Search This Blog

Monday, January 24, 2011

Why this Mormon will NOT vote for Mitt Romney

***This is an updated article on one I originally wrote on December 28, 2007.  Given the recent event in New Hampshire, I found it apropos to update it.***

I have come to the conclusion that Mitt Romney is a Mormon In Name Only (MINO.)  I know this requires an explanation, especially for those who may know nothing about the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.  And even more so for my fellow Mormons.

So here goes.

Before we were born, we had a choice to make.  As our Heavenly Parents were helping us decide on the how’s and what’s of the next section of our eternal progression, we were confronted with a baffling decision.  We had progressed as far as we could spiritually; now was the time to conquer the flesh.  We all wanted to return to live with our Parents when our earthly mission was over, but knew that once we had a body on earth, we would be weak things whose default mode was sin.  That meant it would be impossible for any of us to return to Father, who can look upon sin with no tolerance.

What to do?

Enter two beloved siblings, each with a plan.

The plan of our oldest brother, who would on earth be known as Jesus, was to continue the plan we already followed in Heaven under our Father in Heaven--free will--but have one who would pay the wages for us sinners who would agree to follow him.  That way He could satisfy the demands of justice--which mercy can not rob--but give the gift of mercy for those who would choose it.  He even volunteered to be the one who paid that terrible price, and in humility offered the glory that would follow such a gift back to His Father.

The plan of the Son of the Morning Star--whose tantrum and evil tongue would cause him to turn against Father and leave His presence with 1/3 of our easily led siblings and take on the name Satan--played on the tender feelings of our Heavenly Parents.  He promised that if he was in charge, he would force all of us to obey God's will so that not a single one of us would be lost.  We would all come back whether we wanted to or not.  But in return, God's glory would become his own.

Father could have said, "My domain, my decision, I'll choose."  After all, it was His domain, and He did have the right.  But He didn't.  He turned to us; after all, we were going to be the ones who would have to live and die with this decision on Earth.  So we joined him in a Grand Counsel where we discussed with logic, reason, and what we already knew of free will and democracy and made the decision that made our Parents proud and us free.  We raised our hands for the right to choose.

Christ's plan won our hearts, and the day.  Decision made, we set about planning for our Second Estate, during which we would prove to ourselves whether or not we were truly capable of walking what we talked.

Lucifer, seething over losing the vote, began planting little seeds of anger and hate here and there.  His advantage was a good one; having been raised with our spiritual family, he knew us, and knew who among us could be easily led with emotion, anger, confusion, frustration, power, lust, and hatred.  He eventually convinced 1/3 of our beloved siblings to leave our Father's House with him and try to wrest the kingdom away.  This would be extremely difficult for him to do given the fact that he and his 1/3 forfeited their right to physical bodies.  Their success or failure, therefore, would depend upon how well they could convince the rest of us to carry their flag for them.  This would also enable them to punish us for voting against their side.   And never forget--unlike us, they have not gone through the veil of forgetfulness.   They remember you, and more importantly, they remember how you voted.

It's been the exact same battle following us to earth, and the exact same choice.

So now we have a Mormon running for the highest office in the country--no, let's face it:  in the world.  Given that most people like Mormons--those they know, anyway--you would think it would be an easy sell.

So far, however, it hasn't been, but not for the reasons you might think.  It truly has less to do with prejudice against Mormons than it does this particular Mormon.

I am writing this article because I have been deluged with readers assuming that I am voting for Romney.  Aside from the fact that it is excruciatingly RETARDED to vote for someone just because they are the same race, sex, or religion as you, my answer to the Romney question comes from the first Prophet of the Restored Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, Joseph Smith, and the book he translated under modern-day revelation from Father.  (Yep, Father talks to us...wouldn't you answer the call of a child in need?   If you, weak mortal that you are, are capable of such love, how much more is Father?)

Mormon view of Government--Doctrine and Covenants Chapter 134, verses 1-3, dated August 1835
All Boldface is added by me)
1.  We believe that governments were instituted of God for the benefit of man; and that He holds men accountable for their acts in relation to them, both in making laws and administering them, for the good and safety of society.

2.  We believe that no government can exist in peace, except such laws are framed and held inviolate as will secure to each individual the free exercise of conscience, the right and control of property, and the protection of life.
3.  We believe that all governments necessarily require civil officers and magistrates to enforce the laws of the same; and that such as will administer the law in equity and justice should be sought for and upheld by the voice of the people if a republic, or the will of the sovereign.

Mormon view of Religion--Doctrine and Covenants Chapter 134 verses 4, 9-10

4.  We believe that religion is instituted by God; and that men are amenable to Him, and to Him only, for the exercise of it, unless their religious opinions prompt them to infringe upon the rights and liberties of others; but we do not believe that human law has a right to interfere in prescribing rules of worship to bind the consciences of men, nor dictate forms for public or private devotion; that the civil magistrate should restrain crime, but never control conscience; should punish guilt, but never suppress the freedom of the soul.

9.  ...We do not believe it just to mingle religious influence with civil government, whereby one religious society is fostered and another proscribed in its spiritual privileges, and the individual rights of its members, as citizens, denied.

10.  We believe that all religious societies have a right to deal with their members for disorderly conduct, according to the rules and regulations of such societies; provided that such dealings be for fellowship and good standing; but we do not believe that any religious society has authority to try men on the right of property or life, to take from them this world's goods, or to put them in jeopardy of either life or limb, or to inflict any physical punishment upon them.  They can only excommunicate them from their society, and withdraw from them their fellowship.

Mormon view of Citizen Responsibility and Law--Doctrine and Covenants Chapter 134 verses 5-8, 11 

5.  We believe that all men are bound to sustain and uphold the respective governments in which they reside while protected in their inherent and inalienable rights by the laws of such governments; and that sedition and rebellion are unbecoming every citizen thus protected, and should be punished accordingly, and that all governments have a right to enact such laws as in their own judgments are best calculated to secure the public interest; at the same time, however, holding sacred the freedom of conscience.

6.  We believe that every man should be honored in his station, rulers and magistrates as such, being placed for the protection of the innocent and the punishment of the guilty; and that to the laws all men show respect and deference, as without them peace and harmony would be supplanted by anarchy and terror; human laws being instituted for the express purpose of regulating our interests as individuals and nations, between man and man; and divine laws given of heaven, prescribing rules on spiritual concerns, for faith and worship, both to be answered by man to his Maker.

7.  We believe that rulers, states, and governments have a right, and are bound to enact laws for the protection of all citizens in the free exercise of their religious belief; but we do not believe that they have a right in justice to deprive citizens of this privilege, or proscribe them in their opinions, so long as a regard and reverence are shown to the laws and such religious opinions do not justify sedition nor conspiracy.

8.  We believe that the commission of crime should be punished according to the nature of the offense; that murder, treason, robbery, theft, and the breach of general peace, in all respects, should be punished according to their criminality and their tendency to evil among men, by the laws of that government in which the offense is committed; and for the public peace and tranquility all men should step forward and use their ability in bringing offenders against good laws to punishment.

11...We believe that men should appeal to the civil law for redress of all wrongs and grievances, where personal abuse is inflicted or the right of property or character infringed, where such laws exist as will protect the same; but we believe that all men are justified in defending themselves, their friends, and property, and the government, from the unlawful assaults and encroachments of all persons in times of exigency, where immediate appeal cannot be made to the laws, and relief afforded.

And finally, Doctrine and Covenants section 98: 4-10, regarding the Constitution and obligations of citizenry

4  And now, verily I say unto you concerning the laws of the land, it is my will that my people should observe to do all things whatsoever I command them.

5  And that law of the land which is constitutional, supporting that principle of freedom in maintaining rights and privileges, belongs to all mankind, and is justifiable before me.

6  Therefore, I, the Lord, justify you, and your brethren of my church, in befriending that law which is the constitutional law of the land;

7  And as pertaining to law of man, whatsoever is more or less than this, cometh of evil.

8  I, the Lord God, make you free, therefore ye are free indeed; and the law also maketh you free.

9  Nevertheless, when the wicked rule the people mourn.

10  Wherefore, honest men and wise men should be sought for diligently, and good men and wise men ye should observe to uphold; otherwise whatsoever is less than these cometh of evil.
The LDS Church does not endorse a party or candidate as a church, although individual Mormons may do so publicly on their own.  We are always encouraged to vote according to out conscience--in other words, to WALK what we TALK.  There have been a few--very few--political issues in which the LDS Church has publicly taken a side, such as abortion, marriage, lottery, slavery, and such.  Father is a God of logic and expects us to be logical too, and it is a reasonable presumption for all of us to make that if we believe it, we will act it.

OK, there you have it--this is what I believe, and this is the man I will vote for.  And this is why Mitt Romney is a MINO.


I will vote for a man who looks to his logic, his reason, his moral compass, and his God in making decisions that may be unpopular but are nonetheless correct.  How does Romney measure up?

Abortion/Gay Marriage--two of only a handful of political issues the LDS Church has stood firmly against, Romney decided to NOT walk this talk and based his decision on an emotional experience with two beloved family members.  Read about Romney and his wife’s decades of support for abortion here.  While I have gay friends and am sure I love people who have had abortions, until Father says OK, I say NO WAY to such behavior, and we have the right and obligation to judge behavior, not the individual.  It bothers me, because it should, that Romney made the decision based on emotion rather than reason or his belief system, and then justified away the fact that he--as a committed member of the LDS Church, raised around and bounced on the knees of Prophets and apostles while growing up, given more, given much, yet chose his own reasons as higher than what God Himself had told His prophet concerning these issues--spoke out against the prophet he votes to uphold twice a year at our General Conferences.  It makes me wonder what commandments from Father will be the next to go, since Romney has shown an unconscionable ability to reject God's command for his own reasons, his own "feelings."  The fact that he is now flip-flopping back to Mr. Mormon in that belief--just in time for his Presidential run announcement, akin to a deathbed confession at the last minute in an attempt to "save his soul"--has me concerned, and justly so, about what he truly believes when the cameras are off.  We need a man to lead with ease, not to be easily led, or justify the rejection of God's way for his own.  We have had enough of those, and look where it has left us.

Islam--Reminder of what Mormons believe:  ...unless their religious opinions prompt them to infringe upon the rights and liberties of others.  Of the Big 3 religions on earth--Judaism, Christianity, and Islam--only one believes in force over free will.  If you believe that this whole earthly existence is about the battle between force and free will, which is evil and good, then you must also believe that any religion who follows force follows Lucifer, making them indeed Satanic by the strictest of definitions.  A friend and man I deeply admire, Robert Spencer of JihadWatch, commends Romney for not being afraid of words when it comes to calling this particular spade a spade.  As my readers know, I despise Political Castration, and am pleased that he didn't succumb to it in this most important battle of these last days, but I can't help but pull back a little; he has rationalized turning on Mormon doctrine before, as clearly indicated above.  I cannot help but wonder if he'll walk away from this one if he's given enough emotional but bullcrap Mohammed al-Dura stories.  After all, emotion has disarmed his reason center in the past; it's hardly a stretch to consider that it might happen again.

Israel--Given that everyone whose ancestors peopled England, Scotland, Ireland, most of western Europe, and all American Indians descend from Joseph of the House of Israel ,--supported, oddly enough, with the beginnings of the evidence recently discovered here in America --given that this large branch of the tree of Israel restored the smaller branch of the same tree, given that the Muslims also know that in order to restore Hagar and Ishmael they must rid the world of ALL of Sarah and Isaac's descendants--that's 12 tribes, people, not just Judah, and in case you're a bit slow, YOU are part of one of those tribes too, and in Islam, that means you are fair game--and given that this war is fast coming down to both old Jerusalem and new Zion, can we count on Romney to walk the Mormon talk of standing with Israel?  Again my mind wanders to what he has done when confronted with what he believes and what he has chosen to do.  This one is too important to leave unanswered.  It isn't enough just to support the current war or the troops, sir; as Israel and America are targeted more and more by Islam and a             hate-filled UN, as supporting both republics becomes more and more unpopular, as your political life may one day hinge on the answer to this question alone, where can we count on you to walk?

Law-breaking Illegal Immigrants--Do I really need to point out the difference in his talk and his walk on this issue?  It is against our doctrine to exempt ANYONE from the law, sir, and you know it.

"I don't believe in rounding up 11 million people and forcing them at gunpoint from our country," Romney informed the Lowell Sun in 2006. How about forcing out those we catch? No? Then you believe that some laws (including those safeguarding our national sovereignty) shouldn't be enforced, Governor.
 In November 2005, Romney didn't oppose the McCain plan, which went down in flaming defeat in the Senate this spring. (He then described it as "very different than amnesty.") Now, he was always against it -- after he was for it.
So, what to do with 12 million to 15 million illegal immigrants? First, Romney wants to register them. (What makes him think they'll comply?) Then, some will be repatriated and others will begin "the process of applying for citizenship and establishing legal status." Sounds like qualified amnesty, which Mitt swears it isn't.
From Discover The Networks, December 12, 2007

Big Government--Two words:  Romney Care.  Walk vs. talk?  Yeah...he stayed sitting, in spite of what I know he believes--read it for yourself--regarding government and the freedom of the citizenry.  Right in line with what he did on the abortion/gay marriage issue.  Does not portend well in the whole trusting him to support what he claims to believe with actions that match.


We are at the exact same crossroads that we were at in Heaven with Father.  We must now choose which side we want--freedom or force?  Do we want to grow up and take responsibility for our own lives and ask only that our government protect our freedom to choose which side we will follow, or are we toddlers who must be commanded in all things, too gutless and weak to stand on our own two feet and walk what we talk?  We chose freedom once, when it counted, and that choice in Heaven gave us this chance on Earth.   What will we walk, America?  Will it match our talk?

Me vote for Romney?  That depends.  Does the man walk what he talks, as he did in the first war we fought for freedom, at Father's side?  Will he defend free will, even if some choose to use that free will to do wrong?  Will he expect enemy nations to keep their word and not hide hatred behind an insane, allah-fueled justification?  Will he do that which Father forbids:  call "wrong" right and "right" wrong, deny us our free will since he knows better, alter the natural consequences of right and wrong, deny truth, and justify it by leaning unto his own understanding?  His actions so far have been dubious, and that does NOT inspire the confidence necessary for me to support him.

As a fellow Mormon, I know what he is at least supposed to talk, to believe.  So far, Romney has failed to convince me that, when faced with tough decisions for this nation, he will base those decisions on those moral codes he claims to espouse rather than stick his finger up and feel the direction of the political wind.  Father trusted us to choose the right in that long ago counsel, and He's trusting us to do it again now.  Think about that...God trusts us with our free will.  Shouldn't we be suspicious of any man who doesn't think we can even handle our own healthcare?  Shouldn’t we, who know what he is supposed to believe and claim to believe the same, be ashamed of this image or righteousness?  I know I’m ashamed of him; I hold him to a higher standard than I do a non-member because I should.  His failure is greater because his standard was greater.

And before you think I expect him to lead America from Salt Lake City, think again, and better this time.  All of us base our sense of right and wrong on morals, and whether we admit it or not, or even know it or not, all morality comes from God, because it is the nature of man to be selfish, to do what feels good for himself.  It is the spirit within the tempers that physical with discipline and restraint, and since that spirit comes from God, our laws, our morals, come innately from God.  And only a fool would look at our founding documents and not know that all the Constitution is based on a moral code, that better side of mortality that hearkens to eternity and answers to God. 

I expect Mitt Romney to walk the talk of his moral code, and being from the same belief system, I know that code better than I would that of any other religious belief.  That is what we should all expect, from ourselves and others, when we know more fully what we and they believe.  To expect more or less than this from ourselves or others is exemption, after all, and can only possibly come from an evil source.  It is a recipe for resentment, anarchy, and destruction, for it rapes justice and therefore, negates the beauty of mercy.  Man succeeds when he follows the rule, not the exception; when the unselfish and correct exception is the better way, history has shown that patience, persuasion, and free will inevitably draws in the more righteous part of society, which then become the majority, or in other words, the rule.  The pattern of history has made the truths undeniably and mathematically certain.

The time for talk is over.  Choose ye this day whom ye will serve.  Vote for a walker , people.  Our very existence depends on it; if you fail to choose the right now, you may very well never have the gift of choice again, and all the talk in the world won't save you then.

Keep the faith, bros, in all things courage, and no substitute for VICTORY. 


Deanna said...

Great points to consider! Thank you for your insight. I am curious who then, if not Mitt Romney, that you think is best qualified to do the job as you have described it?

Unknown said...

Hey Deanna! Personally, at this point, I'm all hot and bothered for a John Bolton and Col. Allen West ticket for 2012. Love them both, such strong men who are willing to do the right thing for no other reason than it is right. I voted in the primaries since 2000 for Alan Keyes, because he's an ardent and immaculate Constitutionalist who is unswayed by popularity and emotional fagatronics. We need balls, brains, courage, fortitude, wisdom, and adherence to the law of this land: the Constitution. that ain't Romney, who believes his own beliefs in God and His Gospel are subject to change by popularity or polls. SHAME! No MINOs!