Romney

[jcricket6048captain of 100]

Of course Romney is responsible for all that, we mustn't vote for the priesthood holder!

I disagree with you on that Bob we should vote for someone who holds the priesthood and hold him at the highest regards to what we expect him to do.After all look at the candidates we have now. They are far more worse than Romney and they would even put our country even in more trouble than what it is. Mitt Romney has taken leadership where few have even tread by taken action to fix those problems that does exist and make sure that it has promise of a future. A good example would be the the US Olympic in 2002 where Mitt Romney made it profitable and saved it from disaster. If we can have him win the Presidential election then he can do the same thing for us here. A priesthood holder is held to his honor by laws and covenant that he makes when he is ordained to the office to which he is called and when he fulfills it then he is held high in respect and Mitt Romney is have held up his bargain in magnifying his calling in the priesthood and where he comes from he is held high in respect. So I would rather have a priesthood holder in the US Presidential office because he will do what is right. He will honor his priesthood in the highest regard and we need that now more than ever.

Ah, I see you have only posted 26 times here, I was saying that in jest for all the Ron Paul supporters. Everybody here (most) know I support Mitt! How the the Paul people can support him and his libertarian views instead of the priesthood holder is beyond me!
sorry about that I did not know that you were only jest but I do agree with you on that
Mitt will do the same thing to the government he did with the Winter Olympics. And, is the only one running who has even a ghost of a chance of conferring with the Prophet!

Bob

[bobhenstracaptain of 1,000]

Do you mean a priesthood holder like Orrin Hatch, who went on a national speaking tour to drum up support for the Patriot Act and just voted for the NDAA, like Priesthood holder Harry Reid or did you mean a priesthood holder like Val Southwick, from Ogden, who was convicted of the largest swindle in Utah history?

I mean a priesthood holder like Mitt Romney!

Bob

[Ben McClintockcaptain of 100]

I mean a priesthood holder like Mitt Romney!

Bob

he is?!?!? Since when? I haven't seen any evidence. Everything I have seen him involved in would remove his authority according to D&C 121

[bobhenstracaptain of 1,000]

Well Ben, your quite good at judging your fellow man, not so good at understanding and the correct application of scripture!

Why is that???

Bob

[seer stonecaptain of 100]

bobhenstra wrote:
Mitt will do the same thing to the government he did with the Winter Olympics. And, is the only one running who has even a ghost of a chance of conferring with the Prophet!

Bob

Why do you think that Mitt would be the only candidate that would confer with the prophet? Many past presidents have called the prophet for advice. David O McKay and Lyndon B. Johnson had a strong bond and the latter would confer with the prophet throughout his presidency. LBJ would occasionally make an unscheduled stop in Salt Lake to visit with the prophet.

Ronald Reagan was another president who had close ties with the church and envied the church's welfare program.

The president doesn't have to be a Mormon to council with the prophet.

[Ben McClintockcaptain of 100]

Well Ben, your quite good at judging your fellow man, not so good at understanding and the correct application of scripture!

Why is that???

Bob

You're the one that made the claim that he has it, therefore the burden of proof is with you. You refuse to do so.

Why is that???

[Shabakocaptain of 50]

I think this is a valuable debate to have, and we should all be prayerfully considering whom we are going to vote for, because it is an important responsibility not to be taken lightly.

In my personal opinion (and that's all it is) there is only one candidate whose LDS stances appear to square the most with LDS principles, and so I'm going to vote for the most "Mormon" candidate, and that man is Ron Paul . In all seriousness, he may not hold the Priesthood, but he is as morally stalwart and as ethically sound as any LDS leader. Romney is just another big government politician. In this race, we have four big government politicians (among whom Romney may be the best choice) and one true statesman; I'm going to vote for the one true statesman. It's sad that the LDS candidate with more gospel resources access to truth, compared to the others, can't align himself more closely with true liberty (in my view).

Those who like to attack Ron Paul as being pro-choice, or pro-gay, or pro-drugs don't seem to have a firm understanding of the concept of federalism and denigrate the man just for allowing the States to do their job, as granted by the Constitution. The President of the United States should have no more say in these issues than he does about the same issues in Canada (it's outside his purview, regardless of his personal opinions).

[PunaGabecaptain of 100]

Shabako that was awesome!!!!! I new I would start some debates with this thread but I didnt think it would go like this . EVERYONE is entitled to an opinion thats why I love America!

[seer stonecaptain of 100]

Of course Romney is responsible for all that, we mustn't vote for the priesthood holder!

The question is which priesthood does Mitt Romney hold? Here is a short documentary that exposes Mitt Romney true character and how responsible he really is. Give this man a little power and he will rule with unrighteous dominion. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ad_E8VXm4m0

[Fairmindedcaptain of 1,000]

Of course Romney is responsible for all that, we mustn't vote for the priesthood holder!

The question is which priesthood does Mitt Romney hold? Here is a short documentary that exposes Mitt Romney true character and how responsible he really is. Give this man a little power and he will rule with unrighteous dominion. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ad_E8VXm4m0

Thanks for linking to that video, seer stone. I knew Romney had made tons of money gutting companies, but I had no idea the true scope of it. Anyone who would participate in such business practices is true scum, and I don't care how harsh that sounds.

Just doing some quick math, if the average American makes around 26,000 dollars a year and works productively for around 40 years, and if Romney has a net worth to the tune of around 250 million dollars, then that means Romney's robbed the lifetime earnings of around 250 people. And that's just his own personal take.

Which is more heinous, to murder one person, or steal the lifetime earnings of 250? Romney should be in jail for the rest of his life.

[bobhenstracaptain of 1,000]

I judge the principal of libertarianism, a very korihorish philsophy, the men like Paul who fall in line with that philosophy, are then modern day korihors. It's totally wrong to assume that all members of the True Church must have a staunch conservative view of politics. Our general Authorities are and have been all over the map politically, many have been and are Democrats. But none are libertarians! Libertarians who would allow abortions, who would allow the decriminalization of drug laws, same sex marriage, etc---! Men who would place libertarian judges in courts to rule on those moral issues! Ron Paul is one of those!

In reality, Ron Paul is nothing more than a very liberal politician, trying to take over the Republican party with a glib tongue (Hey, just talk about the constitution!!)! Just like Korihor attempted to take over the True Church in Alma's day, but by his own words struggled mightily with his ability to preach, reduced himself to begging with a sign on street corners next to the markets, and had very bad luck in a foot race!

A lot of politicians have visited with the Prophet, did any of them ask for guidance from the Lord during that visit? Last one who did was President Eisenhower, he picked Ezra Taft Benson as his Agriculture Secretary.

I have high hopes that Mitt will pick Elder Oaks as his Attorney General! Not much chance of that happening with Ron Paul!

And I pay no attention to political propaganda!

That's why!

Bob

[seer stonecaptain of 100]

bobhenstra wrote:
I judge the principal of libertarianism, a very korihorish philsophy, the men like Paul who fall in line with that philosophy, are then modern day korihors. It's totally wrong to assume that all members of the True Church must have a staunch conservative view of politics. Our general Authorities are and have been all over the map politically, many have been and are Democrats. But none are libertarians! Libertarians who would allow abortions, who would allow the decriminalization of drug laws, same sex marriage, etc---! Men who would place libertarian judges in courts to rule on those moral issues! Ron Paul is one of those!

Ron Paul believes that those things need to be dealt on a state rather than national level. Each state's representatives by the voice of its citizens would determine those laws. If you haven't noticed Bob, our nation has been changing those laws because the majority are turning towards corruption. Legalizing same sex marriage will be Obama's political weapon in this next election. Isn't it better to have a state perish in corruption rather than the whole nation. Then at least you can choose to live in a environment that endorses your moral standards! The paradigm of the political party system has changed dramatically over the years. There isn't much difference between a Rupublican and a Democrat anymore, while in the past there was. The same crimes have happened during their tenures in the white house. Many prophets have never voiced their political preference as well.

bobhenstra wrote:
In reality, Ron Paul is nothing more than a very liberal politician, trying to take over the Republican party with a glib tongue (Hey, just talk about the constitution!!)! Just like Korihor attempted to take over the True Church in Alma's day, but by his own words struggled mightily with his ability to preach, reduced himself to begging with a sign on street corners next to the markets, and had very bad luck in a foot race

Sure Dr. Paul talks about the constitution, a document that he cherishes as if it is scripture "And for this purpose have I established the Constitution of this land, by the hands of wise men whom I raised up unto this very purpose, and redeemed the land by the shedding of blood (D&C 101:80)" Ron Paul who doesn't have our scriptures understands that the Constitution is divinely inspired. Mitt Romney would rather confer with his lawyers than following its principles. Ron Paul sees the direction our country is heading and trying to slam on the brakes.

I have high hopes that Mitt will pick Elder Oaks as his Attorney General! Not much chance of that happening with Ron Paul!

Sounds like wishful thinking to me Bob. I bet Mitt fills that position with a corporate raider.

And I pay no attention to political propaganda!

You may want to at least pay attention to the candidates character. Vote for a man that has integrity and values. Just because a man has been ordained the priesthood doesn't actually mean he holds it.

That the rights of the priesthood are inseparably connected with the powers of heaven, and that the powers of heaven cannot be controlled nor handled only upon the principles of righteousness
That they may be conferred upon us, it is true; but when we undertake to cover our sins, or to gratify our pride, compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness, behold, the heavens withdraw themselves; the Spirit of the Lord is grieved; and when it is withdrawn, Amen to the priesthood or the authority of that man.(D&C 121:36-37)

[Original_Intentcaptain of 1,000]

I judge the principal of libertarianism, a very korihorish philsophy, the men like Paul who fall in line with that philosophy, are then modern day korihors. It's totally wrong to assume that all members of the True Church must have a staunch conservative view of politics. The members of the church should be united in upholding the Constitution. Our general Authorities are and have been all over the map politically, many have been and are Democrats. But none are libertarians! Libertarians who would allow abortionswhich libertarians are the ones responsible for allowing abortions NOW Bob? Pretty sure Republicans and Democrats have been in charge exclusively since Roe v. Wade, I have heard a lot of PROMISES about ending abortion and well after 30 years they did get around to banning sucking an infant's brains out while it was being born. The libertarians would leave it up to the states, which would actually allow RIGHTEOUS STATES to ban abortion and remove the Federal ability to overturn state abortion laws. But you are too damn dense to get this through your head no matter how many times you are told!, who would allow the decriminalization of drug laws,again, they want drug laws decided at the state level, the 30 years drug war has been such a success! same sex marriage,more mischaracterization on your part, we've been over this at least a dozen times etc---! Men who would place libertarian judges in courts to rule on those moral issues! Ron Paul is one of those!

In reality, Ron Paul is nothing more than a very liberal politicianyou clearly don't have a clue of what liberal or conservative means, trying to take over the Republican party with a glib tongue Sorry, Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum, and Newt Gingrich are the silver tongued liars. If anything, one of Ron Paul's biggest challenges is that he does NOT deliver "applause lines", he tells the truth even if it is unpopular!(Hey, just talk about the constitution!!)At least he understands it and follows it, unlike Mitt and the rest! Just like Korihor attempted to take over the True Church in Alma's day, but by his own words struggled mightily with his ability to preach, reduced himself to begging with a sign on street corners next to the markets, and had very bad luck in a foot race!ah, but he hasn't yet got around to your favorite, all will eventually be exalted to the highest degree of the celestial kingdom!

A lot of politicians have visited with the Prophet, did any of them ask for guidance from the Lord during that visit? Last one who did was President Eisenhower, he picked Ezra Taft Benson as his Agriculture Secretary.

I have high hopes that Mitt will pick Elder Oaks as his Attorney General! Not much chance of that happening with Ron Paul!

And I pay no attention to political propaganda! Sure you do Bob - it would be poor propaganda if you realized it, though!

That's why!

Bob

Your welcome to your opinion, Bob - no one else wants it! (Natasha comes to Bob's defense in 3...2...1)

Btw, if you missed the debate last night, Ron Paul suggested that our foreign policy should be based on the golden rule and was soundly BOOED by the South Carolina audience. Very shameful for a supposedly Christian state. I am sure you will find many there that support the war-mongering positions of your dear priesthood holder which also align with the serial adulterer and one of the most corrupt members of the senate. Oh, and the knucklehead that can;t remember what three government agencies he wants to eliminate.

[seer stonecaptain of 100]

Think about this Bob-

Ron Paul made the moral decision to become a doctor for his profession. He chose to save lives.

Mitt Romney became a corporate raider. His decisions destroyed lives.

[Nancaptain of 1,000]

I judge the principal of libertarianism, a very korihorish philsophy, the men like Paul who fall in line with that philosophy, are then modern day korihors. It's totally wrong to assume that all members of the True Church must have a staunch conservative view of politics. The members of the church should be united in upholding the Constitution. Our general Authorities are and have been all over the map politically, many have been and are Democrats. But none are libertarians! Libertarians who would allow abortionswhich libertarians are the ones responsible for allowing abortions NOW Bob? Pretty sure Republicans and Democrats have been in charge exclusively since Roe v. Wade, I have heard a lot of PROMISES about ending abortion and well after 30 years they did get around to banning sucking an infant's brains out while it was being born. The libertarians would leave it up to the states, which would actually allow RIGHTEOUS STATES to ban abortion and remove the Federal ability to overturn state abortion laws. But you are too damn dense to get this through your head no matter how many times you are told!, who would allow the decriminalization of drug laws,again, they want drug laws decided at the state level, the 30 years drug war has been such a success! same sex marriage,more mischaracterization on your part, we've been over this at least a dozen times etc---! Men who would place libertarian judges in courts to rule on those moral issues! Ron Paul is one of those!

In reality, Ron Paul is nothing more than a very liberal politicianyou clearly don't have a clue of what liberal or conservative means, trying to take over the Republican party with a glib tongue Sorry, Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum, and Newt Gingrich are the silver tongued liars. If anything, one of Ron Paul's biggest challenges is that he does NOT deliver "applause lines", he tells the truth even if it is unpopular!(Hey, just talk about the constitution!!)At least he understands it and follows it, unlike Mitt and the rest! Just like Korihor attempted to take over the True Church in Alma's day, but by his own words struggled mightily with his ability to preach, reduced himself to begging with a sign on street corners next to the markets, and had very bad luck in a foot race!ah, but he hasn't yet got around to your favorite, all will eventually be exalted to the highest degree of the celestial kingdom!

A lot of politicians have visited with the Prophet, did any of them ask for guidance from the Lord during that visit? Last one who did was President Eisenhower, he picked Ezra Taft Benson as his Agriculture Secretary.

I have high hopes that Mitt will pick Elder Oaks as his Attorney General! Not much chance of that happening with Ron Paul!

And I pay no attention to political propaganda! Sure you do Bob - it would be poor propaganda if you realized it, though!

That's why!

Bob

Your welcome to your opinion, Bob - no one else wants it! (Natasha comes to Bob's defense in 3...2...1)

Btw, if you missed the debate last night, Ron Paul suggested that our foreign policy should be based on the golden rule and was soundly BOOED by the South Carolina audience. Very shameful for a supposedly Christian state. I am sure you will find many there that support the war-mongering positions of your dear priesthood holder which also align with the serial adulterer and one of the most corrupt members of the senate. Oh, and the knucklehead that can;t remember what three government agencies he wants to eliminate.

Actually it is Ron Pauls OPINIONS that are unpopular. I find it funny how ofter here people offer up their opinions as facts. And how often they act as if Ron Paul's opinions are facts.

[AGalagaChiasmuscaptain of 100]

This is from the Central Oklahoma Earthquake thread. Elder L. Tom Perry came to the Moore Oklahoma Stake conference (and a M5.6 hit!).

Anyway, Elder Perry did not mention the earthquake, but during the adult session, my brother para-quoted him as thus: "I shutter* to think of a member of the Church as President. Not because of who it would be or their political compass, but because of the microscope-like scrutiny the Church itself would come under when comparing the doctrines of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints to the day in and day out decisions made by such a President. Brethen and Sisters, learn the doctrine, study the history of the Church and be prepared for all manner of people asking questions. The day for seeking these conversations is past, they are coming to us now."

*emphasis original, apparently

[Original_Intentcaptain of 1,000]

I'd like to add that it will require a libertarian philosophy to establish Zion. Only a libertarian philosophy is going to overturn the federal usurpation of authority and return it to the state and local level. This decentralization will allow for communities to set their own standards, be they high or low. This will also cause the wheat and the tares to voluntarily separate from one another.

Libertarianism and true conservatism strive to shring the federal government and push choices AND responsibility to the lowest possible level - towards the individual and away from the central government (be that federal or global). Progressives, neocons and neo-liberals strive for centralization of power and control over the individual.

[Original_Intentcaptain of 1,000]

One other thing in the debate last night - Romney declared himself completely in favor of the NDAA as written. Even Rick Santorum said he did not agree with some provisions of the NDAA, Romney said that he completely trusted the President with the powers the NDAA gave him, he said "I would not abuse them, I don't believe that President Obama would abuse them."

Which is completely beside the point. Once granted, such powers are only relinquished under duress. It isn;t about whether the power will be abused, such power should never be delegated to the president under the constitution! PERIOD! Proff that Mitt still has no clue and would be a disaster as president....he would do terrible things with the best of intentions - his support of NDAA proves it.



conversation on NDAA starts around 1:00 mark. I'd love to hear comment from any Romney supporters about this righteous priesthood holder grinding the constitution under foot and exercising unrighteous dominion. Wow! Even Santorum understood but Mitt either has no clue or is supporting evil.

[Thomascaptain of 1,000]

I judge the principal of libertarianism, a very korihorish philsophy, the men like Paul who fall in line with that philosophy, are then modern day korihors. It's totally wrong to assume that all members of the True Church must have a staunch conservative view of politics. Our general Authorities are and have been all over the map politically, many have been and are Democrats. But none are libertarians! Libertarians who would allow abortions, who would allow the decriminalization of drug laws, same sex marriage, etc---! Men who would place libertarian judges in courts to rule on those moral issues! Ron Paul is one of those!

In reality, Ron Paul is nothing more than a very liberal politician, trying to take over the Republican party with a glib tongue (Hey, just talk about the constitution!!)! Just like Korihor attempted to take over the True Church in Alma's day, but by his own words struggled mightily with his ability to preach, reduced himself to begging with a sign on street corners next to the markets, and had very bad luck in a foot race!

A lot of politicians have visited with the Prophet, did any of them ask for guidance from the Lord during that visit? Last one who did was President Eisenhower, he picked Ezra Taft Benson as his Agriculture Secretary.

I have high hopes that Mitt will pick Elder Oaks as his Attorney General! Not much chance of that happening with Ron Paul!

And I pay no attention to political propaganda!

That's why!

Bob

Bob, you are equating free agency with promoting a behavior. Isn't that Satan's philosophy? Ron Paul wants the states to have the right to make laws concerning these issues. Right now the Federal Government is overturning laws ,made by states, because of issues like nude dancing being interpeted as free speech .Libertarians want to put the power back where it belongs, with the states. The Federal Government has made a mockery of the constitution, grabbing power and imposing tryannical rule over the states.

[bobhenstracaptain of 1,000]

That's why we have free agency, so we can vote for korihors or priesthood holders! you guys go ahead and vote for the korihor, Then if Paul wins you can brag on how you voted for abortion, drug decriminalization, open borders, and every other travesty the korihors seek.

I'll use my single vote for the priesthood holder. I'm more than willing to give our Lord the chance to work with Romney, there is no chance our Lord will be able to work with Paul.

I end my discussion with paid propaganda specialists.

Bob

[BrianM]

Bob, there's no need for any "paid propaganda specialists" to be posting on LDSFF because Latter-day Saints who understand the principles of Freedom and the Constitution will naturally support a candidate that is right for the job: Ron Paul.

[DrJonescaptain of 1,000]

Good point, Original_Intent:

One other thing in the debate last night - Romney declared himself completely in favor of the NDAA as written. Even Rick Santorum said he did not agree with some provisions of the NDAA, [snip] Once granted, such powers are only relinquished under duress. It isn;t about whether the power will be abused, such power should never be delegated to the president under the constitution! PERIOD! Proff that Mitt still has no clue and would be a disaster as president....he would do terrible things with the best of intentions - his support of NDAA proves it.

Bob: I don't think its fair at all to suggest that Ron Paul is akin to "Korihor". Wow. I disagree with you on that point, my friend.

But see the Earthquakes thread... I REALLY think, based on the evidence which is growing, that a BIG devastating earthquake will strike soon... (I hope not.) This before the election and tending to keep the incumbent in office BTW to deal with the "crisis".

[Original_Intentcaptain of 1,000]

In fairness to Bob, many of us Ron Paul supporters have been a bit - overbearing - in jumping on other candidates faults. I find no problem with pointing out errors in the candidates honestly held and expressed opinions - such as Mitt's unqualified support of the NDAA. But I do think it is unfair to mischaracterize a candidate' positions or assert motives (such as his supporter's just care about legalizing drugs).

I have been far from an example in the past, but in the past months I have tried to at least show the courtesy to other candidates that I would like mine to receive. That means no taking things out of context, certainly showing their past errors in judgement is fair game, even necessary. I have no problem with anyone disagreeing with Ron Paul or myself. But attributing positions to them that they don't hold is an act of desperation and dishonesty. If you are unsure that they actually hold those positions, and are just going from hearsay from a talking head on TV - you had better do your research before you smear or you will be held accountable for bearing false witness. That should be a serious concern.

[shadowcaptain of 1,000]

Just doing some quick math, if the average American makes around 26,000 dollars a year and works productively for around 40 years, and if Romney has a net worth to the tune of around 250 million dollars, then that means Romney's robbed the lifetime earnings of around 250 people. And that's just his own personal take.

Which is more heinous, to murder one person, or steal the lifetime earnings of 250? Romney should be in jail for the rest of his life.

Do you actually believe that crap? Anyone who makes over 26k should be sent to jail for stealing from people who makes less than 26k? Quit drinking the kool-aid!

Think about this Bob-

Ron Paul made the moral decision to become a doctor for his profession. He chose to save lives.

Mitt Romney became a corporate raider. His decisions destroyed lives.

Actually many doctors these days don't really save lives at all but ruin them, check out the many vaccine threads and the words of Brigham Young. And Romney went in and saved what he could of already failing companies, companies that would otherwise shut their doors and lay off 100% of their workers. You people make it hard NOT to support Romney!!

[LateOutOfBedcaptain of 100]

But see the Earthquakes thread... I REALLY think, based on the evidence which is growing, that a BIG devastating earthquake will strike soon... (I hope not.) This before the election and tending to keep the incumbent in office BTW to deal with the "crisis".

I'm just curious what the crisis will be this year that Obama has to deal with and how big it will need to be to keep him in office. The last event that kept a president in office required the deaths of over 1,000. What will this years crisis be? I'm waiting for it to happen, because it's happened for the last 2 presidencies when they were failing...

-- Geoff

[Spencecaptain of 1,000]

When did Mitt honor his priesthood while governor of Mass? Look at his record. When did he consult the prophet about how to run that state?

Please, Mitt has only one god and that is his pride for himself. This is a man who honored his priesthood by denying the first vision. All he cares about is the praise he could obtain by being president. I've known people like him, they do everything expected of them because they fear losing respect from men, not losing respect form their God.

If he becomes president. As Niel A. Maxwell once said, "he will get his reward."


ASK YOURSELF THIS? Mitt Romney doesn't believe in anything, it has been established by his 180 flip flops time and time again. Why would a man who believes in nothing want to be president if it were not to praise himself?

[uglypitbullcaptain of 1,000]

I judge the principal of libertarianism, a very korihorish philsophy, the men like Paul who fall in line with that philosophy, are then modern day korihors. It's totally wrong to assume that all members of the True Church must have a staunch conservative view of politics. Our general Authorities are and have been all over the map politically, many have been and are Democrats. But none are libertarians! Libertarians who would allow abortions, who would allow the decriminalization of drug laws, same sex marriage, etc---! Men who would place libertarian judges in courts to rule on those moral issues! Ron Paul is one of those!

Do yourself a favor and substitute the word Constitutional(ism) where you wrote libertarian(ism)...Dr Paul is a Constitutional Republican.

Funny, but after a quick spin around the Google block, I am finding most libertarians don't consider Dr Paul a true libertarian in the first place. "Jeffrey Miron, author of “Libertarianism, From A to Z,” told Here & Now’s Robin Young, “I don’t think he [Paul] presents a calm, thoughtful, rational face for libertarianism. I think he presents a relatively cranky, some people would go much further, suggesting a quirky, nutty, insane version, and I don’t think that’s the right view of Libertarians.” Miron describes a Libertarian as someone who wants the government to stay out of your pocketbook and your bedroom. And that’s where he has a problem with Paul, who is against abortion rights and gay marriage." http://hereandnow.wbur.org/2012/01/04/r ... ibertarian

Sounds to me as if Dr. Paul is on the right side of moral issues.
http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/abortion/ <------ here he even chastises libertarians for their non stance on abortion

[Thomascaptain of 1,000]

That's why we have free agency, so we can vote for korihors or priesthood holders! you guys go ahead and vote for the korihor, Then if Paul wins you can brag on how you voted for abortion, drug decriminalization, open borders, and every other travesty the korihors seek.

I'll use my single vote for the priesthood holder. I'm more than willing to give our Lord the chance to work with Romney, there is no chance our Lord will be able to work with Paul.

I end my discussion with paid propaganda specialists.

Bob

Right now, the only reason that Utah and many other states do not have anti-abortion laws is, the Federal Government is overturning these laws. A vote for the status quo is a vote for abortion.

Korihors sometimes come dressed as priesthood holders. I wish our world was simple enough, that we could put our trust in all preisthood holders. Satan is the master of deception.

[InfoWarrior82captain of 1,000]

Annnnnndd for the 89347837th time... Haaarrryyyy Reeiiiddddd. Nuff said.

[Mackingstercaptain of 100]

The arguments being made that Romney is a priesthood holder and a member of the church we should automatically vote for him. By that very logic. Does that mean we would have to vote for Harry Reid? Would we have to vote for any member regardless of their platform?

In my way of thinking. That would be like blindly voting for a Republican or Democrat. The church teaches us to not only use the spirit but also our critical thinking skills on deciding who to vote for. Past church leaders have also told also not to support socialist policy.

Just my two cents.