What's so wrong with having a Mormon as President of the United States?

Because the president should be someone who wants to know the facts about a matter and acts on those facts. He should not be someone who is gullible, which is what Mormons are. Here is why.

Joseph Smith was a con man who pretended to be a seer who could find treasures hidden in the ground. Farmers and other gullible people paid him money to find the treasures. He had a peepstone that he used to locate the supposed treasures and direct the suckers where to dig. His excuse for not finding the treasures was that they were guarded by spirits who moved the treasure through the ground.

The relatives of one of his suckers had him arrested as a "juggler," which was the term used to mean "con man." He was brought before a justice of the peace in a preliminary hearing, or examination, to determine if he should be brought to trial. The judge, Albert Neely, determined there was enough evidence to try him, but he told Smith to take "leg bail" and get out of town and not return. This took place in Bainbridge, N.Y., in 1826. Several documents relating to the examination have been found, including the judge's bill for the examination. (It had been assumed the court appearance was an actual trial and the Mormons made issues about some discrepancies that violated trial procedures. But those procedures and the judge's bill make it clear that it was actually an "examination" rather than a trial. Smith was labeled a "glass looker" in the bill.) The evidence against Smith was sufficient that, if Smith had not taken "leg bail" and left town, he would certainly have been judged guilty in the resultant trial.

http://www.irr.org/mit/neely.html

Smith then went on and fabricated the Book of Mormon as another confidence scheme. He got his idea for the book from Ethan Smith's View of the Hebrews, or The Tribes of Israel in America, which was published in Poultney, Vt., when Oliver Cowdery, who became one of Smith's scribes, lived there.

Though he supposedly used a pair of phony spectacles to "translate" the plates for the Book of Mormon, his friends and relatives said he used his seer stone to do so. It was the same stone he used in his former money digging confidence scheme.

Continuing his calling as a con man, when he first started his church he required his converts to turn over all of their property to him. But that caused some problems, so he instituted tithing.

The gold plates never physically existed according to Martin Harris, one of the witnesses and the financial backer for the publication of the Book of Mormon. The printer of the book asked Harris if he saw the plates. Harris replied, "No, I saw them with a spiritual eye."

Stephen Burnett, an early Mormon convert, lost his faith when he heard Harris say something similar. Burnett said "I came to hear Harris state in public that he never saw the plates with his natural eye only in vision or imagination, neither Oliver nor David & also that the eight witnesses never saw them & hesitated to sign that instrument for that reason, but were persuaded to do it."

In an interview with Harris, Anthony Metcalf reported that Harris said, "I never saw the golden plates, only in a visionary or entranced state."

Details about the above information, particularly about the use of View of the Hebrews as the source for the Book of Mormon, can be found in Joseph Smith and the Origins of the Book of Mormon, by David Persuitte. Persuitte presents a very significant number of parallels between the two books.

On top of that, there has not been found one single piece of archaeological evidence to convincingly support the story of ancient America found in the Book of Mormon. In fact, in the 1950s, the LDS church financed "the largest and most ambitious archaeological project ever funded by a religious institution" in an attempt to uncover evidence for the Book of Mormon. It was successful in that it uncovered an enormous amount of archaeological information about ancient America, but as far as providing any evidence for the Book of Mormon, it was a dismal failure. That has not been changed by any subsequent archaeological findings.

That research project is described in Quest for the Gold Plates, by Stan Larson.

In addition, in his book, Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church, Simon G. Southerton shows that the American natives show no evidence of Israelite descent, which contradicts what the Book of Mormon says.

Added:

That is not the only document. There were several others, including the transcript of the hearing and other accounts by those who witnessed the hearing. They all confirmed that Joseph Smith was engaged in a money-digging confidence scheme. If Smith was not involved in a confidence scheme, why was there a hearing?

And there are a great many parallels between the two books, as Persuitte shows quite clearly--Ethan Smith's book even provides the basic story line of what would be the Book of Mormon.

I think I might vote for Romney. The old adage is, vote for the lesser of the two evils... but then on the other hand, why should we have to choose between evils? Because that's the world's system, and we still live on this side of the clouds. Sigh. But which one is the lesser??? How can we tell?

If it means that Romney gets in, manipulates the economy to tank, allowing the LDS to take over running the country thereby setting up the antichrist's system, causing Jesus Christ to come back sooner because of my vote, then so be it!....?

Or would that really be ethical? What a conundrum!

There are many more atheists in Congress than mormons, and obviously mormons have no problem with them running the country either. So exactly what is your point, unless you prefer to vote for your own preferred religion candidate regardless of his politics and abilities, and simply want to tell the world you do and to vote your way? Honestly. People don't LIKE Romney's policies and lack of abilities. That's why. Why make it about religion?

Nothing. Politically Mormons are actually quite moderate in comparison to the politics of many Evangelical types. I think people would need to worry less about a Mormon imposing his/her religious beliefs on the people than they would a Baptist or members of other conservative Christian religion.

For example compare Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee. By far Mike Huckabee has often inserted his religious ideology into his politics it doesn't seem to be that big of an issue when he does it. So far, I haven't heard seen Romney mix his religion with his politics much.

Some people talk about a Mormon conspiracy to to run the country. I can't even imagine that people would even think that's possible and even if it was what kinds of dangerous things do they think Mormons would do if they ran the country? If anyone cared to take an unbiased look into our history, they would see that Mormons strongly uphold the constitution and believe in freedom of religion.

Could be because when I was a Mormon in the 1970's the mormons in my ward where saying they could not wait for the LDS president to make laws against alcohol, smoking, drugs and other laws that go along with the LDS religion, but we all know that it has to go through congress first. Still we have never had a jewish President.

A Mormon will be president before an atheist will be. If you think your religion is the victim of religious prejudice, compare it to what happens to atheists. You guys ain't seen nuthin.

Romney is just not good presidential material. Always flip flopping on what he believes and he definitely has anger problems.

Sure, there might be a decent Mormon who I might not minding be a President who is not completely delusional and self-righteous, but Romney is not that guy.

no longer something.... I accept as true with the respond approximately JFK being Catholic and so on. They assumed approximately JFK that he could answer to the Pope and to no longer his cabinet, senators, or the human beings interior the rustic . i can work out that many could think of that a Mormon President could pass to President Monson or who ever the prophet is right this moment? They anticipate that Mormons could make the US a theocracy, which isn't real. by way of fact that Mormons abide with the aid of the comparable rules of the land as all human beings else and that those comparable rules can condemn us besides. The rules of the United State preclude theocracy from happening. Plus their are rumors that the Washington D.C. temple has an oval place of work in it, which in accordance to a pair anti-Mormon rhetoric is information that Mormons are going to take over and so on. that's unquestionably bogus besides by way of fact that all Mormon Temples are all equipped interior the comparable way with the comparable innovations of non secular guidance in strategies. One want basically seem at Harry Reid or Orrin Hatch to work out that Mormons exist on the two aspects of the Political spectrum, the two Republican and Democrat to comprehend that Mormons abide with the aid of the form and abide with the aid of the innovations of a consultant democracy. Edit: And appear is in basic terms proving my component, she thinks in basic terms as I stated that a Mormon president could finally end up answering to the Prophet. want I say extra that better than possibly the vast majority of Non-Mormons think of precisely the comparable.

As members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, we believe that the US Constitution is inspired of God. An LDS president, if living his religion, would uphold the Constitution, and the laws of the land. Since we believe that keeping the commandments of God is an absolute necessity, there would be no scandals.

An LDS president would be very likely to seek inspiration from God in his duties, which could only bless our nation.

Another one of our beliefs is that we allow all people to worship as they please, so there wouldn't be any imposing of LDS beliefs on others.

So, if he/she is living their religion, I don't see anything wrong with having an LDS President.

Nothing... unless he's Mitt Romney.

what do you mean we haven't had a problem?

our government is corrupt as any mideastern country.