I'm pretty much resigned to Romney being the next President because of his business and UT connections; I do think it's funny how everyone made such a big terrifying deal of Huckabees history as a Baptist minister but none of those same people seem to care about Romney being in charge of double digit Mormon congegations for nearly a decade. I don't have a problem with Romney just because he's a Mormon, because I know much of the laity in many churches don't endorse every iota of official church doctrine. Senior church leaders typically do though, particularly when descended from six generations of such leaders all the way back to the men revered as the twelve patriarchs of the church. That in itself wouldn't be a problem either were it not for the LDS promoting itself as a Christian church despite asserting (though rarely in mixed company) the deification of man, the sinful fallen nature of Christ and the notion that Christ not only had a Father but (apparently) a grandfather and great-grandfather, too. It's a fundamental and deceitful misrepresentation of the facts, but it's also part and parcel with the gun-hating, tax-loving NARAL donor who was Governor of MA and now presents himself as a gun-loving, tax-hating pro-life GOP presidential candidate.

There are a lot more questions than answers with Romney, and his senior role in an organization that shouts its Christianity yet to this day quietly affirms man should perfect HIMSELF so that he can assume Gods throne as God did before him is just one of many, but as a Christian, yes, it's a big one for me. I think it speaks volumes that, although the Roman Catholic, Greek Orthodox and virtually all Protestant churches accept the Nicene Creed even when it isn't part of their catechism, the LDS explicitly rejects it, and still insists they're a Christian church. At best, LDS leaders BADLY misunderstand the gospel if they genuinely believe Christianity is about man achieving his own righteousness (not to mention divinity), but representing it as Christianity, combined with an extreme reluctance to discuss their actual doctrine even in religious forums unless backed into a corner, smacks of a hidden agenda. Jehovahs Witnesses think Jesus is the Archangel Michael, so they're just as non-trinitariann(although Joseph Smiths sermons affirm both polytheism and strict monotheism at various places, but anyway... )--but Jehovahs Witnesses don't conceal that belief or market their religion as the Christianity they reject.

Ultimately, I think Americans have a right to know what the nations leader stands for rather than simply accepting whoever back room Wall Street donors and a cadre of mysterious religious leaders appoint. Not that I expect any of that to make any difference in the end, because Romney undeniably DOES have the money and connections that are all that matter in American politics now, and some people will always vote for whoever the Republican Party puts in front of them. I must say it's kind of ironic to see you dismiss sincere and, IMHO, valid concerns as if religious advocacy is somehow off limits, in the same thread where rt decided to bring up Jeremiah Wright again. Say what you want about him or Obama, but I bet you can't find one bit of doctrine in their catechism that explicitly contradicts the gospel at the most basic level.

Bah, I'd decided I wasn't wasting my time with the elephant and pony show anymore; I'll link the article later that aided that decision, but I'll leave the floor to you and anyone who wants it here.

EDIT: I do that far too often, but at least there's a link now.