The EFM Feature
Screen Shot 2011-10-18 at 9.48.05 PM

“With regard to the disparaging comments about my faith, I’ve heard worse.  So I’m not going to lose sleep over that.  Actually, what I found most troubling about the Reverend’s introduction was when he said, ‘In choosing our nominee, we should inspect his religion.  And someone who is a good, moral person is not whom we should select.  Rather, we should select someone based on their religious beliefs.’

“That idea–that we should choose them based on their religion for public office–is what I find most troubling. The founders of this country went to great length to make sure–even put it in the Constitution–that we shouldn’t choose people to lead this country based on their religion, that this would be a country that would respect other faiths, where there’s plurality of faith, where there’s tolerance for people of other faiths.  That’s a bedrock principle and it was that principle, Governor, that I wanted you to say, It’s wrong.  Rather than say, ‘Reverend Jeffress, you knocked that out of the park,’ I wanted you to say, ‘Reverend Jeffress, you got that wrong.  We should select people not based on their faith.’

“And I don’t expect you to distance yourself from your faith any more than I would.  But the concept that we select people based on the church or the synagogue they go to, I think, is a very dangerous and enormous departure from the principles of our Constitution.”

Comments and Discussion

Evangelicals for Mitt provides comments as a way to engage in a public and respectiful discussion about articles and issues. Any comment may be removed by the editors for violating common decency or tempting flames.

18 Responses to Gov. Romney’s Full – and Brilliant – Answer to the Religion Question

  1. Pingback: comMITTed to Romney! » Blog Archive » EFM: Gov. Romney’s Full – And Brilliant – Answer To The Religion Question

  2. Robin says:

    Now that is what I call ‘hitting it out of the park’. Mitt, you are awesome. I was disappointed with Sarah Palin’s view of the debate. Has she not been listening? She wants someone to actually have an economic plan. Does she not realize that Mitt Romney has that plan and is the only one with a viable jobs and economic plan? It seemed like she was ignoring the fact that Romney has exactly what she says is needed. Maybe she hasn’t been following the news very well.


    Exactly Robin. Some people run their mouths before their Brains wake up.Remember the proverb or saying about the Good Old Owl: he learns more by listening than by talking or making noises!

  4. RC says:

    I have been an undecided voter up until now. I lost all respect and honor for two presidential candidates during the debate last night – Rick Santorum and Rick Perry. Rick Santorum seemed to be angry, hostile and buligerant. Rick Perry seemed unnatural, programmed and tactless. Both men got multiple boo’s. VERY UNPROFESSIONAL at best. If you are planning to be the next POTUS, ACT THE PART!!!

    On the other hand, Herman Cain and Mitt Romney, clearly the front-runners, were attacked viciously and still remained patient, poised, stern and still kept a smile.

    I don’t advocate “no questions please”, of course, asking questions is how you get answers – but the procedure, the attitude and the sarcasm is MOST definitely a big turn off and totally unprofessional. So I have made up my mind. It is either Mitt Romney or Herman Cain for POTUS, not the ones that got booed.

  5. lee pierce says:

    Obama’s call was yes we can, Mitt it’s out opinion that we should give him that can, and follow the Romney plan!

  6. Hannah Rebekah says:

    It’s ironic that this Anti-Mormon attack for political reasons is coming from mostly Baptists of all people, that Mormons are not qualified for public office when history shows us it was the Baptist who were being persecuted when the founding fathers took notice and added protections into the Constitution. Here are some links to get a feeling of just how these issues came about and how they were remedied. Shame on the Baptist who are now the persecutors.

    Column: Founders wouldn’t have targeted Mormons
    By Rodney K. Smith

    “persecuted and imprisoned Baptists and others”
    V. Religion and the State Governments

  7. Jim Tills says:

    Mitt Romney is so clear and correct in his comments as to what the founders of our Nation intended regarding the religious faith of potential leaders, that it becomes obvious where real bigotry exists. Introducing fundatmental error or as stated “the Religion Question” into the National Debate is a serious flaw promulgated by the Perry Campaign and will backfire against him.

    He should bow out now and save the multi-millions of dollars he will spend needlessly trying to destroy Romney— and in essence, our Nation’s dwindling hope for salvaging the Constitution being relentlessly destroyed by Obama’s transformation of America into a socialistic state.

    Last night’s debate left no doubt as to Romney’s ability to answer the numerous attacks, petty as they really are, in a reasoned manner. While we can all realize that small things mean a lot, when contrasting his miniscule so-called faults against the huge issues facing us for which Romney is eminently qualified to handle, the attacks are infantile and superficial. It is my hope that the harrange and attention on the thin things of virtually no major importance leveled against him will not distract the great body of Americans from realizing he is the most competent and best qualified to confront the thick things of monumental importance our Nation is facing and will continue to face in the immediately near future.

  8. JediMormon says:

    I could vote for Cain or Romney. However, I believe that Romney has a more rounded knowledge on the things this country needs most right now. Cain would do well on the financial things, but I think he lags far behind Romney when it comes to foreign policy and terrorism. Once Cain’s newness has worn off with the voters, I think they will realize that Romney is the more logical choice.

  9. Pingback: Post Las Vegas Debate Analysis w/o The Hangover | Article VI Blog | John Schroeder

  10. Jonesy says:

    Great post. Romney knocked this one out of the park. An interesting note: Glenn Beck & Pat Gray (his co-host guy) have been very anti-Mitt this entire cycle for non religious reasons (both are Mormon, in fact, so religion is not an issue for them). But they’ve had problems w/Romneycare, etc. And they’ve been huge fans of Perry–apologists really. However, today, after last night’s debate, they seem to have changed their tune. Pat Gray absolutely laid into Perry.

    “Another win; I mean, another Romney win. He just beat him [Perry] senseless.” – Pat Gray

    Here’s the clip of Pat Gray dismantling pretty much everything Perry did last night:

  11. Phil says:

    I liked Romney, Cain and Ron Paul best in the debates. I don’t like Cain’s 9-9-9 tax plan though. Romney’s solution is better. I also like Ron Paul, as far as his monetary/budget opinions go. He goes too far with isolationism, but I do think we need to move in that direction somewhat. I like Mitt the best, but I am glad that Ron Paul is there to help influence the others in the budget-cutting direction, which I think is most crucial right now. Perry and Santorum I have lost confidence in. They came across as very rude, the way they kept interrupting during Mitt’s time.

  12. Sarah says:

    I have noticed somethings that I think is really important.

    #1 Mitt laid into Perry with a few great thought provoking points. Mitt listens until the person is finnished talking. The key here is he is demonstrating that he can listen. An absolutely necessary skill. I trust that Mitt will listen to the American people from this example.

    #2 Mitt is quick on his feet. He gets to the point, and not in an entirely mean way. He chooses his words carefully. Think about him in a foreign policy situation. I trust that he can articulate what we want or need as a country and not let another country bully us around. In the debates he doesn’t let anyone bully him, he keeps his cool and lets’em have it, nicely!

    I have noticed that I have been ignoring the non verbal character cues. This last debate I saw them. Look at Perry’s face when he tries to accuse Mitt of hiring illegals. He looked like he just got away with a sucker punch on the playground. Mitt spun him around so fast he then looked dizzy!

    I like santorum but he did come off as whiney, so does Ron Paul but in a defferent way. Bachman, well I just don’t see it. Newt, been there too long, and I am not sure I trust that.

    I could vote for Cain. I like him very much. Like another poster said I think Mitt has a better grasp on other Presidential issues.

    1 more thing. Glenn has talked about the overton window…..well if we elect someone who is not well rounded then the pedulum will swing back too far. We do not want this as a country. It will mean more hard times for more people for longer.


  13. John Eidsmoe says:

    I can’t agree with those who say we shouldn’t consider a candidate’s religion. Moral values are of the uttermost importance, and moral values are largely influenced by religious beliefs. Article VI of the Constitution prohibits the federal government from imposing a religious test as a condition for holding federal office. It does not mean citizens may not consider a candidate’s religious beliefs in determining for whom to cast their vote.

    Nevertheless, as a fundamentalist Christian I strongly support Mitt Romney. Fundamentalist Christians and members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (LDS) have substantial and important theological differences. But their moral values are very similar, and in their voting patterns, LDS members embrace a Christian worldview at least as well as fundamentalist Christians do.

    I am favorable to Mitt Romney for four reasons:

    He is CLEAN. No one’s perfect, but if there were any scandal in his personal or professional or public life, it almost certainly would have come out in his four previous campaigns.

    2. He is COMPETENT, as he has proven in his business experience, his record as governor, and his administration of the Olympics.

    3. He is reasonably CONSERVATIVE. Remember that when he took office as Governor of Massachusetts, he faced a legislature that was 85% Democrat. To get anything done, he had to make some compromises. Rather than “waffling,” I believe his move toward conservative and pro-life positions represents his “coming home” to his true convictions. On pro-life issues, the most important thing a President can do is appoint pro-life conservative judges and justices. Romney has promised that his judicial appointments would be like Justices Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, and Alito.

    4. He is our BEST HOPE for beating Obama. The polls indicate that, and he has shown that he can win — twice — in even a liberal state like Massachusetts. Don’t forget that our Supreme Court is divided — four pro-life conservatives, four pro-abortion liberals, and one swing Justice. Whoever serves as President for the next four years will almost certainly make several Supreme Court nominations, and those nominees will probably serve on the Court for decades. If Obama is re-elected, we can forget about overruling ROE V. WADE for a long time to come.

    Not in spite of my fundamentalist Christian convictions, but because of them, I therefore support Mitt Romney.


    John Eidsmoe

    • Natalie says:


      You hit this one out of the ball park. I come from a family where I have siblings and a father who refuse to vote for a LDS. My dad and brother who are Masons were chagrined to find out that Mormanism is based quite a bit on Masonry.

      I wasn’t crazy about this either; however, as Mitt states America has religious freedom. That being said I have told my brother, sister, and father that everything else lines up. I am trying to spread the word to evangelicals that they need to vote and not vote because they are sitting on their “principals”. My argument is then you are enabling the left and Obama will surely win. How embarrassing is Newt on wifey number three how does that show ethics?

      While I don’t believe in LDS theology I do believe in morality and LDS for the most part are good decent moral and family oriented people. I have spoke to LDS missionaries and we have both agreed that the evangelicals and the LDS need to work together instead of against each other. We don’t need to convert one another.

      I had the pleasure of meeting Mitt 4/10 at a book signing and he is well spoken, nice, and has a great plan for America. A catholic priest was at the signing and he openly said he didn’t care that Mitt was a morman he just wanted America back on track. I am spreading the word amongst Christians and Catholics why Mitt is the best choice.

      I am so glad I found this webiste and there are evangelicals for Mitt.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>