Tuesday, April 3, 2012

The October Surprise

Are you ready for the surprise if Romney wins the nomination.  If you do not think the below would ever happen, then you may not have a full understanding of what the MSM and our current president will do to win this upcoming election.  Granted, it is hypothetical.  However, the facts stated are all found in LDS literature.

The Mitt Romney Interview:

Lauer:  Good morning Gov. Romney!  How are things on the campaign trail going for you since the last poll has you and the President neck and neck

Romney:  Matt, thanks for having me.  We have had a great time on the trail and I am looking forward to the election.

Lauer:  I want to clear a couple things up with you before we get to the economy of our nation.  Now, you were or are a bishop in the Mormon church, correct?

Romney:  Yes, but what does that have to do with jobs and our national debt.

Lauer:  I was wondering, is there a way you can assure us that the president and twelve apostles of your church will not have a direct line to the White House?

Romney:  Now Matt, being Governor of Massachusetts, I can assure you that they never called me or influenced the way that I had govern Mass, and I do not see that being carried forward.

Lauer:  You are aware though that there is a difference of being a governor than president.  Anyways, isn’t true that Mormons look on our Constitution as a divine document.

Romney:  Uh…uhmm, I don’t know, not sure on why that really matters anyway.

Lauer:  Isn’t it true that Mormons look on the US Constitution just like the Book of Mormon?  Ezra Taft Benson in an article entitled, “Our Divine Constitution,” found in your magazine or newsletter Ensign, Nov 1987 stated that our constitution is divine.  Is that not correct.

Romney:  I suppose so, but I don’t recall that article that you reference.  I will have to check into that.

Lauer:  Wasn’t there a time when the Mormon church did not allow African-Americans to become Mormons because it was taught that their dark skin demonstrated that they were cursed by God for siding with Satan?

Romney:  Now wait one moment, there was no teaching that prevented African-Americans from being Mormons, that is a bald face lie.

Lauer:  But right here (Pearl of Great Price. Moses 7:8) it states that those of darker skin is not allowed to be a part of the priesthood. 

Romney:  That is different than being allowed to become a Mormon.  It was all just a myth or a misunderstanding that was cleared up.  

Lauer:  A hundred-thirty year misunderstanding?  According to research, on June 8th, 1978, Mormon Church President Spencer W. Kimball, claims to receive a Revelation which grants the Priesthood to all worthy males "regardless of race or color".  My question is, if a president of the Mormon church can receive divine revelation in correcting doctrine and the Constitution is a part of that doctrine, isn’t it possible for you to receive a call from your church telling you of a new revelation in understanding our constitution?  

And this will be where Romney gets up knowing that he just gave the presidency to Obama for another four years.

Edit for clarification purpose as to where "here" is in Lauer's comment to distinguish that the reference is not the Book of Mormon


  1. I've had similar thoughts in the back of my mind Puritan. Well put and given the leftist hypocrisy, it wouldn't surprise me at all if they would go after Romney's religion when they refused to dig into dear leaders. Well said.

  2. Thanks Carolyn. I appreciate. I hope that the Republicans have an open convention. Anyone but Romney will improve the ticket IMHO.

  3. This is silly!

    If the President of the Mormon church said something stupid like there is some religious way to interpret the constitution like you link to… you’re hyperventilating for no reason. In Romney’s own words from his Faith in America Speech:

    “We separate church and state affairs in this country, and for good reason. No religion should dictate to the state nor should the state interfere with the free practice of religion. But in recent years, the notion of the separation of church and state has been taken by some well beyond its original meaning. They seek to remove from the public domain any acknowledgment of God. Religion is seen as merely a private affair with no place in public life. It is as if they are intent on establishing a new religion in America – the religion of secularism. They are wrong.”

    Thus he nails the separation of church and state while tackling the problem with hyper-secularism. It isn’t hard to see that most attacks on Mormonism will end up a trap for the attacker. The blow-back will be in Romney’s favor. All religions require faith and have unbelievable (for many) events and bases for that belief. Attack one, you attack all, even if you really really dislike Mormonism.

    1. You error in your assumption that this could possibly be silly.

      Does any other religious group calls the US Constitution a divine document? As a divine document, the president of the Mormon Church as well as the apostles to give clarity (change meaning like in 1978) to any divine document as they are directed by their "god". All of their books are divinely inspired from the Book of Mormon to the Pearl of Great Price. So it is not far fetched at all to think that this is a possibility.

      It looks as if you are assuming that Mormonism falls under the umbrella of Christianity. It does not. Mormonism rejects the Trinity, atoning work of Christ, and other major tenants of the Christian faith, putting them way outside Christianity. The sad part is that most Americans do not know what Mormonism is and when the truth of their beliefs become more exposed the harder it will be on Romney.

      You do realize that Romney is in a tight jam. He will not be able to throw Mormon beliefs under the bus as Obama did with Jeremiah Wright. Also note, the attacks from the MSM on Santorum is on his religious beliefs so to think that MSM will not do to Romney as they have done to Santorum is foolishness.

    2. Does any other religious group calls the US Constitution a divine document? Not that I know of.

      I never said Mormons were Christians, nor do I claim it pertaining to mainstream Christian definitions.

      I think you're arguments are silly for the following reasons:
      1. Anyone who has extensive experience with Mormons should laugh at the Mormon President trying to rewrite the constitution by revelation. They have a strict concept of stewardship meaning the church is over the church and the state is over the state. Just like Christ's statement on Roman taxation. But for arguments sake, let's say the Mormon President did. Romney stated publicly that the Mormon President would not affect his governing, or did we miss what I quoted?
      2. Bad press on religion tends to have blowback effects. Just look at MSNBC's Laurence O'Donnell's comments about the LDS Faith recently. They were very bigoted and blatantly wrong. This is an example of how media's influence backfires.
      3. Anything bad press about the Mormon faith sticks to the Democrats too because Harry Reid the Senate Majority Leader is LDS too.

    3. Now that I have a better idea of where you are coming from, here are some of my thoughts as to why this may be more hurtful than not.

      I agree that O'Donnell's comments will not cause much if any damage to LDS. However, the scenario I present is all based on fact and facts are stubborn things. One just has to google the US Constitution and divine, to see what Mormons believe. It will be like the Westview(?) Baptists: who receive negative press with no blow back against the media. Why, because the story is factual.

      I would not be too quick to write-off what the Mormon President can or cannot do. If the Constitution is a divine document then the President has authority to correct it as see fit as they have done historically. We just do not know since it has never happened in history. No other religion places our Constitution as divine. This really falls into the "I Don't Know" file. The second aspect of this is that Romney was/is an active bishop. What does that mean? He may be more bound to what the 12 Mormon apostles say than most Mormons. Again, this is uncharted territory.

      Believe me, Obama will use Harry Reid, throwing him under the bus just as long as it will help him win the presidency. Harry Reid will be a small price for Obama to pay to keep his residency at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

    4. The problem with your fact is that it is isolated from the political decisions of both Romney and Reid since they both have had political positions that are not supported by their church.

      The LDS President doesn't command Romney just like he doesn't command Reid. Romney's Faith in America speech has inoculated him from LDS influence in his political actions as President. Romney isn't having a Rev. Wright problem, since he already distanced himself from LDS/political entanglements. Also, any entanglements for Romney effects the Democrat's top leader as well, thus, such an October Surprise in my opinion is silly.

    5. Also, I wouldn't worry too much about Romney previously being a Bishop and Stake President as he no longer holds those positions within the church.

      One historical example of potential entanglement without any problems was Ezra Taft Benson. He was an Apostle of the LDS faith, and was appointed to U.S. Secretary of Agriculture by President Eisenhower while he remained being one of the twelve apostles of the church. He even got permission from the LDS President to join the cabinet. Bensen later became one of the LDS Presidents. One of the official writings about the divine inspiration of the U.S. Constitution come from him. Yet, his tenure as part of the U.S. President's cabinet was one of professional success. No political ramifications from him being a continuing member of the LDS Twelve Apostles. I cite this only as a recent example of bigger entanglement than you are complaining about without any fact of problems resulting from said entanglements.

    6. Anonymous,

      I appreciate the dialogue here. Thank you for the information on the appointment of an apostle of the LDS being a cabinet position.

      Even if the president of LDS has little influence on Romney per se, one cannot argue for a divorce of belief with position of authority. JFK was incorrect to state that his belief is separate from his public position of president. We act upon our beliefs. There is no way around it. In LDS, one must submit to the authority of the apostles. If Romney wants to state that he rejects Mormonism, fine. However as long as he is a Mormon, desiring good standing, he will have to submit to this authority.

      The idea that Mr. Benson had to get permission gives me great concern as it should you. Did Romney receive permission from LDS to run? Do we know? The upper echelons of any religious "cult" are very secretive.

      The situation as I stated may be "silly" to you and others who might be more a tune politically. And even if the possibility is remote in that the LDS calls on Romney over the Constitution, that is not how the media will play it or the public in general will perceive it. The media will bring a harsher light to Romney's religious beliefs, than on any other person ever to run for the office.

      Again,President Obama has proven that he will do anything and everything to be reelected and if Reid is thrown under the bus, so be it. Unless Romney has a JFK moment, which has been clearly debunked but people still believe one can divorce private/public beliefs, he will be in a steep uphill battle.

    7. I want to apologize for the delay in posting your comments. I have had very little time to review and respond. I still have one comment left to go through and I want to listen to the links given before I post it, in case it warrants a response.

    8. Anonymous (Nathan?)

      Here is what one president of LDS stated, As President J. Reuben Clark taught under assignment from the First Presidency: Here we must have in mind—must know—that only the President of the Church, the Presiding High Priest, is sustained as Prophet, Seer, and Revelator for the Church, and he alone has the right to receive revelations for the Church, either new or amendatory, or to give authoritative interpretations of scriptures that shall be binding on the Church....

      Bold are mine for emphasis

  4. I look forward to see if you will approve a comment that broadens your discussion.

    1. If you really wanted to broaden the discussion, one would think you would do so not being anonymous.

    2. Hello PuritanD, thank you for posting my comments even as anonymous. I prefer anonymous out of laziness towards YAL (yet another login). Yet, a good discussion can still be had. :)

  5. Hi,

    Just so you know,that is from the Pearl of Great Price, a separate piece of Mormon scripture, and not from the Book of Mormon. The LDS church in 1978 changed its policies on race, allowing men of all ethnic backgrounds to become church bishops and serve in positions of authority. Don't know if it matters though!

    1. Thank you Terri for the heads up and need of clarification. I added the actual reference in the discussion where it was appropriate.

      Thanks again.