Romney Reaches to the Christian Right

There are probably many Americans who do not understand why Mitt Romney has to “reach out” to the “Christian right” in his bid to become President of the United States. I’m sure there are many who would think Romney the Mormon would go with the Christian right like peas and carrots. After all, Mormons and Evangelicals both have conservative stances on social issues, in particular issues affecting the family. But matters are just not that simple.

Evangelical Christians who know what Mormonism is do not consider Mormonism to be a Christian denomination, but a cult. On top of that, just a few short years ago this particular Mormon ran for the governor of Massachusetts as a pro-abortion candidate. It was only when he decided to run for President that he changed positions on abortion and became pro-life. For these reasons, photo ops like the one above can look strange indeed.

But in the debate last week, Romney assured the “Christian right” that his conversion to the pro-life cause was as authentic as Ronald Reagan’s. I hope that he’s telling the truth, but I haven’t drunk the Romney Kool-aid yet.

“Romney Reaches to the Christian Right” – Washington Post

8 Responses to Romney Reaches to the Christian Right

  1. Jason May 7, 2007 at 10:44 am #

    Denny,

    Do you not disqualify him from consideration because of his Mormonism? I’m confused at the inclusion of the word ‘yet’ at the end of the drunken from the Kool-aid statement.

    Jason

  2. dennyrburk May 7, 2007 at 10:50 am #

    Jason,

    I don’t consider a candidate to be disqualified on the basis that his religion is different than mine. However, it is conceivable that person’s religious beliefs might dictate policy positions or personal character traits which would disqualify them.

    Thanks,
    Denny

  3. Jason May 7, 2007 at 10:59 am #

    Denny,

    I’m actually surprised you would say that. I would worry that having a non-Christian in office could promote whatever religion that person held and could lead many people astray. Personally, I would be weary of the risk of allowing someone to have a public forum to promote (I realize it is against the Constitution to do such a thing, but . . .) something other than Truth. Even if I think he is a well spoken candidate that may be electable and might hold all the view points I find valuable, I’ve already poured the Kool-aid out.

    Jason

  4. dennyrburk May 7, 2007 at 11:22 am #

    We could count on one hand how many born-again Christians we have had in the oval office. It’s just an unusual thing that we would have such an option, and I don’t presume that we always will (like last time with George W. Bush). I like having an evangelical Christian in the White House, but I think we have to be prepared to throw our support to candidates that will implement just policies, even if they are not evangelical Christians.

    Thanks,
    Denny

  5. Jason May 7, 2007 at 12:17 pm #

    I understand that we haven’t always had evangelical Christians in the White House, but I think if I had 2 candidates that were supporting similar views, then I would go with the Christian over the non-Christian. I think Huckabee would be a better Christian option than Romney. Although I think it will be tough for him to get elected, I am not going to let that be a factor in my decision process.

    Jason

  6. dennyrburk May 7, 2007 at 12:35 pm #

    I agree with you on that one, Jason. I guess I’m looking ahead to the general election in which it is unlikely that we will have an evangelical option.

  7. GUNNY HARTMAN May 7, 2007 at 3:08 pm #

    If his conversion to “Christian” happens, then he’ll get my attention. I’d rather him be a nominal Christian who sees that as just part of being a good American than a member of a cult with a passionate desire to infiltrate the world with its deviltry.

    Actually, I might be more inclined to have a Muslim president, because Islam doesn’t have the same organizational prowess that the LDS group does.

    Denny wrote: “However, it is conceivable that person’s religious beliefs might dictate policy positions or personal character traits which would disqualify them.”

    I agree and I think I’m convinced that those beliefs and the organization would influence things.

    All I know is … it’s slim pickins when the Christian right has to latch onto a heretic as the champion of the cause.

    ; )

    But this goes back to the lesser of two evils, doesn’t it? It’s one thing to campaign before the primaries, but what does a Christian do if it’s a Mormon pro-lifer vs. a professing Christian Democrat pro-choicer?

    Talk about getting our categories out of whack!

  8. Ethan May 24, 2007 at 8:18 am #

    I can’t see voting for Mormon at the moment. The LDS church has deliberately engaged in a P.R. campaign to convince the public that they are just another Christian denomination. I think we hand them a huge P.R. victory if we are able to look past the issue of his Mormonism. So it it isn’t that he isn’t “Christian”, the problem is that he is part of a religion which seeks to promote another gospel while calling itself “Christian”.

    Enjoy your blog Denny.

    James White 5/17 show (aomin.com) touches on some good points about Mormonism.

    – Ethan

Comment here. Please use FIRST and LAST name.

Powered by WordPress. Designed by Woo Themes