From the desk of Mitt Romney:

Error message

Deprecated function: implode(): Passing glue string after array is deprecated. Swap the parameters in drupal_get_feeds() (line 394 of /var/www/pied-piper.ermarian.net/includes/common.inc).

Pages

AuthorTopic: From the desk of Mitt Romney:
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
Profile #0
Say what you will about American politics, at least it is never boring. With Bush entering his injured mallard years, the hunt is on for eligible candidates for the next travesty. The Boston Globe tends to lead the editorial pack, especially since many presidential candidates hail from that state.

This editorial talks about the front runner Republican candidates and brings up something near and dear to our hearts.

Religion.

Would you vote or not vote for a President based on religion?

Discuss.

--------------------
quote:
Originally written by Kelandon:

Well, I'm at least pretty sure that Salmon is losing.


Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00
Shaper
Member # 6292
Profile #1
A Mormon candidate, huh? We might have a First, Second, and Third Lady in the White House. :D

--------------------
A4 Item Locations A4 Singleton G4 Items List G4 Forging List The Insidious Infiltrator
Posts: 2009 | Registered: Monday, September 12 2005 07:00
...b10010b...
Member # 869
Profile Homepage #2
Well, a recent Australian Prime Minister was an agnostic who held a world record for fastest beer-drinking. So I don't think a Mormon would necessarily be automatically passed over.

--------------------
The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure!
Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
Law Bringer
Member # 2984
Profile Homepage #3
quote:
Would you vote or not vote for a President based on religion?
I probably wouldn't vote for a southern baptist creationist, and that vote could be said to be based on religion.

However, that is extended to fundamentalists of any religion; the actual failing criterion would be that they are likely to have church and government interfere with each other.

[ Tuesday, February 21, 2006 00:20: Message edited by: Arancaytar the Grey ]

--------------------
Encyclopaedia ErmarianaForum ArchivesForum StatisticsRSS [Topic / Forum]
My BlogPolarisI eat novels for breakfast.
Polaris is dead, long live Polaris.
Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair.
Posts: 8752 | Registered: Wednesday, May 14 2003 07:00
Triad Mage
Member # 7
Profile Homepage #4
I wouldn't vote for or against somebody because of their religion, no matter what it was. What would make me vote for or against them would be how that religion affected their political platform.

--------------------
"At times discretion should be thrown aside, and with the foolish we should play the fool." - Menander
====
Drakefyre's Demesne - Happy Happy Joy Joy
Encyclopedia Ermariana - Trapped in the Closet
====
You can take my Mac when you pry my cold, dead fingers off the mouse!
Posts: 9436 | Registered: Wednesday, September 19 2001 07:00
Apprentice
Member # 6808
Profile #5
The whole government and election in US are a joke. I mean, look at it, how the absent-minded people always claim power and screw their whole nation over.
Posts: 4 | Registered: Sunday, February 19 2006 08:00
Law Bringer
Member # 2984
Profile Homepage #6
quote:
Originally written by Drakefyre:

I wouldn't vote for or against somebody because of their religion, no matter what it was. What would make me vote for or against them would be how that religion affected their political platform.
Indeed. But their degree of devoutness may be an indicator of how much they will let religion influence their platform. And there are definitely different religions/denominations who center their lives around their faiths to varying degrees...

--------------------
Encyclopaedia ErmarianaForum ArchivesForum StatisticsRSS [Topic / Forum]
My BlogPolarisI eat novels for breakfast.
Polaris is dead, long live Polaris.
Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair.
Posts: 8752 | Registered: Wednesday, May 14 2003 07:00
Shaper
Member # 3442
Profile Homepage #7
quote:
Originally written by Drakefyre:

I wouldn't vote for or against somebody because of their religion, no matter what it was. What would make me vote for or against them would be how that religion affected their political platform.
Seconded. I wouldn't vote for somebody because they were a Catholic, or whatever. But I wouldn't vote against them for religious reasons either.

It's all about the politics, right?

--------------------
And when you want to Live
How do you start?
Where do you go?
Who do you need to know?

Posts: 2864 | Registered: Monday, September 8 2003 07:00
Triad Mage
Member # 7
Profile Homepage #8
Always? Screw the nation over? Absent-minded?

I hardly think absent-minded is an appropriate descriptor, always is hardly true (maybe once or twice), and screw our nation over? The last president to screw our nation over was probably Reagan or Nixon, depending on your point-of-view.

--------------------
"At times discretion should be thrown aside, and with the foolish we should play the fool." - Menander
====
Drakefyre's Demesne - Happy Happy Joy Joy
Encyclopedia Ermariana - Trapped in the Closet
====
You can take my Mac when you pry my cold, dead fingers off the mouse!
Posts: 9436 | Registered: Wednesday, September 19 2001 07:00
Law Bringer
Member # 335
Profile Homepage #9
I think Bush has done a decent job of nation screwing himself, but that opinion is by no means universal.

—Alorael, who is very tempted to reject out of hand any candidate to seems to allow any religion to strongly determine political policy. Unfortunately, in this lovely era of religion-tinged vote grabbing, it can be hard to tell who believes and he just mouths the words. (Bush shows several strong signs of being in the latter category.)
Posts: 14579 | Registered: Saturday, December 1 2001 08:00
Councilor
Member # 6600
Profile Homepage #10
Well, there is a growing religious movement to protect the environment. We shall see what Bush chooses: religious pressure or business pressure.

Dikiyoba.
Posts: 4346 | Registered: Friday, December 23 2005 08:00
Master
Member # 4614
Profile Homepage #11
While Mormonism is not really true Christianity, I don't think it would change my views all that much on a Republican candidate for President, unless, of course, the democratic candidate was better in the first place. Just whoever conforms more to my views, which many of you are aware of.

After all, though many of you are so biased you think otherwise, Bush is doing quite a good job keeping the country in line with his good Christian values. :P

--------------------
-ben4808
Posts: 3360 | Registered: Friday, June 25 2004 07:00
E Equals MC What!!!!
Member # 5491
Profile Homepage #12
Yeah, apart from the "Thou Shalt Not Kill" thing. :P

Abortion is a hot topic here at the moment, and it's an issue I feel strongly about. A candidate's stance on that will be the single most important thing in deciding my vote. Decide for yourself if that's voting by religion.

--------------------
SupaNik: Aran, you're not big enough to threaten Ash. Dammit, even JV had to think twice.
Posts: 1861 | Registered: Friday, February 11 2005 08:00
Fire! Fire! Fire! Fire!
Member # 919
Profile #13
quote:
Originally written by PublicDiplomat:

The whole government and election in US are a joke. I mean, look at it, how the absent-minded people always claim power and screw their whole nation over.
quote:
Originally written by PublicDiplomat:

From Estonia
*teeheehee*

I'd assume that black Mormons don't believe themselves cursed. If Romney agrees with them, then I'd have no problem with him on that point. If he does not, then yes, I'd vote against him based on religion.

It's kind of amusing to watch Aran's reponse. I'm picturing Salmon asking the question and Aran kind of pulling his chin down and grunting "yes" as unintelligibly as possible...

--------------------
And though the musicians would die, the music would live on in the imaginations of all who heard it.
-The Last Pendragon

Polaris = joy.

In case of emergency, break glass.
Posts: 3351 | Registered: Saturday, April 6 2002 08:00
...b10010b...
Member # 869
Profile Homepage #14
quote:
Originally written by Ash Lael:

Abortion is a hot topic here at the moment, and it's an issue I feel strongly about. A candidate's stance on that will be the single most important thing in deciding my vote. Decide for yourself if that's voting by religion.
You believe abortion to be a sin, right?

Resisting the temptation to commit a sin is a good thing, right?

Giving other people the opportunity to do good things is also a good thing, right?

Therefore, your duty as a Christian is to give other people as many opportunities as possible to be tempted by sin so that they can grow in moral character by resisting that temptation, which means, logically, that you should be in favour of legalised abortion.

Okay, so that's a silly argument. But I'm not in the mood for serious ones at the moment. :P

--------------------
The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure!
Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
Law Bringer
Member # 2984
Profile Homepage #15
quote:
Originally written by Lady Davida:

It's kind of amusing to watch Aran's reponse. I'm picturing Salmon asking the question and Aran kind of pulling his chin down and grunting "yes" as unintelligibly as possible...
Well, to answer otherwise would be disingenuous of me.

However, if we're really going to go after the definition of "is":

Is the influence someone's belief have on his politics not a part of said belief? I don't think you can separate church and state without believing in the necessity of the separation of church and state. And believing in that necessity would form a very fundamental tenet in your personal idea of religion. If someone followed a concept of religion that included the tenet of imposing one's belief on others, then based on that religion, I would have to vote against him or her.

Unless, of course, by religion you mean denomination. But on a scale of vagueness, that seems to me on par with defining one's personality by one's skin color.

--------------------
Encyclopaedia ErmarianaForum ArchivesForum StatisticsRSS [Topic / Forum]
My BlogPolarisI eat novels for breakfast.
Polaris is dead, long live Polaris.
Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair.
Posts: 8752 | Registered: Wednesday, May 14 2003 07:00
E Equals MC What!!!!
Member # 5491
Profile Homepage #16
quote:
Originally written by Thuryl:

quote:
Originally written by Ash Lael:

Abortion is a hot topic here at the moment, and it's an issue I feel strongly about. A candidate's stance on that will be the single most important thing in deciding my vote. Decide for yourself if that's voting by religion.
You believe abortion to be a sin, right?

Resisting the temptation to commit a sin is a good thing, right?

Giving other people the opportunity to do good things is also a good thing, right?

Therefore, your duty as a Christian is to give other people as many opportunities as possible to be tempted by sin so that they can grow in moral character by resisting that temptation, which means, logically, that you should be in favour of legalised abortion.

Okay, so that's a silly argument. But I'm not in the mood for serious ones at the moment. :P

I believe abortion is murder in the name of convenience.

As for temptation, do you recall the Lord's Prayer? "...lead us not into temptation." This would imply, that though resisting temptation is a good thing, temptation itself isn't and should be avoided as much as possible. In the same way that saving a life is a good thing, but it's better if that life isn't in danger in the first place.

--------------------
SupaNik: Aran, you're not big enough to threaten Ash. Dammit, even JV had to think twice.
Posts: 1861 | Registered: Friday, February 11 2005 08:00
Law Bringer
Member # 335
Profile Homepage #17
"...Lead us to temptation and then away again!"

Suppose somehow someone were prevented from having the opportunity to sin or resist the temptation to sin. Would that person be a good person? Would the preventers be good (assuming no cruel and unusual methods of restraint)? What about that big deal issue of free will?

—Alorael, who is reasonably sure that fetuses can't sin and humans almost always do. Aren't an unborn baby's chances of getting a free trip to Heaven better than a born baby's?
Posts: 14579 | Registered: Saturday, December 1 2001 08:00
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
Profile Homepage #18
That's Thanos of Titan logic, Alo.

--------------------
Slarty vs. DeskDesk vs. SlartyTimeline of ErmarianG4 Strategy Central
Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00
E Equals MC What!!!!
Member # 5491
Profile Homepage #19
quote:
Originally written by Uc:

"...Lead us to temptation and then away again!"

Suppose somehow someone were prevented from having the opportunity to sin or resist the temptation to sin. Would that person be a good person? Would the preventers be good (assuming no cruel and unusual methods of restraint)? What about that big deal issue of free will?

—Alorael, who is reasonably sure that fetuses can't sin and humans almost always do. Aren't an unborn baby's chances of getting a free trip to Heaven better than a born baby's?

I'll ignore the first question, since that's hypothetical to the point of absurdity.

As for the last point, I would say that's fairly irrelevant. An evil deed with an incidental good result is still an evil deed. That's ignoring the fact that all theology involving the soul of an aborted fetus is complete guesswork. :P

--------------------
SupaNik: Aran, you're not big enough to threaten Ash. Dammit, even JV had to think twice.
Posts: 1861 | Registered: Friday, February 11 2005 08:00
Warrior
Member # 6689
Profile #20
quote:
Originally written by Drakefyre:

Always? Screw the nation over? Absent-minded?

I hardly think absent-minded is an appropriate descriptor, always is hardly true (maybe once or twice), and screw our nation over? The last president to screw our nation over was probably Reagan or Nixon, depending on your point-of-view.

You're right. Absent-minded and screw the nation over are two very understated phrases about how GWB acts and what he has done. He started a war with Iraq. War screws everyone over.

Don't forget all of his political buddies who are getting indicted and that he supports drilling in ANWAR. I would go on, but I have mono and am about to fall asleep at the keyboard.

ztrbv ft vf

--------------------
--Dachnaz
Posts: 50 | Registered: Saturday, January 14 2006 08:00
Councilor
Member # 6600
Profile Homepage #21
Wasn't one of the reasons abortion even became legal in the first place was because too many women were getting illegal abortions and dying from them?

I believe that abortion is the result of the problem and not the problem itself. The problem is that we have unwanted pregnancies. So if someone really wanted to reduce the number of abortions, maybe preventing unwanted pregnancies in the first place or making unwanted pregnancies wanted (or at least tolerable) is the place to start.

And that is Dikiyoba's opinion.
Posts: 4346 | Registered: Friday, December 23 2005 08:00
E Equals MC What!!!!
Member # 5491
Profile Homepage #22
quote:
Originally written by Dikiyoba:

Wasn't one of the reasons abortion even became legal in the first place was because too many women were getting illegal abortions and dying from them?

I believe that abortion is the result of the problem and not the problem itself. The problem is that we have unwanted pregnancies. So if someone really wanted to reduce the number of abortions, maybe preventing unwanted pregnancies in the first place or making unwanted pregnancies wanted (or at least tolerable) is the place to start.

And that is Dikiyoba's opinion.

Anger is the problem. Instead of outlawing murder, we should be trying to find ways to stop people getting so angry.

--------------------
SupaNik: Aran, you're not big enough to threaten Ash. Dammit, even JV had to think twice.
Posts: 1861 | Registered: Friday, February 11 2005 08:00
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
Profile Homepage #23
The mention of the Lord's Prayer made me do what I compulsively do now: look it up! I read it in English first, then in Latin, and then in Greek. It comes, after all, from Matthew (and also appears, in a slightly less developed form, in Luke).

The English actually is a very good translation of the Latin, and the Latin is a pretty good translation of the Greek. There's some odd textual history with the last line, but other than that, I'm impressed with how well this one actually holds up.

Other than that, I'm not touching this topic with a ten-foot pole at the moment. :P

--------------------
Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens.
Smoo: Get ready to face the walls!
Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr.

Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me
The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever
Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00
Agent
Member # 798
Profile Homepage #24
Okay,I hate to interrupt the obortion argument but I need to save my nation bye going to the original point of discussion in this topic with Romney. If you are a American citizen of voting age, (18 or older), I advise that you do not vote for Romney. I try to keep Massachusetts and World history on here as seperate as I can but I can't this time. Judging bye how Romney has ran Massachusetts I doubt he will save this country from The annals of Hell it is now in, (Pardon the religious refrence). JFK, RFK, Paul Revere and others all came from Massachusetts, but they were good for the country. Mitt has done absolutly nothing for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to mention. and I doubt he will do much more for the country. And remember US Citizens who are going to vote in 08, you've been warned.

--------------------
"I am Batman". Batman.

"I was Escobars guy, I was untouchable".

George Jung-Blow.

"Dare to disturb the Universe". The Chocolate War.

There is nothing sadder Than wasted Talent.

Lorenzo, A Bronx Tale.
Posts: 1046 | Registered: Friday, March 22 2002 08:00

Pages