Connect with us

Ignite the Pulpit

Faith and politics

Published

on

The solid-gold Menorah, a project of the Temple Institute. The Bank of Israel should buy gold bullion to afford a Temple to put this object into.

A Texas pastor opened a hornet’s nest this week when he commented on Mitt Romney’s Mormon faith. Although many think Mormonism is a cult-like religion, Mormons (like Jews and Christians) uphold the Mosaic Code and the principles of Christianity.

Questioning someone’s faith

Governor Rick Perry. How does his faith inform his decisions?

Governor Rick Perry (R-TX) addresses the 2011 Conservative Political Action Conference. Photo: Gage Sizemore, CC BY-SA 2.0 Generic License.

Is it fair to question a politician’s faith? The answer is YES! But not for the reasons many may think.

Faith and politics are a sure way to break up social (especially family) gatherings. But they are perhaps the exact topics we should speak about incessantly. Very few issues affect our daily lives as these two Taboo subjects do. However, the purpose of examining a politician’s faith is not to promote one’s creed.

The Judeo-Christian faith clearly sets standards of right and wrong. The Old Testament standard is the Ten Commandments. The New Testament embraces the Old Testament Mosaic Code and adds the Golden Rule – love your neighbor as yourself. When candidates who are true to the tenets of their faith get elected, the rest of us should be able to trust what principles they bring into government. This is not to say that those who do not embrace Judeo-Christian moral codes have no moral code. But without the clear standards that have stood for millennia, those codes and their worldview might not be clear. They are free to decide whatever is right or wrong in their own eyes and create their own moral standards.

Faith in a republic

Knowing a person’s faith is especially important in a republican form of government where decisions are made every day that affect the lives of many. Our founders understood this when they stated on many occasions and in many different ways that we should “prefer” Christians in government. These are the same men that wrote the First Amendment that protected our freedom to practice religion as we see fit. Their preference wasn’t based on their wish to convert the nation to Christianity. They understood that for anyone to be able to worship as they see fit, they must assure that everyone can worship as they see fit. Their preference was based on practicality – or an understanding that people of faith bring (or should bring) the principles of their faith into their decision-making process.

Conclusion

During campaign season, candidates must answer many questions about the issues of the day. People want to know where these men and women stand on a variety of issues. The problem is that the issues in the forefront today most likely will not be in the forefront tomorrow. Additionally, our elected officials will face a multitude of decisions that never make the news or receive public attention. A republic works best when we can trust our representatives to do the “right” thing. In order to be able to trust that they do what’s right, you should know what they consider to be right vs. what is wrong. And what better indication is there to know how a person thinks than their faith?

Advertisement

You may or may not agree with the Texas’ pastor’s opinion about Mormonism. But in my opinion it is entirely proper to examine the faith of those asking for your vote – especially in a republic such as ours.

Featured image: a solid-gold menorah, symbol of an imperishable faith, stands in Jerusalem’s Old City, awaiting its use in a dreamed-of Third Temple. Photo: CNAV.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Website | + posts

RoseAnn Salanitri is a published author and Acquisition Editor for the New Jersey Family Policy Council. She is a community activist who has founded the Sussex County Tea Party in her home state and launched a recall movement against Senator Robert Menendez. RoseAnn is also the founder of Veritas Christian Academy, as well as co-founder of Creation Science Alive, and a national creation science speaker.

Advertisement
29 Comments
0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

29 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Geno

From the United States Constituion, Article VI:
“no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.”

I think that says it all…..

Geno

Terry wrote:
“You know perfectly well that that does not forbid a voter to vote for or against someone on account of his religion, or lack of it.”

Geno answers:
Absolutely. We are free to vote for whoever we want (except here in Oklahoma) for whatever reason we want. For example, you might choose to vote against Obama because he’s black. That is your constitutional right.

The issue here is a specific claim made that:
“Our founders understood this when they stated on many occasions and in many different ways that we should “prefer” Christians in government.”

I merely pointed out that Article VI of the Constitution of the United States of America is in direct contradiction to the claim. Given what is explicitly stated in the constitution, this article is little more than an attempt to make religious bigotry somehow an exercise in patriotism that would be supported by the founders of the nation.

#####

Terry claims:
” Or do you desire to invalidate the votes of people of faith precisely because they have faith, and would know the faith, or lack of faith, of any who ask for their votes?”

Geno answers:
Unfounded implication noted.

Nowhere have I ever so much as suggested anyone’s vote should be “invalidated.” Terry knows I have dedicated much of my life to defending our constitutional freedoms. That he should even imply I would support their violation is offensive.

Perhaps I’m more sensitive to religious discrimination in presidential politics because my denomination of Christianity (Roman Catholic) was discriminated against for most of the nation’s history.

Geno

Terry says:
“All I know about you are your remarks, and their tone. And by that tone, I draw certain inferences.”

Geno replies:
Then you know, by my remarks, that I spent over 12 years in the military defending the constitutional rights of all Americans.

You infer, by me having documented the founders of this nation EXPLICITLY included in the Constitution a prohibition of religious tests for office that I would support “invalidating” someone’s vote. That’s quite a stretch, Terry.

Geno

Terry claims:
“The issue was whether a candidate’s campaign ought to mention the subject, and what a voter ought to make of it. But along you come, and say, “No, no. That’s wrong. Any campaign that did that, and any voter who so voted, would violate Article Six of the Constitution. You’re trying to set up a religious test for office.””

Geno points out:
Like it or not, this article specifically suggests a religious test for office. I have pointed out this is not in keeping with what is explicitly written in the Constitution. On the other hand, those who seek to support their religious discrimination have no Constitutional support at all.

Make what you will of it.

Geno

Terry writes:
“neither you nor any other leftist …”

Geno replies:
Which goes to clearly show you ass-u-me far too much. I would only be a “leftist” when compared to someone who is to the right of Atilla the Hun.

Just as a for-instance, I’ve voted in some 11 presidential elections and not once has a democrat gotten my vote.

Geno

Terry said:
“Secular humanism is the semi-official anti-religion of the Democratic Party.”

Geno points out:
I’m a Catholic, not “secular humanist.” While I am registered to vote as a Democrat, that is a fairly recent thing (since I moved to Oklahoma) and was done for one reason only.

As I said, in Oklahoma, we aren’t free to vote for anyone of our choice as write-ins are not allowed. Further, one cannot cannot cross party lines in primary elections. Republicans field few, if any, candidates in local elections. Therefore, local elections are almost always decided by the winner of the Democratic primary. In order to participate in any meaningful way in local elections, it is necessary I be a registered Democrat. In virtually all state and federal elections, my votes go to Republican candidates.

#####
Terry claims:
“the sort of open criticism of voters for examining the faith of a candidate, that you left on this comment space, is part and parcel of secular humanism.”

Geno comments:
Irrelevant. If I happen to agree with someone on one issue doesn’t mean I have to agree with them on all issues. For example, we share a disdain for Obama and what he has been trying to do to us.

#####
Terry claims:
“I therefore know you by the company you keep. And that company is distinctly unsavory.”

Geno responds:
Likewise, I’m sure.

Joel V

Knowing a political candidate’s religious views is certainly an important variable, but at the same time shouldn’t be the only variable.

Though I do wish that there would be some emphasis in the American educational curriculum concerning world religions, it would clear up a lot of ignorance in this country.

Emerson White

I suspect that you highly overestimate your own ability to detect someones true faith based on their outward expressions of faith. How many pastors over the years have wrapped themselves in the flag and the bible while stuffing their pockets with filthy lucre?

Emerson White

Well eventually yes, but the regular pastor can steal a lot of stuff and steal for decades with out getting fired. i remember a pastor in a 500 seat church stealing something like 1.3 million dollars over the course of 20 years from his church.

I am not overestimating my ability to determine someones ideological stance based on their campaign, I recognize how very weak it is. I tend to vote based on perceived competence. If someone really can’t do a good job of making it look like their head is screwed on straight I assume that it isn’t.

I wrote in Ron Paul, I couldn’t bring myself to vote for McCain/Palin, especially not after the Couric interview, After Palin was brought on board I did sport an Obama pin for a while while I was trying to woo an Obama campaigner, boy was she good looking. To some extent ideology can be inferred from voting record, which is nice. However the open declaration of faith is the easiest thing to fake.

Emerson White

What did Obama steal? Or are you talking about thief in the social parasite sense?

I am a fan of Ayn Rand. I even took a date to Atlas Shrugged Part I, a girl who I was interested in because she liked Ayn Rand. However Ayn had some pretty peculiar views of sexuality that I just don’t cotton to. She had a great body, and really nice skin and really great hair, totally woo worthy. Long term marriage material? Not so much.

Emerson White

I do find it a bit ironic that you are using Ayn Rand in your defense of religion as a means of judging politicians.

Geno

Terry said:
“Catholics these days are very weak on the fundamentals of the faith.”

Geno answers:
If by that you mean we aren’t fundamentalists, you are absolutely right. We also don’t accept “sola scriptura.”

#####
Terry said:
“They ceded the high ground of “science” to the evolutionists.”

Geno answers:
Yeah…. we learned our lesson with Galileo… a couple hundred years before your denomination of Christianity even existed. The turn of fundamentalism will come and it will be at the hands of physics, not evolution.

#####
Terry said:
“You might as well have said that any voter who wants to apply his own test for higher office, which test happens to be religious, should not vote.”

Geno answers:
I guess you missed this explicit statement made by me:
“We are free to vote for whoever we want (except here in Oklahoma) for whatever reason we want. For example, you might choose to vote against Obama because he’s black. That is your constitutional right.”

That said, just because it is your constitutional right doesn’t mean it’s the right thing to do. Further, as I have pointed out, my specific objection was with the claim made by the author that:
“Our founders understood this when they stated on many occasions and in many different ways that we should “prefer” Christians in government.”

Again, I point out this statement is at odds with what is clearly stated in the Constitution. In other words, I have constitutional authority for my position that we should not use a candidates religious beliefs as a qualifier for public office. Do you have a right to do so? Yes. Is it right to do so? No.

I said it before, and I’ll say it again. This article is nothing more than an attempt to justify religious bigotry using alleged but undocumented claims of support for such descrimiination by the Founding Fathers.

This whole exercise reminds me of what happened when my mother moved to Oklahoma and neighbors would recommend workmen to help remodel her house. She got ripped off by so many “fine Christian gentlemen” that she finally told people she doesn’t care if a worker is a devil worshiping
pagan as long as he did good work.

It is my opinion that the only LEGITIMATE test for public office is how well a candidate will do the job. JFK proved a couple generations ago the religious bigotry practiced by the exclusion of Catholics from the presidency was wrong and it’s just as wrong for fundamentalist “Christians” to engage in such behavior today.

Emerson White

You used Ayn Rand at all, and that makes it ironic

Emerson White

If she is correct but her reasoning is false then why cite her? You cite someone as shorthand for their argument.

Emerson White

If you saw what kind of body she had I don’t think you would be giving me this much guff about my choices.

Besides, I’m an Atheist Republican with Austrian Economic leanings. there are exactly 5 women in the world who I are my age, single, in moderately good health, and who I can consider complete political allies, I have yet to locate any of those 5. I’ve got to compromise somewhere or be very very lonely.

Trending

29
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x