| |
| ||||||
|
religion and politics
For all but the last hour of California’s Super Tuesday, I was on the road or in a conference room in Orange County. Breaking news trickled in on my BlackBerry: Huckabee takes West Virginia; McCain engineers a hush-hush deal to thwart Romney; Romney stomps and kicks the dirt. There was far too little on news radio about the primaries, just speculation and filler. I made it home in time to cast my vote just before the primaries closed, and then Felicia and I sat back and watched the predictions roll in. A couple of days ago I read an opinion piece by John Paulos, who, I have to say, has some really bizarre hair. Paulos makes an interesting point:
He then goes on to pose twelve questions to the candidates in general, and to the more vocally religious candidates in particular (e.g. Huckabee and Mitt Romney). The questions themselves, while important, are secondary to the broader point being made here: that, like any prospective president’s voting record, position on controversial issues, potential scandals or questionable morality, a candidate’s personal religious beliefs should be open to scrutiny — particularly if that candidate is running on a faith-based platform or is openly religious. If a candidate’s sexual misconduct — an aspect of a person’s life which has arguably no bearing on their ability to perform the duties of the presidency — can be investigated and rigorously examined, then a candidate’s faith, which most certainly has a bearing on their decision-making process, should be fair game. This idea runs in a similar vein to one I have written about before, but is urgently more important. It is imperative that whomever we elect to run our country is capable of speaking plainly and openly about his or her religious or spiritual beliefs — capable of intelligent, animosity-free discourse about their faith, as well as discussion of its disadvantages or perceived flaws — for the simple reason that those beliefs will, to varying degrees, influence or even guide that person’s behavior in the most serious of scenarios. One of the questions Paulos asks speaks directly to that point:
Granted, the question could be phrased a little less combatively, but that shouldn’t lessen its impact, nor distract from the importance of the candidate’s response. I’m not confident that, if these questions were asked, they wouldn’t be deflected or defended against. Questions posed in a manner that reflects a genuine desire for real answers, and in such a way that doesn’t communicate the curious party’s bias, if it exists, are more likely to encourage conversation about this topic. Paulos raises another question in his article:
Which makes me wonder: Can a candidate of strong religious faith truly represent the entire spectrum of American interests? Paulos’ question makes it clear that at least one group of Americans felt discarded by Romney’s comments. Is there anything that a religious candidate could do to reassure Americans who are not of religious faith that their interests will be served and given equal attention and consideration? Or will those Americans resign themselves to a presidency that does not speak for them?
| | 
 Subscribe to RSS feed My Flickr photostream My Twitter feed  exit musicwaiting, seeingthat faint sensation of losskninjathe boondock skeinshow to be betterthe chime-maker’s nemesissome things change, some don’t, etc.ohh hahh ohh hahhdamn you, mollyView complete archive
  Lust, CautionDouble IndemnityIron ManForgetting Sarah MarshallThere Will Be BloodGone, Baby, GoneLive Free or Die HardThe Indian RunnerThe Iron GiantContactAn Inconvenient TruthX-Men: The Last StandSuperman ReturnsEnigmaNobody's FoolLook, Up in the SkyNumb3rsMission: Impossible IIIHeavenThe AbyssThe Constant GardenerThe Mosquito CoastThe HustlerLimboGrizzly ManThe VerdictSuperman ReturnsElizabethtownBattlestar GalacticaYou Can Count on MeRolling Roadshow 2005The American PresidentMy DVD collection
 01. dreaming of falling02. marvelous descent03. a conversation04. the colors05. huffnagle island06. a hundred million07. sixty-six stories08. anyone earthbound09. a girl named eleanor10. a route obscure and lonely11. a certain stillness12. this is jack13. wide flat lands14. going home15. girl unscrewed16. slow rehabilitation17. twenty-three stories18. a far-off point19. fifteen years quiet20. a one-beer fella21. luminescence22. one-sided conversation23. hearts big and stupid24. nineteen seventy-eight25. first light26. a hundred years27. too long to stop now28. plainswept29. a widower in training30. spies and assets31. thirty years and then some32. leaping over couches33. cricket song34. eleanor's first kiss35. like so much ballast36. too much37. the longest wait38. the second ice storm39. rocket summer40. waiting41. wax wings42. breakup43. tough beans43. the heavy gray sea
| |  welcome to sxswthe last omelettesummer of '69firewalker with melady bewarehow to drink winefish waffle beanbagssmells like granny fannysimple requeststudent of okinawan historyoperation dinner outstraight on til morningbillions and ... eh, whateversighton the subject of overtimepermafrostedthis morning on the waythree days laterrally, monkeygrowing shamessmall moves, captainbored beyond beliefso well, so strong, so slowthat was a good dayamazing storiescracked your codevarieties of experiencehate it when she does thatmost likely to wear tightsshould've been a cowboymean old menand scenetime-traveling head-puncherwhat're the odds?big k daysthis base will explodno place like50/100/buh-byefurther baseball conversationslongest last rites everwatch the skieswho needs sleeprogue agentred shag carpet and iced teafuck you, murphyslow driftpyro, singular possessivedecompositionwide-eyed wonderoctober morningnational pasttimewordplaymovie buff extraordinairean approximate transcripti wonder if neil simon had a catteach my feet to flyunexploredold girlfriend
  AchewoodAlligators in a HelicopterArt of the Title SequenceThe Big PictureA.V. ClubBinary BonsaiBluishorangeBrand NewCollision DetectionConsumeristCynical-C BlogThe Daily FigureFacetiously MeFast CompanyFirelandFool's ParadiseFtrainHacking NetflixIn the Kitchen with KristieIn One Ear...Looks Good Works WellKathleen EdwardsMark SimonsonOblivioOne Good MoveOur Secret HandshakePhotoshop DisastersPhysical InterfacePosterwireRoger Ebert JournalRyan KeberlySarah's SketchesThe Snowsuit EffortThree-Letter Word for ArtTomorrow MuseumTraditionally Modern DesignsUnreasonable FaithWarpspireWired - EpicenterWired - Geekdad The Eleanor SketchesMy FlickrSketch GalleryThe Dialogue ArchivesManualBest Fiction, Vol. 1DS on Archive.orgHosted by Kionic 9rules member | |
| ||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
February 8th, 2008 at 9:37 am
[…] The notion that God would be an active player in the Republican (or even Democratic) Party would have made them laugh at first, and recoil in horror second. […]