Romney believes: ie Mormonism

Erickson says Romney believes:

  • He will become a “god” in the afterlife and be given his own planet
  • Satan is Jesus’ literal brother
  • He will be given his own afterlife kingdom where he will have sexual
    relations with his wife, Ann, to populate his kingdom with spirit children as
    God the Father Himself has a wife on His own planet.

“Mormonism teaches we pre-existed on God the Father’s planet as spirit
children before we were planted in our mother’s wombs,” Erickson told WND. “And
the reason why we’re here according to Mormonism, is so that we can work out our
own progression to godhood and our own planets themselves.”

The author, who herself was married in a Mormon temple at age 19 but now considers herself a
non-denominational Christian, says there’s a secret agenda  Mormon officials
don’t like to talk about publicly.

“A complete takeover of the government,” she said. “They have more people in
the CIA, the FBI. They have an employment office for Mormons in D.C. to be able
to infiltrate them into the government.”

“They’ve been trying since the beginning to get someone in the presidency,
because they believe they have to establish their authority so when Jesus comes
to Earth, the Mormon Church will take control of the government and the Mormons will be the government of God on Earth,”
she continued.

Erickson says her main concern is that the leader of the free world have the
ability to discern fact from fiction.

“It may be crucial to our survival,” she said. “If his beliefs are distorted,
which they unequivocally are, why would it not be be critical to our existence
to protect our country from being placed in the hands of such a person?”

When asked for specific rituals she considers bizarre, Erickson claims Romney
and other Mormons take part in clandestine marriage ceremonies involving
“outrageous” customs. Explaining her own Mormon wedding, she says she was forced
to completely disrobe against her will.

“It was horrific,” she told WND. “There I was standing naked. They brought
this bowl of water, and started washing my body down and whispering prayers over
my body. They stopped over the right and left breast, the navel and knees and
prayed specific prayers.”

To help ensure the general public did not learn details of the rituals, she
says believers took a symbolic knife to feign their own murder if members
spilled the beans of what really goes on behind closed doors.

“They
actually had us slashing our guts open and our guts falling to the ground if we
told people of the secret dogma of the ceremonies,” Erickson said.

“Mitt is not a casual Mormon,” she told online interviewer Thom Hartmann,
noting Romney has reached the upper echelons of the faith. “There is no way that
he will be able to not listen to the [Mormon] prophet. His eternal salvation
depends on it. He has to put the church first over country.”

Read
more: Mormon bishop’s daughter
spills Romney’s ‘secrets’ …
http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=354721#ixzz1alm4aJYt

WHY MORMONS AND JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES ARE NOT CHRISTIANS

WHY MORMONS AND JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES ARE NOT CHRISTIANS – Answering the Question: “Why do you say that Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses are not Christians. Don’t they believe in Jesus?”

The Mormon religion (officially known as the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints or LDS) and the Jehovah’s Witness organization (also known as the Watchtower) both share a common foundational doctrine: They claim that Christianity became corrupt at the death of the New Testament apostles. They assert that through their religion alone, God has restored the lost and corrupted elements of the Christian faith so that only those who practice their religion possess the purest form of Christianity.

When challenged by non-members that they are not “Christians” because they deny many of the doctrinal tenets of the original Christian faith, often Jehovah’s Witness and Mormon adherents take offense. Reasoning that they “believe in Jesus Christ,” they question why anyone would consider them “unchristian.” In response to these assertions we ask:

1. If the confession that one “believes in Jesus Christ” is sufficient to qualify one as a “Christian”, how do we reconcile this with Jesus’ statement in Matthew chapter seven?

Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven; but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness.” —Matthew 7:21-23 *

It is apparent that the people in Jesus’ example thought they were Christians. Even though they may have performed many works in Jesus’ name as proof of their religious devotion, Jesus rejected them with the statement, “I never knew you.” Given Jesus’ preceding warnings about “false prophets” who would masquerade as followers of Jesus Christ (verse 15), is it any wonder Jesus commanded us to test the “fruit” of religious teachers before embracing them into the fold (verse 20)? This brings us to our second question:

2. Suppose we evangelical Christians were to claim that we are “Mormons” because we “believe in Jesus Christ,” but we deny the Book of Mormon and teach that Joseph Smith was a false prophet. How would a LDS person feel about us claiming to be “Mormon” when we reject the basic tenets that underlie the LDS religion?

In the same way that a Mormon or a Jehovah’s Witness would not be pleased with someone who claims to follow their religion but who rejects the fundamental tenets of their faith, so it is with true Christians. The following chart analyzes many of the Christian doctrines that the Jehovah’s Witness and Mormon religions either deny or distort:

DOCTRINE
BIBLE
MORMON
JEHOVAH’S WITNESS
GOD
*1 Eternal God (Isa 43:10-11; 44:6,8) in 3 Persons: Father – Phil 2:11, Son – John 1:1, Holy Spirit – Acts 5:3-4

* Spirit Essence who fills Heaven and Earth is not a Man– Jn 4:24; 1 Kings 8:27; Hos 11:9* 3 Separate GodsTeachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, by Joseph Fielding Smith, 1976, p. 370

* God has not always been God. He is not a spirit but is an “exalted Man” Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp. 345-346; D&C 130:22; Millennial Messiah,by McConkie, p. 77* Jesus is a lesser “god” under Jehovah the only true God. Reasoning from the Scriptures, p. 212

* Holy Spirit is not a person but is God’s “active force”Should You Believe in the Trinity, p. 20

JESUS CHRIST

* The Eternal God the Son – Jn 1:1-3,18; Phil 2:5-9; John 20:28; Heb 1:8; Heb 7:3; Isa 9:6; Jn 8:58; Col 2:9; 2 Pet 1:1, Tit 2:13; Jn 5:18; 19:7* Creator God of “all things” including the angels and Lucifer – Jn 1:3; Col 1:15-17; Jn 8:23; Heb 1:5,13; 2:5,8; 4:16-17

 

* Worshipped as God – Heb 1:6; Jn 5:23; 14:14; Rev 5:11-14

* Resurrected as a man in His glorified physical body – John 2:18-22; Acts 17:31

* His blood is sufficient to cover “all” sin including murder– Heb 7:25; 1 Jn 1:7,9; 1 Tim 1:13-15; c.f. Acts 8:1* Jesus earned His godhood and salvation – Mormon Doctrine, McConkie, p. 129; Mortal Messiah,vol. 4, p. 434* Contended with Lucifer His “spirit brother” for the appointment as Savior – Gospel Principles, pp. 17-18

* Certain sins for which Jesus’ blood cannot atone – including murderDoctrines of Salvation,vol. 1, pp. 134-135* A created angel who is “divine” as a “mighty god” next (but not equal to) Jehovah GodReasoning from the Scriptures, pp. 212, 218* Jesus is not worthy of prayer or worshipInsight on the Scriptures, vol. 2, p. 667; The Watchtower, Dec. 15, 1994, pp. 24-25

* Resurrected as Michael the archangel in a non-human spirit bodyYou Can Live Forever in Paradise on Earth, pp. 21, 144-145; The Kingdom Is At Hand,1944, p. 258

GOSPEL

* Gospel = Death, Burial, Resurrection of Jesus Christ – 1 Cor 15:1-4

 

* Free gift of Eternal Life by faith in Jesus Christ alone (apart from works of personal worthiness) – Rom 4:4-6; 6:23; 10:9; 11:6; Eph 2:8-10; Isa 64:6; Phil 3:9

* Eternal Destiny in either Heaven or Hell – No Second Chance – Heb 9:27; Matt 25:46; Rev 20:12-15

* Only a “few” will be “saved” – Matt 7:13-14

* Spiritual authority for adoption out of Satan’s family into God’s family is given to “everyone” who believes (trusts) in Jesus Christ– 1 John 5:1; John 1:12* Gospel = Faith in Jesus Christ + Works of obedience to LDS Gospel “laws”The Miracle of Forgiveness, Spencer W Kimball, p. 6

* All people (regardless of religion or lack of it) will be “saved” except for the few who leave Mormonism Joseph Smith—Seeker After Truth, John A Widtsoe, p. 178; Mormon Doctrine, p. 778, 351

* Highest level of Salvation (i.e., Eternal Life) is only for those who do their part in working for their salvation – 2 Nephi 25:23, Book of Mormon; The Miracle of Forgiveness, p. 206; Mormon Doctrine, p. 669* Gospel = Faith in Jehovah God, Jesus Christ and the Watchtower OrganizationThe Watchtower, Feb. 15, 1983, p. 12

* Faith in Jesus Christ + works are required to prove oneself worthy for the “reward” of Eternal LifeThe Watchtower, Aug. 15, 1972, p. 492; Aug. 1, 1992, p. 17

* Jesus’ mediatorship, heavenly life and New Covenant spiritual adoption as a child of God are only for 144,000 peopleWorldwide Security Under the Prince of Peace,‘ 1986, p. 10; Knowledge that Leads to Everlasting Life, 1995, p. 88; Reasoning from the Scriptures,1989, p. 76

MAN

* Man is a creation of God whose “spirit” was formed “within” him – not in a spirit world – 1 Cor 15:46; Jn 8:23; Zech 12:1

 

* Immediately upon death, the conscious soul/spirit of the Christian will dwell with God– 2 Cor 5:6-8; Phil 1:21-23; Rev 6:9-10* Physical offspring of Celestial Parents – Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother – in a spirit world Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 1, p. 97; Mormon Doctrine, p. 589

* We are gods in embryo” and “you have got to learn how to be Gods yourselves…the same as all Gods have done before you.…” – Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson, p. 21; Teaching of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp. 345-346

* Second chance in a “spirit prison” for those who haven’t heard the Mormon “gospel”Gospel Principles, 1992, p. 292 * The soul of man ceases to exist after deathno hell Knowledge that Leads to Everlasting Life, pp. 81-85

* Second chance in the resurrection for all to prove worthy of everlasting life. – Knowledge that Leads to Everlasting Life,pp. 87-88

This chart provides ample evidence of the unbiblical doctrines of these groups. For a more complete and thorough analysis of these groups, see the following reference charts on our website:

http://4witness.org/jehovahs_witness/jw_exp.php

http://4witness.org/mormon/lds_exp.php

Many of the people involved in these groups are sincere and are often the nicest, moral people one will ever meet. However, they have been deceived by a counterfeit religion that on the surface looks good, but is leading many into spiritual darkness. It doesn’t matter how many articles of “sheep’s clothing” they put on as they perform good “works” in the “name of Jesus Christ;” if their doctrinal “fruit” fails the test, they will experience the spiritual destruction accorded to those who follow “false prophets.”

  • “If a prophet…gives you as sign…and the sign or the wonder comes true, concerning which he spoke to you, saying ‘Let us go after other gods (whom you have not known) and let us serve them,’ you shall not listen to the words of that prophet….”—Deuteronomy 13:1-3
  • “to the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.”—Isaiah 8:20, KJV
  • “…the prophet that teacheth lies, he is the tail.…and they that are led of them are destroyed.”—Isaiah 9:15-16, KJV

3. If Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses are “Christians” just like we are, why do they send Missionaries to our doors to convert us to their beliefs?

Joseph Smith, Jr (founder of the Mormon religion) claimed that in 1820, Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ appeared to him in a vision proclaiming that “all” the churches of Christianity were “wrong…that all their creeds were an abomination…that those professors were all corrupt….” (Joseph Smith—History 1:19). Likewise, Jehovah’s Witnesses have claimed that all of the churches of Christendom are part of false religious Babylon and that one must “come to Jehovah’s organization [i.e., the Watchtower] for salvation.”—The Watchtower, November 15, 1981, p. 21

Is it any wonder Christians reject Jehovah’s Witness and Mormon religions as being unchristian? If they were truly just other sects or denominations of Christianity, why would they send missionaries to the doors of Christians to proselytize them into their religious groups? Why would they be concerned about gaining converts out of Christianity, if they were honestly part of Christianity? To add emphasis to the Mormon claims concerning Christianity, 1 Nephi 14:10 in the Book of Mormon states:

“And he said unto me: Behold there are save two churches only; the one is the church of the Lamb of God, and the other is the church of the devil.…”—1 Nephi 14:10

To the Mormons who proclaim that they are Christians just like we are, we ask the following questions:

  • According to the Book of Mormon which church is your church? If your church is the “church of the Lamb of God,” doesn’t this verse make our church the “church of the devil”? If then, according to Mormonism, our church is the “church of the devil,” how can you honestly claim to be Christians like we are?

In context, there is no question that the Book of Mormon is proclaiming that the churches of Christianity collectively comprise the “church of the devil.” The preceding verse (1 Nephi 14:9) speaks of a “great and abominable church…whose founder is the devil,” and 1 Nephi 13:26 identifies this “abominable church” as none other than the church that had possession of the Bible after it was delivered from the hands of the original apostles.

In contrast to the claims of Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons who insist that a restoration of true Christianity was needed as a result of a complete apostasy from the original faith, Jesus proclaimed: “…I will build My church; and the gates of Hades shall not overpower it” (Matthew 16:18). Since Jesus promised to protect His Church, how could the Christian church have apostatized to the point of needing a new religion to be developed in order to restore it to the earth? The Apostle Paul warned about those who would arise to draw disciples “after themselves” when he stated:

“For I know this, that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparking the flock; also from among yourselves men will rise up, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after themselves.”—Acts 20:29-31, NKJV

Indeed, we would do well to heed the words of Scripture and prove all things before welcoming into the fold of “Christianity,” all churches claiming adherence to Christ.

“But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good.”—1 Thessalonians 5:21

“I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him…for a different gospel; which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you, and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to that which we have preached to you, let him be accursed.”—Galatians 1:6-8

* Unless otherwise noted, all Scripture quotations are from the New American Standard Bible

You know you’re in a cult when

You know you’re in a cult when

11/19/2008 – by Cultivator at Recovery from Mormonism– you buy a bag of coffee and are afraid you get caught

– you have to burn the markings of your underwear before disposing them

– certain parents can’t attend the weddings of their own children

– people look at you like you’re the Antichrist when you show a shoulder

– you have to pay tons of money no matter how broke or sick you are

– only you and your tiny little group goes to the highest heaven and the
other 99.98% don’t

– you have to work for free 10-20 hours a week

– everybody’s broke but ‘headquarters’ builds a 2 billion Dollar mall

– they don’t release financial information

– no credible scientist outside your group believes in huge Nephite, Lamanite
or Etherite civilizations where 2 million died in battles

– you don’t attend church for only a few weeks and ‘concerned’ people visit
you unannounced.

– you can end up in church court because you shared non approved literature /
websites with your fellow members

– you have to answer intimate questions about your sex life

Isn’t that proof enough ?

The Mormon Cult

11/19/2008 – by Charles L. Wood, Ph.D., Emeritus Professor, The
University of Akron – submitted by Tim RathboneMormonism Is a dangerous, family-splitting religion spreading throughout the
world. The purpose of this website is to give you the scientific and factual
information you need to evaluate this religion. With this information you will
save yourself many years of heartbreak and deception or help a loved one or
friend get loose of the dangerous grip that The Church Of Jesus Christ Of Latter
Day Saints has on innocent people through fear and intimidation.

Cult members of the Mormon/Latter-Day Saints religion are manipulated through
fear and guilt.

This Mormon/Latter-Day Saints cult produces fear in their members because if
they don?t practice church doctrine faithfully, they believe they will fail to
reach the highest levels of heaven and fear that if they don?t wear their
garments, they will not be protected by God.

Mormon church cult proselytizing functions at three levels:

1) marketing strategy,

2) missionary lessons, and

3) use of friendshipping families.

Seventy-five million dollars was earmarked by Bonneville International, the
Mormon church’s powerful communications branch, for satellite dishes in Canada
and Mexico. The Mormon Church set a similar goal for South America, Europe,
Asia, and the Philippines. The Mormon church’s satellite is the largest video
network in the world, having the ability to merge into any cable system in North
America….it spends approximately $550 million a year.

In addition, the LDS cult has been cosmitized, that is a sacred canopy has
been developed. The following explains what cults like the Mormon church must do
to establish this sacred canopy:

1. claim contact with heaven or the cosmos

2. claim God has chosen a leader as His divinely chosen representative

3. give royal or divine status to the leader(s)

4. insist their society mirrors the divine structure of heaven

5. build temples to practice sacred ordinances

6. produce ‘sacred’ literature

Cult Characteristics of the Mormon Church:

1. Teaching that the doctrine of the Mormon Church is reality, the doctrine
is to be accepted, not understood.

2. Reality is black and white, good and evil, spiritual world versus physical
word. (As an example: “the Mormon Church cult is the only true church on the
face of the earth”.)

3. Mormon Church members are taught to feel part of an elite group: following
and accepting church doctrine insures members eternal life and a delightful life
in heaven.

4. Mormon Church members are manipulated through fear and guilt, fear that if
they don?t practice church doctrine faithfully that they will fail to reach the
highest levels of heaven, fear that if they don?t wear their garments, that they
will not be protected by God.

5. Mormon Church members are taught that any problems that they may have are
due to their own inadequacies. If they are having marital, financial or other
difficult problems, it is because they are not following Church doctrine, or are
not praying enough. Guilt, fear and shame are present in the minds of Mormons if
they are not loyal and fail to follow the church doctrine.

6. Unlike non-cult organizations, Mormon Church members find it difficult to
leave when they find out that church teachings are false or otherwise become
disenchanted with the church. They believe that terrible things will happen to
them and their family if they leave. This becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy
because those who do leave actually often do lose their family, friends and
other social contacts within the Mormon community

Some of the Most Blasphemous and Damnable Mormon Doctrines

Some of the Most Blasphemous and Damnable
Mormon Doctrines

  1. “We believe in a God who is
    Himself progressive
    , whose majesty is intelligence; whose perfection
    consists in eternal advancement — a Being who has attained
    His exalted state by a path which now His children are permitted to
    follow
    , whose glory it is their heritage to share. In spite of the
    opposition of the sects, in the face of direct charges of blasphemy, the Church
    proclaims the eternal truth: ‘As man is, God once was; as
    God is, man may be.
    ‘” (LDS Apostle James E. Talmage, Articles of Faith,
    Ch.24, p.430 – p.431, LDS Collectors Library ’97 CD-ROM)
  2. ” ‘It is the first principle of the gospel to know
    for a certainty the character of God,’ the inspired word continues, ‘and to know
    that we may converse with Him as one man converses with another, and that He was once a man like us; yea, that God himself, the
    Father of us all, dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ Himself did.’ The
    Father is a glorified, perfected, resurrected, exalted man who worked out his
    salvation by obedience to the same laws he has given to us so that we may do the
    same.”
    (LDS Apostle Bruce R. McConkie, A New Witness for the Articles of
    Faith, p.64, LDS Collectors Library ’97 CD-ROM)
  3. “Thus, on this beautiful spring morning in the
    Sacred Grove, Joseph Smith witnessed the renewal of God’s dealing with his
    children in accordance with the great gospel plan of redemption. Upon this
    occasion God the Father and his Beloved Son Jesus Christ appearing as glorified
    Resurrected Beings unto a chosen servant of God, made known once again the state
    of immortality which man will attain in preparation for the next estate of
    eternity; that also the world once again could know the reality of the personal
    nature of God the Father and his Beloved Son. (LDS Apostle Alvin R. Dyer,
    Conference Report, April 1963, p.49 – p.50, LDS Collectors Library ’97 CD-ROM)
  4. “As we stretch our imaginations to absorb the
    limitlessness of the creations of God we turn to a favorite song: If you could
    hie to Kolob in the twinkling of an eye, And then continue onward with that same
    speed to fly, D’ye 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.” (LDS Apostle Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon
    Doctrine, p.250, LDS Collectors Library ’97 CD-ROM)
  5. God: Creator And Ruler Of
    Many Worlds
    . — While it is true that evolutionists may be divided
    between theistic and atheistic groups, yet most of those professing belief in
    God consider him to be an indefinable force, essence, or power of an
    incomprehensible nature. According to revelation, however, he is a personal Being, a holy and exalted Man, a glorified,
    resurrected Personage having a tangible body of flesh and bones, an
    anthropomorphic Entity, the personal Father of the spirits of all men.

    (D. & C. 130:22- 23; Moses 6:51, 57; Abra. 3:22-24; Jos. Smith 2:16-19.)”
  6. “We are members of the family of the Eternal
    Father. He is a glorified and exalted and eternal Being,
    having a resurrected body of flesh and bones. His name is God, and the kind of
    life he lives is God’s life.
    His name is also Eternal, and the name of
    the kind of life he lives is eternal life. Eternal life is God’s life, and God’s
    life is eternal life. We are commanded to be perfect as he is perfect and to
    advance and progress until we become like him, or in other words, until we gain
    eternal life. Thus Joseph Smith said, “You have got to learn
    how to be Gods yourselves, and to be kings and priests to God, the same as all
    Gods have done before you, namely, by going from one small degree to another,
    and from a small capacity to a great one; from grace to grace from exaltation to
    exaltation, until you attain to the resurrection of the dead, and are able to
    dwell in everlasting burnings and to sit in glory, as do those who sit enthroned
    in everlasting power.”
    (Teachings, pp. 346-47.) Christ our Lord has so
    obtained, thus enabling him to say to the faithful: “Ye shall be even as I am,
    and I am even as the Father.” (3 Ne. 28:10.)” (LDS Apostle Bruce R. McConkie,
    The Mortal Messiah, Vol.1, p.23 – p.24, LDS Collectors Library ’97 CD-ROM)
  7. “I will prove that the world is wrong, by showing
    what God is. I am going to inquire after God; for I want you all to know Him,
    and to be familiar with Him; and if I am bringing you to a knowledge of Him, all
    persecutions against me ought to cease. You will then know that I am His
    servant; for I speak as one having authority. … “I will go
    back to the beginning before the world was, to show what kind of a being God
    is
    . What sort of a being was God in the beginning? Open your ears and
    hear, all ye ends of the earth. for I am going to prove it to you by the Bible,
    and to tell you the designs of God in relation to the human race, and why He
    interferes with the affairs of man. … “God himself was
    once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens!
    That is the great secret.
    If the veil were rent today, and the great God
    who holds this world in its orbit, and who upholds all worlds and all things by
    His power, was to make himself visible,–I say, if you were to see him today,
    you would see him like a man in form–like yourselves in all the person, image,
    and very form as a man; for Adam was created in the very fashion, image and
    likeness of God, and received instruction from, and walked, talked and conversed
    with Him, as one man talks and communes with another. … “In order to
    understand the subject of the dead, for consolation of those who mourn for the
    loss of their friends, it is necessary we should understand the character and
    being of God and how He came to be so; for I am going to tell you how God came
    to be God. We have imagined and supposed that God was God from all eternity. I
    will refute that idea, and take away the veil, so that you may see. … “These
    are incomprehensible ideas to some, but they are simple. It is the first
    principle of the gospel to know for a certainty the character of God, and to
    know that we may converse with Him as one man converses with another, and that
    He was once a man like us; yea, that God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on
    an earth, the same as Jesus Christ Himself did; and I will show it from the
    Bible. … “I wish I was in a suitable place to tell it, and that I had the
    trump of an archangel, so that I could tell the story in such a manner that
    persecution would cease forever. What did Jesus say? (Mark it, Elder Rigdon!)
    The scriptures inform us that Jesus said, as the Father hath power in himself,
    even so hath the Son power–to do what? Why, what the Father did. The answer is
    obvious–in a manner to lay down his body and take it up again. Jesus, what are
    you going to do? To lay down my life as my Father did, and take it up again. Do
    you believe it? If you do not believe it you do not believe the Bible. The
    scriptures say it, and I defy all the learning and wisdom and all the combined
    powers of earth and hell together to refute it. Here, then,
    is eternal life–to know the only wise and true God; and you have got to learn
    how to be gods yourselves, and to be kings and priests to God, the same as all
    gods have done before you, namely, by going from one small degree to another,
    and from a small capacity to a great one; from grace to grace, from exaltation
    to exaltation, until you attain to the resurrection of the dead,
    and are
    able to dwell in everlasting burnings. and to sit in glory, as do those who sit
    enthroned in everlasting power. And I want you to know that God, in the last
    days, while certain individuals are proclaiming His name, is not trifling with
    you or me.” (LDS President Joseph Smith, History of the Church, Vol.6, Ch.14,
    p.305-6, LDS Collectors Library ’97 CD-ROM)
  8. Intelligent beings are
    organized to become Gods, even the Sons of God, to dwell in the presence of the
    Gods, and become associated with the highest intelligences that dwell in
    eternity. We are now in the school, and must practice upon what we
    receive.
    ” (LDS President Brigham Young, Discourses of Brigham Young,
    p.245, LDS Collectors Library ’97 CD-ROM)
  9. “This was the calling of Joseph Smith. He taught
    anew that God was in the form of man; that man was made in the image of God; and
    he taught the principles of justice, mercy, charity, and forgiveness. … He
    taught the truths that the Prophets before him had taught;
    and he went beyond them. …
    Joseph Smith taught men to look up to heaven and conceive of
    a God in the form of man. He taught them that they could become like their
    Father and God, who was ‘an exalted Man.’ And what is more simple and
    reasonable? Don’t you parents expect your children to become like you? Or do you
    expect your children to be something else than men and women?
    No. You men
    will see your sons become men; you women will see your daughters become women.
    Then God our Father–yes, and our Mother–in heaven, looking down upon this
    world– this school house in which their children are being
    educated–expect, and Joseph Smith taught it as a truth, that their children
    will be exalted, if they pursue the proper course, until they shall become
    divine beings themselves, worthy to stand upon that plane where stand their
    Father and their Mother in heaven. Like begets like; and the principle of
    eternal progress will make of man a God.
    (LDS Apostle Orson F. Whitney,
    Collected Discourses, Vol.5, May 8, 1898, LDS Collectors Library ’97 CD-ROM)

Why would the Mormons believe that Adolf Hitler can be transferred from “spirit prison” and get into heaven?

 

Adolph Hitler

One of the most evil men known. Who
brought about what millions perceive as the darkest days in world history.

Although none can imagine and many even shudder to think at the
possibility of this man calling upon God’s grace in the Cross of Christ in his
last hours, there is one Church that does not believe he needed to do so in
order to go to heaven.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

 

 

Why would the Mormons believe that Adolf Hitler can be transferred from
“spirit prison” and get into heaven?

It is not because they believe the grace of God can extend to the most evil
of men, but because of their practice known as “Baptism For The Dead”.

What is Baptism for the dead? Mormons teach that there are 3 separate levels
of heaven. Evil people leave this world and are kept in spirit prison where they
have a chance to hear and receive the “Mormon gospel”. In the mean time, Mormons
who are alive are being baptized for their dead relatives so the dead relative
will be allowed into heaven after receiving the “gospel” in the spirit prison.

LDS President Joseph Fielding Smith explained: “The Lord will judge each
individual case and will assign transgressor to that degree to which each is
entitled according to his works. If a man only merits a place in the telestial,
that will be his reward; if it should be the terrestrial, then he shall be
admitted to that kingdom. In order to enter the celestial a man must be true and
faithful to the end, observing all things which the Lord has commanded,
otherwise he shall be assigned to some other kingdom, or to outer darkness if
his sins so merit” (Doctrines of Salvation 3:310).

These beliefs are taken from very poor Biblical interpretation by LDS
General Authorities who like to read things into these verses of the Apostles,
Paul and Peter, that simply are not there. (1
Cor. 15:29
, 1
Cor. 15:40-41
, 1
Peter 3:19-20
)
Click here for more on these
verses: Baptism For The
Dead?

Yet, what do Mormon Church officials do when they are questioned about their
gospel extending to Adolf Hitler? Are they open in exclaiming the grace of God
to all, or are they coy in their dealing with questions? The following report is
what happens when questions arise concerning the pratice of “Baptism For the
Dead”.

The Mormon Church Attempts to Conceal Temple Records for Adolf Hitler Special
Report by Helen Radkey
(Taken from the May/June 1999 Edition of
“The Evangel” a Utah Missions Inc. Publication — )

On August 30, 1998, Don McAreavy, of Calgary, Alberta, Canada, wrote to the
LDS Family History Library asking if LDS proxy temple work had been performed
for Adolf Hitler and Eva Braun. McAreavy specifically wanted to know if temple
ordinances had been performed for Hitler and Braun on September 28, 1993, in the
Jordan River Temple, Utah.

A response to this inquiry was sent to McAreavy on September 8, 1998. Typed
on an official letterhead of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints,
the letter was signed by Mae Dean Ashton. The address of the sender was shown
as: Family History Library, 35 North West Temple Street, Salt Lake City, Utah
84150-3400.

Ashton’s reply reads as follows:

DON McAREAVY

Dear Mr. McAreavy:
Thank you for your letter of August 30th regarding
temple ordinances for Adolph Hitler and Eva Braun. We searched the International
Genealogical Index TM Addendum and found no information listed for either. The
enclosed printout is the closest we could find and you will note that birthdates
are 1836 and 1838. No additional information is available.

Sincerely,

Mae Dean Ashton
Team Leader
Photo duplication Unit

The printout Ashton sent McAreavy shows LDS proxy ordinances that have been
performed for Alois Hiedler or Heidler (Hitler), the father of Adolf Hitler.

In October 1998, McAreavy was able to obtain copies of LDS temple ordinance
records for Adolf Hitler and Eva Braun from Philip Roberts of the North American
Mission Board of the Southern Baptist Convention. These IGI (International
Genealogical Index) copies reveal that Adolf Hitler was “baptized” and “endowed”
on December 10, 1993, and “sealed” to his parents on March 12, 1994. These
events took place in the London Temple, England.

Roberts’ copies also show that Hitler was ‘sealed” to Braun on September 28,
1993, in the Jordan River Temple, Utah and on June 14, 1994, in the Los Angeles
Temple. Roberts sent copies of these records to Ashton.

McAreavy sent another mailing to Ashton on October 17, 1998, again asking her
if she could locate information for Adolf Hitler and Eva Braun in LDS files. On
November 17, 1998, McAreavy mailed a double registered letter to Ashton. He
reminded her that Roberts had sent documentation to her that seemed to indicate
that the Mormon Church had done templeordinances for Adolf Hitler and Eva Braun.

“Would you please be kind enough to verify if the information that Philip
Roberts provided is both accurate and proof that temple ordinances were
performed for Adolf Hitler,” McAreavy wrote.

Ashton replied to McAreavy’s November 17 letter on December 2, 1998. She
again insisted that the (Alois Hitler) copies she had sent McAreavy with her
September 8 letter were all that could be located in the IGI TM (Addendum).
McAreavy was informed that he could soon expect to receive a reply from the
(Family History) Department Director.

On December 29, 1998, McAreavy again wrote to Ashton. He requested the name
and mailing address of the Department Director because he had received no
communication from that person as promised by Ashton. When there was no response
to this request, McAreavy wrote directly to the Department Director of the
Photo- duplication Department of the Family History Library on January 25, 1999.
McAreavy again asked if the Mormon Church had done temple ordinances for Hitler
and Braun.

The following reply, again typed on an official letterhead of The Church of
Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, dated March 16, 1999, was sent to McAreavy
from the Family History Library:

To Whom It May Concern:

Subject: Famous or Historical Figures

You recently wrote to
inquire if temple ordinances have been performed for a famous or historical
figure. As a matter of policy, we respond to such requests only when those
making the request are directly related to the person about whom they seek
information. It might be helpful to know that, as an institution, we have no
control over the names individuals submit to receive temple ordinances. However,
we strongly counsel Church members to submit only the names of those persons to
whom they are related. Furthermore, we believe that ordinances performed in
behalf of any deceased individual are valid only if that person is worthy of and
chooses to accept what has been done in his or her behalf. The Church spends a
great deal of time, effort, and money to make information available that helps
not only its members, but all who are interested in family history pursuits. You
are welcome to use the resources we provide. We hope you find satisfaction in
doing so.

Sincerely,

Family History Department

In this impersonal communication to McAreavy, thc LDS Family History
Department clearly avoided taking responsibility for the discrepancy between
Ashton’s September 8 denial of LDS temple work for Hitler and Braun and the IGI
copies, supplied by Roberts, which seem to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that
this notoriously well-known pair have, indeed, had proxy LDS ordinances
performed on their behalf.

At the time McAreavy made his initial inquiry to the Family History Library
on August 30, there were multiple entries in LDS temple ordinance files that
showed that Mormons have performed various rituals on behalf of Hitler and
Braun. These records can still be accessed. Ashton gave McAreavy incorrect
information. Was this a deliberate evasion of truth? What are the facts?

Current IGI TM addendum temple ordinance entries for Mr. (Adolf) Hiedler
(Hitler) show that Hitler was “baptized” by Mormons on September 30, 1993, and
“endowed” on April 27, 1994, in the Jordan River Temple, Utah. This record was
in the IGI TM Addendum at the time of Ashton’s denial to McAreavy (of temple
ordinance information for Adolf Hitler) on September 8. I obtained a copy of
this particular record for Hitler from the LDS Family Search Center in the
Joseph Smith Memorial Building in downtown Salt Lake City on July l3, 1998 —
less than two months before Ashton stated that no such IGI record existed for
Hitler!

If Ashton and her co-workers were not very efficient in their search for
Adolf Hitler temple ordinance entries in the LDS genealogical computer system,
the same could be said for their lack of thorougliness in locating the same type
of records for Eva Braun.

Eva Anna Paula Braun, born in Munich, Bavaria, Germany, on February 7, 1912,
was “baptized” by Mormons on October 16, 1964, and “endowed” on February 5,
1965, in the Los Angeles Temple. She had been ‘sealed” to her parents some time
prior to 1970. This information is current and is easily accessible in the IGI
TM Addendum, in which file Ashton stated that no information was available for
either Hitler or Braun. Genuine seekers should have found these entries for
Braun.

In this case, it seems these records may have been intentionally overlooked.
Was it easier for McAreavy to be given inaccurate information rather than
present him with any copies that he could possibly have used against the Mormon
Church? 0r,are the staff of the Family History Library so poorly skilled at
accessing their own computer files that they missed the entries in question?

In addition to the IGI, which is a huge database of names and vital
information for multi-millions of people, with an Ordinance Index attached, the
other significant LDS genealogical file is the Ancestral File. In this family
history archive, LDS ordinance records may be found attached to pedigree charts.

There are currently Ancestral File ordinance records that show that Adolf
Hitler was “baptized” on September 4, 1993, “endowed” on October 12, 1993, and
“sealed” to his parents and also Eva Braun on June 14, 1994 in the Los Angeles
Temple. The June 14 sealing of Hitler and Braun is the same sealing of which
Roberts sent copies to McAreavy and Ashton. These entries could once be found in
the IGI. They have since been deleted, along with other entries for prominent
Nazis. What is going on here?

Prior to adding the 1997 edition to the IGI, it seems that the Mormon Church,
intent on preserving its public image, attempted to remove the names of
well-known Nazis from the IGI files. Most of the IGI entries for Adolf Hitler,
Mrs.(Adolf Hitler), Adolf Eichmann, Paul Joseph Goebbels, Hermann Goering,
Rudolf Hess, and Heinrich Himmler were quietly removed. Also erased were the
records for Benito Mussolini, the dictator of Fascist Italy from 1922 to l943
and an ally of Hitler and the Third Reich.

But the deletion effort was botched. Some entries were missed, such as the
ones still current for Hitler and Braun in the IGI and Ancestral File. The IGI
ordinance records for Hitler’s deputy, Rudolf Hess, which correctly showed his
place of birth as Alexandria, Egypt, were deleted yet other TGI ordinance
entries still exist for Hess, wrongly listing his place of birth as Germany.

Also missed were LDS ordinance records, which still exist in the Ancestral
File, for Paul Joseph Goebbels and Hermann Goering These entries, which include
baptisms for each of them, may have been intentionally removed from the IGI
files.

Mormons apparently overlooked the LDS ordinance records of other well-known
Nazis during their IGI purge. These records are currently accessible. Included
in this liberal list are: Reinhard Heydrich, “The Father of The Final Solution”
Hitler’s plan to exterminate all Jews in Europe; Alfred Rosenberg, hanged at
hanged at Nuremberg for war crimes; Ernst Roehm, once the thuggish leader of
Hitler’s Storm Troopers; and Field Marshall Erwin Rommel, the Famous Desert Fox
of World War II.

In May 1994 and March 1996, from LDS genealogical centers I obtained numerous
Nazi IGI entries that have since been deleted. In this collection are copies of
the LDS records for Hitler and Braun that Roberts sent to McAreavy and Ashton,
with the additional sealing of Adolf Hitler to his parents on June 14, 1994.

I have IGI copies of all the LDS ordinance records for Hitler, which are
currently in the Ancestral File but no longer in the IGI. As well, my copies
show another baptism for Hitler, almost identical to the one still in the IGI
files under Heidler (Hitler) with the same ordinance dates. But the deleted
entry is listed as Hitler (Hiedler) Adolf, showing a birth date of l889. The
Hiedler (Hitler) entry shows a birth date of 1891so they are different records.

A mysterious record for a Mr. Hitler, of Vienna, Austria, with date of death
1900, and showing a proxy baptism date of April 15,1924, in the Logan Temple,
Utah, is also no longer in the IGI files. Other vanished IGI entries are a
sealing of Adolf Hitler to Eva Braun on October 19, 1993, at the Jordan River
Temple, and a baptism for Mrs. Hitler (Hiedler) on September 10, 1993, and an
endowment for her on March 17, 1994, also in the Jordan River Temple.

The Mormon Church has attempted to deliberately conceal LDS temple ordinances
for Adolf Hitler. This first occurred with the disappearance of many of the IGI
records for Hitler and other publicly known evildoers of the Third Reich. Then
— there was a second attempt to cover-up Nazi records who Ashton told McAreavy
that no LDS temple ordinances had been performed for Adolf Hitler and Eva Braun.

Even when confronted by Robert with IGI temple records for Hitler and Braun,
those in charge of the Family History Department at the Family History Library,
representing the genealogical arm of the Mormon Church, did not want to lake
responsibility for these records. Their implausible excuse was that they have no
control over the names individuals submit to receive temple ordinances.

Like a slippery snake in the grass, the Mormon Church may have tried to dodge
public criticism by denying its questionable proxy recognition of Adolf Hitler
the amoral and evil Nazi genius who was responsible for the terror and barbarism
of the Third Reich and the loss of millions of innocent lives before and during
World War II. But LDS ordinance records speak for themselves–Mormons have
repeatedly claimed the unpopular Hitler. Anything stated to the contrary cannot
alter this conclusion.

Deception is not the hallmark of a church with integrity. As the Mormon
Church will eventually find out even the most artful serpent can be choked by
its own coils!

Taxpayer-Funded Abortion on Demand, Courtesy of a Catholic and a Mormon

Taxpayer-Funded Abortion on Demand, Courtesy of a Catholic and a Mormon

By Eileen McDevitt and Larrey Anderson

It is beyond ironic that a Mormon, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, and a Catholic, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, are in charge of passing ObamaCare. If passed, the legislation will federally fund elective abortions in every state. Reid’s and Pelosi’s respective religions, both of which (at least according to the churches’ official doctrines) ardently oppose abortion, are letting them get away with it. Apparently, in this day and age, the powerful are exempt from following God’s laws.
While having been formed centuries apart and on different continents, the Catholic Church and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (LDS, or Mormons) share some strikingly similar attributes. The leader of the Catholic Church, its Pope, and the leader of the LDS Church, its President, are selected from the innermost ring of their churches’ hierarchies. In each church, this ring is representative of the original twelve apostles of Jesus Christ. Each church believes that its respective leader is divinely inspired and speaks for God.
Both churches have clear and exacting positions on what they believe to be God’s teachings and the tenets to which humans must adhere in order to live a morally honorable life. Failure of a church member to adhere to core and fundamental doctrines results in discipline — and can even lead to excommunication (expulsion).
Yet it appears that both churches are becoming more humanistic by turning a blind eye to some of their core teachings — as well as by making exceptions to crucial doctrines for the political class. Did God stop talking to these leaders?
The Catholic Church has ten core tenets referred to as the Ten Commandments. The fifth of these commandments includes a provision that prohibits the killing of humans, commonly referred to as murder. For centuries, the Catholic Church has held that abortion is murder and accordingly has forbidden the practice.
In November of 1974, Pope Paul VI, considered the most open and modernizing Pope in recent history, set forth a twenty-seven-point “Declaration on Procured Abortion.” It remains the current position of the Catholic Church:
The right to life is no less to be respected in the small infant just born than in the mature person. In reality, respect for human life is called for from the time that the process of generation begins. From the time that the ovum is fertilized, a life is begun which is neither that of the father nor of the mother, it is rather the life of a new human being with his own growth. It would never be made human if it were not human already.
Nevertheless, a small group of sixty American nuns, who have allegedly devoted their lives to the Catholic Church, sent a letter to the U.S. Congress supporting abortion. This is a position in direct contravention of the divinely inspired teachings and declarations of the Catholic Church.
In response, the Council of Major Superiors of Women Religious, the sanctioned society representing women of over 103 Catholic service organizations in America, sent a letter to Congress officially opposing the proposed health care bill:
In a March 15th statement, Cardinal Francis George, OMI, of Chicago, president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, spoke on behalf of the United States Bishops in opposition to the Senate’s version of the health care legislation under consideration because of its expansion of abortion funding and its lack of adequate provision for conscience protection…. Protection of life and freedom of conscience are central to morally responsible judgment.  We join the bishops in seeking ethically sound legislation.
No action has been taken by the Vatican to discipline the sixty rogue nuns who chose to openly and defiantly misrepresent the Catholic Church’s position on abortion to Congress, to U.S. citizens, to the world.
Pope Paul VI was equally clear that it is a violation of the Catholic Church’s basic tenets to support and/or vote for abortion:
It must in any case be clearly understood that whatever may be laid down by civil law in this matter, man can never obey a law which is in itself immoral, and such is the case of a law which would admit in principle the liceity of abortion. Nor can he take part in a propaganda campaign in favor of such a law, or vote for it.
Nancy Pelosi, purportedly Catholic, has long been an open proponent for abortion and today is the leading champion for nationally funded abortion. Pelosi was granted an audience with the sitting Pope. The Pope merely criticized Pelosi for her position and failed to take any disciplinary action for Pelosi’s open “propaganda campaign in favor” of abortion. Meanwhile, Pelosi’s local priest in San Francisco continues to give her communion — even though the Pope has stated that those who support abortion should not take part in the Catholic sacrament.
The official position of the LDS (Mormon) Church on abortion closely mirrors that of the Catholic Church. The LDS Presidency has emphatically stated the position of their church, likening abortion to murder:
Abortion must be considered one of the most revolting and sinful practices in this day, when we are witnessing the frightening evidence of permissiveness leading to sexual immorality.
Members of the Church guilty of being parties to the sin of abortion must be subjected to the disciplinary action of the councils of the Church as circumstances warrant. In dealing with this serious matter, it would be well to keep in mind the word of the Lord stated in the 59th section of the Doctrine and Covenants, verse 6, “Thou shalt not steal; neither commit adultery, nor kill, nor do anything like unto it.” [Emphasis added.]
But the Mormon Church has taken no “disciplinary action” against Harry Reid. According to the Salt Lake Tribune:
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid keeps a copy of the Book of Mormon in his office just off the chamber floor. There’s a second copy handy to give away to someone in need of spiritual guidance.
The Temple-recommend-carrying Reid is very active in his church, say fellow members in the Washington area.
Only the most obedient of Mormons are given “temple recommends.” These recommends allow faithful members access to the Church’s sacred temple ceremonies. Harry Reid, despite his vocal and public support for legislation that provides federal funds for abortion, is known to have such a “temple recommend.”
Abortion is murder unless one is the Senate Majority Leader or Speaker of the House, just as advocating abortion is a sin unless one is the Senate Majority Leader or Speaker of the House.
In the ultimate slap in the face to the Catholic Pope and the Mormon President, Pelosi and Reid have joined in the demand that the congressional health care vote be set for Sunday. Under both Catholic and Mormon doctrines, Sunday is a day of rest, a day set aside for the worship of God. Yet on this Sunday, in the middle of Lent, America’s most powerful Catholic and Mormon are abandoning God in favor of nationally funded abortion on demand.
Eileen McDevitt is a retired attorney. Larrey Anderson is a writer, a philosopher, and submissions editor for American Thinker. He is the author of The Order of the Beloved, and the memoir Underground: Life and Survival in the Russian Black Market.

FYI on San Angelo, FLDS Mormons,etc.

FYI on San Angelo, Mormons,etc.
 

 

 

  

THE FOLLOWING HAS BEEN SHARED BY SOME OLD TEXAS FRIENDS

AND I SHARE WITH YOU “FOR WHAT IT’S WORTH”. KNOWING OUR

CURRENT ELITIST LEFT WING MEDIA AND THEIR NEED TO CREATE

‘VICTIMS OF THE RIGHT’ – LORD KNOWS HOW THE STORY WILL BE

CONVOLUTED BY THE TIME IT PLAYS IN THE NEW YORK TIMES AND

THE LA FISH WRAPPER.

 

DAN

 

Al Shea is a close friend of my brother Jim who also lives in San Angelo. 

I’m passing this along to you as I suspect you’re interested. 

 

This situation is very bad. 

 

This was first frowarded from Gay Ingrum who works at Shannon Hospital

and knows many of the people involved.The governor’s office has officially taken this case over. They have over
500 child protection officers working out at the Spur Arena/Wells Fargo
Pavilion now along with our local agency (Debbie Brown’s personnel). Child
Protection has pulled in most of their state wide workers for this case.

 
 
 

 

These kids will have to be eventually de-programmed where they can begin
living a more normal life. Today, they only know their group and are
non-commutative to any of the workers. Today these children only answer

” I won’t answer any of your questions” and they never look anyone in the
eye, always looking down. They have not had any vaccinations and presently
they are all quarantined as they now have a case of small pox or maybe
chicken pox.  The state is treating this as their Katarina.  How they will
resolve this is certainly the big dilemma.  There are several 13 year old
children that are currently pregnant. They are all being given medical
exams but their religion is such that no one can touch their private parts
nor their underwear. The total count on children is 515 with few of them
boys.

 

They have about 110 women that voluntarily wanted to be rescued from
their environment. All of the attorneys in town are meeting this Friday to
learn more about the situation as each individual has to have attorney
representation. The state will no-doubt be picking up the expenses for
attorney representation. I think that the funds will be coming from
Homeland Security funding.This group ships out the boys as they get older so that they won’t interfere

 
 
 

 

with the old men getting their spiritual wives.  I’m told that they just expel

them for some minor infraction to their rules so as to rid them as predators

to their goal.  At age 13, the girls are taken up to the top floor where the chief priest 
lays them on his bed and de-flower them in the presence of 12 other 
group/men leaders. Each of these girl are expected to have 19 children.

 

They had to have a lock-smith go with them to open the doors to the 
temple. This was after they used ladders to scale the 12 foot high solid 
concrete wall. This group was intent on not letting anyone that was not a 
believer get into the temple. They have tunnels all through the 
encampment. The Texas Rangers are using cadaver dogs to search the 
compound. It will take many years of special work getting these children 
back into society. They most likely will keep them all together for 
sometime in order to start educating them, including the older women. 

These kids don’t even know who their mother or father is. There are only 
three last names among the group of children and there are only about a 
half dozen first names so there will be maybe 100 Sara’s for example. 
This is the only life that they know and they don’t believe that they 
have been mistreated. Even the older women don’t consider their selves as 
being mistreated. In this sect of the Mormon church the words rape or sex 
or incest are not in their vocabulary. Fathers don’t even know who their 
children are so thus sex happens between them.

 

They had some semblance of home schooling but mainly these
kids were made to work the compound in farming, milking, cleaning. They 
only drink pure milk and their diet consist of organic food products only 
(what ever that means).Basically, this is a very serious quagmire that has no good or even 
correct answers. So to your question – they would not be allowing 
adoption under the current process. It would take a very special kind of 
handling for these kids of which I don’t think any of us are prepared to 
take on. And I imagine that the Mormon Church would first take them on, 
but it is such a nasty mess out there which we only know the tip of this 
ice burg as to its details. All of the hotels in San Angelo are 
completely full with out-of-town folks including lots of Utah license 
plates on their cars. The state should be praised for taking charge of 
this raid.

 
 
 

 

 

They brought in virtually all of their Texas Rangers for this operation.

 

At first they were expecting maybe as many as 50 children and 
now we know its more than ten times that many. I’ve rambled but I wanted 
to tell you guys what little I know. They “believe” that now they have 
found all of the children, even though they were all in hiding. As to 
what we can do, so far the State has not ask for any local assistance.

 

In San Angelo there were ten satellite trucks representing all of the major 
news organization staked out near Ft. Conch on Monday where they 
originally brought these folks until they ran out of room and had to 
re-locate them to bigger facilities. The talk is that they eventually 
want to move them to a big Salvation Army camp near Midlothian where 

excellent conditions for children exist.This is a true case of child exploitation.  The male elders of this extreme

 
 
 

 

religious sect should be castrated!  How dare they play God with the lives

of these girls and women in the Lord’s name!!

 

I hope the Morman Church in Utah intervenes to help these innocent victims adjust. 

 

NO MILITARY SERVICE FOR ROMNEY’S 5 SONS

What Is It About Mormonism?

Our post-denominational age should be the perfect time for a Mormon to become president, or at least the Republican nominee. Mormons share nearly all the conservative commitments so beloved of the evangelicals who wield disproportionate influence in primary elections. Mormons also embody, in their efficient organizational style, the managerial competence that the party’s pro-business wing considers attractive. For the last half-century, Mormons have been so committed to the Republican Party that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints once felt the need to clarify that Republican affiliation is not an actual condition of church membership.

Yet the Mormons’ political loyalty is not fully reciprocated by their fellow Republicans. Twenty-nine percent of Republicans told the Harris Poll last year that they probably or definitely would not vote for a Mormon for president. Among evangelicals, some of the discomfort is narrowly religious: Mormon theology is sometimes understood as non-Christian and heretical. Elsewhere, the reasons for the aversion to Mormons are harder to pin down — bigotry can be funny that way — but they are certainly not theological. A majority of Americans have no idea what Mormons believe.

Mormonism’s political problem arises, in large part, from the disconcerting split between its public and private faces. The church’s most inviting public symbols — pairs of clean-cut missionaries in well-pressed white shirts — evoke the wholesome success of an all-American denomination with an idealistic commitment to clean living. Yet at the same time, secret, sacred temple rites and garments call to mind the church’s murky past, including its embrace of polygamy, which has not been the doctrine or practice of the mainstream Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, or LDS, for a century. Mormonism, it seems, is extreme in both respects: in its exaggerated normalcy and its exaggerated oddity. The marriage of these opposites leaves outsiders uncomfortable, wondering what Mormonism really is.

For Mitt Romney, the complex question of anti-Mormon bias boils down to the practical matter of how he can make it go away. Facing a traditional American anti-Catholicism, John F. Kennedy gave a speech during the 1960 presidential campaign declaring his private religion irrelevant to his qualifications for public office. For Romney, a Republican who would risk alienating “values voters” if he denied faith a central role in politics, emphasizing the separation of church and state is not an option. In his own religion speech, he coupled his promise to govern independently of the hierarchy of his own church with a profession of faith: “I believe that Jesus Christ is the son of God and the savior of mankind.” Although this formulation is unlikely to satisfy those evangelicals who deny that the LDS church is Christian, Romney presumably calculated that speaking about Jesus Christ in terms that sound consistent with ordinary American Protestantism would reassure voters that there was in the end nothing especially unusual about Mormonism.

Something troubling is afoot here. From a constitutional standpoint, the religion of a candidate is supposed to make no difference. Even before the founding fathers dreamed up the First Amendment, they inserted a provision in the Constitution expressly prohibiting any religious test for office. The framers recognized, of course, that a candidate’s religion (or lack thereof) would enter political debate, and they were prohibiting only a formal test for taking office. But they were also giving their imprimatur to Jefferson’s appealing notion that a person’s beliefs about religion were no more relevant to his politics than his beliefs about geometry. Romney, by contrast, was staking his character and values on his religious beliefs while insisting that no one ask what those beliefs are.

It is easy to see why Romney would see some aspects of his Mormon identity as an asset. In the elite East Coast worlds where Romney has made his career, Mormonism signifies personal rectitude, professional competence and an idiosyncratic-but-impressive rejection of alcohol and caffeine. If anything, the systematic overrepresentation of Mormons among top businesspeople and lawyers affords LDS affiliation a certain cachet — rather like being Jewish, but taller.

Still, even among those who respect Mormons personally, it is still common to hear Mormonism’s tenets dismissed as ridiculous. This attitude is logically indefensible insofar as Mormonism is being compared with other world religions. There is nothing inherently less plausible about God’s revealing himself to an upstate New York farmer in the early years of the Republic than to the pharaoh’s changeling grandson in ancient Egypt. But what is driving the tendency to discount Joseph Smith’s revelations is not that they seem less reasonable than those of Moses; it is that the book containing them is so new. When it comes to prophecy, antiquity breeds authenticity. Events in the distant past, we tend to think, occurred in sacred, mythic time. Not so revelations received during the presidencies of James Monroe or Andrew Jackson.

For some, then, the objection to Romney may be that Mormonism is religiously false and that voters should choose a president who belongs to the true faith. If many Americans felt this way, that would be bad news for Romney but worse news for the country, since it would mean that we had abandoned the values that underlay the constitutional ban on religious tests. But most Mormonism-related discomfort with Romney may, in fact, reflect less a view of religious truth than a sense that there is something vaguely troubling or unfamiliar in the Mormon manner or worldview. This latter possibility presents Romney with an especially tricky political problem. For such reservations are not simple prejudice; they are a complicated outgrowth of the tortured history of the faith’s relationship to mainstream American political life over the nearly two centuries since God first spoke to Joseph Smith.

Persecution and the Art of Secrecy

Mormonism was born amid secrecy, and throughout its existence as a religion it has sustained a close yet complex relationship to the arts of silence. From the start, the Mormon penchant for secrecy came from two different sources. The first was internal and theological. Like many great world faiths, Mormonism has an important strand of sacred mystery. Mormon temples have traditionally been closed to outsiders and designed with opaque windows. Marriage and other key rituals take place in this hallowed space — a manifestation of religious secrecy familiar to students of world religion but associated in the United States more with Freemasonry than with mainstream Protestantism.

Like Mormon ritual, much of Mormon theology remains relatively inaccessible to outsiders. The text of the Book of Mormon has always been spread to a broad audience, but the text is not a sufficient guide to understanding the details of Mormon teaching. Joseph Smith received extensive further revelation in the nature of sacred secrets to be shared with only a handful of close associates and initiates within the newly forming church.

The most famous such revelation was the doctrine of celestial — which was to say plural — marriage, revealed to Smith as early as 1833 but never publicized during his lifetime and formally announced to the world only in 1852, eight years after his death. And there were other doctrines of similar secrecy revealed to Smith, especially in the years just before his death. “God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens! That is the great secret,” he is reported to have said in one of his last communications with his followers.

The connections between the sacred and the secret in early Mormonism did not come out of nowhere. Believers, of course, consider the source to be divine inspiration — although over the course of the last century Mormon teaching has moved away from many of Smith’s more radical ideas, which are often not accepted by contemporary LDS members. Academic students of early Mormonism have traced the mysteries expounded by Smith to the hermetic tradition of secret magic dating back to the Renaissance and beyond. If this account is accurate, then Mormonism’s theological secrets actually have more than a little in common with religious mysteries that can be found in medieval Islamic esotericism, kabbalistic mysticism and ancient Christian Gnosticism. Successive generations have rediscovered these secrets and reasserted their antiquity in ways very similar to Smith’s discovery of ancient tablets. For example, the most important work of the kabbalah, the Zohar, presents itself as a lost manuscript written by the 2nd-century mystic Rabbi Shimon bar Yohai, though scholars maintain that it was composed in the 13th century by the man who “discovered” it.

The greatest difference between the esoteric tradition and Smith’s version of it is that Smith’s faith has grown into an organized religion rather than remaining the preserve of a select few. Almost from the start of his career, Smith was denounced as a charlatan, an impostor and worse. Such criticisms sometimes pointed to his early pre-revelation career as a treasure seeker who used techniques like the seer stone (similar in function to a crystal ball) and the divining rod to seek treasure in the countryside of upstate New York. Notwithstanding these attacks, Mormonism grew steadily. Growth brought publicity — and with it came not merely prejudice but outright persecution. This external persecution created a second, externally driven source for secrecy: protection.

Not content with polemics, Mormonism’s opponents turned to violence. In 1838, after skirmishes between armed Mormons and state militia left several people dead, Gov. Lilburn Boggs of Missouri issued a military order declaring that the Mormons had made open war on the state and that therefore they “must be treated as enemies, and must be exterminated or driven from the state, if necessary, for the public good.” Later, at Nauvoo, Ill., the Mormon community under Smith’s leadership came under constant pressure from skeptical and sometimes violent neighbors. In response, Smith sought and received a measure of home rule for Nauvoo, including the authority to establish his own municipal militia. Though the militia grew until it was a substantial fighting force, Smith was nevertheless gunned down by a kind of quasi-organized lynch mob after having been arrested and jailed in nearby Carthage.

Unhindered by Smith’s death, the Mormons, now under the leadership of Brigham Young, went out to Utah to establish their own kingdom. In what felt like the relative safety of the intermountain West, Mormons began to practice plural marriage in the open — and ended up paying dearly for this lapse in secrecy. In 1856 the Republican Party made the defeat of polygamy a key plank in its first national platform, characterizing it alongside slavery as one of the “twin relics of barbarism.” The federal government soon criminalized the practice and then in effect outlawed membership in the Mormon Church until it would agree to give up polygamy. The Mormons appealed this persecution to the Supreme Court, which turned them down flat, holding that religious belief was protected by the First Amendment but that religious conduct was not. After the Civil War, federal prosecutors in the Utah territory and in neighboring areas convicted and jailed thousands of Mormons in the most coordinated campaign of religious repression in U.S. history.

The reaction of the Mormon Church to this new wave of persecution was, initially, to take refuge in secrecy once again. In 1890, the president of the church, Wilford Woodruff, issued a manifesto in which he gave his “advice” to members of the Mormon Church not to enter into any marital relationships that would violate the laws of the land. Publicly this declaration had its desired effect of placating the federal government; in 1896, Utah was allowed to become a state. But like Jewish rituals under the Spanish Inquisition, plural marriage continued, secretly in Utah and also among refugees (like several of Mitt Romney’s ancestors), who fled to Mexico or other places the law could not reach.

This period of resisting persecution by living outside the law taught Mormons that secrecy can be a necessary tool for survival. As one apostle (there are 12 who guide the church) later put it in a speech recounted by the historian Kathleen Flake, “I am not dishonest and not a liar . . . [but] we have always been taught that when the brethren were in a tight place that it would not be amiss to lie to help them out.” Yet such secrecy, reminiscent of the taqiyya or dissimulation sanctioned by Shiite Islam under the threat of persecution, could be difficult to maintain. Matters came to a head when another apostle, Reed Smoot, was elected in 1903 to the U.S. Senate as a Republican from Utah, despite political opposition from
President Theodore Roosevelt. Opponents of Mormonism, mostly Protestants, sought to block Smoot from taking his seat.
Over several years, the Senate engaged in a series of hearings that put Mormonism on trial. The president of the church, Joseph F. Smith, a nephew of the founding Smith, was called to testify and sought somewhat unsuccessfully to conceal both the continuing practice of plural marriage as well as his own status as seer and revelator. After returning to Utah, Smith issued a manifesto of his own, in 1904, this one somewhat stronger, aimed at ending plural marriage. After that, plural marriage gradually disappeared from the mainstream Mormon scene, until it remained only among peripheral fundamentalist or sectarian Mormons who defied the church authorities and claimed a more authentic line of succession to the first prophet. In 1907, the Senate finally voted to seat Smoot. The course was set for the Mormon religious practice of the 20th century: a process of mainstreaming, both political and theological, and would set the stage for Mitt Romney’s run for the presidency.

The Mormon path to normalization over the course of the 20th century depended heavily on this avoidance of public discussion of its religious tenets. Now that plural marriage was out of the picture, the less said the better about the particular teachings of the church, including such practices as the baptism of the dead and the doctrine of the perfectibility of mankind into divine form. Where religious or theological conversation could not be avoided, Mormons depicted themselves as yet another Christian denomination alongside various other Protestant denominations that prevailed throughout the United States.

Another part of the Mormon assimilationist strategy was to participate actively in politics at the state and national levels. The condition for political success was that nobody asked about the precise content of Mormon religious beliefs and the Mormons themselves made no particular effort to tell. If 19th-century Mormon secrecy was a matter of survival, 20th-century Mormon reticence was a form of soft secrecy, designed to avoid soft bigotry. Revealing Mormon teachings would no longer have led to lynch mobs or federal arrest, but it certainly would have fueled the kind of bias that keeps politicians out of office.

What helped Mormons in maintaining theological radio silence was the way that American political norms until the late 1970s made religion a taboo subject in polite civil and political society. Probably the high point of the Mormon mainstreaming process took place when Ezra Taft Benson, like Smoot an apostle of the church, became secretary of agriculture under President Dwight D. Eisenhower. In just a century, the leaders of the Latter-day Saints had gone from being murdered outcasts to being appointed to the cabinet. Mormons began to succeed in national business and came to be seen as exemplars of the patriotic American ethos. George Romney, Mitt’s father, became chairman of the American Motors Corporation in 1954 and was elected governor of Michigan in 1962. Soft secrecy was holding soft bigotry at bay.

Romney and Mormon Politics

In politics, Joseph Smith was something of a radical. He preached, instead of democracy, a version of theocratic rule within a framework given by his own prophetic leadership. At Nauvoo, Smith affected a Napoleonic uniform and made himself into a general and quasi king of the polity he had constituted. He claimed that the home-rule permission given to the town by the State Legislature rendered him the equivalent of a governor or perhaps even president of a little republic on a par with the state of Illinois in which it resided. At the time he was assassinated, he was running for the presidency of the United States in a quixotic campaign that only a true person of faith could have believed in.

Ensconced in Salt Lake City, Brigham Young modified this initial political vision somewhat. Yet he still governed in an essentially autocratic fashion, constrained by only the federal requirement that Utah take on a republican form of government in order to be organized into a territory. In the territorial period, the Utah State Legislature remained very much under the control of the leadership of the church, and the democratic trappings of elections did not ensure real competitive politics. Mormons belonged to a single party, the People’s Party, which was not disbanded until 1891, when the LDS leadership determined it would need Republicans and Democrats in order to persuade Congress to grant statehood. Even then local LDS leaders apparently assigned church members almost at random to join one of the two parties in roughly equal numbers.

As of the 20th century, through engagement with the federal political sphere, Mormons came to embrace fully the American ideals of multi-party governance and electoral democracy. They also gradually embraced the Republican Party itself — a fact that would not seem so remarkable today were it not for the G.O.P.’s history of condemning Mormonism.

The Mormons’ passage from bugbears of the Republican Party to its stalwarts may be analogized to a similar move among middle-class white Southerners, to whom the Republican Party was anathema until the 1970s and ’80s, after which it became almost the sole representative. In the case of Southern whites, a particular event shifted party allegiance, namely the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as promoted and passed by President Lyndon Johnson. Johnson knew he would be alienating Southern whites with the act, yet he went forward with it anyway.

In the case of the Mormons, however, no single event pushed them in the direction of Republicanism. To the extent that 19th-century Mormons sided with any national political force, it was the Democratic Party, the party of states’ rights — of great interest to Utah Mormons trying to buck federal control. What made the Mormons Republican was simply their move toward the conservative center of American public opinion. With Eisenhower especially, the Mormons found a leader they could admire and with whom they could work. Ike himself was famously indifferent toward the particularities of religious doctrine. Moderate Republicanism was therefore the perfect conduit for bringing Mormons into the American political mainstream.

According to Jan Shipps, a renowned scholar of Mormon history, anticommunism also played an important role in making Mormons Republican — Ezra Taft Benson, the apostle who became secretary of agriculture under Eisenhower, had ties to the John Birch Society. In the 1960s, as the Democratic Party increasingly began to embrace an agenda of civil and cultural liberties, the Mormon allegiance to Republicanism was cemented further still. Gone was the political radicalism and the concern for minority rights that accompanied plural marriage and other unusual Mormon behavior. Now the Mormons could look at the counterculture as a threat. The most prominent Mormon national politician in the 1980s and ’90s was Orrin Hatch, Republican of Utah, now in his 31st year in the Senate, who on the Judiciary Committee has maintained a consistently conservative position, favoring judges who are simultaneously favored by the religious right.

The rise of the religious right posed a tricky political quandary for the LDS church. On the one hand, a vocal movement pressing for conservatism and moral values must have seemed to them like a natural home. After all, they, too, were religious believers who drew upon their faith for their political conservatism. Yet there was a strand of the religious right that could potentially put it at odds with Mormonism — its barely concealed commitment to evangelical Protestant theology.

Evangelical ideology was certainly flexible. Before Roe v. Wade, for example, abortion was not a major issue for most Protestant evangelicals in the United States, and it took the active efforts of the Catholic Church to bring evangelicals on board. Yet despite being pliant on some substantive issues, Protestant evangelicals nonetheless did share a commitment to biblical inerrancy and to a rather strict definition of salvation by faith alone. Their worldview certainly relied upon some basic and nonnegotiable propositions, like the acceptance of the doctrine of the Trinity and of Jesus Christ as a personal lord and savior.

Mormons were able to argue that they, too, believed in salvation and in the literal accuracy of the Bible. The difficulty was that in addition to the Bible in its King James Version, the Latter-day Saints had further scriptures with which to contend — the Book of Mormon, translated by Smith from “reformed Egyptian” and styled as “another Testament of Jesus Christ”; and supplements to various biblical texts known collectively as the Pearl of Great Price.

Whatever the variances among the four synoptic gospels, contemporary evangelicals, like their forebears, have long been committed to the exclusivity of these texts. Newly unearthed gospels or pseudo-gospels (like the so-called Gospel of Thomas, written in the Egyptian language Coptic and found at Nag Hammadi in 1945) have posed few theological doubts for these Protestant evangelicals, who have dismissed them as foreign heretical works, despite their antiquity. Against this backdrop, the rejection of the Mormon Bible is simple and formulaic. Coupled with concerns about what they consider Mormonism’s nontrinitarian theology, it has led ineluctably to an unwillingness to recognize Mormons as full participants in the category “Christian.”

In theory, the evangelical political movement says that it is prepared to embrace Jews and even Muslims so long as they share the same common values of the religious right. In the case of a Mormon candidate, though, many evangelicals are not prepared to say that common values are enough. The reason seems to be the view among evangelicals that the substantive theological beliefs of Mormons are so radically different from their own as to constitute not a sect of Christianity but a Christian heresy, which would be worse than a different monotheistic faith like Judaism or Islam. One prominent evangelical, the Southern Baptist Richard Land, has proposed that Mormonism be considered a fourth Abrahamic religion — a compromise view that has found few takers in the evangelical camp and privately infuriates Mormons who insist on their Christianity.

Faced with the allegation that they do not believe in the same God as ordinary Protestants, or that their beliefs are not truly Christian, Mormons find themselves in an extraordinarily awkward position. They cannot defend themselves by expressly explaining their own theology, because, taken from the standpoint of orthodox Protestantism in America today, it is in fact heterodox.

What is more, what began as a strategy of secrecy to avoid persecution has become over the course of the 20th century a strategy of minimizing discussion of the content of theology in order to avoid being treated as religious pariahs. As a result, Mormons have not developed a series of easily expressed and easily swallowed statements summarizing the content of their theology in ways that might arguably be accepted by mainline Protestants. To put it bluntly, the combination of secret mysteries and resistance in the face of oppression has made it increasingly difficult for Mormons to talk openly and successfully with outsiders about their religious beliefs.

Assimilation, Culture And Compromise

The general pattern of Mormon history is one of growth leading to external pressure being brought to bear on the church. Internal resistance eventually gives way to change sanctioned by new revelation, followed in turn by new growth and success. This was the pattern not only for the abolition of polygamy but also for the extension in 1978 of the Mormon priesthood to black men. Mitt Romney’s run for the presidency is the occasion for the latest round in this cycle, with cultural and religious skepticism representing the vector for outside pressure. What will Romney — or the church — do in response?

One option is for Romney to try to devise a new language for talking about his religious beliefs that will make them seem accessible and familiar without compromising them. Romney has expressly said that he will not take this tack — but inevitably he has done so, and if he is chosen as the Republican candidate or elected to the presidency, he will have to do more. This could prove a tricky undertaking, full of pitfalls to the believer. Thus Romney has felt the need to minimize the centrality of Mormon scripture by saying that he reads the Gideon Bible when he is alone in his hotel room on the campaign trail.

The formulation may be seen as a clever hedge: to the ordinary Protestant listener, it sounds as if Romney is saying that he reads the same Bible that they do. To the Mormon insider, however, Romney is simply saying that when he travels to the hotel and finds himself, presumably, without a handy copy of the Book of Mormon, he reads the text of the Bible that can be found in the drawer beside the bed. Some LDS insiders have been heard to wonder quietly how Romney could come to be traveling without his own copy of the Mormon scriptures — or why he isn’t staying in Marriott hotels, where the Book of Mormon can be found in the nightstand drawer alongside the bible.

This is a perfect example of esoteric public speaking: the attempt to convey multiple messages to different audiences through the careful use of words. Something similar is perhaps contained in Romney’s outspoken admiration for Rick Warren, the megachurch pastor and best-selling author. To the general audience, the message is the embrace of an evangelical who is as mainstream as it gets. To a Mormon audience, however, the praise is presumably intended at most as a suggestion that it is possible to learn from the remarkable organizational and evangelizing effects of a well-known public figure.

Speaking esoterically about faith has a firm basis in LDS tradition — but history suggests it may not be enough for the church to overcome the strand of soft bigotry that it is now facing. And from the church’s perspective, facing up to the reality of such prejudice is not a trivial matter. Precisely because Romney is so accomplished, so telegenic, in short such an impressive candidate, it may be a slap in Mormons’ faces if he finds that he cannot garner the support of conservative values voters. If such voters prefer, say, a pro-choice Roman Catholic of questionable conservative credentials like Rudy Giuliani, the result may look like a public repudiation of Mormonism — from the very party to which Mormons have given their allegiance for the last half-century. (Even if the charge against Romney were that he failed because he was a dissimulating phony, that would hardly be an improvement for the church, given the similarity of that charge with the historical bias against Mormon secrecy.)

If the reality of soft bigotry does not today pose an existential threat to Mormons as explicit oppression once did, it would nevertheless undercut the hard-won public face of Mormonism as a distinctively American religion characterized by worldly accomplishment. For conservatives to reject a Mormon because he is a Mormon would be an especially harsh setback for a faith that has accomplished such extraordinary public success in overcoming a history of painful discrimination.

If Mormonism were to keep Romney from the nomination, the Mormon Church hierarchy may through continuing revelation and guidance respond by shifting its theology and practices even further in the direction of mainstream Christianity and thereby minimizing its outlier status in the culture. Voices within the LDS fold have for some time sought to minimize the authority of some of Joseph Smith’s more creative and surprising theological messages, like the teaching that God and Jesus were once men. You could imagine Mormonism coming to look more like mainline Protestantism with the additional belief not in principle incompatible with Protestant Scripture that some of the lost tribes of Israel ended up in the Americas, where a few had a vision of Christ’s appearance to them. If this hypothetical picture of a future Mormonism seems unimaginable to the contemporary LDS faithful, as it may, today’s Mormon theology would look almost as different to Brigham Young.

Religious development, driven by turns from within and without, is, after all, the mark of a vital faith. Today we do not think of the Catholic pope as the occupant of the pagan Roman office of pontifex maximus, but of course the pontiff is precisely that: the living exemplar of how Christianity met, conquered and was changed by the very empire that presided over the crucifixion. All religions assimilate and change, even as they claim to hew to the old truths.

America changes, too. Today the soft bigotry of cultural discomfort may stand in the way of a candidate whose faith exemplifies values of charity, self-discipline and community that we as Americans claim to hold dear. Surely, though, the day will come when we are ready to put prejudice aside and choose a president without regard to what we think of his religion.

Noah Feldman, a contributing writer for the magazine, is a law professor at Harvard University and adjunct senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. He writes frequently on religion and public life.

Polygamy Prominent in GOP Presidential Hopeful Mitt Romney’s Family Tree