Anti-Mormonism

The following is a post by a commentor on the Salt Lake Tribune's website (coltakashi: 2/13/2008 1:54:00 PM) which I thought did an excellent job at confronting the anti-Mormon contention in America. Unedited, it appears below:

Anti-Mormonism is not simply disagreeing with Mormon doctrine or beliefs. By definition, anyone who is not a Mormon disagrees, as do even some Mormons. Anti-Mormonism is rather an active dedication to preventing the growth of the Mormon Church and the advancement of its programs. It involves publishing information critical of the Church and its members.

Obviously there is a spectrum of activity in that area. However, the program that is carried on by the Southern Baptist Convention North American Missions Board is motivated by their understanding to 40% of Mormon converts in the US come from at least nominally Baptist members. That would be on the order of some 40,000 people each year. The SBC for several decades has been engaged in telling its members that Mormons are not Christian, and that Mormons are ignorant of the Bible and Christian doctrine or in some cases actively deceptive to both the members of the Mormon Church and to Christians. Thus, a statement by a Mormon, such as was made by Mitt Romney, that he believes Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Davior of Mankind is held by the SBC to be false and deceptive. The SBC thus labels Romney as a liar, and Mormons generally are classified as either ignroant dupes or intelligent liars. During 2007, the SBC was actively putting out anti-Mormon messages to its churches every month, climaxing in a direct attack on Romney because the election of a Mormon to the presidentcy would give the Mormon "cult" a legitimacy in society that it did not deserve. Clearly, Baptists would for the same reason oppose the election of any Mormon to any public office, and it manifested itself in the campaign of Representative Istook of Oklahoma for governor of that state. Even in Idaho, where Mormons are the plurality religion in the eastern part of the state, Larry Echohawk's campaign for governor was derailed to a great extent because of his identification as a Mormon who held a fund-raising event in one of the rented reception rooms at the former Hotel Utah.

Huckabee did not need to publish anti-Mormon propaganda himself, because Evange;lical churches were already carrying his water for him. Just as they gave him forums to speak, and used church resourcves and membership lists to call for donations and votes, they also distributed anti-Mormon propaganda to ensure that Romney would not be accepted as credible and would be rejected as not really Christian.

A survey done by political scientists at a non-Mormon university in the East found that many of the people who criticized Romney as a "flip-flopper" really were using that term simply to express their religious enmity and distrust toward him. They had been indoctrinated for years that Mormons are liars, especially on religious matters.

Now imagine if those churches were teaching the same thing about Jews and Catholics. A due and cry of criticism would arise in the national new media that would not cease until the church involved stopped the action and apologized profusely. But the national news media do not care when Mormons are getting beat up.

Mormons do not publish pamphlets and books and videos attacking Baptists. They do not picket Baptist churches, yelling at people who have just been married. Mormons do not insist that Baptists be relegated to second class citizenship, where they cannot be elected to any office because it would give their religion prestige. Mormons believe specifically that a Baptist who lives a good life will spend eternity in the presence of Christ (in what Mormons call the Terrestrial Kingdom). As noted, a good many Mormons WERE Baptists. Former Mormons who are now Baptists are much fewer in number, but can trade on that fact for notoriety. Mormons do not claim that Baptists are inveterate liars or unthinking dullards.

The resentment that is professionally taught by the SBC to its members is no different than the anti-Semitism that the Nazis promoted in Germany. It treats peope of a specific religion as if they are a unique ethnic strain, who deserve to be discriminated against, and kept out of leading roles in society. If anti-Semitism is bad, if anti-Catholicism is unacceptable, then why is anti-Mormonism given a pass by the larger American society?

To a certain extent, it is because many non-religious people in America also hate Mormons. A Survey done by a Jewish organization of religious prejudice in academia found that college professors disliked and distrusted Evangelicals the most, with Mormons coming in second, even though Mormons were overrepresented in academic positions nationally. The screeds written in Slate and other left wing journals have attacked Mormonism for the intensity of its belief in the reality of God and Christ. So a Democratic Mormon would have just as much trouble with the left wing of his party as Romney had with the right wing of his.

What this points to is the need for the creation of a party of the Center, that will exclude the extreme antagonisms of both the Left and the Right. Such a center is a majority of Americans. It would take wrenching change to create a Center party, but once established, the extremes in the current two parties would be minorities that could not win power nationally.

Romney Suspends His Campaign

What a sad day for Romney supporters and conservatives around the nation. Romney evalutated his position in the race (GOP and DEM), his chances, and the status of the world, and made a hard decision to suspend his candidacy. Ironically, this is probably Romney's most presidential moment (along with the "Faith in America" speech). He truly loves the country more than himself and his campaign. I wish him well and hope to see him in 2012.

McCain Considers Setting Benchmarks for Iraqis

McCain continually claims that Mitt Romney wanted some sort of timetable to withdraw troops from Iraq. Every major newssource in the nation, after reading Romney's statement about goals, not "timetables", agrees that McCain is blatantly distorting Romney's quote and record. In fact, McCain, himself wanted to set benchmarks. Read the following article.



McCain considers setting benchmarks for Iraqis
By Margaret Talev

MCCLATCHY-TRIBUNE
WASHINGTON — Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., one of the most stalwart supporters of the war in Iraq, said Thursday that he might propose that the Iraqi government meet certain benchmarks for the United States to continue its engagement.

Fellow senators and independent political scientists said McCain's thinking reflected growing concerns within the Republican Party about the course of the war, and also might mark a turning point for the likely 2008 presidential contender, whose previous unconditional backing of the war may have hurt his prospects.

McCain said Thursday that he hadn't yet decided on precise benchmarks. "They'd have to be specific, and they (Iraqi government officials) would have to meet them," he said.

Asked what penalty would be imposed if Iraq failed to meet his benchmarks, he said: "I think everybody knows the consequences. Haven't met the benchmarks? Obviously, then, we're not able to complete the mission. Then you have to examine your options."

Senate Minority Whip Trent Lott, R-Miss., a McCain ally, said many Republicans might back a resolution of the sort McCain is suggesting. He noted that earlier this week, Republicans in the House of Representatives proposed establishing a set of benchmarks and asking the Bush administration to report monthly on progress.

"Everybody wants the situation to change," Lott said. "Everybody wants to lay down some markers. We need to see some results here. A lot of people would like to be on record on something or for something."

Andrew E. Smith, a political science professor and the director of the University of New Hampshire Survey Center, said: "I think it certainly could be politically significant." New Hampshire will hold the first presidential primary of 2008.

"This seems to me like he's trimming his sails a little on the issue," Smith said, adding: "He has a lot of company with this. He's not out on a limb. I think there is probably a deep sense of frustration among Republicans."

McCain in no way is withdrawing his backing for the war or President Bush's plan to add 21,500 troops. It was unclear what consequences or timetables McCain would spell out, or whether he believes that Congress has the authority to enforce them.
Still, several Senate Demo-crats who oppose the troop buildup and also may seek the presidency said they were struck by McCain's comments.

"We Catholics call that an epiphany," said Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Joseph Biden, D-Del., who is sponsoring the main Democratic resolution opposing the troop buildup.

Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., said: "I called for that . . . several weeks ago. I'm glad that John McCain agrees with me.

"He's somebody who has enormous influence with the White House. He's been one of the key champions of this escalation of troops."

Church and State: The Contrasting Views of Huckabee and Romney

As I continually am appalled at the religious comments coming out of the Huckabee campaign, I see Romney becoming the true religious conservative in the race. More and more Evangelicals are leaving the Huckabee campaign, many going to the Romney campaign. Why? Huckabee's views of church and state are oppressive rather than progressive. Huckabee would change the Constitution to fit his dogma. Meanwhile, Romney champions the diversity of religious thought in America and swears to uphold the Constitution above his religious beliefs.


Here are the candidate's positions, from their own mouths, concerning the matter.

Flip-Flopping Huckabee

• Mike Huckabee, over the course of ONE DAY, decided that he was against the 14th ammendment (which grants citizenship to all children born on US soil) and then decided that he was for it in a press release later that day.
  http://washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080108/NATION/311698216/1001
  http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZTUxZjNkYmIxYTAyNzJiZTEzNjJmNzI2OTMyOWNmMzI

• Mike Huckabee scheduled a big press conference in which he was going to release a negative ad about Mitt Romney. When the press conference started, he announced that he was not going to air any negative ads. Then he proceeded to show the ad to the press anyway. They laughed at him. It later ran on Iowa television and was aired during news broadcasts nationwide.
  http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/12/31/huckabees-remarkable-play/

• *Mike Huckabee was asked "If you are president in 2009 and Congress brings you a bill to outlaw smoking nationwide in public places, would you sign it?" To which he responded "I would, certainly would. In fact, I would, just like I did as governor of Arkansas, I think there should be no smoking in any indoor area where people have to work," To which his campaign LATER responded "...the governor believes that this issue is best addressed at the local and state levels."
  http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/huckabee-about-face-on-smoking-2008-01-16.html

• Mike Huckabee, as governor, was among a bi-partisan group of politicians who were calling for the end of the US trade embargo with Cuba. Recently, while campaigning at a Cuban restaurant in Florida, he decided that the embargo was a good thing and promised to do more than George W Bush to economically strangle Castro.
  http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-huckabee11dec11,1,4449705.story?coll=la-politics-campaign

• Mike Huckabee accused his opponent in his 1998 senate race of mischaractarizing his record when he was "accused" of supporting school vouchers, saying that they were impractical for Arkansas. But in November, 2007, he decided that he now supports school vouchers, apparently unbenownst to the New Hampshire teacher's union which endorsed him.
  http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/campaign-k-12/2007/12/should_huckabee_be_wearing_fli.html

• Mike Huckabee was asked how he felt about about overturning Roe v Wade. He said "it should be left to the states," Then, in a presidential debate, he said it was preposterous to leave such a deep moral issue to the states.
  http://www.rightwingnews.com/interviews/huckabee.php
  http://www.arkansasleader.com/2007/11/editorialshuck-flip-flops.html

• Mike Huckabee, in the same interview noted above, was asked if he thought illegal immigrants should be allowed to stay in the country on a pathway to citizenship. He said "Well, I'm not as sure that leaving and then coming back is as important as it is to acknowledge that what they've done is illegal, pay a fine, and then get in line behind the people that are going through the process of being here legally. But now he has completely ruled out a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants before they have returned to their countries of origin.
  http://www.rightwingnews.com/interviews/huckabee.php
  http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/12/07/huckabee-releases-immigration-plan/

• Mike Huckabee told The Guardian that he would NOT increase federal funding for music and art education, but then in a presidential debate, he said he"would make arts and music education tested curriculum and provide federal funds to do so."
  http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/usa/2007/12/huckabees_reverse_flipflop.html

• Mike Huckabee said "I am not sure that I support the troop surge if that surge has to come from our guard and reserve troops," which it did. Until yet another recent presidential debate, where he felt it appropriate to claim that he supported the surge when Mitt Romney did not. (Despite the fact that Romney came out in support of the surge on January 10 and Huckabee was unsure on January 24.)
  http://www.evangelicalsformitt.org/front_page/huckabee_flip_flops_on_surge_w.php

Ann Coulter on Romney & Flip-Flopping

Ann Coulter wrote an article about Romney on Jan 16. Full Article Link. Here is an excerpt on the "flip-flopping" issue:


Liberals claim to be enraged at Romney for being a "flip-flopper." I've looked and looked, and the only issue I can find that Romney has "flipped" on is abortion. When running for office in Massachusetts -- or, for short, "the Soviet Union" -- Romney said that Massachusetts was a pro-choice state and that he would not seek to change laws on abortion.

Romney's first race was against Sen. Teddy Kennedy -- whom he came closer to beating than any Republican ever had. If Romney needed to quote "The Communist Manifesto" to take out that corpulent drunk, all men of good will would owe him a debt of gratitude.

Even when Romney was claiming to support Roe v. Wade, he won the endorsement of Massachusetts Citizens for Life -- a group I trust more than the editorial board of The New York Times. Romney's Democratic opponents always won the endorsements of the very same pro-choice groups now attacking him as a "flip-flopper."

After his term as governor, NARAL Pro-Choice America assailed Romney, saying: "(A)s governor he initially expressed pro-choice beliefs but had a generally anti-choice record. His position on choice has changed. His position is now anti-choice."

Pro-abortion groups like the Republican Majority for Choice -- the evil doppelganger to my own group, Democratic Majority for Life -- are now running videos attacking Romney for "flip-flopping" on abortion.

And People Call Romney A Flip-Flopper

• In 2006, McCain sponsored legislation to require grassroots lobbying coalitions to reveal their financial donors. In 2007, after receiving "feedback" on the proposal, McCain told far-right activist groups that he now opposes the measure.

• McCain said before the war in Iraq, "We will win this conflict. We will win it easily." Four years later, McCain said he knew all along that the war in Iraq war was "probably going to be long and hard and tough."

• McCain went from saying he would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade to saying the exact opposite.

• McCain went from saying gay marriage should be allowed, to saying gay marriage shouldn’t be allowed.

• McCain criticized TV preacher Jerry Falwell as "an agent of intolerance" in 2002, but has since decided to cozy up to the man who said Americans "deserved" the 9/11 attacks. (Indeed, McCain has now hired Falwell’s debate coach.)

• McCain used to oppose Bush’s tax cuts for the very wealthy, but he reversed course in February.

• In 2000, McCain accused Texas businessmen Sam and Charles Wyly of being corrupt, spending "dirty money" to help finance Bush’s presidential campaign. McCain not only filed a complaint against the Wylys for allegedly violating campaign finance law, he also lashed out at them publicly. In April, McCain reached out to the Wylys for support.

• McCain supported a major campaign-finance reform measure that bore his name. In June, he abandoned his own legislation.

• McCain used to think that Grover Norquist was a crook and a corrupt shill for dictators. Then McCain got serious about running for president and began to reconcile with Norquist.

• McCain took a firm line in opposition to torture, and then caved to White House demands.

• McCain opposed a holiday to honor Martin Luther King, Jr., before he supported it.
  

• McCain was against presidential candidates campaigning at Bob Jones University before he was for it.

• McCain was anti-ethanol. Now he’s pro-ethanol.

• McCain was both for and against state promotion of the Confederate flag.

• McCain decided in 2000 that he didn’t want anything to do with former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, believing he "would taint the image of the ‘Straight Talk Express.’" Kissinger is now the Honorary Co-Chair for his presidential campaign in New York.

• McCain is now both open and closed to redeployment in Iraq.

• And McCain claims to have "bitterly disagreed" with a "failed strategy" in Iraq for more than three years, despite having argued the need to "stay the course" just one year ago.

• McCain supported the Law of the Sea Treaty that Ronald Reagan defeated. In October, after having been a strong supporter of it for over decade, he told conservative bloggers that he would "probably vote against it."

• McCain, who has been a supporter and even a co-sponsor of the DREAM Act, said during the conference call that he would have opposed it on the Senate floor last week if he had stuck around for the vote.

The Real Romney

This article appeared in the NYT and reflects the attitudes of the voters and the character of Romney.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/15/opinion/15barnett.html?_r=1&ref=opinion&oref=slogin

Here's a good video that shows Romney's character:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-W6SUM__ZU&session=IxpiG7muPD0vD1VrpvLedplOP-MJLs9fidlE6Se-pdACemft1xhbvl3k5GL5cZIsGMaIYhx4PgFSWI9d9a420pdWXcGEPJQCUviWVxSIfHiV3NALIdTbXuAJSiAN9lCrc1P31_3VBg5FJ2PpWqgRcLLd_dL5ZgCm63XGEv3yfQN3D9me1qRkH6yw5BjoKAK1o11XqL8XDWezimJe9Z873ytS5ZckX0-0olZ0HJHsFNP0yevTuEIInfs1SFjZ7wS8

IRS, Churches, and Politics

"Huckabee, a Baptist minister, also met with about 100 pastors to help develop an evangelical network similar to the one that helped him defeat Romney in Iowa's leadoff caucuses." Huckabee received the endorsements of these pastors which also gave Mike Theformerbaptistpastor Huckabee the rolls of the congregation including addresses and phone numbers. This is unacceptable in a political race. The following was posted and thought I'd forward it on:

Anyone observing political intervention by any tax-exempt 510 (c)(3) religious organization should write to

Linda E. Stiff
Acting Commissioner
Internal Revenue Service
1111 Constitution Ave NW
Washington, DC 20224

Please provide contact details for the organization and its officers and give details of its political activities, then ask that the IRS:

(1) Initiate tax inquiry proceedings with the organization under IRC section 7611 to determine whether its tax-exempt status should be revoked;

(2) Determine whether the organization and any of its managers should be assessed taxes under section 4955 based on the organization's political expenditures; and

(3) Notify the organization of its intention to seek an injunction, pursuant to IRC section 7409, if the organization's flagrant political campaign activities do not cease immediately.

Spread the word.

Huckabee and McCain's Negative Campaigning

Below is a video I created highlighting the negative campaigning of both Gov. Huckabee and Sen. McCain even though both have pledged to make this a "positive campaign." If they can't keep their promises now, how can they if they become President?

Priority: LDS Beliefs or Oath to Constitution?

Statement: " I cannot morally vote for a Mormon. The LDS church is just as controlling and anti-freedom as any ultra liberal democrat."

Response: Some people were disappointed when Romney didn't talk about the specifics of his religion in his "Faith in America" speech but if you know anything about the LDS faith you understand that Romney did share some very important parts of his faith:

First off, in the LDS' Articles of Faith (basic points of the church revered as scripture) it says:

"We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law." (http://scriptures.lds.org/en/a_of_f/1)

Second, another Article of Faith states:

"We claim the privelege of worshipping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privelege, let them worship how, where, or what they may." (http://scriptures.lds.org/en/a_of_f/1)

Anyone can worship/not worship as they will.

Third, LDS scripture also specifically speaks of the U.S. Consitution and the member's role in supporting it:

“And now, verily I say unto you concerning the laws of the land, it is my will that my people should observe to do all things whatsoever I command them. And the law of the land which is constitutional, supporting that principle of freedom in maintaining rights and privileges, belongs to all mankind, and is justifiable before me. Therefore, I, the Lord, justify you, and your brethren of my church, in befriending that law which is the constitutional law of the land; I, the Lord God, make you free, therefore ye are free indeed; and the law also maketh you free." (D&C 98:4-6,8)

Fourth, but certainly not the last of possible points, a statement quoted in the LDS church's official Ensign magazine by then President and prophet of the LDS church, Spencer W. Kimball:

“The Mormon people who are citizens of [the United States of America] today are intensely loyal to its Constitution and desire in every way to promote the God-given freedoms it was designed to protect. They have had experience with the tragedy that results when those freedoms are not protected, but this only feeds their determination to do all within their power to protect these freedoms, both for themselves and others, everywhere.” (Link)

You state that you can't vote for a Mormon because they are controlling and anti-freedom. I think you have your facts wrong. The LDS church has done nothing to show that they are against the founding documents of this land. In fact, they strongly support it. Freedom of choice is fundamental to LDS doctrine. It's based around it -- freedom to choose!

Despicable 'Freedom Defense Advocates' Letter

Mr. John Boyd, in his letter about Mitt Romney, Mormons, and government on the Freedom Defense Advocates website is a slap in the face to not only Mormons, but every faithful Christian and those of other faiths, not excluding atheists.

The nature and tone of his letter denote the degrading separation of church and state in this nation. Boyd, an "expert" on "cults" blurs the fundamental line between church and state. He claims in his letter, " Now, many think as long as a candidate holds to conservative values his religion shouldn’t matter. I’m writing to tell you why it does matter!...Tragically, many Christians believe a candidate’s religion shouldn’t matter as long as he holds to conservative values." As part of a political organization, Freedom Defense Advocates (though not registered with the Federal Elections Commission or the Internal Revenue Service (Link)), Boyd violates the spirit of Article Six of the U.S. Constitution which states,

"The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."

Boyd insists that the presidential candidates, especially Romney, must pass his religious test to be fit for the presidency of the U.S. Boyd claims the LDS church will destroy the Constitution but Boyd is destroying the Constitution himself!

Would Boyd, or has he, criticized JFK for believing that the wafers and wine at communion actually transform into Jesus' flesh, but changes back to wafers and wine before it reaches the stomach? Does he criticize Eisenhower for his Jehovah's Witness beliefs? What effect did Eisenhower's beliefs have on his career and presidency? Considering the JW don't believe in supporting a "worldly government" or enlisting in the military, it appears that his religion didn't affect his actions as General or President. Does he currently criticize Huckabee, Bill Clinton, or Jimmy Carter for their Baptist views? Huckabee says we need to "take this nation back for Christ" (ArkansasOnline, June 8, 1998). This coupled with his direct statements that his faith in Christ "defines" him as a candidate (CNN, Nov 27, 2007), and that he is the "Christian Leader" (Huckabee ad, Nov 25, 2007) really makes the issue Huckabee not Romney. Huckabee, by pandering to evangelicals, makes the issue religion. He wants the evangelicals' religious vote, not political vote.

Romney has shown and stated that he will not engage in a religious point-by-point debate because of its unconstitutionality. Romney stated in his "Faith in America" speech (MittRomney.com), "A person should not be elected because of his faith nor should he be rejected because of his faith." He later continued,

"What do I believe about Jesus Christ? I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Savior of mankind. My church's beliefs about Christ may not all be the same as those of other faiths. Each religion has its own unique doctrines and history. These are not bases for criticism but rather a test of our tolerance. Religious tolerance would be a shallow principle indeed if it were reserved only for faiths with which
we agree.

"There are some who would have a presidential candidate describe and explain his church's distinctive doctrines. To do so would enable the very religious test the founders prohibited in the Constitution. No candidate should become the spokesman for his faith."

To quote JFK in his speech on his religion (link),
emphasis added,

"I believe in an America that is officially neither Catholic, Protestant nor Jewish; where no public official either requests or accepts instructions on public policy from the Pope, the National Council of Churches or any other ecclesiastical source; where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials; and where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against all…

"Finally, I believe in an America where religious intolerance will someday end; where all men and all churches are treated as equal; where every man has the same right to attend or not attend the church of his choice; where there is no Catholic vote, no anti-Catholic vote, no bloc voting of any kind; and where Catholics, Protestants and Jews, at both the lay and pastoral level, will refrain from those attitudes of disdain and division which have so often marred their works in the past, and promote instead the American ideal of brotherhood...

"And in fact ,this is the kind of America for which our forefathers died, when they fled here to escape religious test oaths that denied office to members of less favored churches; when they fought for the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom; and when they fought at the shrine I visited today, the Alamo. For side by side with Bowie and Crockett died McCafferty and Bailey and Carey. But no one knows whether they were Catholic or not, for there was no religious test at the Alamo."

Romney stated in his speech, "Some believe that such a confession of my faith will sink my candidacy. If they are right, so be it. But I think they underestimate the American people. Americans do not respect believers of convenience. Americans tire of those who would jettison their beliefs, even to gain the world."

These attacks (often bogus and full of incorrect and distored facts) are not what we are about as a country. Religious leaders may have the right to preach what they want over the pulpit about other religions, but when pastors, candidates, political activists start influencing the nation as to vote or not vote for a candidate based on his/her religion, we start down a path that will only tear the nation apart. If this trend continues, those religiously inclined, and those not, who decide to run for any office will be scrutinized on where they go to church, or not go, and what belief practices they prescribe to, or not. This issue is not the matter of one presidential
election, it will define us as a nation and all other political races in the future.

---

Below are selected quotes from the letter of Mr. Boyd and my personal responses and beliefs as a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.

"Has the Christian church fallen so low that we will accept any candidate –- even one who wears 'sacred underwear' inscribed with occultic symbols and believes he will one day be a god –- just because he espouses conservative values?"

I hate to think that one's underwear is a disqualification for president. Must he wear boxers or briefs…or a thong if the president is Hillary?

Has Romney ever said that he will "one day be a god"? Without evidence, how can this assertion be credited to Romney's personal beliefs?

"In fact, despite the charming photographs of Mitt Romney and his wife
of 38 years that are splashed across the press, he expects to be rewarded with
many wives when he arrives in the Mormon 'celestial glory.' This is something
you won’t hear him talk about on the campaign trail."

Source? There is no where in LDS scriptural doctrine where men are "rewarded with many wives when [they] arrive in [heaven]." Mr. Boyd is correct in one assertion, that Romney won't talk about this on the campaign trail, because it simply is not true! If you have questions about LDS doctrine on the family, see the Church's "The
Family: A Proclamation to the World."

"While most Americans are aware of the terrorist acts committed by Muslims in the name of their god -- such as the murders of 3,000 people on September 11, 2001 -- fewer know of the killings and massacres perpetrated by Mormons...Believe it or not, a Mormon war party led by one of their bishops acting under the authority of 'prophet' Brigham Young massacred well over 100 men, women, and children in southern Utah exactly 144 years -- to the day -- before the Twin Tower attacks!"

First, Mr. Boyd compares radical terrorist Islamists to Mormons by comparing the 9-11 attacks to the Mountain Meadows Massacre. By this reasoning we must contrast them with Gov. Lilburn Boggs' extermination order against the LDS in Missouri (source), the Catholic Crusades, conquest of the New World, and others.

Mr. Boyd states that the despicable attack from the local Mormons on the emigrants was done under the authority of Brigham Young. Historians admit there is no evidence that Young ordered anything of the kind. Evidence shows that the local LDS leaders took these actions upon themselves and were not under the direction of the prophet on the matter. Sources (Shirts 1994, LDS.org, PBS.org's
story on Mormons)

The simple truth is the Mormon Church’s history is filled with violence. . . and splinter groups that hold to the original teachings of Joseph Smith and Brigham Young continue to kill in the name of their god.

Have you read anything about these people still killing "in the name of their god"? Again, no evidence or citation of such incidents. I am an avid news watcher (local, national, and international) and have not seen one example of this.

There is a Mormon prophecy -- little known outside their church -- that in “the last days” the United States Constitution would “hang by a thread” and will be rescued by the Mormon elders. This 1843 prediction by LDS founder Joseph Smith is about to come true according to many Mormons...They see the fulfillment each time a Mormon runs for president, beginning with Joseph Smith’s candidacy in 1844 . . . and they see its fulfillment in Mitt Romney and that’s
why Mormons keep pouring millions of dollars into his campaign.

"They see the fulfillment" and "…according to many Mormons." Who exactly? Not by the members of the church's hierarchy. I would like names not blanket generalizations. This has not been declared by any governing body of the LDS Church.

The one time Mr. Boyd hints at a citation is here stating that the prediction was made in 1843. Unfortunately, the date is incorrect. From LDS church's June
1976 Ensign "The first known record of the prophecy dates to July 19, 1840, in Nauvoo, when the prophet spoke about the redemption of Zion. Using Doctrine & Covenants 101 as a text, he said, “Even this nation will be on the verge of crumbling to pieces and tumbling to the ground and when the Constitution is on the brink of ruin this people will be the staff upon which the nation shall lean and they shall bear the Constitution away from the very verge of destruction.” (Joseph Smith Papers, LDS Church Historical Archives, Box 1, March 10, 1844.)

To be frank, it was soon decided that the so-called “Kingdom of God” would succeed only when a Mormon prophet ruled over not only the church. . . but the civil government as well.

To be frank myself, what are Mr. Boyd's sources for all this allegation? This is news to me as a member of the LDS church.

The simple truth is the Mormon temple in Washington, D.C. -- our nation’s capitol -- has a large room on its upper floor that I believe was designed to house their theocratic government. From this room, Mitt Romney, along with the Mormon prophet and the council of elders plan to rule the United States of America...Yes, it sounds far-fetched.

I, myself, have heard some pretty ridiculous accusations about the LDS temples. I've heard that the Washington D.C. temple has a volcano underneath it where the LDS faithful sacrifice children by dropping them into the volcano. Another great one is there is an underground tunnel running from England to the Salt Lake Temple where missionaries could "seduce" women, take them through the tunnel, come up into the temple, get married, and jump off the temple's spires into the Great Salt Lake (mind you the temple is over ten miles from the edges of the Great Salt Lake).

Other's asked to me are, "Do you in Utah go out and round up the cattle every day?" The oft confusing Mormons with Amish, "Do you guys use electricity and have cars?"

"However a Mormon like Romney becomes President -- whether elected outright or ascending to the office from the Vice Presidency -- there is every reason to believe that he will immediately begin to gather around him increasing numbers of zealous Temple Mormons in strategic places at the highest levels of government. "

There is every reason to believe? Evidence? He must be referring to all those Mormons Gov. Romney, Harry Reid, Orrin Hatch, Rep. Matheson, and others have placed Mormons in "strategic places."

Maybe he's referring to a takeover by appointments of Mike Leavitt (current HHS secretary), Ezra T. Benson (Secretary of Agriculture under Pres. Eisenhower, then Apostle and later President of the LDS church), L. Stewart Udall, Reed Smoot, and Dallin Oaks (U.S. Supreme Court nominee by Reagan), and many others…wait, these were all appointed by NON-LDS leaders.

"Yet Mitt Romney -- a Temple Mormon and High Priest -- claims he will “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic,” while owing his supreme allegiance to the Mormon Church. ...Simply put, you must understand that these sworn oaths of obedience to the Mormon Church represent a clear conflict of interest for all Mormons who have also pledged their allegiance to the United States. Romney’s church oaths
supersede any civil oaths he will take… It even trumps the United States Constitution and his pledge to honor and defend it should he be elected President. "

This argument has come up in many places. See my blog entitled "Priority: LDS Beliefs or Oath to Constitution?"

"And when you return your reply form, please enclose your best possible gift to help me get this crucial warning out to millions of Christians all across the nation. This message is too important to let it be muzzled by the Mormon Church and Mitt Romney’s high-paid publicity team. Together, you and I must lay bare the hidden secret of the Mormon plan to turn America into
a 'Latter Day Saint' dictatorship. Time is of the essence!...And with your gift of $25 or more... For a $50 or more gift, you will receive…

Ahhh…well that explains it. He wants your money.

2 Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind;
3 Neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being ensamples to the flock.
(New Testament | 1 Peter 5:2 - 3)