Can't we stop bashing people based on their religion and start judging them as people?

Religions do evolve - some people don't.

The Romney campaign attempts to re-write history in order to make a point that mormons were persecuted for their religious beliefs is ridiculus. The facts show that the mormons were persecuted largely because they set up their own banking system, printed worthless currency, and bought real estate in Ohio, Michigan, and Missouri (the mormon promised land) with the phony cash. This crime angered the landowners who were cheated out of their property and they drove the mormons out.

From Church News:
In 1836 the Kirkland Safety Society Bank was formed. Orson Hyde was sent to the legislature to try to secure a charter and Oliver Cowdery was sent to secure printing plates for the bank. The charter was denied, so the bank reorganized as an anti-bank or quasi banking organization in 1837. Joseph Smith used boxes full of rocks with a layer of coins on top to show the bank assets in order to get people to deposit money. In reality most of the assets of the Mormon Church and the members was in land.

At that time there was a great deal of land speculation in Ohio, Michigan and Missouri. This drove the land prices from around $7.00 per acre to around $44.00 per acre. Joseph Smith used the money that the bank did have to speculate further. By 1839 the price of land fell to the $17.00-$18.00 per acre. The bank and the Church had invested $60,000 in land and no longer had funds to cover its obligations. Oliver Cowdery was the Vice President of the anti-bank and signed most of the bank notes. Joseph Smith made himself cashier rather than an officer.

Voters need to understand that the fundamental belief of the LDS religion is based on the allegation that resurrected Jesus came to North America to find two tribes of Jews. Edited from Wikipedia:

According to The Book of Mormon, the family of Lehiand Zoram traveled from the Middle East circa 600 B.C. to the Americas by boat. Nephi (Lehi's fourth son) overheard that his brothers were plotting to kill him, so Nephi and his followers left and went into the wilderness. The followers of Nephi called themselves Nephites. The followers of Laman (Lehi's oldest son) were called Lamanites.

Following the American visitation of the resurrected Jesus Christ the Nephites became the Mormons because they accepted the teachings of Jesus. However the Lamanites rejected Jesus so God marked the Lamanites with a darker skin color to identify them and their state of wickedness.

There has never been any creditable DNA or archeolgical evidence uncovered that substantiates any of part of this story.

America is currently experiencing the effects of an administration that gives access to large groups of people with fringe religious beliefs. Can we surive another one?

On the other hand, I don't want Muslim financiers or any other financiers telling our presidents whom to appoint to cabinet positions, and certainly not based on ethnic or religious patronage. If we play those games, we should also ask Romney the Mormon whether will appoint any Christians, Jews, deists or atheists to cabinet positions.

Romney's should have answered, "I don't know. I don't ask about the religion of my appointees."

Yeah and what's sad is that many Americans, even so called "progressives" buy into this "Islam is a death cult" BS. Romney's political commercials talk about "Jihadists" and "Islamofascists", sewing fear and distrust of other people and other cultures that are unlike the dominant WASP culture (And I am not talking about the insect). Romney could be our next President if keeps doing what he is doing, I'm sad to say.

Would someone please read Mitt Romney Article VI, paragraph 3 of the US Constitution since he obviously hasn't read it.

"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."

To make the argument that Muslims (or any other religious group) should be given OR denied a place in government on the basis of religion is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

We're nearing the final year of an administration that has played fast and loose with the Constitution. We can't afford another.

To me this is no where near as bad as some things he has said lately.
During the latest republican debate he argued with McCain (who clearly stated that waterboarding is horrendous torture in violation of international law) over the avoidance of calling waterboarding torture. He also added that he wanted people to go straight to Gauntanamo and not be here in the US (which basically means, more torture, less trials!). This had me in sheer horror, my jaw dropped to the floor.
http://www.democracynow.org/2007/11/29/romney_mccain_spar_on_waterboarding_and
Let's talk about what THAT means to Muslims who are already being profiled. Do not pass go, do not collect $200, go straight to hell.

This is a bigger issue than who he would or would not appoint where. The point is, he should not be in office, and there are countless more blatant gestures of bigotry in his actions.

Another example of Romney's complete lack of sympathy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NY6UTnS6Z-A

Jews make up 2% of the population and yet they have high number in cabinet positions and other gov't leadership positions and for Romney to say Muslims are too small of a percenatge (some put them at nearly 10% of the population) to hold office smacks of hypocrisy. However, I agree with the other posters that religion should not matter when appointments are made to cabinet positions we should neither discriminate nor favor those of certain religious or ethnic backgrounds.

Religious people have been fighting and killing themselves for centuries. And Romney is a crusader.

Check out what Bob Marley's eldest son, Ziggy, said about religion.....

Ziggy Marley - Love Is My Religion lyrics

Love is my religion, Love is my religion, Love is my religion
I'll take you to the temple tonight

All my days I've been searching, to find out what this life is worth
through the books and bibles of time I've made up my mind
I don't condemn, I don't convert, this is a calling have you heard
bring all the lovers to the fold, cause no one is gonna lose their soul

Love is my religion, Love is my religion, Love is my religion
hey you can take it or leave it, and you don't have to believe it

I don't want to fight, hey let's go fly a kite
there's nothing that we can't cure, and I'll keep you in my arms for sure

so don't let nobody stop us, free spirits have to soar
with you I share the gift, the gift that we now know oh oh oh

( Chorus )

Well I'm done searching now, I found out what this life is worth
not in the books that I find, but by searching my mind
I don't condemn, I don't convert
this is the calling have you heard, bring all the lovers to the fold
no one is gonna lose their soul

( Chorus )

How about appointing the person that is most qualified for the job, regardless of religious affiliation? The idea that people need to be appointed or elected according to their proportion of the population is absurd.

don't vote; it only encourages them.

Just for yucks, from the CIA World Fact Book: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/us.html

Protestant 52%, Roman Catholic 24%, Mormon 2%, Jewish 1%, Muslim 1%, other 10%, none 10% (2002 est.)

For me, one of the low points of last week was seeing that debate question asking the Repubs if they believed "every word of the Bible." I suppose I should be happy that most of them wriggled out of the verbatim interpretation (if not, see how many modern Christians conform to Dueteronomy rules), but it would have been nice if even one of them - just one! - had brought up the Constitution's forbidding religious tests for public office.

Appoint the qualified! what a naive idea in this day and age.

When I was a young man, many years ago, there would be an occasional vacancy on the Supreme Court. The greatest legal minds in the United States were consulted as to whom should be picked as a successor. The choice was narrowed down to perhaps two or three. These choices did their own soul searching as to whether they were qualified for the office. Eventually, the final choice went before the Senate and were questioned closely on their Constitutional knowledge and their commitment to upholding the Constitution. Their background was examined most thoroughly, as were their legal decisions.

Then, and only then, were they approved to sit on the Court.

Now, almost anybody with a legal degree, who is a guaranteed party hack who will support the Unitary Executive (read dictator) and who has not done something immoral or reprehensible, in public, can be nominated. The Senate will avoid asking any deeply probing or embarrassing questions, then will ritually approve the Unitary Executives choice.

So, now we have a Supreme Court dedicated to erasing the civil rights gains of the last century, of removing power from the people and firmly entrenching it in the mega corporations, the power brokers, and the dictatorship that supports them as they support it.

The same thing goes on in every lesser political appointment. There was a day when "conflict of interest" was the kiss of death. Now it seems to be a job requirement.

Let's not get into ethnic bashing since there is good and bad in every group - just ask Winston Blackmore's opinion on Warren Jeffs.

Personally, I see nothing wrong with a Muslim cabinet Minister - unless they are Conservative jerks like Chair of the Conservative caucus Rahim Jaffer or people who write ghost books with strange conclusions like Wajid Khan.

Lawrence (Larry) Shaben never ran Federally, but Provincially he was (at various times) Minister of Housing, Minister of Utilities and Telephones, and Minister of Economic Development and Trade. (The Hamdon/Shaben family was featured on CBC's Generations - along with the family's involvement in the building of the first Mosque in the West)

Then again I see nothing wrong with a Jew and a Muslim marrying:

http://www.cbc.ca/thehour/video.php?id=957

Or even just being friends:

http://www.cbc.ca/national/blog/video/internationalus/moshe_and_munir.html

Edited to add, the Hamdon family was behind the building of the first Mosque in North America - which opened in Edmonton Alberta in 1938. Former Cabinet Minister Larry Shaben is a direct decendent of the Hamdon family.

http://www.cbc.ca/documentaries/generations/alberta.html

Sadly, he was a Conservative. But what they hey!

Note that, while I was technically correct in the previous post, this one is more accurate.

All religion should be banned, specially the monotheistic kinds. Judaism, Christianity and Islam have killed countless people and caused untold misery. We need another newer rallying point. The world has changed too much for us to use the same old slogans and go down the same old path that leads to chaos and bloodshed.

So in the meantime we can demonize christians, jews and yes moslems..

How much longer will human beings wallow in mythology? Who knows.

While we're on the subject of quotas, one point not made in the article is that there are more Muslims than Jews in the U.S. There is one lone Muslim in the entire U.S. Congress, none in statehouses, and precious few in state legislatures. How many Jews are there?
Hey, let's start enforcing quotas!! Maybe then the U.S. would be evenhanded in the Middle East.

As far as Mormons go,

Nathan Eldon Tanner was the Minister of Lands and Mines for the Province of Alberta. This MLA was also Speaker at one point.

MLA=Provincial version of a Congress Person.

Greg Melchin is the current Minister of Seniors and Community Supports (and former Minister of Energy and Minister of Revenue) in the Alberta Legislature. He is not planning to run in the next election. Personally I would consider his present cabinet portfolio a demotion.

http://www.seniors.gov.ab.ca/about_ministry/minister/index.asp

Cindy Ady, another Mormon, is the Associate Minister of Tourism Promotion in Alberta.

Not to be out done, Randy Thorsteinson (another Mormon) became leader of the Alberta Social Credit party at one point. Or Paul Hinman, the current leader of Alberta Alliance Party.

And then there was the famous [b]Grant Hill[/b] - who placed fourth in the Canadian Alliance leadership election and was interm leader while the Conservative Party (a "merger" of the PCs and Canadian Alliance) chose their "first" leader. The Conservatives were trying to present themselves as being pro-church and anti gay marriage but were trying to avoid the label of being homophobic (which offended the very homophobic Grant Hill).

I wonder what Grant Hill thinks of the fact that two of Winston Blackmore's wives got married - to each other. Then again, like most Mormons, I don't think that Grant Hill is in favour of polygamy either.

http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/bustupinbountiful/

My, it is indeed a laugh riot when my teenage daughter , a Muslim, was made to sit at each meal in an Episcopal Prep School, they only wanted her due to ice hockey AAA player, during Ramazan(Ramadan/Arabic)she fasts and they forced her to sit and watch the others eat and drink. Eat before sunup then at sundown, you have a calender because the times vary each day. So she missed her prayers, was forced to watch others eat and was called every variable of Islamic teenage hate terms they could muster. Yanked her Turkish Muslim tush out after 7 weeks.
As long as she is on the ice, she could care less. Checks too much when she is fasting, coaches love her.
So do you think this means Mitt may not be calling?

O roe, that is sick! I hope they get more than a slap on the wrists for that. There would be an uproar for weeks if that happened in Canada. If your Congressperson won't take your complaint seriously, take it to the NDP.

That said, if your daughter is good enough to play against team Canada, I will be cheering against her.

thomas j hussey, it all boils down to how the riding (ie voting districts) are drawn.

Corporatism is a religion, so it is possible to practice more than one.

It is not so much a point of getting religion out of Congress as it is a point of not letting any one religion dominate. That is what is meant by the separation of Church and State - not forced atheism among our Representatives.

Ironically, Prince Charles (who, if he were to become King, would also become head of the Anglican church) is married to a Roman Catholic. Because the reigning King (or Queen) was the head of the Anglican Church, there was no separation of Church and State in England at the time that the 13 Colonies rebelled.

Ironically, Roman Catholics in Canada were allowed , by England, to vote and run for office at a time when Roman Catholics in England were still not allowed to vote and run for office. Thus, suffrage was based on religious affiliation in the early days.

xxxxxxxxxxxx

I was watching a repeat of the Republican Debate on CNN and this one guy with dark hair and grey sideburns who seems to be in love with Ronald Regan said, with no hint of sarcasm what-so-ever, that the "don't ask don't tell" policy in the American Military has been working for generations and that he has no plans of changing it.

delete, edited, looked like it did not go through and it did.

From Wikipedia on the size on the Muslim population in the US:

There is no accurate count of the number of Muslims in the United States, as the U.S. Census Bureau does not collect data on religious identification. There is an on-going debate as to the true size of the Muslim population in the US. Various institutions and organizations have given widely varying estimates about how many Muslims live in the U.S. These estimates have been controversial, with a number of researchers being explicitly critical of the survey methodologies that have led to the higher estimates.[31] Others claim that no scientific count of Muslims in the U.S. has been done, but that the larger figures should be considered accurate.[32] Some journalists have also alleged that the higher numbers have been inflated for political purposes.[33] On the other hand, some Muslim groups blame Islamophobia and the fact that many Muslims identify themselves as Muslims but do not attend mosques for the existence of the lower estimates.[34]

The following are a few of these disputed estimates:

1.1 million (2001) City University of New York - American Religious Identification Survey [0.5% of national adult population] [35]
1.6 million (2000) Glenmary Research Center [0.5% of national population][36]
1.9 million (2001) American Jewish Committee [0.6% of national population][37]
2.0 million (2000) Hartford Institute for Religious Research [0.7% of national population][38]
2.4 million (2007) Pew Research Center. [39][40]
4.7 million (2005) Encyclopædia Britannica Book of the Year [1.5% of national population][41]
6.7 million (1997) J. Ilyas Ba-Yunus [2.2% of national population][42]
[1% of population] (2002) CIA World Factbook[43]

Ethnicity and Nationality

All of this talk regarding qualifications and life preferences mean little in the end. In America even an idiot can be appointed (President or Cabinet).

In Canada, the UK and Australia, one has to be first elected as an MP before one can become a Cabinet Minister (with one exception).

Why doesn't the President pick his Cabinet from Congress? That way the Secretary of Defense or the Secretary of State would be accountable to the American people in that if they perform abhorently, they will lose their seat in Cabinet!

MP=Congressperson

In Canada, the Senate is appointed. Hopefully, the Senate will soon be abolished!

Stephen Harper's Cabinet Ministers

http://www.conservative.ca/EN/4568/

If you actually want contact information, it is under "OUR MPS" rather than "THE MINISTRY" under the "TEAM" link and you have to find the name after guessing what province the MP is located. It takes you an extra five minutes work.

BTW - How many former lead singers are in the general population of Australia? Anyone remember Midnight Oil's "Beds are Burning?"

The US has had, with some glaring exceptions, a generally good record of treating religious minorities, but the idea that a person should be disqualified from public office on the grounds of his/her religious affiliation flies in the face of reason itself, let alone the values of the US constitution.

ezeflyer: "Religious people have been fighting and killing themselves for centuries" True. But be fair a lot of good has been done in the name of religion also. Like feeding the poor,AA,Salvation Army,providing housing in poor countries and all the countless churches that have done good works. I bet if you could add all the good works up they would far outweigh the atrocities commited in the name of religion. All we ever hear about are the Jimmy Swaggarts,horny priests, and Jerry Falwell hypocrites and rarely the box of groceries given to a family down on their luck of whom I have been a recipient.

Romney comes across as a religious jihadist.

America was born on slavery, racism and genocide. The Muslims of today are the Native America Indians of yesterday. They are in the way of the expanding empire of the United States of America and will be stomped buy our IRON HEEL.

The true test is whether a pastafarian can get elected (ramen). I wish the church of the flying spaghetti monster would field a candidate.

Thomas Dewey, former Governor of New York who was blessed with the oportunity of losing presidential elections to both FDR (1944) and Harry Truman (1948) was said to look like "the guy on a wedding cake". The more i see and hear Mitt (and who the hell names a kid "Mitt anyway"?) the more that Deweyesque description seems to fit.

Imagine Ronald Reagan minus 40 years, handsome, smiling, smooth talking, and totally clueless. The question of appointing a cabinet member of Muslim faith assumes several things in the asking.

First of all is that he or she is competently trained and experienced for the job. Secondly, te question assumes that such an appointment would enable any President so doing to visibly demonstrate that he (or she) was President of all the people and not just selected and favored groups. Fianlly, the question speaks to the need for a President to show a doubting world that his administration speaks with a voice that is not tinged with the hypocrisy of racial, gender, ethnic or religious prejudice.

The correct answer to such a question is: "the appointment of any cabinet official is based on competence and compatibility with the prevailing philosophy of the adminstration." How hard is that to figure out?

Think of a cube, instead than a sheet of paper. I was always taught to consider an issue, no matter what its meaning, to look at all of the sides.

We live in a physically apparent in a three dimensional sense. We ought to look at issues as not simply two sided, but rather three dimensionally. Unfortunately, for all those in power in our government, they choose to look at things in a very childish, simplistic manner. Even childish is too good a word to describe our so called representatives.

All I can say is that for each of us who cares, to try to make some change at the local level. Grassroots has lost its meaning to a great extent. Make change possible in your sphere of influence.

It can no longer be the paradigm of trickle down. It must be a surge from the bottom upwards.

Mormons, Muslims, Christian Zionists and all of these lunatic religions are the number one cause of hatred and wars and I include the Bush-Blair born again crusade in Iraq. These people are dangerous because they actually put their absurd beliefs into practice and the results are not pretty.

I won't bash members of religion, but I have every right to bash the religions themselves. Religion, for no good reason, is the only sphere of public discourse where people have free reign to spout whatever nonsense they want, with absolutely nothing to back it up, and we aren't even allowed to criticize it or we are "bigots". If you say you believe the earth is flat, you are laughed out of the room -- and for good reason, where's your rationale?

But yet Mitt Romney can believe some guy with magic glasses deciphered some mysterious golden tablets given to him by an angel, claiming, among other things, that native americans are basically cursed with their darker skin because they are evil and that they are descendants of a lost tribe of Israel. (Something completely disproved through genetic mapping.)

I'm sorry, but it is perfectly valid to make a decision about a candidate based on religious beliefs. Nothing dictates a person's actions more than their beliefs when it comes to what gives their life meaning.

I DO NOT want someone's finger on the nuclear button who buys into the BS that is Mormonism.

Nothing could be scarier.

We also have every right to disrespect belief systems that degenerate women, promote slavery, act like human beings are the tantamount goal of all of creation, fill people's heads with hogwash about the origin of our species, and promote martyrdom. (Read the Koran or the Bible and see for yourself).

The only good deeds that are done in the name of religion are done through the ability to critically think and disregard the horrible stuff in between the lines. Whenever people take religion very seriously and follow their holy books to the letter, atrocities are committed. So why not just finish the job, ditch these so-called holy books all together and invent a new religion/philosophy grounded in reason, respect for human beings and other creatures, and without any belief in magical mumbo-jumbo.

John Lennon didn't say imagine no religion for no reason. And we don't have creativity for nothing...

perceptionexperiment says: But yet Mitt Romney can believe

This is what Mitt believes - some of it based loosely on his religious beliefs but much of it based on the fact that he is an (rymes with "glass bowl"). Note that two of Winston Blackmore's mormon wives got married - to each other. Thus, not all Mormons are against gay marriage.

And, although there are many Muslims who do not approve of gay marriage, there are other Muslims who do not see a contradiction between their religion and gay marriage.

In fact, the first homosexual MP to marry ended up doing so in a church (he was going to get married outside overlooking the ocean but it was raining). And while you have Republicans leadership hopefuls saying that "Don't ask, Don't tell" is a good policy, Canada, not only has openly gay people in our military, but some of them are married to other openly gay people.

MUCH OF WHAT WE ATTRIBUTE TO RELIGION IS REALLY THE MARRIAGE BETWEEN RELIGION AND CULTURE.

We have come from cultures which are racist and homophobic so why is it so difficult to understand that some have tried to interpret the bible/queran in very inappropriate ways.

It is not a problem with the book but a problem with the way others have previously chosen to interpret the book.

As far as I know, Ewan Cameron was not specifically religious, yet he also had dangerous ideas and destroyed the lives of those who trusted him most - who were harmed solely because they sought his help.

John Lennon also believed in the colour white (I hate white because I am allergic to Bleach). He also figured that one should get a large room and sparsely furnish it - rather than a smaller room where the wall space would not be wasted.

John Lennon grew up at a time when Northern and Southern Ireland were bombing each other - which, as it turned out, was not the religious war we all thought it was.

It is not what Mormons believe that is important, but what Mitt believes. If Mitt's beliefs are dangerous or harmful to others - then Mitt needs to be judged according to the danger he may cause others and be treated accordingly.

I don't mean "harmful" such as what Karlheinz has to say about Mulroney either - but the harming of entire groups of people based on Mitt's prejudices.

Northern and Southern Ireland were bombing each other. HUH? This was never a civil war last time I checked. The British have been occupying Northern Ireland for over 500 years and partitioned Ireland. The South was not bombing the North as you state. The IRA and the British parlimilitary forces were definitly bombing each other though.

Ok, you are correct. I was ranting a bit. But my point was that being Protestant and Catholic had less to do with it than - er - what you said.

Should note that the Irish used to be friendly with the French way back - which might explain why there are so many presumably pureblood French Canadians with Red hair.

Read in the Canadian Encyclopedia that the surname Riel was probably originally a more French sounding form of Reilly.

BTW - You do know when Louis Riel Day is celebrated? And, while we are talking about minorities, how many American school teachers do you know who have a Statuatory holiday named after them?

And George W Bush belongs to a few minority groups himself - how many sons of former American Presidents are there living in the United States?

How many former Cocaine addicts are there in Public Office? Besides Bush, the only other one I know of is Andre Boisclair.

How many husband and wife teams are there who are in public office at the same time?

In Canada, Gurmant Grewal and Nina Grewal were the first married couple to be MPs at the same time. The second married couple to be MPs at the same time are NDP MPs Olivia Chow and Jack Layton. There may be a third soon since Conservative MPs Rahim Jaffer and Helena Guergis are engaged to be married.

Any such couples in the US Legislature - er - Congress/Senate? ;)

Maybe Mitt can raise some casino money if he tells Native Americans that they are actually Jews who had their skin turned brown because they rejected Jesus.

Manitou is the native word for "Great Spirit", Allah or God. "Manitoba" means "Great Spirit's Strait."

When we were kids, we used to think that the following was funny because the word "gitch" is another word for underwear:

(can't find the Tom Jackson version, so this will have to do)

HURON CHRISTMAS CAROL

'Twas in the moon of wintertime when all the birds had fled
That mighty Gitchi Manitou sent angel choirs instead;
Before their light the stars grew dim and wondering hunters heard the hymn,
Jesus your King is born, Jesus is born, in excelsis gloria.

Within a lodge of broken bark the tender babe was found;
A ragged robe of rabbit skin enwrapped his beauty round
But as the hunter braves drew nigh the angel song rang loud and high
Jesus your King is born, Jesus is born, in excelsis gloria.

The earliest moon of wintertime is not so round and fair
As was the ring of glory on the helpless infant there.
The chiefs from far before him knelt with gifts of fox and beaver pelt.
Jesus your King is born, Jesus is born, in excelsis gloria.

O children of the forest free, O sons of Manitou
The holy Child of earth and heaven is born today for you.
Come kneel before the radiant boy who brings you beauty, peace and joy.
Jesus your King is born, Jesus is born, in excelsis gloria.

I guess what raises my eyebrows about Romney's quota comment is that I always associated Democrats with quotas, as in Affirmative Action. It was Republicans that rejected the use of quotas since they believed that a person should be hired on the basis of their ability, not on the basis of some classification.

Not to say that quotas are without merit: they can promote people who are historically bereft of resources, including intellectual. But quotas are unfortunately highly subject to judgement. Judgements include relative skin pigment, relative religious fervor (as opposed to say agnostic or atheistic skepticism), relative femininity/masculinity, and it goes on. Promoting people who are disadvantaged due to historical attitudes and events is itself subject to judgement.

Judgement is what politics is all about, so bias is a natural companion of politics. But hopefully, we can generate our judgments not on the basis of permanent bias, but with the clear understanding that our bases for judgement may change with better understanding of this world and with maturity.