 | ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
|
« Set Up For Failure? | Main | Blogging the Blogging Revolution » May 31, 2005Romney's RunHugh Hewitt is wondering whether the Christian evangelicals who make up a large portion of the "social conservatives" in the Republican Party would be willing to support Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, a social conservative but a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, as a presidential candidate in 2008. There are vast and fundamental theological differences between the LDS - a/k/a the Mormons - and mainstream evangelical Christianity. Hewitt: In 2008, many are expecting that Romney will present the question squarely with a very well-funded campaign by a very credentialed candidate.I'm a Christian evangelical and social conservative and I'll answer Hewitt's question on behalf of myself: Yes, absolutely, I could support Romney, although my top two 2008 presidential preferences right now are for Colorado Gov. Bill Owens and Secretary of State Condi Rice. While I disagree with the very basic tenets of the LDS faith, it is clear as glass that Romney is a man of principle - and his principles and political viewpoints are those with which I agree. Here's a prediction: Should Romney mount a serious candidacy, the vast majority of any vilification of him based on his religious affiliation, his faith and the sometimes peculiar history of the LDS church will come from the Left, not from the Right. UPDATE: I misrepresented Hugh Hewitt's article, which focused on how Republican religious conservatives would view Romney's Mormon faith, not on how they would view his stand on social issues. A commenter pointed out that Romney's not very conservative on social issues such as gay rights and abortion. I actually don't know much about his positions on those issues, though I suspect he felt he had to run to the left on those issues while focusing mostly on fiscal conservative issues in order to get elected governor of Massachusetts. Romney would have to run more to the right on social issues to win the GOP presidential nod in 2008. Where he really stands on those issues is an issue I'm not addressing here except to note that Charles Colson, noted Christian evangelical author and speaker, considers Romney a social conservative, according to a Terry Eastland article in the Weekly Standard, linked to by Hewitt. That article is a must-read if you want to be ahead of the general knowledge curve on Romney. My only point with this original post was that Romney's religion would not disqualify him from recieving my vote in the primary or general election. That's not to say I'm supporting Romney - as I said above, my current top choices for the GOP nomination in 2008 would be Colorado Gov. Bill Owens and Secretary of State Condi Rice. If the War on Terror is still the number one issue facing America, Condi would get my vote. If, by '08, the Islamists are a spent force and domestic issues (fiscal and social) are the main focus, Owens would get my vote. But it's early. A lot can change. Comments
Just out of curiousity (and slightly off topic), what do you think of a possibility of a run by Fred Thompson? As Doug Petch writes here: http://www.dougpetch.com/archives/001296.html Posted by: DocB at May 31, 2005 4:13 PMFred could win big. And I'd be happy about that. But I don't see him running. Posted by: Bill Hobbs at May 31, 2005 4:29 PMYou really think that there won't be the whisper campaigns ala 2000 (the rumor that McCain fathered a black child out of wedlock)? Come on. For Joseph Smith's sake, a little intellectual honesty would be nice. Posted by: Jason R. Cox at May 31, 2005 7:53 PMMitt Romney would be an excellent candidate and were he nominated, I'd have no qualms in supporting him. Most of the criticism of his religious faith would come from the left, although the Pat Robertson and James Dobson types would do their share of bleating over the fact that he's not "one of them." Neither am I one of them. I worship God, not those two buffoons. Posted by: Evangelist at June 1, 2005 7:17 AMMitt Romney is no social conservative. He supports various gay rights, legal abortion, and gun control. There's no way the religious right will support him for president. Posted by: Nguoi Dang Chay at June 1, 2005 9:24 AMI'm not sure where Mr. Chay is getting his information on Gov. Romney because he's probably fought harder for social conservatives than any other governor in the U.S. and he's done it in the daunting political environment of liberal Massachusetts. Romney strongly opposed the Mass. high courts ruling on gay marriage. He has also vetoed legislation to allow the cloning of embryos for use in stem cell research. He also threatened a veto of legislation to allow illegal immigrants to get driver's licenses, killing the bills chances in the Legislature. That said, Romney's not my first choice, but I wouldn't have a problem casting a vote for him either. I think Romney's biggest problem isn't being Mormon, it's being a Republican in the land of Kennedy and Kerry. Most red state conservatives are highly skeptical of any politician coming out of Massachusetts, regardless of party affiliation. Posted by: Jay at June 1, 2005 3:29 PMRomney does not support abortion. He just said that it's the law of the land and not within his power to change. There's no point in shooting yourself in the foot on an issue you can't do much about. If he were president, I think he'd want to appoint judges similar to those Bush is nominating who will exercise judicial restraint. I don't believe that he supports gay rights. He has strongly opposed gay marriage. It's true that has been endorsed by Log Cabin Republicans in the past for supporting legislation against discrimination in employment, but I don't think that makes him pro-gay. I'm a Utah Mormon, and I support stem cell research, as Senator Hatch does. So I guess that makes Romney more conservative than I am. Don't forget though that he's governor in a state with a lot of Catholics and opposing cloning would represent them. The LDS church doesn't have a position on the issue. If you want to know the church's position on marriage and family, you can read it at the following site: http://www.lds.org/library/display/0,4945,105-1-11-1,00.html The proclamation also states LDS views on other doctrines such as the pre-mortal existence of mankind and eternal marriage, which I doubt non-members will agree with, but the central points are about as family oriented as it's possible to be and those beliefs strengthen that position by giving it a stronger doctrinal basis. The church is pretty conservative on most things, but it doesn't endorse candidates or parties. Posted by: AST at June 1, 2005 5:58 PMPost a comment
Comments Policy: Your comment is subject to deletion if it is off-topic or includes foul language or personal attack. Readers, please email me if you find comments that include egregious violations of this policy. Comments may not post immediately - do not post twice!
|
|||||||||||
