Romney: I’ll talk Mormon practices, not doctrine

ROMNEY: “I’m sorry, we’re just not going to have a discussion about religion in my view. But if you have … Continued

ROMNEY: “I’m sorry, we’re just not going to have a discussion about religion in my view. But if you have a question, I’ll be happy to answer your question.”

BRET HATCH: “If you become president, do you believe it’s a sin for a white man to marry and procreate with a black?”

ROMNEY: “No. Next question. […] This gentleman wanted to talk about the doctrines of my religion. I’ll talk about the practices of my faith.”

Mitt Romney, facing questions on the campaign trail about Mormon scriptures on race and Mormon doctrines and practices.

Read more in the Faith 2012 Quote Archives.

View Photo Gallery: Scenes of religious faith meeting politics in the 2012 campaign.

  • kenonwenu

    Of course Romney’s ridiculous religion isn’t off-limits. 12% of America’s population is black, over 40% have darker-than-white skin, and Romney’s bible says that dark skin is a curse sent by God to punish evil tribes by making them ugly.

    Yet Romney wants to be their president. Far from being a question the media should shy away from, it’s actually a bloody disgrace that no-one has asked Romney: “do you believe that dark-skinned Americans are a cursed, evil tribe, or is your holy book false?”

    It’s one or the other, so which is it?

  • ccnl1

    Why the Christian Right no longer matters in presidential elections:

    Once again, all the conservative votes in the country “ain’t” going to help a “pro-life” presidential candidate, i.e Mitt Romney, Newton Leroy Gingrich, Ron Paul or Rick Santorum, in 2012 as the “Immoral Majority” rules the country and will be doing so for awhile. The “Immoral Majority” you ask?

    The fastest growing USA voting bloc: In 2008, the 70+ million “Roe vs. Wade mothers and fathers” of aborted womb-babies” whose ranks grow by two million per year i.e. 78+ million “IM” voters in 2012.

    2008 Presidential popular vote results:

    69,456,897 for pro-abortion/choice BO, 59,934,814 for “pro-life” JM.

    And the irony:

    And all because many women fail to take the Pill once a day or men fail to use a condom even though in most cases these men have them in their pockets. (maybe they should be called the “Stupid Majority”?)

    The failures of the widely used birth “control” methods i.e. the Pill and male condom have led to the large rate of abortions ( one million/yr) and STDs (19 million/yr) in the USA. Men and women must either recognize their responsibilities by using the Pill or condoms properly and/or use other safer birth control methods in order to reduce the epidemics of abortion and STDs.

    i.e. If the Pill and male condoms were used properly, abortion would not be an issue and Obama would not be president.

  • plattitudes

    Your misunderstanding of what is said in scripture leads to the false dichotomy you posed. No member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believes that dark-skinned Americans are a cursed evil tribe, and they believe that the holy books are true. If 14+ million people can figure out how to make the two co-exist, I’d say it’s not outside your own capacity either. Try the Khaldunian model of thesis/antithesis/synthesis, and rejoice in greater understanding.

  • kenonwenu

    So they don’t believe what the Book says, but they insist the Book is true, and making these incompatible facts co-exist is a form of enlightenment?

    No, it’s a form of self-deception, or in Romney’s case, mass deception.

    Your 14 million Mormons resolve these discrepancies by avoiding thinking about them. Just as they avoid thinking about the overwhelming evidence that their history of North America is fraudulent garbage.

  • XVIIHailSkins

    At least the man acknowledges there’s something to be ashamed about. The real issue is that this type of question has somehow become taboo in American elections. This man is running to have the keys to the bombs, I’d like to know if he embraces his church’s doctrinal racism. I’d like to know if he believes in an end-times scenario. His archaic beliefs affect a nation of millions, it is abjectly absurd that we should feel shy about investigating them.

  • Stscl0312

    Romney brings to light a important issue the difference between ‘practice’ and ‘doctrine’ Mormon religious practice are very clearly defined and required. Such as baptism by immersion for the remission of sins and membership in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Church doctrine is a different discussion. Not every thing has been revealed this is why we believe in a living prophet who recieves revelation from God and interprets scriptures so we can understand their meaning. Being as not all questions have answers and all doctrines have not been revealed or are not clear it makes ones interpretation of scriptual writing speculative. Like what was Isaiah seeing in Chapter 55? Without direct revelation from God all we can do is guess or infer from other scriptual references.

    The scripture Hatch quoted is not from the Book of Mormon, but another book of scripture called The Pearl of Great Price which is a retranslation of the book of Genesis in the Old Testament with many insights and revelations. The passage in question is not referring to the interracial marriage but is direction given to Adam that his righteous offspring should not marry with Cain’s (Cain who slew Abel) offspring or they would be cursed because Cain and his family had chosen to worship Satan.

  • kevrobb

    One problem: the Book of Mormon is also full of racism, and repeatedly equates evil with dark skin and goodness with light skin.

    It even says that black people who become righteous can see their skin lighten!

    So you can drop the meaningless diversions and face the facts: Mormon doctrine is clearly, wildly racist, and that’s the real reason Romney doesn’t wish to address it.

  • plattitudes

    Yes, it is easier to tell yourself that Mormons are blind and stupid than to admit that you might be wrong.

    If you want evidence that Mormons do not simply avoid thinking about the evidence, you might be interested to look into the work done by FARMS and other groups. Most likely you’ll find it to be ‘biased’ and therefore discount it, but you may possibly learn something. The trend in evidence since the Book of Mormon was published in 1830 has moved towards supporting claims made in it, rather than the opposite, but I digress.

    Your belief that the facts discussed above are incompatible does not make them so.

  • Secular1

    Stscl0312, your argument is so jumbled up that it looks like the BillMaher’s dumbest state awards figure. The one with it’s head up the bung hole.

    You claim doctrine is not complete revealed so you won’t discuss it. Isn’t that a boatload hors manure. If you are not going to discuss the so called doctrine as it stands today, what is the point of all that revelation. Since not all is revealed so it becomes speculative to interpret anything. By that argument, you guys shouldn’t be talking about your sky daddy’s intentions. Then you claim that the reason for living prophet is to get new revelations. Tell me why doesn’t your sky daddy reveal everything once and for all? Then you don’t need this living prophet guy, taking up all the space. BTW does sky daddy talk to trhis guy before other clowns choose him to be living prophet? How do you know that the living prophet is not a Borgia in disguise. You know that vile pond scum who bribed and slept is way into papacy. Also, can u tell us what is view like, Up the bung hole?

  • Secular1

    The issue that Lawrence O’donnel brings up is “Did Romney believe in his Church doctrine about blacks, as was current before 1978? or did he disagree with it? If he was not with teh church what did he do to oppose the then doctrine? He was atr that point 31 years old, fully cognizant of right and wrong. If he was with his church, that is a very damning issue, we need to know.

  • XVIIHailSkins

    Interesting how religion offers a buffer between our most animalistic prejudices and the court of public criticism.


    It’s a fair and IMPORTANT question.

    Romney grew up in a religion that believed those of African ancestry were cursed by his god for some mythological sin committed thousands of years ago. It is a singularly RACIST religious dogma.

    Did Romney believe these teachings? Did he promote these teachings when he was a bishop in this church? Does he still believe any of these racist teachings? Will these racist teachings affect the way he would perform his job were he elected president?

    If he won’t anser these questions, he does not deserve to even be on the ballot in November.


    So, when did Mormons STOP being racists?

  • plattitudes

    «Sigh» I know I’m feeding a troll, but….

    Mormons have never been racist. It is only your willful misunderstanding that makes you think we are. From the beginning, Mormons were anti-slavery, which contributed to their being forcefully evicted from Missouri in the late 1830s.

    During Christ’s life, he would not teach those who were not Jews. By your interpretation, Christ then must have not only been racist, but Nazi-esque, in only teaching one ethnic group: ironically, the Jews. Policy changed under Peter to begin preaching to all people. Based on your posts, however, this kind of nuance is likely lost on you.

  • mwpalmer


    So, when did you stop beating your wife?

  • sumergoedom

    Romney’s Bible is the King James version. We do not consider the Book of Mormon (the book to which you referr) to be above, or better than, the Bible. We believe it to be a companion, a second witness to the divinity of Jesus. The curse you mentioned was not dark skin, but rather the result of choosing to live a wicked life style. The dark skin was a way to distinguish who belonged to which group. (Yes, difficult to understand from today’s perspective.)

    Also, later in the book, the “dark skinned” people became the most righteous group not only of that time but of the whole history of the Book of Mormon, while the “light skinned” became the most wicked and vile. What does that say about the “racist Bible” accusation you made? I’m not trying to pick a fight, I genuinely would like to know what you think about a book that includes something like that. is it racist?

  • sumergoedom

    I would like to see Mr. Hatch pose this same question to “regular” members of the church who are black. Because, there are more than a few. I’d be very interested in their response.


    The tax status on his hundreds of million dollar fortune is even more damning.

  • tom95

    The Book of Mormon speaks of one event that happened to a single group (Lamanites)- they initially were white – then cursed with dark skin, and later their skin became white again.. the book is not speaking about any other groups of people – not blacks of African descent, or any other groups.

    You are drawing an unfair generalization to say it’s racist.. It was a unique, miraculous event.

  • tom95

    The BOM is describing a single event that happened to a certain group of people – Lamanites. It doesn’t speak about blacks of afircan descent or any other dark skinned people. It is not accurate to draw conclusions about race from this event..

    This particular group of people started out white, were cursed with dark skin (for specific reasons) – and when they repented, they were restored to white skin. It is a totally unique event, unrelated to any other groups of people.