An Ugly Story of Bigotry (If True)
on April 19, 2012 at 4:48 am
It is my opinion that there are more than enough things to disqualify Willard from assuming the Presidency without ever touching on his religion. He is a completely disconnected, clueless rich man who knows how American lives and works the way I know about how to reattach severed limbs. He’s not his dad, who was a far different kind of individual. Like many sons of wealthy men, Willard seems to have grown up believing that he is somehow entitled to all the wealth he can lay his hands on, simply because he is who he is.
This sense of entitlement that Willard and his wife have (she did say, after all, that THEIR time has come) is what makes examining their religion relevant, as opposed to examining the religion of the President, or even the other Rushpubliscum candidates. Rapture Rick and Newt may offend us with their religious lunacy, but their religion isn’t, in and of itself, necessarily a cause for concern.
We can’t say that about Willard, as our commenter KatzKids pointed out yesterday.
It’s called “Lying for the Lord” which is fully blessed and promoted by the SLC leadership of the Mormon Church. They aim to bring our country under Mormon rule and have from Joseph Smith’s first “prophecies.” So any and all of Willard’s lies are in pursuit of glory for the Church, his first and only allegiance. Certainly not for the American people – with the exception of the 1%.
Here’s some interesting reading about it.
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0706/S00066.htm
http://www.salon.com/2012/01/29/mitt_and_the_white_horse_prophecy/
All of these links are relevant, and they are disturbing. Especially the last link. There is where we learn about the oath that Willard took, an oath that flies in the fact of the United states Constitution and in and of itself should make someone ineligible for the Presidency.
All arise.
Each of you bring your right arm to the square.
You and each of you covenant and promise before God, angels, and these witnesses at this altar, that you do accept the law of consecration as contained in this, the book of Doctrine and Covenants [he displays the book], in that you do consecrate yourselves, your time, talents, and everything with which the Lord has blessed you, or with which he may bless you, to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, for the building up of the kingdom of God on the earth and for the establishment of Zion.
Each of you bow your head and say, “Yes.”
That will do.
No, that will NOT do. It sure as hell will not. The last thing we need is someone in the Presidency who is obligated to do what Joseph Smith told him to do. Smith was, most assuredly, a flim-flam man, and most of his oaths were self-serving. Willard is also a self-serving flim-flam man, of course, but it becomes easier to figure out why he’d have no problem doing what he does, since he took an oath to follow the dictates of a flim-flam man who exalted lying to people as a Divine practice. Hell, Joseph didn’t hesitate to lie to HIS OWN people, if he decided that the Lord wanted it that way.
I have nothing personally against LDS members. I’ve known a lot of them, and they are overwhelmingly decent people with a strong sense of family and community. But they have not, and cannot, repudiate a lot of their teachings. Among those teachings are that it is OK to lie to “Gentiles” if you’re doing it for “the cause,” and that whole thing about me being an accursed Lamanite. Yeah, they don’t mention these things on a daily basis, but those things are still a part of the D&C.
And what is alleged in this lawsuit would also be OK. The LDS itself does not openly do things like this by and large, but their offshoots are well-known for screwing over “Gentiles,” both inside and outside of the Government. If this turns out to be true, it wouldn’t be shocking.
The fact that it wouldn’t be shocking is why Willard is going to have to answer some of the questions put to him. Unfortunately, of course, he can lie all he wants, because it’s OK to lie.
To most of us.
Former executives from Bain Capital, a company founded by presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney, have been accused of firing six out of seven members of a management team for not belonging to the Mormon church.
David McCurdy and four other co-plaintiffs are suing Sorenson Capital Partners (SCP), Care Holding Co., Care Senior Living, and SCP Care Acquisition because they say the private equity firm fired them from their jobs at Care Senior Living because they were not members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS), according to Courthouse News Service.
“Despite the promise of 5-years employment, in mid-November 2011, after only 7 months Plaintiffs were told that their employment would be terminated effective February 2012,” the lawsuit (PDF), which was filed in federal court in Oregon, states.
“During their tenure with Defendants, Plaintiffs learned that SCP strongly favored hiring, employing, and doing business with other members of the LDS Church,” the suit continues. “SCP partners, in particular Curtis Toone and Mike Scott, made comments about religion and questioned the beliefs of Plaintiffs and other employees.”
Remember that this would be perfectly legitimate behavior for these guys, according to the dictates of their religion. That’s why I decided to post on it. I feel like we need to understand how Willard may think, and this lawsuit may give us some insight into that.
And even if the basis of the lawsuit gets thrown out, we will have to watch carefully to see why. An improper filing is a lot different from a finding of innocence on behalf of the defendants.
There is certainly the potential here to expose some ugliness. An ugliness that may have led certain people to feel that they are entitled to behave as they please, as long as they keep to the oath. Especially if it is THEIR time to do so.
Excellent post. I found the Salon article quite interesting, as it offered specifics about Romney himself. The sworn secrecy of those men who have a lot invested in LDS is concrete. We have to remember, too, that women are not invited to the top ranks of LDS and are expected to be subserviant to the wishes of men; they are only allowed certain roles (such as Lenore Romney running for the Senate) when and if it is useful to their men and the church.
When a Mormon took over as CEO of our local company, he instituted a hire Mormons only or convert those already in the positions. Several of my newer neighbors came out from Idaho and Utah to take positions in the company as those who had jobs were “eased” out. Since the CEO had to maintain some sort of legality in the hiring and firing, he could not do what they did at Bain.
Read One Nation Under Gods and No Man Knows My History to get more information about Smith and the LDS church. Those two books cover the history, present, and desired future of the LDS higher ups.
I had a boss once that was LDS–Good guy,but his 2 sons were arrogant entitled pricks.So it goes. We called him the Mormon Foreman.They are good folks,but don’t try to get more involved than superficially,as once you’ve fallen into their orbit you’ll see a whole new horizon of bizarre.
Do you think that Romney’s campaign will bring a scrutiny to the LDS that maybe the Elders wouldn’t want? Is now the time that America realizes that there is a deeply weirdo faction embedded in the corridors of power?
As you said in your post, the Mormons I’ve met have been really likable people, and Utah is a friendly state. That said, I don’t want a Mormon in the White House, especially not the one named Willard.
Circle, I don’t know-I doubt it though. The MSM is Romney’s messenger service, so I’m guessing they’ll do all they can to protect him.
Gindy, Tom…. I had one for a boss, too, and I’ve worked with a whole bunch of them. As someone who used to do Novell, I broke bread with a lot of them
I am guessing that once I told them of my Lamanite status, the desire to convert me went away, although there was always this attempt to step around that issue, without REALLY disavowing it.
I admit I can’t know what’s in Romney’s mind and heart. That said, my reading of him is that he’s not passionately spiritual. More the kind who’s found it helpful to be seen and thought of as a good member of his church.
IMO, Romney’s chief motivations are obsessive desires for money, power and the ego satisfaction of cheering crowds. His M.O. is that he gets what he wants, whatever it takes.
Sure enough, he’s got the money. He then wanted to be governor of Massachusetts and he got that. He missed out on winning a Senate seat, but let that go when he decided it would take the presidency to satisfy his desire to count, to be greeted as he steps off Air Force 1 by cheering crowds, his hunger for lifelong celebrity (a la Bill Clinton) and a place in the history books.
To win in Massachusetts, Romney was Mr. Moderate, a get-along guy who had no problem avowing his respect for women’s reproduction rights. He had no ideological qualms about a state-run health insurance program. Now, wanting to be president and needing votes from blocs that consider both unacceptable, he disavows both.
Romney is similar to Nixon, who wasn’t particularly religious. Only Nixon had a certain talent for foreign policy and gift for schmoozing with other pols Romney lacks.
Bryan Fischer(wingnuts nut) has already come out saying evangelicals should not vote for this guy because he dared place an out gay man in his cadre of advisors. Infighting will be great to see how long it takes the Talibangelicals to do what they are told to do and vote for him because of “scary black man” in the WH. Free Republic is on a tear because of JimRob and his not tolerating any dissent from voting for the “true conservative” like Noot. I’m telling you this election was looking to be really boring for a while to me, now not so much.
Call me dull, but I fail to see how this makes Mormons any different from any other religion when it is mixed into the workplace. There are so many examples of religious affiliation used as a reason for discrimination. There are also some splendid examples of the faithful who actually follow the word and treat their co-workers and employees with dignity and respect.
I don’t think Willard should be discounted because of his religion. There are much better reasons why he shouldn’t be the Prez. However, like any of todays Political elite, he only uses religion as a convenient tool.
Personally, I won’t vote for anyone who publicly displays their religious beliefs. I won’t vote for anyone who publicly displays their sexual orientation. I won’t vote for anyone who publicly displays their family relations. These things are none of my business and it has nothing to do with how a person will do their job.
OTOH, if Willard refuses to say whether or not he’s bound by the pledge, he DOES disqualify himself. A Kennedy case, this is not.
Jim B, my objections are not to his religion,but his Tribalism. The tribe before my countrymen doesn’t float with me,My Countrymen before my planet doesn’t float with me. That, and he’s a sociopath and he’s surrounded by sociopaths who are convinced “Its Our time,now” That shit has GOT to change.
Comments are closed.