Mitt Romney obviously has not had much experience dealing with crowds. Especially American crowds, who are not obliged to follow any fundamental church's authority. He was in Iowa, yesterday, talking about whatever Mormon Republicans talk about.......blah..blah..blah.......and someone in the crowd loudly disagreed with him. It became a shouting match, and it boiled down to an interesting statement, made by Mitt Romney, in his retort that "corperations are people, too". While corperations have certain obligations and rights under the law, in order to function as entities in the business world, there are a few things that set them apart in the legal world from people. So I am going to have to say that Romney is wrong about this. Now; after the whole criminal investigation, criminal findings, and criminal court proceedings with Warren Jeffs and his sexual taste for children and the reluctance of the surrounding community, mostly Mormon, to assist in bringing Jeffs to justice, I am forced to wonder if this comparison of corperations to human beings on Romney's part is cultural. One of the main differences between a corperation and a human in the United States is that a human cannot be bought, sold, or traded, but a corperation can. Yet, it appears, from recent data, mostly data presented as evidence in court, disturbingly, that girls and women in the Mormon church ARE considered "property", or "chattel" to be bought, sold, and traded, and that may be part of the confusion from which Romney suffers. See also http://blogoliticalsean.blogspot.com/2011/08/fundamentalist-mormon-warren-jeffs-and.html , where someone who just wanted the custody orders from his divorce enforced ran into a brick wall, when dealing with the largely Mormon culture in Utah. Children and folks who are not Mormon apparently rank the same as women and corperations in their world; things to be bought, sold, or traded.
I really hope America is paying attention here. Downgrading a human being to the same civil level as a corperation is not acceptable, and I see nothing but trouble and problems for this country if it is run by someone who sees all of us as pawns to be bought, sold, or traded, like one of his businesses. Once again, let me make this point:
BOTH MORMON!!!!!
I really hope America is paying attention here. Downgrading a human being to the same civil level as a corperation is not acceptable, and I see nothing but trouble and problems for this country if it is run by someone who sees all of us as pawns to be bought, sold, or traded, like one of his businesses. Once again, let me make this point:
BOTH MORMON!!!!!Both of these men were respected and protected by their communities, the MORMON CHURCH. You should not be any more ready for children of both genders to live as pawns to be bought and sold by Romney than you are for Jeffs to get his hands on your daughters.
13 comments:
Just because Mitt Romney is a Mormon does not depict his political veiws or attitude.
Also. A corporation at one point does start out as a small business owned by one person. Your comments are assinine. Your socialistic views would make it so easy for every Tom, Dick, and Harry to make a dollar from government handouts. Socialism is corrupting the country because it puts successful business owners and welfare dependant blow-jos in the same category.
Normally, I would agree with you about a person's religion not defining him or her politically. But after watching the footage of Warren Jeffs in court, and listening to the reactions of those who still support him and his leadership in his "church", I really think voters need to be more cautious.
Inasmuch as ownership of an item qualifying a thing, such as a corperation, as a person, is concerned, you are way off base. I own my car. Does that mean my car can register to vote? Can it petition Magistrate Court for emancipation if I fail to change the oil often enough? A corperation can be bought, sold, or traded on the stock market. A human cannot. In recent years, the judicial systems of several states have had quite a few problems with Mormona who think their daughters CAN be bought, sold, or traded. As long as there is potential for this attitude and practice to cross over into the White House via elected official, I think Americans need to think long and hard before they expose their children and themselves to subtle downgrading as people and resulting loss of civil rights.
Here's a question for you, anonymous: You stated, in your comment, that socialism puts successful business owners in the same catagory as "welfare dependant blow jos". I'm curious; should someone on welfare not enjoy the right to vote, attend school, send his or her kids to school, or call the cops if someone breaks into his or her house? Or is it a different catagory to which you refer? How do you not wish to be catagorized with someone who is on some sort of assistance? And where would you draw the line? Food stamps? Medical assistance? Homeless shelters? Assistance to abused children? Assistance to domestic violence victims? Kids who get social security when a parent dies? Tax refunds? Where's this line gonna be drawn, that separates you from other American citizens and makes you better? Also, should my daughter be denied all the "special" treatment she gets at school, due to her high IQ and phenomenal abilities, because her mother got medical assistance for emergnecy transfusions that were not covered by insurance? What would you like to take away, and who would you like to take it away from?
Wow. The points that you present clearly label yourself as a socialist. Sure, your car can't vote and isn't a citizen but the motor company and/or automobile company started out as a small business owned by a successful person who was smart with their money and knew how to run their business. On the other hand, you have car corporations who are implementing bad money management and were going in the hole each year they were in business. So what does the government do? They bail them out and save them. Granted, the motor companies (GM) net worth might be more than there net loss, but shouldn't they pay the price of running their business (corporation) poorly? Bailouts, my friend, is socialism.
Ask not what your country can do for you — ask what you can do for your country.
That quote describes my entire veiwpoint on the statements you made. With your political veiwpoints, all you do is want to use the government. The way society uses food stamps and social security makes me absolutely sick. I firmly believe that every state should pass the same law that Florida did. It requires every citizen getting a government handout to take a drug test and a psychological test.
By the way- I am 16 and your veiws affirm to me that the world I will be raising my kids in is getting crazier and crazier. It really seems like all people like you do is Want Want Want. When really we should be worried about eachother and getting right with God.
"Anonymous"
A Socialist? I don't see how.....I consider myself more of an anarchist! Hahaha! But if wanting public schools available for the children you think you are going to have and the children I actually do have is is socialism, and if wanting roads built to get them to school, and wanting the garbage picked up and wanting policemen on duty is socialism, well then, so be it.
Mitt Romney's view of corperations being "people" is incorrect, and he's eaten some crow for that statement, too. No matter how you shake it up and sprinkle it out, the above referenced car company and it's owner are two very different types of entities, here in America. The owner of the company cannot be bought or sold, but the company can.
Don't let this ruin your optimism, but the world you live in has always been crazy, especially in Maryland, where all people seem to do is Want Want Want. But which would be more expensive in the event of a person getting food stamps? The traditional screening done by a social worker, or drug testing? Who would pay for the drug testing? What would a psychilogical test prove to you? Would you deny a crazy person food stamps, just because he or she is crazy? And which "god" should we "get right" with?
Consider this argument closed because the narrowness of your mind path astounds me. I will consider your veiws as a daily reminder to be optimistic about the future I must live in as I walk the halls and eat lunch with your daughter and other children in this tiny tiny world we have.
God Bless.
Trenton Kennedy
Goddess Bless! Apparently, Blue Valley uses signals from the East Coast!
You need to get your facts straight on the men you are talking about and there religious beliefs. Warren Jeffs is a Fundamentalist Mormon. Mitt Romney belongs to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. Also known as Mormons. They are two different churches. You need to research the beliefs of both churches they are not the same.
Hmmmm. Excellent point, and I honestly didn't know that. Until several months ago, I didn't even know that Mormons are Christians, believe it or not. Do people also need to get their facts straight about the different Muslim communities, and the difference between Bin Laden and mainstream Muslims? Just asking. But I do admit, I didn't know the two men were part of different branches of Mormonism.
Yes people often criticize the great group because of the deeds preformed by one.
They do. But aside from that, I do not want to see this nation become a theocracy in any way. That idea deeply concerns me.
Mitt Romney does not base his political platform based on theology.
Sure. Whatever. He is who he is, you know. I don't think America is ready for a president who does not let on that he understands the many cultures that make America what it is.
Post a Comment