affected by the fruits of their illegal activity.)
    In 2005, Huckabee promoted an “open door” policy on immigration as he addressed the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) national convention in Little Rock. LULAC is a left-leaning group that opposes virtually all measures of immigration enforcement.
    “He was an absolute disaster on immigration as governor. Every time there was any enforcement in his state, he took the side of the illegal aliens.” - Roy Beck, president of NumbersUSA, a group that played a major role in rallying the phone calls that helped defeat this year’s Senate immigration bill.
    “I would hope he could be trusted to secure the borders, but given his track record in Arkansas, I don’t see the conservative he has portrayed himself to be in Iowa.” - Jake Files, a former Arkansas state representative and current chairman of the Sebastian County Republican Party

    4) Governor Huckabee was no friend to fiscal conservatives in Arkansas.
    Huckabee’s record on taxes, government spending, and growing government programs was miserable. Basically, when the economy got tough, Huckabee expected families like mine to tighten our budgets in order to help state government meet its spending whims.
    In 2003, Huckabee called a special session of the legislature to push for a tax increase to make up for spending shortfalls. This led to his signing HB1039, an across the board income tax and tobacco tax increase. Huckabee even refused to consider a Republican proposal to cut spending and use general improvement funds (i.e., legislative pork) to make up for the budget shortfall. Ironically, the same day Huckabee was practically begging the Arkansas legislature to raise taxes (here’s the video), President Bush was also in Little Rock to push for his tax cut plan. (Note: When asked about this video recently, Huckabee gave a misleading response to Fox News, blaming his tax increase plea on a court order. This prompted State Representative Johnny Key, the current Republican Leader in the Arkansas House, to send out a letter correcting the accuracy of Huckabee’s statement.)
    If that weren’t enough, Huckabee called a 2nd special legislative session in 2003 to pass a nearly one-cent state sales tax increase. The measure also expanded the sales tax to include previously exempted services (for more information and context, see reason #6 below).
    During Huckabee’s term, Arkansas showed a net tax increase of $505 million, and the average Arkansan’s tax burden grew from $1,969 to $2,902. Governor Huckabee raised more taxes in 10 years in office than Bill Clinton did in his 12 years.
    During Huckabee’s 10 years as governor, state spending more than doubled (from $6.6 billion to $16.1 billion), higher education and public schools got big increases, as did social services. Meanwhile, the state added about 8,000 full-time workers to its payroll during that period, a 19% increase (according to the Bureau of Legislative Research).
    The conservative Cato Institute gave Huckabee an “F” for his final term as governor on its Fiscal Policy Report Card, saying, “Huckabee’s leadership has left taxpayers in Arkansas much worse off.” His grade was lower than 15 of the 21 Democrat Governors. His overall grade as governor was a D.
    “The main reason for the drop was his insistence on raising taxes at almost every turn throughout his final term.” – Cato Institute explaining why Huckabee had dropped from a “D” to an “F” on their Fiscal Policy Report Card.
    “[Huckabee] says he’s pro-family. If you’re raising taxes on the families of Arkansas, causing wives to go out and get jobs to make ends meet, that’s not pro-family.” - Former Arkansas State Representative Randy Minton (R)
    “In the past, he blamed Democrats for raising taxes…We voted for them, but he proposed them.” - Arkansas State Senator John Paul Capps, a Democrat
    5) Huckabee left a long trail of ethics questions while Governor of Arkansas
    This is an area where I think Huckabee does receive some unfair criticism. Some of the ethics charges against him were frivolous and politically motivated. However, it has been concerning for some time just how much the governor accepted in gifts and how he was seemingly always pushing ethical limits.
    During his tenure, Huckabee accepted 314 gifts valued overall at more than $150,000, according to documents filed with the Arkansas’ Secretary of State office.
    The Huckabees set up wedding registries at local department stores as Mike was leaving office – even though they had been married for 30 years. State ethics laws prohibited Huckabee from receiving gifts of more than $100……but there was an exception for wedding gifts.
    Judicial Watch, a non-partisan group dedicted to fighting government corruption, listed Huckabee among their Ten Most Wanted Corrupt Politicians of 2007. Huckabee was one of only three Republican politicians to make the list.
    6) Huckabee’s education record shows him to be an advocate of the “status quo”
    The New Hampshire chapter of the National Education Association (NEA) has endorsed Hillary Clinton and Mike Huckabee for the upcoming Primary elections. This is the first time in memory that they have recommended a Republican (in 2004 they endorsed Howard Dean). They likely chose Huckabee because:
    Huckabee has consistently opposed virtually all proposals for education reform, including school choice vouchers.
    The former president of Eagle Forum of Arkansas said Huckabee “continued the Hillary Clinton education plan” as our governor.
    When the Arkansas Supreme Court ruled that Arkansas’ public school funding was “inequitable,” Huckabee took the ruling as a mandate to raise taxes in order to once again increase school funding…which he did. (To his credit, however, he also used the opportunity to consolidate some of the school districts in the state - although rural legislators severely watered down the proposal.)
    7) Huckabee has very little support for his Presidential bid here in Arkansas
    For the most part those in his party who know him best are not supporting him.
    In October, a University of Arkansas poll showed that, among all Presidential candidates in both parties, only 8% of Arkansans said they were supporting Mike Huckabee.
    That same week, the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette reported that only one-third of Republicans in the Arkansas Legislature said they were supporting their former governor’s Presidential bid.
    After this story, the Huckabee campaign published a list of supporters in his home state. The Arkansas News Bureau then reported that as some of the names on Huckabee’s Arkansas endorsement list were used without permission and had to be removed.
    This is purely anecdotal, but despite my involvement in Republican politics, I am unaware of any of my Republican friends who are supporting Huckabee. I have seen maybe 3 Huckabee for President bumper stickers – and I live in Republican west Little Rock and work 2 miles from the state capitol where Huckabee just completed over 10 years as Governor (my wife says she saw her first sticker today…..guess he’s picking up steam here!).
    “…if Huckabee didn’t have things sewn up with Republicans back home, what kind of message did that send?….The truth is that Huckabee hasn’t had that much support from former and current Republican legislators.” - David Sanders, conservative columnist for Arkansas News Bureau (November 11, 2007)
    Conclusion:
    I realize the Republican Presidential field does not leave true conservatives with much to get excited about. However, it is unlikely I will support Huckabee over any of the Republican frontrunners because of his liberal record, his questionable judgment, and his reckless use of power while Governor. Now is not the time for Republicans to compromise on core conservative values. More importantly, we need a leader with a history of using strong judgment as our nation continues to lead the world in the War on Terror.

    Two final questions:
    1) Given the many vulnerabilities in his record, what is the likelihood that Huckabee would win in a general election? Democrat National Committee officials have already been quoted as saying that they see Huckabee as “easy kill” and refer to him as “the glass jaw — and they’re just waiting to break it.” The DNC has issued over 200 attack press releases on Republican candidates - only 4 on Huckabee, the last one coming 10 months ago.
    2) Does his record as governor represent someone who should be given greater power and responsibility? Is he Commander and Chief material? Leader of the free world? National Review recently expressed concern, and Huckabee raised eyebrows with recent comments critical of U.S. Foreign policy and our role in the world - he was essentially repeating the Democrat talking points!

    Feel free to pass this letter on or contact me if you have any questions about anything stated here. I have tried very carefully to be fair, accurate, and to stick to facts from Huckabee’s record. But it’s certainly possible I made a mistake somewhere or worded something poorly. I would be more than happy to further dialogue on any of these issues.

    Sincerely,
    David Thompson
    Little Rock, Arkansas


  45. BTC McDaniels,

    PTL=Pay The Lady


  46. Thanks for changing my vote. I supported Huckabee until I read your website. Now I can email all my 100’s of friends around the country to let them read your website. You represent Huckabee and his stand against the Mormon religion.


  47. Going back to the original question. Clearly the answer is yes. I strongly believe it, all of my research supports it and therefore it must be true. Makes as much sense as your answer. Actually, more sense, because my research defines how a true Christian behaves, and clearly you have some issues with a few things like “judge not that you be not judged” etc. But that line could go on indefinitely with actual scripture to back it up and it appears you never let a scripture that might be interpreted contrary to your view get in the way of your actions. Here’s the one thing that truly I wish to understand. Why do Baptists and some other evangelicals feel such a compulsive, one would almost say, paranoid, need to spend so much time and energy fighting the Mormon church? Wouldn’t some of that time, energy and money be better spent helping your own people. You just had a rather devastating natural disaster down there. You do believe in natural disasters don’t you? You don’t think that was God’s vengance for being unChristian do you? I certainly don’t, but you seem to have some very very unusual beliefs, so I’ve been a little worried about how you might be interpreting that. Anyway, maybe some of your time and money could be spent helping people get their lives back together. You know, the way Mormons help other Mormons and every other group of needy people regardless of race or religion, when they are in trouble. In fact, why don’t you check it out. I bet the Mormons are already down there doing real things to help. You know, helping people clean up the mess, feeding them, making sure they have the basic necessities to move forward. And I bet they aren’t asking what religion people are or trying to convert them before they help. Just saying.

    Before leaving, I want to sincerely thank you for this website. It provides such illumination to people who honestly didn’t understand what I was talking about when I said that the evangelicals were rabidly anti-Mormon and it was having a serious effect on the election. Thanks for putting that doubt out the window.

    And no I will not vote for Huckabee for a legion of reasons, but the most important is his dishonesty about his “understanding” of Mormon beliefs and the sly and negative way he has used this through the entire election cycle. I find him to be a dangerous man, and not at all Christian.


  48. Are we to not follow Jesus in like manner that we would follow his prophet? Mike Huckabee nor Mitt Romney are prophets nor claim to be so how could this have any relevence. Mike Huckabee follows doctorine and quotes scripture for the benefit of his campaign. Prophets and apostles wrote the bible. So Mike is following prophets. Oh my save us all. The only difference with Mormons is that we believe in a living prophet thus what they say would be just as revelvent as scriptures written 2000 years ago. I don’t see Mitt quoting scripture. If anyone is being led by their prophet it would be Huckabee. He doesn’t hide it either. Yet people are voting for him. Who do you really need to worry about imposing their beliefs on you?


  49. Haisty,
    I just recently found your site and have been reading the posted comments and find them quite interesting. Sadly I have not been able to find any comments posted by you addressing the issues raised since December 13, 2007 at 10:38 pm where you said “I will respond this evening I trust”. You obviously never posted that evening or any other evening since then (at least not to this comment section).
    I would like to hear your views about the points that have been raised throughout this comment section. Thanks.


  50. [...] pro-Huckabee blog recently(ish) set out the (now somewhat dated) argument that (non-Mormon) Christians have a Biblical duty not to vote for Mitt Romney. In response, Bruce (husband of blog-butterfly Margaret) Young wrote a short rebuttal piece. [...]


  51. I have found all of this discussion interesting, here and at LDS blogs, and other blogs. As an active Mormon, I will admit that there are theological differences between us and evangelical Christians. But those differences are part of what helps me to consider my self both Christian and a Mormon. I have been saddened to see so much misunderstanding and bigotry displayed by both sides in this argument. And I won’t engage in trying to dispute your arguments, which include elements of truth and deliberate falsehood. Nonetheless, I will accept your right to free speech, but your arguments would seem to even limit my rights to employment, for my wife to work as a schoolteacher, or even cheapen volunteer efforts my members of the Mormon church. How sad.

    Incidentally, I’ll just say that with respect to this year’s election, my religious and personal values have led me to be a supporter of a Democratic candidate. Let’s see, they don’t seem to have problems with blacks, a woman, or even a Mormon in their ranks (see Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev, Senate Majority leader and an active Mormon). If by their fruits ye shall know them, I’d rather be with the Democrats in this election than participate in the hate-speech and innuendo perpetrated in this year’s Republican primary races.


  52. Hmmmm, interesting discussions on religion. I’m sure that all Christian-based faiths should be getting along much better than this. Both Romney and Huckabee are apparently done for this republican primary. It’s too bad. I think that Romney was the most qualified candidate on both sides.

    That being said, I hope that we can all get together and vote for the most conservative candidate available in the general election. No sane individual would desire the socialist agenda that is being promoted by the democratic party.


  53. I find it endlessly interesting that men who dump their wives and kids to marry rich, young women AND those who stay married and just have some on the side every chance they get AND those who cheat on wives you are undergoing chemo, etc., etc., etc. are not called out by the religious right. Seems that CLAIMING to belong to one of the “correct” denominations is all that matters. Check the right box and you’re in. DO whatever you want. But as long as you SAY you’re saved, you’re good with us.

    Then you get the guy who is honest and actually faithful to his wife. Wow. But we can’t have him. After all he believes that when God said, “This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased.” he was actually talking about his SON, not himself. Yes, that is pretty damning.


  54. You’re not doing Huckabee any favors by expressing your bigoted views in his favor. This election has certainly turned America’s attention towards the Mormons, but it’s also turned America’s attention towards certain Evangelical extremists. I dare say the public scrutiny has done more PR damage to the extremists.


  55. Matt,

    I agree with you. I wonder if years from now our nation will live to regret having passed an opportunity to put into office what could have been the best qualified candidates on either side. It is a remarkable time in our nation’s history to have had candidates break the ceiling for women, blacks and who knew, but for Mormons as well. It’s striking how the Wall Street Journal’s article pertaining to Romney’s faith had a poll to indicate that of the three, being a member of the LDS faith was the biggest obstacle to overcome.

    I’d rather that a godless, atheist, left winged, communist group oppose Mitt Romney than God fearing Christians who should recognize that members of the LDS faith by and large are very good people. It really doesn’t bode well for the Republican party. LDS members are highly encouraged by their leaders to be politically active and though not quite the force in the American electorate that of Christianity at large, but should not be cast aside or taken for granted either.

    In the end, those that vote against a religion wind up with McCain. How sad is that!


  56. Where’d Haisty go?


  57. Anyone who bears false witness is breaking the 9th Commandment. Huckabee and his Pastors must repent because they spread lies. If I am not going to support a Bigot.

    See thir web site that spreads fear and hate about Mormon faith.

    http://pastors4huckabeeblog.com/the-biblical-case-against-voting-for-a-mormon-for-president-why-christians-who-support-romney-actualy-violate-scripture/


  58. I agree: Incidentally, I’ll just say that with respect to this year’s election, my religious and personal values have led me to be a supporter of a Democratic candidate. Let’s see, they don’t seem to have problems with blacks, a woman, or even a Mormon in their ranks (see Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev, Senate Majority leader and an active Mormon). If by their fruits ye shall know them, I’d rather be with the Democrats in this election than participate in the hate-speech and innuendo perpetrated in this year’s Republican primary races.


  59. Lots of interesting stuff here, but getting back to the basics of the question posed, I would have to say, “Yes. Anyone, Jew, Christian, or Muslim, is a bigot if they cannot support Mitt because he is a Mormon.” Yes, I know it’s a moot point since he has dropped out of the race, but here’s just a few things I observed:

    1) Romney won 90% of the vote in Utah, yet only 75% of the state are “Mormons.” So apparently, others are voting for him as well.

    2) Lots of broad generalizations by both sides on this one. I believe it was Christ who taught us to “Judge not, that [we] be not judged. For with what judgment [we] judge, [we] shall be judged.” So, if we want our judgment to sound something like “You Americans did such and such and so and so, therefore you individually are going to spend eternity in hell,” then by all means keep it up. Or, “Jeff here says you weren’t nice to people. I didn’t see for myself, but that’s what I heard, so you’re going to hell.” If, on the other hand you would like the Lord to look at what you individually did with your life, with the gifts and talents and responsibilities that were given to you; then you may want to look into people based on their individual merits.

    3) Any dictionary will tell you that a Christian is a person who believes in Jesus Christ, a person who believes in or follows Christianity. If Evangelicals want to distinguish themselves from the rest of Christianity, that’s fine, but they can’t hijack a word that already exists and applies to I don’t how many millions of people in the world. I believe that the name of their church is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. Not the The Church of the Latter-Day Saints or the Mormon Church. I have known many Latter-Day Saints, or “Mormons,” and for the most part they are a good people. Of course, like any denomination, there are some that don’t quite exemplify Christ’s teachings, but they are the exception, not the rule.

    4) Here’s a great idea: I want to learn about Judaism, so who am I going to ask? I know, a Nazi. Great idea. Give me a break. You want to know what Mormons believe? Ask a Mormon … not a disgruntled “ex-mormon.”

    5) I don’t see anywhere on this site where Governor Huckabee endorses this site. Please don’t judge Governer Huckabee based on what this site says, just like you shouldn’t judge the Mormons based on this site, which brings us back to not judging. :-)

    I hope we can follow Christ’s example and teachings and see good things for what they are, and not go through life hating our brother because


  60. looks like the tail got caught off of that last post:

    … and not go through life hating our brother because he is from Samaria … or [gasp] Utah.


  61. Looks like this thread doesn’t get read much anymore. Returning to my point #5, it would appear that the supporters of Mr. Huckabee would aren’t exactly in line with their beloved leader:

    http://www.sltrib.com/ci_8239620

    Huckabee himself says you shouldn’t vote for or against Romney or himself based on religion. Hmmm, makes you think doesn’t it?


Leave a Comment




Web Hosting