[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1[2]345678910 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 23:00:20 12/30/06 Sat
Author: Chuck in ND
Subject: I think you misunderstand
In reply to: Deborah 's message, "A theocray, maybe?" on 01:38:21 12/30/06 Sat

A theocracy is literally "rule of God", where God or His designated representative rules. Voting for Romney would be no more a theocracy than voting for Kennedy was (and that was the complaint against Kennedy as well). I think you know very well that I am not advocating for a theocracy.

No, I'm merely pointing out that when a person says "I'm LDS" he is saying he subscribes to a well-defined, well-known set of beliefs. Ditto when some says he is Catholic, Baptist, Mennonite or what have you. If someone says he subscribes to a set of beliefs (a religion) and then acts contrary to those beliefs, I naturally question the integrity of that person.

Let's face it, every single one of us abides by an ethical code. There are almost as many ethical codes as there are people in the world. So when you vote for someone you are saying "I approve of his ethical code. I want him to bring those ethics to the office he will hold. I want those ethics to guide his decisions." Now rather than have us investigate each of the billion personal ethics, we instead lump them into general categories: Mormon, Buddhist, GOP, Democrat, socialist, etc etc. No one fits those categories 100%, but they share enough in common to want to be identified with those ethical codes. And we endorse those ethics with our vote.

So when Romney (or Bush or McCain or whoever) says "I believe X" (in Romney's case "I believe in Mormonism and I embrace the GOP") and then acts contrary to X (in this case approving abortion, gay marriage, gay adoption, opposing gun rights, increasing taxes and gov size) I naturally question his integrity. Wouldn't you?

This goes all ways: When John Kerry says he is Catholic but supports abortion and the Iraq War, I see a disconnect there as well. I now know that while he claims a Catholic ethos, he rejects that ethos and I then doubt the validity of the rest of his ethics.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]


Post a message:
This forum requires an account to post.
[ Create Account ]
[ Login ]
[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.