<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/1.5.1.3" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Latter-Day Saints for Chuck Baldwin</title>
	<link>http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/09/07/latter-day-saints-for-chuck-baldwin/</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 23:13:25 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1.3</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: Cody Quirk</title>
		<link>http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/09/07/latter-day-saints-for-chuck-baldwin/#comment-884267</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Sep 2008 04:47:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/09/07/latter-day-saints-for-chuck-baldwin/#comment-884267</guid>
					<description>I wonder how the alliance would hold up if the CP were actually elected? 

= The Utah CP did elect a city councilman (Matthew Curry) in Lewiston last year.

In my state (Nevada), the Nevada affiliate has 3 people serving in office.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>I wonder how the alliance would hold up if the CP were actually elected?</p>
	<p>= The Utah CP did elect a city councilman (Matthew Curry) in Lewiston last year.</p>
	<p>In my state (Nevada), the Nevada affiliate has 3 people serving in office.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Porter Rockwell</title>
		<link>http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/09/07/latter-day-saints-for-chuck-baldwin/#comment-880543</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Sep 2008 18:33:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/09/07/latter-day-saints-for-chuck-baldwin/#comment-880543</guid>
					<description>Amen Jeff...Libertines are having too much fun to hate.  Most of Baldwin's sychophants are right there in SLC twice a year.  Spewing hate, waving stolen G's in the air, throwing the BoM on the ground.

Any LDS who would cast a vote for Baldwin, should question thenselves seriously.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Amen Jeff&#8230;Libertines are having too much fun to hate.  Most of Baldwin&#8217;s sychophants are right there in <span class="caps">SLC</span> twice a year.  Spewing hate, waving stolen G&#8217;s in the air, throwing the BoM on the ground.</p>
	<p>Any <span class="caps">LDS</span> who would cast a vote for Baldwin, should question thenselves seriously.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Latter-day Saints for Chuck Baldwin</title>
		<link>http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/09/07/latter-day-saints-for-chuck-baldwin/#comment-879142</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Sep 2008 06:30:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/09/07/latter-day-saints-for-chuck-baldwin/#comment-879142</guid>
					<description>Cody,

A video on this site has a video from Chuck Baldwin talking about Mormons
http://mormonsforbaldwin.wordpress.com/2008/08/14/what-would-a-baldwin-administration-look-like/.

LDS4Baldwin</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Cody,</p>
	<p>A video on this site has a video from Chuck Baldwin talking about Mormons<br />
<a href='http://mormonsforbaldwin.wordpress.com/2008/08/14/what-would-a-baldwin-administration-look-like/' rel='nofollow'>http://mormonsforbaldwin.wordpress.com/2008/08/14/what-would-a-baldwin-administration-look-like/</a>.</p>
	<p><span class="caps">LDS4</span>Baldwin</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Jeff</title>
		<link>http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/09/07/latter-day-saints-for-chuck-baldwin/#comment-878760</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Sep 2008 03:38:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/09/07/latter-day-saints-for-chuck-baldwin/#comment-878760</guid>
					<description>Hard for a Mormon to choose between any of the candidates. I will go with Barr because although I hate a libertine lifestyle I dislike evangelicals even more than libertines. Libertines do not parade in front of the LDS temple like the evangelicals do.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Hard for a Mormon to choose between any of the candidates. I will go with Barr because although I hate a libertine lifestyle I dislike evangelicals even more than libertines. Libertines do not parade in front of the <span class="caps">LDS</span> temple like the evangelicals do.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Clark</title>
		<link>http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/09/07/latter-day-saints-for-chuck-baldwin/#comment-875897</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Sep 2008 13:24:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/09/07/latter-day-saints-for-chuck-baldwin/#comment-875897</guid>
					<description>grungeman vomits: &quot;Homosexuality has long been recognized as a emotional pathology by all stable cultures and societies.&quot;

...too much to comment on, too little time...but i believe grungeman, and other ranting quasi-republicrat authoritarians here, have fallen victim to &quot;the fallacy of reification,&quot; other forms of mass brainwashing, etc.

LISTEN UP, GRUNGEMAN!!, 'cultures' and 'societies' are mere concepts and/or labels...

...and as anyone not a goddamned quasi-republicrat fool can recognize, 'concepts' and 'labels' can't/don't 'recognize' anything..certainly not 'emotional pathologies'.. in other words, grungeman, me thinketh you speaketh much ooga booga! ;o) 

and shock and awe..good job, west!... ;o)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>grungeman vomits: &#8220;Homosexuality has long been recognized as a emotional pathology by all stable cultures and societies.&#8221;</p>
	<p>...too much to comment on, too little time&#8230;but i believe grungeman, and other ranting quasi-republicrat authoritarians here, have fallen victim to &#8220;the fallacy of reification,&#8221; other forms of mass brainwashing, etc.</p>
	<p><span class="caps">LISTEN UP</span>, GRUNGEMAN!!, &#8216;cultures&#8217; and &#8216;societies&#8217; are mere concepts and/or labels&#8230;</p>
	<p>...and as anyone not a goddamned quasi-republicrat fool can recognize, &#8216;concepts&#8217; and &#8216;labels&#8217; can&#8217;t/don&#8217;t &#8216;recognize&#8217; anything..certainly not &#8216;emotional pathologies&#8217;.. in other words, grungeman, me thinketh you speaketh much ooga booga! ;o)</p>
	<p>and shock and awe..good job, west!... ;o)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Porter Rockwell</title>
		<link>http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/09/07/latter-day-saints-for-chuck-baldwin/#comment-875877</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Sep 2008 13:19:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/09/07/latter-day-saints-for-chuck-baldwin/#comment-875877</guid>
					<description>I love Utah!!!...Only problem with Utah...Too many Mormons....BWAHAHAHA

I'm joking...don't anyone get yer Depends all knotted up.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>I love Utah<img src="!" alt="" border="0" />...Only problem with Utah&#8230;Too many Mormons&#8230;.BWAHAHAHA</p>
	<p>I&#8217;m joking&#8230;don&#8217;t anyone get yer Depends all knotted up.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Joe Buchman</title>
		<link>http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/09/07/latter-day-saints-for-chuck-baldwin/#comment-874370</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Sep 2008 06:56:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/09/07/latter-day-saints-for-chuck-baldwin/#comment-874370</guid>
					<description>Cody,

==The western state affiliates of the CP, especially Utah, are made up of Mormons, me included. The CP prohibits any form of religious tests in its preamble and welcomes all to the party.==

Thanks for the insight.

52 CP candidates in Utah is impressive and suggests more support here for the CP than LP.  I believe that also holds up for vote totals from two years ago.

I wonder how the alliance would hold up if the CP were actually elected?  I'm thinking especially of some of (most actually of) my Baptist friends in Tennessee who, when they learned I was moving to Utah, were certain I had been &quot;abducted by Satan and going to hell&quot; just for deciding to live here!   

Joe</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Cody,</p>
	<p>The western state affiliates of the CP, especially Utah, are made up of Mormons, me included. The CP prohibits any form of religious tests in its preamble and welcomes all to the party.</p>
	<p>Thanks for the insight.</p>
	<p>52 CP candidates in Utah is impressive and suggests more support here for the CP than LP.  I believe that also holds up for vote totals from two years ago.</p>
	<p>I wonder how the alliance would hold up if the CP were actually elected?  I&#8217;m thinking especially of some of (most actually of) my Baptist friends in Tennessee who, when they learned I was moving to Utah, were certain I had been &#8220;abducted by Satan and going to hell&#8221; just for deciding to live here!</p>
	<p>Joe</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Andy Craig</title>
		<link>http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/09/07/latter-day-saints-for-chuck-baldwin/#comment-873809</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Sep 2008 04:13:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/09/07/latter-day-saints-for-chuck-baldwin/#comment-873809</guid>
					<description>To clarify- slavery wasn't accepted as a &quot;social pathology&quot;, obviously. My point was that it was however widely accepted by pretty much all societies up until the 1800s, including in the Bible.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>To clarify- slavery wasn&#8217;t accepted as a &#8220;social pathology&#8221;, obviously. My point was that it was however widely accepted by pretty much all societies up until the 1800s, including in the Bible.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Andy Craig</title>
		<link>http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/09/07/latter-day-saints-for-chuck-baldwin/#comment-873788</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Sep 2008 04:08:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/09/07/latter-day-saints-for-chuck-baldwin/#comment-873788</guid>
					<description>*Non-Christians ( NC”s ) are free to drink*

So Christians aren't?

*Mr. Idiot/Fool*

Childish insults. How Christ-like of you.

*Anyone ( NC’s included ) can gamble subject to municiple ordinances which may ban casinos etc. in a state or a local area. So how, Mr. Idiot/Fool, does this harm your liberty in any way?*

A law saying I can't allow people to gamble on my property absolutely impinges on my liberty.

*Drugs are illegal or legal depending on various catagories. So how, Mr. Idiot/Fool, does this harm your ” liberty?”*

My body is my own, and I have the natural right as the sole person who has any legitimate control over my body to smoke, inject, inhale, or otherwise consume any substance I please.  You might not approve (for the most part neither do I) but that gives you no right to use violence against me to prevent it.

*Non-traditional families. English translation – homosexual ” families.”*

That would be a subset. So would unmarried couples, relationships consisting of more than two people, and communal-type families.

*Here is the core ( real reason ) of your rants.*

Again, that &quot;bearing false witness&quot; (better known in post-Copper Age nomenclature as &quot;making shit up&quot;) rears its ugly head.

Though I do find something slightly Freudian in your obsession with homosexuality. I've never made a central issue out of it, and in fact it's pretty low down on my list of priorities. I don't even support &quot;gay marriage&quot; because I don't think the government should license marriage at all (which would also solve your objections to the government endorsing something you feel is immoral). Yet you insist that sexual perversion is secretly motivating pretty much any one who disagrees with you. 

*Homosexuals are free to marry at this moment anyone of the opposite sex*

I actually agree here. Marriage properly understood is a private contract which the state plays no role in expect perhaps enforcing the relevant terms surrounding a divorce.

*Homosexuality has long been recognized as a emotional pathology by all stable cultures and societies*

So was slavery.

*Homosexual marriage is simply a means to accomplish the mass indoctrination of children that homosexuality is normal via the changing of all school textbooks and instruction which the legalization of homosexual marriage would pave the way for.*

Right. Setting aside the conspiratorial kookery, simply get the government out of deciding textbook curriculum altogether. That way you can send your kid to Bible brainwashing camp, and I can send mine to one that's learned something in the past 3,000 years.

*So how, Mr. Idiot/Fool, does banning homosexual marriage harm your ” liberty?” Harder to prostilitize children?*

Banning homosexual marriage is an attack on the liberty of people to engage in a voluntary interaction. And as for &quot;proselytizing children&quot; (of all people, you should know how to spell that word), the free exchange of ideas is part of a free society. Suck it up, get used to it, and mind your own children rather than everybody else's.

*So how, Mr. Idiot/Fool does stopping, or simply opposing, ” offensive sexual behavior ” harm your ” liberty?”*

Uh, my liberty to do whatever I want with my body even if you think it's &quot;offensive&quot;? Are you really that dense? Not that you disagree, but that you don't even see the obvious point?

*I address you as Mr. Idiot/Fool as only the pathologically sick who desire to spread their sickness throughout our nation and especially to the children will be those who complain about having their ” liberty ” hindered by those opposing the above behaviors, especially numbers 4 &amp;#38; 5 above*

Again, your obsession with sexual perversion. Perhaps some one's projecting. Also, again with the stunningly ironic (but not altogether unexpected) insults and baseless accusations for someone supposedly living a life based on the Gospels.

*In our time we have the pathologically sick working to poison the nation by spreading their pathology in all areas of society and culture with special emphasis upon the children*

They're also using fluoride to sap our precious bodily fluids.

*The CP can take pride that it, as a last political fortress of humanity, is the only party which openly opposes such sickness and is hence the target of those mutants who desire to drag all of humanity into the gutter.*

If I wrote this as a parody, it would be so unbelievable no one would find it funny.

Really, &quot;the last political fortress of humanity&quot;? Alrighty then. Go hole up in your bunker under the Chancellery.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p><strong>Non-Christians ( NC&#8221;s ) are free to drink</strong></p>
	<p>So Christians aren&#8217;t?</p>
	<p><strong>Mr. Idiot/Fool</strong></p>
	<p>Childish insults. How Christ-like of you.</p>
	<p><strong>Anyone ( NC&#8217;s included ) can gamble subject to municiple ordinances which may ban casinos etc. in a state or a local area. So how, Mr. Idiot/Fool, does this harm your liberty in any way?</strong></p>
	<p>A law saying I can&#8217;t allow people to gamble on my property absolutely impinges on my liberty.</p>
	<p><strong>Drugs are illegal or legal depending on various catagories. So how, Mr. Idiot/Fool, does this harm your &#8221; liberty?&#8221;</strong></p>
	<p>My body is my own, and I have the natural right as the sole person who has any legitimate control over my body to smoke, inject, inhale, or otherwise consume any substance I please.  You might not approve (for the most part neither do I) but that gives you no right to use violence against me to prevent it.</p>
	<p><strong>Non-traditional families. English translation &#8211; homosexual &#8221; families.&#8221;</strong></p>
	<p>That would be a subset. So would unmarried couples, relationships consisting of more than two people, and communal-type families.</p>
	<p><strong>Here is the core ( real reason ) of your rants.</strong></p>
	<p>Again, that &#8220;bearing false witness&#8221; (better known in post-Copper Age nomenclature as &#8220;making shit up&#8221;) rears its ugly head.</p>
	<p>Though I do find something slightly Freudian in your obsession with homosexuality. I&#8217;ve never made a central issue out of it, and in fact it&#8217;s pretty low down on my list of priorities. I don&#8217;t even support &#8220;gay marriage&#8221; because I don&#8217;t think the government should license marriage at all (which would also solve your objections to the government endorsing something you feel is immoral). Yet you insist that sexual perversion is secretly motivating pretty much any one who disagrees with you.</p>
	<p><strong>Homosexuals are free to marry at this moment anyone of the opposite sex</strong></p>
	<p>I actually agree here. Marriage properly understood is a private contract which the state plays no role in expect perhaps enforcing the relevant terms surrounding a divorce.</p>
	<p><strong>Homosexuality has long been recognized as a emotional pathology by all stable cultures and societies</strong></p>
	<p>So was slavery.</p>
	<p><strong>Homosexual marriage is simply a means to accomplish the mass indoctrination of children that homosexuality is normal via the changing of all school textbooks and instruction which the legalization of homosexual marriage would pave the way for.</strong></p>
	<p>Right. Setting aside the conspiratorial kookery, simply get the government out of deciding textbook curriculum altogether. That way you can send your kid to Bible brainwashing camp, and I can send mine to one that&#8217;s learned something in the past 3,000 years.</p>
	<p><strong>So how, Mr. Idiot/Fool, does banning homosexual marriage harm your &#8221; liberty?&#8221; Harder to prostilitize children?</strong></p>
	<p>Banning homosexual marriage is an attack on the liberty of people to engage in a voluntary interaction. And as for &#8220;proselytizing children&#8221; (of all people, you should know how to spell that word), the free exchange of ideas is part of a free society. Suck it up, get used to it, and mind your own children rather than everybody else&#8217;s.</p>
	<p><strong>So how, Mr. Idiot/Fool does stopping, or simply opposing, &#8221; offensive sexual behavior &#8221; harm your &#8221; liberty?&#8221;</strong></p>
	<p>Uh, my liberty to do whatever I want with my body even if you think it&#8217;s &#8220;offensive&#8221;? Are you really that dense? Not that you disagree, but that you don&#8217;t even see the obvious point?</p>
	<p><strong>I address you as Mr. Idiot/Fool as only the pathologically sick who desire to spread their sickness throughout our nation and especially to the children will be those who complain about having their &#8221; liberty &#8221; hindered by those opposing the above behaviors, especially numbers 4 &#038; 5 above</strong></p>
	<p>Again, your obsession with sexual perversion. Perhaps some one&#8217;s projecting. Also, again with the stunningly ironic (but not altogether unexpected) insults and baseless accusations for someone supposedly living a life based on the Gospels.</p>
	<p><strong>In our time we have the pathologically sick working to poison the nation by spreading their pathology in all areas of society and culture with special emphasis upon the children</strong></p>
	<p>They&#8217;re also using fluoride to sap our precious bodily fluids.</p>
	<p><strong>The CP can take pride that it, as a last political fortress of humanity, is the only party which openly opposes such sickness and is hence the target of those mutants who desire to drag all of humanity into the gutter.</strong></p>
	<p>If I wrote this as a parody, it would be so unbelievable no one would find it funny.</p>
	<p>Really, &#8220;the last political fortress of humanity&#8221;? Alrighty then. Go hole up in your bunker under the Chancellery.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Don Grundmann</title>
		<link>http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/09/07/latter-day-saints-for-chuck-baldwin/#comment-873364</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Sep 2008 02:03:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/09/07/latter-day-saints-for-chuck-baldwin/#comment-873364</guid>
					<description>&quot; Andy Craig Says: 

September 8th, 2008 at 5:37 pm 
“Liberty: Freedom of conscience and actions for the self-governed individual”

As long as you’re a Christian who doesn’t drink, gamble, do drugs, have a non-traditional family, or engage in “offensive sexual behavior”, to quote the CP platform.&quot;

Response : 1) Non-Christians ( NC&quot;s ) are free to drink.  No one will stop them and it is only a problem when they drink and drive.  So how ( being frank here ) Mr. Idiot/Fool does that harm your &quot; liberty &quot; in any way?  2) Anyone ( NC's included ) can gamble subject to municiple ordinances which may ban casinos etc. in a state or a local area.  So how, Mr. Idiot/Fool, does this harm your liberty in any way?  3) Drugs are illegal or legal depending on various catagories.  So how, Mr. Idiot/Fool, does this harm your &quot; liberty?&quot;  4) Non-traditional families.  English translation - homosexual &quot; families.&quot;  Here is the core ( real reason ) of your rants.  Homosexuals are free to marry at this moment anyone of the opposite sex.  Homosexuality has long been recognized as a emotional pathology by all stable cultures and societies.  Homosexual marriage is simply a means to accomplish the mass indoctrination of children that homosexuality is normal via the changing of all school textbooks and instruction which the legalization of homosexual marriage would pave the way for.  So how, Mr. Idiot/Fool, does banning homosexual marriage harm your &quot; liberty?&quot;  Harder to prostilitize children?  5) Offensive sexual behavior.  So how, Mr. Idiot/Fool does stopping, or simply opposing, &quot; offensive sexual behavior &quot; harm your &quot; liberty?&quot;  6) How does the CP platform opposing all of these actions harm your &quot; liberty?&quot;  I address you as Mr. Idiot/Fool as only the pathologically sick who desire to spread their sickness throughout our nation and especially to the children will be those who complain about having their &quot; liberty &quot; hindered by those opposing the above behaviors, especially numbers 4 &amp;#38; 5 above.   In our time we have the pathologically sick working to poison the nation by spreading their pathology in all areas of society and culture with special emphasis upon the children.  The CP can take pride that it, as a last political fortress of humanity, is the only party which openly opposes such sickness and is hence the target of those mutants who desire to drag all of humanity into the gutter.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>&#8221; Andy Craig Says:</p>
	<p>September 8th, 2008 at 5:37 pm<br />
&#8220;Liberty: Freedom of conscience and actions for the self-governed individual&#8221;</p>
	<p>As long as you&#8217;re a Christian who doesn&#8217;t drink, gamble, do drugs, have a non-traditional family, or engage in &#8220;offensive sexual behavior&#8221;, to quote the CP platform.&#8221;</p>
	<p>Response : 1) Non-Christians ( NC&#8221;s ) are free to drink.  No one will stop them and it is only a problem when they drink and drive.  So how ( being frank here ) Mr. Idiot/Fool does that harm your &#8221; liberty &#8221; in any way?  2) Anyone ( NC&#8217;s included ) can gamble subject to municiple ordinances which may ban casinos etc. in a state or a local area.  So how, Mr. Idiot/Fool, does this harm your liberty in any way?  3) Drugs are illegal or legal depending on various catagories.  So how, Mr. Idiot/Fool, does this harm your &#8221; liberty?&#8221;  4) Non-traditional families.  English translation &#8211; homosexual &#8221; families.&#8221;  Here is the core ( real reason ) of your rants.  Homosexuals are free to marry at this moment anyone of the opposite sex.  Homosexuality has long been recognized as a emotional pathology by all stable cultures and societies.  Homosexual marriage is simply a means to accomplish the mass indoctrination of children that homosexuality is normal via the changing of all school textbooks and instruction which the legalization of homosexual marriage would pave the way for.  So how, Mr. Idiot/Fool, does banning homosexual marriage harm your &#8221; liberty?&#8221;  Harder to prostilitize children?  5) Offensive sexual behavior.  So how, Mr. Idiot/Fool does stopping, or simply opposing, &#8221; offensive sexual behavior &#8221; harm your &#8221; liberty?&#8221;  6) How does the CP platform opposing all of these actions harm your &#8221; liberty?&#8221;  I address you as Mr. Idiot/Fool as only the pathologically sick who desire to spread their sickness throughout our nation and especially to the children will be those who complain about having their &#8221; liberty &#8221; hindered by those opposing the above behaviors, especially numbers 4 &#038; 5 above.   In our time we have the pathologically sick working to poison the nation by spreading their pathology in all areas of society and culture with special emphasis upon the children.  The CP can take pride that it, as a last political fortress of humanity, is the only party which openly opposes such sickness and is hence the target of those mutants who desire to drag all of humanity into the gutter.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Cody Quirk</title>
		<link>http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/09/07/latter-day-saints-for-chuck-baldwin/#comment-873183</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Sep 2008 01:14:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/09/07/latter-day-saints-for-chuck-baldwin/#comment-873183</guid>
					<description>I’ve got to wonder, and do not know (perhaps someone else here does), what the Constitution Party, or its presidential candidate makes of the LDS church. My impression (misinformed as it might be) is that like most other traditional Christian churches, they see it as more cult than orthodox?

= the western state affiliates of the CP, especially Utah, are made up of Mormons, me included. The CP prohibits any form of religious tests in its preamble and welcomes all to the party.

Mormons are evenly represented in the CP as well as Baptists and Catholics are. There might be theological disagreements, but CP'ers are willing to work side by side with each other to redeem the Constitution; since saving our country is more important then who has the 'best Church.'

I won't be voting Libertarian because, judging by the comments here, there is a strong anti-religious presence and hostility to anything right-wing.

FYI the Utah CP is running candidates for over 52 offices.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>I&#8217;ve got to wonder, and do not know (perhaps someone else here does), what the Constitution Party, or its presidential candidate makes of the <span class="caps">LDS</span> church. My impression (misinformed as it might be) is that like most other traditional Christian churches, they see it as more cult than orthodox?</p>
	<p>= the western state affiliates of the CP, especially Utah, are made up of Mormons, me included. The CP prohibits any form of religious tests in its preamble and welcomes all to the party.</p>
	<p>Mormons are evenly represented in the CP as well as Baptists and Catholics are. There might be theological disagreements, but CP&#8217;ers are willing to work side by side with each other to redeem the Constitution; since saving our country is more important then who has the &#8216;best Church.&#8217;</p>
	<p>I won&#8217;t be voting Libertarian because, judging by the comments here, there is a strong anti-religious presence and hostility to anything right-wing.</p>
	<p><span class="caps">FYI</span> the Utah CP is running candidates for over 52 offices.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Andy Craig</title>
		<link>http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/09/07/latter-day-saints-for-chuck-baldwin/#comment-872520</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Sep 2008 22:37:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/09/07/latter-day-saints-for-chuck-baldwin/#comment-872520</guid>
					<description>&quot;Liberty: Freedom of conscience and actions for the self-governed individual&quot;

As long as you're a Christian who doesn't drink, gamble, do drugs, have a non-traditional family, or engage in &quot;offensive sexual behavior&quot;, to quote the CP platform.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>&#8220;Liberty: Freedom of conscience and actions for the self-governed individual&#8221;</p>
	<p>As long as you&#8217;re a Christian who doesn&#8217;t drink, gamble, do drugs, have a non-traditional family, or engage in &#8220;offensive sexual behavior&#8221;, to quote the CP platform.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: p white</title>
		<link>http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/09/07/latter-day-saints-for-chuck-baldwin/#comment-872352</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Sep 2008 21:50:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/09/07/latter-day-saints-for-chuck-baldwin/#comment-872352</guid>
					<description>I will admit that Sarah Palin makes a strong case for voting John McCain however ..

I am leaning strongly toward voting for Chuck Baldwin for president

And Yes I am of the LDS Faith!!

Seven Principles of the Constitution Party are:

1. Life: For all human beings, from conception to natural death;
2. Liberty: Freedom of conscience and actions for the self-governed individual;
3. Family: One husband and one wife with their children as divinely instituted;
4. Property: Each individual's right to own and steward personal property without government burden;
5. Constitution: and Bill of Rights interpreted according to the actual intent of the Founding Fathers;
6. States' Rights: Everything not specifically delegated by the Constitution to the federal government is reserved for the state and local jurisdictions;
7. American Sovereignty: American government committed to the protection of the borders, trade, and common defense of Americans, and not entangled in foreign alliances.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>I will admit that Sarah Palin makes a strong case for voting John McCain however ..</p>
	<p>I am leaning strongly toward voting for Chuck Baldwin for president</p>
	<p>And Yes I am of the <span class="caps">LDS </span>Faith!!</p>
	<p>Seven Principles of the Constitution Party are:</p>
	<p>1. Life: For all human beings, from conception to natural death;<br />
2. Liberty: Freedom of conscience and actions for the self-governed individual;<br />
3. Family: One husband and one wife with their children as divinely instituted;<br />
4. Property: Each individual&#8217;s right to own and steward personal property without government burden;<br />
5. Constitution: and Bill of Rights interpreted according to the actual intent of the Founding Fathers;<br />
6. States&#8217; Rights: Everything not specifically delegated by the Constitution to the federal government is reserved for the state and local jurisdictions;<br />
7. American Sovereignty: American government committed to the protection of the borders, trade, and common defense of Americans, and not entangled in foreign alliances.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Porter Rockwell</title>
		<link>http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/09/07/latter-day-saints-for-chuck-baldwin/#comment-871339</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Sep 2008 16:43:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/09/07/latter-day-saints-for-chuck-baldwin/#comment-871339</guid>
					<description>No right thinking Latter Day Saint should waste their vote on Chuck Baldwin.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>No right thinking Latter Day Saint should waste their vote on Chuck Baldwin.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Tom Bryant</title>
		<link>http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/09/07/latter-day-saints-for-chuck-baldwin/#comment-870993</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Sep 2008 15:00:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/09/07/latter-day-saints-for-chuck-baldwin/#comment-870993</guid>
					<description>I agree with Tim that the Constitution is not a religious document.  However, I'm not sure if Tim's response was meant as a rebuttle to the beliefs of some LDS that the Constitution was inspired by God.  I see no reason why a secular product could not be the work of a God's inspiration.

I agree with Bob Barr that the Founders representative a very rare collection of some of the brightest political minds in our history.  Of course, not all of them saw eye to eye, but the end result was a truly unique document that had a huge positive impact on the rest of the world.  The Constitution, with all of its flaw, was gigantic step towards liberty at the time.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>I agree with Tim that the Constitution is not a religious document.  However, I&#8217;m not sure if Tim&#8217;s response was meant as a rebuttle to the beliefs of some <span class="caps">LDS</span> that the Constitution was inspired by God.  I see no reason why a secular product could not be the work of a God&#8217;s inspiration.</p>
	<p>I agree with Bob Barr that the Founders representative a very rare collection of some of the brightest political minds in our history.  Of course, not all of them saw eye to eye, but the end result was a truly unique document that had a huge positive impact on the rest of the world.  The Constitution, with all of its flaw, was gigantic step towards liberty at the time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
