Thursday, December 06, 2007
Romney Vows Not to Serve Atheists
Gov. Romney's Religious Speech Today - HUMAN EVENTS: "'We separate church and state affairs in this country, and for good reason. No religion should dictate to the state nor should the state interfere with the free practice of religion. But in recent years, the notion of the separation of church and state has been taken by some well beyond its original meaning. They seek to remove from the public domain any acknowledgment of God. Religion is seen as merely a private affair with no place in public life. It is as if they are intent on establishing a new religion in America – the religion of secularism. They are wrong. 'The founders proscribed the establishment of a state religion, but they did not countenance the elimination of religion from the public square. We are a nation 'Under God' and in God, we do indeed trust. 'We should acknowledge the Creator as did the Founders – in ceremony and word."
In a way, I feel for Romney. Whatever he said today was going to be picked apart. There are going to be plenty of aha's to come on what he has said and mostly from people that were not or would not support him. I am of that ilk. This, however, is not a reason to fail pointing out some of the core problems with him and his speech.
Saying with that kind of pointedness that secularists are wrong tells me what I already knew deep down. Romney could not possibly be my leader. He may end up leading this country, but he cannot be my leader, because his core belief is that my beliefs are wrong and simply don't count. As Romney went through the list of religions for which he had respect, anti-theism was not mentioned. I actually was hoping, for his sake, that he was actually going to be inclusive of the entirety of American beliefs. That seemed to be the course of the speech. I was wrong. Not only was he not going to acknowlege an anti-theists Americanism, but was sure to denounce another's beliefs even as he stood to gain respect regardless of his own.
He, on the one hand, lauded separation of Church and State and on the other, suggests religion's rightful place is in the "public square". How a man who was Governor of a very powerful state could not see that these are conflicts is stunning.
He says: "Let me assure you that no authorities of my church, or of any other church for that matter, will ever exert influence on presidential decisions. Their authority is theirs, within the province of church affairs, and it ends where the affairs of the nation begin."
Then he quotes the bible and says the following: ""My faith is grounded on these truths. You can witness them in Ann and my marriage and in our family. We are a long way from perfect and we have surely stumbled along the way, but our aspirations, our values, are the self-same as those from the other faiths that stand upon this common foundation. And these convictions will indeed inform my presidency."
If you first believe in this faith, believe in its weekly teachings, follow its holy law, and expect it to 'inform [your] presidency, then the former is in conflict with the latter.
Again, I make no pretenses about my distrust of him on many issues, of which this is simply one, but any person wanting to lead the free world should be smart enough to want to lead those of all beliefs when seeking a pardon for his own. It appears Governor Romney and his speech writers don't agree with me on this either.
In a way, I feel for Romney. Whatever he said today was going to be picked apart. There are going to be plenty of aha's to come on what he has said and mostly from people that were not or would not support him. I am of that ilk. This, however, is not a reason to fail pointing out some of the core problems with him and his speech.
Saying with that kind of pointedness that secularists are wrong tells me what I already knew deep down. Romney could not possibly be my leader. He may end up leading this country, but he cannot be my leader, because his core belief is that my beliefs are wrong and simply don't count. As Romney went through the list of religions for which he had respect, anti-theism was not mentioned. I actually was hoping, for his sake, that he was actually going to be inclusive of the entirety of American beliefs. That seemed to be the course of the speech. I was wrong. Not only was he not going to acknowlege an anti-theists Americanism, but was sure to denounce another's beliefs even as he stood to gain respect regardless of his own.
He, on the one hand, lauded separation of Church and State and on the other, suggests religion's rightful place is in the "public square". How a man who was Governor of a very powerful state could not see that these are conflicts is stunning.
He says: "Let me assure you that no authorities of my church, or of any other church for that matter, will ever exert influence on presidential decisions. Their authority is theirs, within the province of church affairs, and it ends where the affairs of the nation begin."
Then he quotes the bible and says the following: ""My faith is grounded on these truths. You can witness them in Ann and my marriage and in our family. We are a long way from perfect and we have surely stumbled along the way, but our aspirations, our values, are the self-same as those from the other faiths that stand upon this common foundation. And these convictions will indeed inform my presidency."
If you first believe in this faith, believe in its weekly teachings, follow its holy law, and expect it to 'inform [your] presidency, then the former is in conflict with the latter.
Again, I make no pretenses about my distrust of him on many issues, of which this is simply one, but any person wanting to lead the free world should be smart enough to want to lead those of all beliefs when seeking a pardon for his own. It appears Governor Romney and his speech writers don't agree with me on this either.
