home
RSS
Christian author: A Mormon should never be president
Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney speaks during last month's CNN presidential debate in New Hampshire.
July 7th, 2011
03:39 PM ET

Christian author: A Mormon should never be president

Tricia Erickson is author of the new book,"Can Mitt Romney Serve Two Masters? The Mormon Church Versus The Office Of  The Presidency of the United States of America". She runs a communications company, Crisis Management, Incorporated and Angel Pictures & Publicity, a political and entertainment publicity and consulting company that promotes conservative causes and personalities. In an off-set "In the Arena" interview, Erickson shares her insight on why Mormons should not be considered for the White House.

(EDITOR'S NOTE: Due to the provocative–and in some cases, inflammatory– nature of Erickson's answers, we asked for a response from Mormon historian Richard Bushman, the Howard W. Hunter Visiting Professor of Mormon Studies at Claremont Graduate University in California. His remarks follow the answers below, along with reactions from Corey P. Saylor, National Legislative Director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations and Ahmed M. Rehab, Executive Director, CAIR-Chicago.)

You ask, “Can Mitt Romney serve two masters?” He was governor of Massachusetts from 2003 – 2007 and his belief in Mormonism seems to have only served him well. Why would this be different if he were elected president?

Let me say that my book is divided in to two parts. Part I covers the spiritual aspect. Part II covers the political.  Both parts are important when considering voting for this possible front runner.

Read more about Tricia Erickson's allegations against Mormonism on CNN's In the Arena blog
- CNN Belief Blog

Filed under: Mormonism • TV-In the Arena

soundoff (424 Responses)
  1. AvdBerg

    Please read the article Mormon church ~ Cult and Spiritual Harlot on our website http://www.aworlddeceiveda.ca

    All of the other pages and articles explain how this whole world has been deceived as confirmed in Revelation 12:9.

    July 8, 2011 at 8:49 am |
    • James

      I read it. It's full of false statements, mischaracterizations, and false analogies.

      July 8, 2011 at 9:06 am |
    • AvdBerg

      To James,

      He that is spiritual judgeth (discerneth) all things, yet he himself is judged of no man (1 Cor. 2:15). The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God (1 Cor. 2:14). Please read the article of Repent and what you and all other Mormons must do to be reunited with God.

      July 8, 2011 at 9:49 am |
    • Bucky Ball

      Speaking of harlots, like pimping your books on a belief blog is not harlotry, (harlotism ? harlotory?) . Oh no.

      July 9, 2011 at 1:22 pm |
  2. Rev. Rick

    What's up CNN? First my post is here, and then it's not (and no, it wasn't being "moderated).

    July 8, 2011 at 8:24 am |
    • Noh

      Maybe you posted at the bottom of the long article and not this short one? Check the link. Maybe that's where it went.

      July 8, 2011 at 8:48 am |
  3. Fitz

    Just like a Catholic, Jew, black, woman, or take your pick should not be president. Lets look at the person and not the trappings.

    July 8, 2011 at 8:15 am |
    • Noh

      Look at their value- and belief-systems and how much common sense and honesty they have and how well they serve other people without bias.

      July 8, 2011 at 8:19 am |
    • Lycidas

      "Look at their value- and belief-systems and how much common sense and honesty they have and how well they serve other people without bias."

      What there value and belief system is is irrelevant unless they make it an issue. Otherwise you are correct.

      July 8, 2011 at 10:16 am |
  4. The Bobinator

    Clearly, person A's religious beliefs are far more valid then person B's religious beliefs, even though both have no evidence and both claim things that are contrary to what we can observe.

    July 8, 2011 at 7:55 am |
    • Really?

      Are you really trying to make the claim that one who supports there beliefs with historical eyewitness accounts should consider the person who believes in child sacrifice and world domination as equal valid?

      See here is the problem, everyone knows something is wrong with the world, read the front page of CNN, but person A answers it based on the historical eye witness accounts and 6000 years of history. Person B, says na, I know better.

      July 8, 2011 at 8:52 am |
    • The Bobinator

      Are you really trying to make the claim that one who supports there beliefs with historical eyewitness accounts should consider the person who believes in child sacrifice and world domination as equal valid?

      Matthew 27:52 talks about zombies. You mean those sorts of eyewitness accounts? And when people claim to be eyewitnesses but copy large parts of books written before them? Those eyewitness accounts?

      And what about eyewitness accounts we have today that are meaningless. Plenty of UFO abductees out there. You can actually go and talk to them. Does the fact that they are eyewitnesses prove to you that there are actually UFO abductions?

      And what about eyewitness accounts by crazy people. Like how they personally witnessed the CIA spying on them from a beatup old pickup truck that had an old grandfather and a child as a "cover story".

      Eyewitness accounts to supernatural events at best recorded 30 years after they occured? That's your evidence. ROFL.

      July 8, 2011 at 1:59 pm |
    • Brynja

      Exactly Bobinator. Not only that but Human history alone is far far older than 6000 years. Its a FACT. Sadly you could deliver proof, evidence, and actual fact into the very hands of a young earth creationist and they will STILL deny reality to their dying breath. Once they have gotten too far in their delusions of grandeur, they There is hope however. Our children are able to access information on a level never before possible. The WWW. gives them access to the new generation of the Library at Alexandria. They have a fighting chance at stopping the return to the Dark Ages.

      July 8, 2011 at 10:09 pm |
  5. Reality

    Another book based on Google searching!!! Save your money and search the topic on your own.

    -----------------------------------------------------

    July 8, 2011 at 7:54 am |
  6. Jason

    MItt Romney was valedictorian at BYU. He has been faithful to his wife their entire long marriage. He has 5 amazing, well educated sons who have great families of their own. He has a JD and MBA from Harvard. He has turned around countless companies. HIs religion is not protestantism so we write him off??? Rediculous! He is much more Christian than Bill Clinton ever was but because Clinton was the "right"religion we don't care about his womenizing and re-elect him?? Once again, rediculous!

    July 8, 2011 at 7:33 am |
    • George Jefferson

      Don't forgot he was the ax man to enforce corporate lay offs and belives in far fetched fairy tales. I think anyone who belives they are wearing magical spiritual underwear to please the invisible man in the sky should be on psychotic medication, I would include every other religion as far fetched fairy tales.

      July 8, 2011 at 8:08 am |
  7. John Richardson

    Can ANY highly religious person serve two masters?

    July 8, 2011 at 7:02 am |
    • ProTane

      I'm sure a poly-theist could do so with ease. They would have many schizoid tendencies, though.

      July 8, 2011 at 7:09 am |
    • Noh

      You mean money and power? They do it all the time.
      Or did you mean the People and a religious cult?
      Or serving the country as opposed to serving whatever religious command he thought he had to follow?
      There are more than two masters here, that can be mutually opposing in application.

      July 8, 2011 at 8:24 am |
  8. George Stewart

    Mitt Romney saved the Olympics here in Utah. He took a scandal and debt ridden Salt Lake Olympic Organizing Committee and turned the Olympics into one of the most profitable winter games in history. He had sponsors lining up to be part of the games and we were able to enjoy a safe and memorable experience here in Utah because of the leadership qualities he displayed in abundance. He knows how to turn around bad situations and as one of the leaders of Bain Capital (Investment Capital Firm)he has shown that he has a nose for finding opportunities and a legacy of turning around companies and making them profitable. He really does have a talent for fixing things. I believe our country could use some of those talents right now, Obamas legacy has turned into a sea of red ink and he has put our country on the brink of bankruptcy. Whens the last time a successful CEO was given the chance to balance the nations checkbook.....I think the good book says by their fruits ye shall know them. I think he must be living a pretty good life to have avoided all the scandals that usually follow most politiciians. If the worst you can say about his life is that he is a Mormon...well maybe there must be more to his beliefs than people give him credit for. He has a strong marriage, good kids, he has values and morals, and he listens to people. He doesnt have any vices that ive been made aware of and he seems to want to use his business talents to fix whats wrong with our economy as well as our society. None of the other candidates can match his resume. He has already performed for us here in Utah. It would be ashame to let bigotry in our day and age keep us from electing a man that can deliver the promised land we are so desperately looking for as a nation.

    July 8, 2011 at 1:54 am |
    • Joe Blow from Idaho is Gay

      Let it all hang out Joe.

      July 8, 2011 at 1:56 am |
    • HotAirAce

      It is a huge insult to gays to associate Blow Joe with them!

      And there is nothing wrong with being gay!!

      July 8, 2011 at 2:29 am |
    • NHA

      It would be a shame to elect such a fascist to any government position.

      July 8, 2011 at 7:02 am |
    • ProTane

      I seem to recall that the Olympic decision-making in that particular case was fraught with bribery and corruption.
      It was in the news all over the place at the time.
      And he was only successful because of his seniority in the religious organization. Mormon businesses are corrupt.
      Also, his recent "public service" has not been all that great, probably due to the "mixed" population he was supposed to represent and work for.
      You can bet that the only people he worked for were Mormons whenever possible.
      That is the bias that is the danger to all Americans. His whole history is filled with representing his religion and religious businesses. He cannot be said to be loyal to the American People as a whole by any stretch of the imagination.
      Greed is not executive ability. It is just greed and selfishness. A country is not a business and should not be run as a business.

      July 8, 2011 at 8:04 am |
    • Lycidas

      1. I seem to recall that the Olympic decision-making in that particular case was fraught with bribery and corruption.
      It was in the news all over the place at the time.

      ~A guess

      2. And he was only successful because of his seniority in the religious organization.

      ~Another guess

      3. Mormon businesses are corrupt.

      ~An opinion that leans on the fallacy of using extremes

      4. Also, his recent "public service" has not been all that great, probably due to the "mixed" population he was supposed to represent and work for.

      ~An opinion but at least it's based on his views of job performance

      5. You can bet that the only people he worked for were Mormons whenever possible.

      ~Another opinion based on no facts

      6.That is the bias that is the danger to all Americans.

      ~Gathering all his opinions as if they were facts and making a leap to say Romney is a danger.

      7. His whole history is filled with representing his religion and religious businesses. He cannot be said to be loyal to the American People as a whole by any stretch of the imagination.

      ~more opinions without facts

      8. Greed is not executive ability. It is just greed and selfishness. A country is not a business and should not be run as a business.

      ~finally, something most could agree on

      July 8, 2011 at 10:21 am |
  9. Don

    This isn't even news just another Christian trying to sell Christ for 20 pieces of silver. I guess mankind never learns, they would rather free a murderer and kill an innocent because they profess a different faith. Even Sodom and Gamorrah would rise up against this generation and condemn it for the hypocrisy.

    July 8, 2011 at 1:49 am |
  10. Krush

    Wow, what a prejudiced thing to write! If someone wrote that an Muslim shouldn't be elected president, the media would pass a large brick and call the author racist, prejudice, right-wing nut job, etc., etc. During the Clinton administration, the liberal d-bags and the media said that character doesn't matter as long as the president can do the job. So, what does a candidate's religion, or lack thereof, have to do with his or her ability to do the job?

    July 8, 2011 at 1:01 am |
    • ProTane

      Hey, you sound like a racist, prejudiced, right-wing nut job, etc.
      How about that? And you didn't even have to try very hard. Wow.

      July 8, 2011 at 7:12 am |
    • Lycidas

      I think Krush makes a good point. Now I do hope he doesn't think all dems are d-bags though.

      July 8, 2011 at 9:54 am |
    • One7777777

      They are attacking ALL Christians. The Bible tells you this is coming.....

      July 27, 2011 at 9:11 pm |
  11. FU

    If you are president, why you can believe in zombie jesus' father killing him on the cross, but not also in magical underwear?

    July 8, 2011 at 12:08 am |
  12. Insecure in Bel-Air

    "Due to the provocative–and in some cases, inflammatory– nature of Erickson's answers, we asked for a response from Mormon historian Richard Bushman"
    ----------------------------------------------------
    Oh great. The blind leading the blind.

    July 7, 2011 at 11:37 pm |
    • James

      Richard Bushman is an American historian and Gouverneur Morris Professor of History emeritus at Columbia University.

      July 7, 2011 at 11:51 pm |
    • Insecure in Bel-Air

      James,
      I don't care who he is. If you read Bushman's BS, it's the same as the Mormon Church's repeated attempts at excusing and doing the high-stepping verbal dancing around and excusing to avoid confronting the insanity of Smith and his follower's extremely odd, (and that's putting it kindly) historical peccadilloes. On top of that Bushman is a historian, who, exactly the same as Smith, is unaware of why the Mormon Church does not lay within the biblical and christian traditions, because he is not a biblical scholar nor a theologian. He debunks himself with his own words, and, just as Smith was, is so unaware of the his own ignorance of biblical literary academic standards and knowledge, that any freshman in any mainline theology school can dismiss his BS in about 5 minutes or less. If Columbia wants to honor him, fine, they are not exactly the apex of biblical literary or biblical form critical academia either. I'd rather go across the street to Union Seminary any day, as they are all chuckling up their sleeves about Bushman, even though they might be too polite to explain why.

      July 8, 2011 at 2:46 am |
    • Bucky Ball

      @James
      Agree with the above. See : http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2005/12/12q-on-rsr/
      He doesn't seem to be able to, or want to, give a straight answer.
      Mormonism does seem to be more odd than other manifestations of Christianity, if indeed it is that.
      Smith said he was interpreting hieroglyphs before knowledge of the Rosetta Stone arrived in the US. Oops.
      See also : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcyzkd_m6KE

      July 8, 2011 at 3:33 am |
    • James

      Insecure:

      The human story between God and man is one long history of extremely odd historical peccadilloes. We only need read the Old and New Testaments and observe all of the failures, weaknesses, sins, problems and false starts and unfulfilled expectations. This tells us the reality and nature of what is means to be “human.” Joseph Smith is no different than biblical prophets and apostles. In fact, Abraham and Jacob were both polygamist prophets. Abraham even lied to pharaoh to save his own life – oh the horror. To claim that the Mormon Church does not “lay” within the Christian tradition is absurd. To claim that the Mormon Church does not lay within the “biblical” tradition is equally absurd. Such accusations only work if the meaning is derived out of a narrow and obscure (and meaningless) definition meant to set aside Mormonism instead of confront it.

      Mormonism confronts the failures of Catholic creeds and Reformation theology and solves deep and significant philosophical problems. In that regard, it is relevant and necessary to the Biblical and Christian “traditions.”

      Your attack on Bushman is unfounded and groundless. Your personal opinions regarding the man, simply because he is Mormon is irrelevant. Richard Bushman is an American historian and Gouverneur Morris Professor of History emeritus at Columbia University. The “New Yorker” said of his book, Rough Stone Rolling, “Bushman is both an emeritus professor of history at Columbia and a practicing Mormon, and his exhaustive biography carefully treads a path between reverence and objectivity.”

      From Publishers Weekly, “This is a remarkable book, wonderfully readable and supported by exhaustive research. For anyone interested in the Mormon experience, it will be required reading for years to come.”

      You claim that the critical academia at Union Seminary, may be chuckling up their sleeves about Bushman, but it’s because of their petty prejudices and silly presuppositions – and not due to any research or study they have conducted. Traditional Christian biblical scholarship has driven more men from God than it has brought to him – so much for its “success.”

      On the contrary, Mormon scholarship adds clarity to faith through objective study of the facts. Mormonism’s pragmatism will win over and win out old Christian absolutism every time, in today’s scientifically minded generation.

      @Bucky
      I read the interview at the link you provided and your assessment is unfounded. Bushman’s responses are italicized and all of them are straightforward. I dare you to name one that isn’t. And to correct your claim that “Smith said he was interpreting hieroglyphs before knowledge of the Rosetta Stone arrived”, Smith did not claim any such thing. He claimed that God gave him the “translation” whole without comparing a single glyph. Any comparisons that were made were done after the whole revelations to attempt to “decipher” the glyphs. Smith was no Egyptologist, yet he brought back more details about the life of Abraham than any historian or professional Egyptian researcher in the 1840s.

      Your criticize Smith for his claims, but are hard pressed to explain his successes. That speaks volumes about your objectivity.

      July 8, 2011 at 12:10 pm |
    • Bucky Ball

      James
      You seem to be really good at that making generalizations without supporting evidence thing.

      "He claimed that God gave him the “translation” whole without comparing a single glyph. Any comparisons that were made were done after the whole revelations to attempt to “decipher” the glyphs. Smith was no Egyptologist"
      - You can say THAT again. The point IS, they have been proven to be MISTRANSLATIONS. So much for "god" telling him anything.

      "yet he brought back more details about the life of Abraham than any historian or professional Egyptian researcher in the 1840s."
      - Like what ? Abraham was a mythological/literary figure. There ARE no FACTS to take anywhere.

      " but are hard pressed to explain his successes."
      - Name one. He was a failure, and his cult broke in half, one half died out, the other moved away and evolved into something similar but different. He was shot and fell out the window trying to escape from prison.

      ”Joseph Smith is no different than biblical prophets and apostles. In fact, Abraham and Jacob were both polygamist prophets. Abraham even lied to pharaoh to save his own life – oh the horror."
      - Yes he was VERY different. Biblical prophets arose "organically" from within their traditions and worshiping co'mmunities. Smith did not.

      "To claim the Mormon Church does not lay within the “biblical” tradition is equally absurd."
      - Why exactly ?

      "Such accusations only work if the meaning is derived out of a narrow and obscure (and meaningless) definition"
      - No. The mainline traditions could not exactly be said to be narrow and obscure and meaningless.

      "Mormonism confronts the failures of Catholic creeds and Reformation theology and solves deep and significant philosophical problems."
      - Like what ? Which ones does it "solve" ?

      Your attack on Bushman is unfounded and groundless. Your personal opinions regarding the man, simply because he is Mormon is irrelevant"
      - I think he provided the reasons he had the opinions he has about him. He didn't say he did not agree with Bushman because he was a Mormon, but because he was ignorant, (as was Smith), of what the actual "Christian" validation process
      of scripture and orthodoxy was and is. If Bushman ever, or in any way even tried to refute the mainline's (archeologically and critical and worshiping community vaildated) accepted processes, he would not be so easily dismissed, but he doesn't.

      "Richard Bushman is an American historian and Gouverneur Morris Professor of History emeritus at Columbia University. The “New Yorker” said of his book, Rough Stone Rolling, “Bushman is both an emeritus professor of history at Columbia and a practicing Mormon, and his exhaustive biography carefully treads a path between reverence and objectivity.”
      - I'm also not impressed. So what ? He is wrong here. I am the Grand Po'obah.

      From Publishers Weekly, “This is a remarkable book, wonderfully readable and supported by exhaustive research. For anyone interested in the Mormon experience, it will be required reading for years to come.”
      - I'm NOT interested.

      You claim that the critical academia at Union Seminary, may be chuckling up their sleeves about Bushman, but it’s because of their petty prejudices and silly presuppositions – and not due to any research or study they have conducted.
      - Wrong again. They have done one he'll of a lot more research about the bible and theology than Bushman will ever do.

      "Traditional Christian biblical scholarship has driven more men from God than it has brought to him – so much for its 'success'.”
      - Finally something we can agree on. It's not a bad thing. (See I can be objective).

      "On the contrary, Mormon scholarship adds clarity to faith through objective study of the facts."
      - What "facts" ? If ever there was any "faith" system ant'ithetical to "fact's" it Mormonism. Religion is not about "facts", anyway.
      "Mormonism’s pragmatism will win over and win out old Christian absolutism every time, in today’s scientifically minded generation."
      - Wishful thinking.You actually think Mormonism has a snowball's chance in he'll when it's looked at by "today’s scientifically minded generation." Hahahahaha.
      😈

      July 8, 2011 at 1:31 pm |
  13. James

    Romney is just as qualified to be president, as a Mormon, just like any other Republican candidate. What Ms. Erickson is proposing here is a religious test of a certain brand of Evangelical Christianity. Truly absurd.

    July 7, 2011 at 10:29 pm |
  14. HotAirAce

    Nothing like a good scrap between competing tribal manmade mythologies – should be very entertaining!

    July 7, 2011 at 9:10 pm |
  15. The Hazel Manifesto (reposted by blobbert)

    Here is some real truth about religion:

    There is no way to discern who honestly believes in a "god" as opposed to those that do not yet pretend that they do for money or power / influence.

    Just think about that for a moment:
    The biggest pathological liar could become a religious figure / leader and simply let the money roll in from those who cannot tell they have a criminal in their midst. No way to tell at all.

    You know why?
    It's because religions and believers require NO PROOF that someone is lying about their faith.

    If you cannot get any proof (and you can't because your "god" does not exist ), then anyone can say anything at all with the most evil of intentions and they will not be questioned or examined beyond the limits of dogma.

    Consider that real loophole in all religions: No proof needed for any part of the religion.

    This, then, is the safest haven for any criminal who is willing to use a religion to get what they desire, freely and easily.

    Being such an obvious haven for criminals, religion draws them like flies. They are all over the place in every religion man has ever made up.

    The history of religion is overflowing with criminal behavior.
    It is a magnet for crime and protects the criminals with the fake authority of the "god" without proof of any sort.
    They are given free rein to do whatever evil deed they think they can get away with under the color of the religious authority that is made up out of thin air.

    Fabricated. All of it.

    And who is so simple-minded that they would think liars had nothing to do with creating the religion itself!
    Within these religions:
    Ritual becomes hypnosis.
    Indoctrination becomes slavery.
    And tradition becomes LAW to rule them all with an iron fist.
    Such is religion.

    The "after death" thing is just a way of "deferring" the justice they would feel in this life. That it also does double (triple, etc) duty as a method of fear-mongering, panacea, and "all encompassing" iron fist of the fraud itself, should not bother anyone who cannot face the truth of the matter. If you have been suckered in, you will be const-itutionally incapable of facing anything that could lead to questioning the "faith" that has wrapped it's tentacles around your mind.
    Religion is just another way to make slaves out of free people.

    You religious people are slaves for the most part, chained to the engine of greed, lust, etc, desire for money and power and locked in by your need for acceptance within a group of any sort. Most humans have a deep need to "belong" to a group.

    These are very primitive emotions and very powerful in some people.
    And humans are vulnerable to false information in a big way.
    Criminals take advantage of this to conceal their crimes.
    Many criminals seek to hide their crimes, not just the ones hiding within a religion.

    And religion requires no proof other than someone saying that something is so. The perfect fraud!

    Tricks can show false proof, but no real proof exists as shown by all of human history, but that's okay, since no proof is required to "believe" in something untrue. That is how fraud works. False information to conceal the criminal activity of the fraudster.

    Notice that it is ONLY untrue things that cannot EVER provide REAL proof.

    I do not need to cover all of physics to test the assertion that there is a "god" who runs the whole universe.
    There isn't even any proof that there is a "god" that runs a TINY piece of this universe!
    There isn't any proof of a god even at the quantum level!

    Face it, people, religion IS a fraud.
    And another proof of that is in ALL the billions of false claims made by religions and "members", NONE of which has EVER been able to show any real evidence or proof to support these claims at ANY POINT at any time throughout known history.

    That is ALL the claims made by religions throughout history, not just the ones we have now.
    Not a single shred of proof for any of them.
    Sounds like it's beyond a reasonable doubt to me.
    Religion = proven false = fraud on a massive scale.

    Religion is a lie. It is used by criminals because it hides them from investigation.
    If money were not involved in any way, things would be so different, wouldn't they?
    But the criminals would just seek it some other way. Their "god" is whatever they desire so much that they are willing to violate anyone and anything that gets in their way.
    And they do not have to answer to anyone. They know religion is a lie. They don't mind it much, as it makes it that much easier to fabricate more lies.

    Just interpret the religion to mean that you get what you want regardless of whether you actually deserve it.
    Hey, that works pretty well, doesn't it? We see it time and again.
    Every individual is "allowed" to interpret their religion the way they want.

    Folks, you couldn't ask for a better set up.
    Religion is the best of havens for criminals of all sorts.

    But if you are a mental slave, you will likely find it extremely hard and painful to break those chains upon your psyche.
    You have been hypnotized, not only by others, but by yourself as well.
    Self-hypnosis is like an evil joke played by you upon yourself.
    It tightens the chains until you cannot hardly do anything to free your mind, and those who use it against you must surely have laughed long and often at the comical spectacle of people turning themselves into mental slaves without knowing what they are doing!
    And they probably laugh all the way to the bank, as well.
    You are doing their work for them.
    Their guidance will make sure you are programmed to do certain things, think in a certain way, make certain judgment, and so on, but for their benefit at your expense.

    If you find some comfort in being a mental slave who gathers with other mental slaves, then you will probably fight me when I try to free your mind as I am doing now.
    Fight against the lies.
    Religion is a lie.
    Religion cannot be proven true.
    Free your mind by seeking the actual truth and not what someone or some book merely "says" is truth.
    Examine it all if you can.
    None of it holds up under scrutiny.

    I suspect that's why so many atheists come here.
    You not only need to be freed from the lies and the fraud of religion, but you need to be stopped from doing wrong and crazy things to others.
    To save one from making a mistake is a very human and compassionate thing to do.
    But you cannot base compassion on lies lest your false information skew your intent and you end up harming others or violating their rights.
    Being a mental slave is a mistake.
    For many, the mistake was in not examining what others told you.
    When they were children, many had no reason to mistrust their parents who raised them in their religion and could not be expected to see any reason why such things should even be questioned.
    Then they grow up and do it to their children. If you are a mental slave, the chains can be very strong and interwoven with emotions to such an extent that many cannot even imagine how it could all be safely unraveled.

    Religion is a lie and a fraud. I have proof beyond a reasonable doubt that this is so.
    I have written some of it here. Your mistakes are not always your fault if you didn't know any better.
    That is why we do not try children as adults. They don't know any better and neither do most "believers."

    I want to save religious people from their mistaken beliefs. The sheer number of different crimes easily hidden within relgion should be visible even to those who are mental slaves to their "beliefs."
    Open your eyes and see that the truth is right there within you.

    You cannot have real proof for what is false. Ever. I will fight lies until I am dead. Religion is a lie.

    July 7, 2011 at 8:26 pm |
    • ProTane

      I almost wish it were longer. Almost.

      July 7, 2011 at 8:37 pm |
    • James

      Your long rant here is meaningless. There is human error in every human organization. Each religion needs to be investigated and examined – philosophical framework, practices and all.

      Mormonism stands on sound philosophical ground.

      July 7, 2011 at 10:31 pm |
    • Vinny

      ProTane

      I almost wish it were longer. Almost.

      That's what your wife said. Badda Boom!!!

      July 7, 2011 at 11:31 pm |
    • Bucky Ball

      @James
      No it doesn't.

      July 8, 2011 at 4:31 am |
    • ProTane

      lol

      July 8, 2011 at 7:17 am |
    • Klaxon

      @blob- wow..what a long way to just give an opinion without any facts supporting the majority of what you are saying

      July 8, 2011 at 7:25 am |
    • Noh

      @Klaxon, what makes you think there needs to be a particular format to someone's opinion on the internet?
      Maybe you are new here. In that case, welcome!

      July 8, 2011 at 8:26 am |
    • Klaxon

      @Noh- I was just implying that it shouldn't take too long to comment that he doesn't like religion on a thread that specifically about Romney.

      July 8, 2011 at 9:57 am |
    • tallulah13

      I bit long but very insightful. I doubt any "true believer" will be convinced though. No one wants to think that they've based their life on a lie.

      Klaxon, it was very appropriate to post here, as the author of the article (who belongs to one cult) is claiming the unworthiness of a political candidate on the basis of his membership in another cult. This comment simply points out that neither individual has a morally superior leg to stand on.

      July 8, 2011 at 10:22 am |
    • One7777777

      "Religion cannot be proven true"

      Yes it can. You are just still blind.

      May God have mercy on your soul because it doesn't seem like you have one.

      July 27, 2011 at 9:16 pm |
  16. Al

    It's funny how Christians think that a man who claimed to be a prophet a couple hundred years ago was a quack but the ones two thousand years ago or longer really did talk to God and everything written is infallible.

    July 7, 2011 at 7:59 pm |
    • Lycidas

      "was a quack"

      And who said that?

      July 7, 2011 at 8:24 pm |
    • ProTane

      Quack = a person who pretends, professionally or publicly, to skill, knowledge, or qualifications he or she does not possess; a charlatan.

      I think that works here. It wasn't used as a direct quote.

      July 7, 2011 at 8:39 pm |
    • Lycidas

      Not really...the statement is given as if their is evidence for the use of the term "quack". He gave no evidence. Under his use of the term I could call him one and should expect ppl to believe me.

      July 8, 2011 at 7:26 am |
    • ProTane

      It would just be your opinion, just like the OP. We are not required to believe anything anyone says. Or didn't you get the memo on that? You know, the Const-itution?

      July 8, 2011 at 8:07 am |
    • Noh

      lol

      July 8, 2011 at 8:27 am |
    • Lycidas

      @Protane- Yes..everyone is welcome to their opinions...though not to imply their opinions are facts without evidence. Didn't you get that memo in logic 101?

      July 8, 2011 at 9:59 am |
  17. Al

    I'd rather have a Mormon for president than another moron like "W".

    July 7, 2011 at 7:40 pm |
    • ProTane

      I really wish you wouldn't do that.

      July 7, 2011 at 8:40 pm |
    • Al

      Sorry. I guess I should have said George W. Bush.

      Better?

      July 7, 2011 at 11:22 pm |
    • ProTane

      I meant that I wish you wouldn't vote for a Mormon in a bid to avoid a moron like Bush, or even want to. Sorry I was not clear about that.

      July 8, 2011 at 7:07 am |
  18. Rush

    Tricia~Shame on you.
    You have quoted Ed Decker's misrepresentation of the meaning of portions of the LDS temple ceremony. This line of argument has been used for decades by professional anti-mormons (people who make a living at it) to try to scare non-mormons and to marginalize members of the LDS faith. Mr Decker refers to "blood oaths" and represents these as threats of punishments that will be perpetrated on those who are disobedient to the LDS faith or leadership. First of all, the fact is that this is no longer part of the LDS temple ceremony. Second, even when it was, it did not have the meaning Mr Decker ascribed to it. Mormons have always been persecuted for their beliefs and practices. Today this persecution usually takes the form of people who are bigoted towards mormons, or make misleading or untrue acusations about them. In the 1800s much of this persecution was violent. This historical memory about persecution is important in understanding LDS belief. The items you refer to as "blood oaths" were not about threats of punishment, but were about making a commitment to God that sacred religious knowledge and ordinances would be kept confidential even upon threat of death (presumably by those who may persecute). It represented a commitment to keep the temple experience sacred and seperate from the world as Mr Bushman has already described. Unfortunately for you, there are no nefarious intentions there as you would like it to be. I suggest that in your zeal to discredit the LDS faith as a validation to your own, that you not continue to misrepresent it.

    July 7, 2011 at 7:34 pm |
    • Austin

      Yes. I sat at a church recently that held pledging allegiance to both the Bible and the Christian flag as equal to that of stating the pledge to the US flag. It was creepy as hell. Serving two masters, indeed!

      July 7, 2011 at 11:19 pm |
  19. ScottK

    I'm sorry, but I do not see any real difference between the Mormons and any other Christian church. Sure they have different rituals, and some seem very silly like the holy underpants, but Christians do things equally as silly in my book. Any group that requires blind faith to be a follower is a danger to society. Why trade one belief in purple fairy's for a belief in green ones

    July 7, 2011 at 7:12 pm |
  20. sdm

    I've often wondered how these great "christian" people can feel so justified in demonizing another christian church? Most churches believe the same thing...God, Christ, and the Holy Ghost...just because Mormons believe that Joseph Smith was a prophet...big freaking deal. I know plenty of Mormons and they are some of the best people you could meet. If you judge people by their work...then I would say that Mrs Erickson doesn't seem very "Christ Like" to me. Maybe she should go back and read the New Testament again. I don't remember Christ acting like that. Just saying...

    July 7, 2011 at 6:52 pm |
    • sdm

      BTW...I've never heard about Mitt Romney being in any type of l scandal...I think that he has very high morals and values. He is an EXCELLENT person...no matter if you like him politically or not.

      July 7, 2011 at 6:54 pm |
    • ScottK

      "Mrs Erickson doesn't seem very "Christ Like" to me. Maybe she should go back and read the New Testament again. I don't remember Christ acting like that."

      Not to defend her in the slightest, but the Christ of the bible wasn't always a pacifist either. I'm pretty sure that if he existed he would be beating the living tar out of 90% of the Christians I know who not only do not represent Christ in daily life, but most havn't even read the gospel's let alone the bible in entirety.

      "When it was almost time for the Jewish Passover, Jesus went up to Jerusalem. In the temple courts he found men selling cattle, sheep and doves, and others sitting at tables exchanging money. So he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple area, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables." John 2:13-15

      July 7, 2011 at 7:30 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Advertisement
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.