I have reservations about Mitt Romney because he’s demonstrably supportive of government-run medicine. It’s also relatively easy to establish that his positions have been rather more fluid than those steady tracking movements likely to be informed by increasing wisdom. (That is such a horrible sentence, but I got in the middle and couldn’t stop. Forgive me.) Finally, I don’t necessarily think it’s a good thing that he is so “electable.” This, so far, seems to translate as “utterly without passion.” You don’t have to go all the way to velvet robes, goblet of wine, and turkey leg to have a little spunk about you.
I am not bothered in the least that Mitt Romney is a Mormon.
You know, Mormonism is a cult. Such is a claim with quite a lot of traction in Southern Baptist churches, anyway. I got that at least twice that I can remember during my adolescence in such a church (which, despite its shortcomings, was more good than bad for me). I’ve had two people express that concern to me about Mitt Romney. One is still gaga for our dear Barack, so her vote isn’t in play anyway. However, she wondered about what kind of effect that might have with Southern religious voters, to which my response was a hearty “none.” Think about it: wouldn’t folks who think Romney’s in a cult be the same folks who think Obama’s a stealth Muslim?
So where are they going to go anyway?
And to anyone who’s genuinely, first and foremost put off by Romney being a Mormon: seriously? Can you really find anything in that narrative that’s any more objectively ridiculous than any other major religion? Now I know it’s trendy and probably metrosexual or something to be a jackass loudmouth atheist. But good luck finding a major presidential candidate without a Judeo-Christian profession.
So within that framework, you’re going to excoriate a guy because there’s a bit more to the story of his faith than that of a “normal” Christian?