ugh

[alonewiththemoon]

I really, really do not Mitt Romney to become president.  It would mark an enormous step backwards for this country.  Excerpt from his speech on religion and tolerance (oh the irony):

There are some who may feel that religion is not a matter to be seriously considered in the context of the weighty threats that face us. If so, they are at odds with the nation's founders, for they, when our nation faced its greatest peril, sought the blessings of the Creator. And further, they discovered the essential connection between the survival of a free land and the protection of religious freedom. In John Adams' words: "We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion... Our constitution was made for a moral and religious people."

Freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom. Freedom opens the windows of the soul so that man can discover his most profound beliefs and commune with God. Freedom and religion endure together, or perish alone.

[....]

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. He should remain on our currency, in our pledge, in the teaching of our history, and during the holiday season, nativity scenes and menorahs should be welcome in our public places. Our greatness would not long endure without judges who respect the foundation of faith upon which our constitution rests. I will take care to separate the affairs of government from any religion, but I will not separate us from "the God who gave us liberty."

Whole speech here.

He references JFK's "don't worry about my Catholicism" speech, but here is what JFK said:

Finally, I believe in an America where religious intolerance will someday end; where all men and all churches are treated as equal; where every man has the same right to attend or not attend the church of his choice; [emphasis mine]

[...]

I want a Chief Executive whose public acts are responsible to all groups and obligated to none; who can attend any ceremony, service or dinner his office may appropriately require of him; and whose fulfillment of his Presidential Oath is not limited or conditioned by any religious oath, ritual or obligation.

I feel more included by a 47 year old speech by a presidential candidate than I do by one given yesterday.  I am sincerely saddened by Mitt Romney's speech.  To me, the Founding Fathers' "God" and "religious people" are just shorthand for the ideas they wanted to convey about a just and equal society that takes care of its own, not something to be taken literally.  I'm sure there were plenty of atheists and agnostics back then; Benjamin Franklin for one was certainly a questioner of blind faith and sometimes of any faith at all, and a reading of Thomas Jefferson's papers shows he saw the basis for the Constitution in philosophy, not religion, and, most significantly, that he felt the common law upon which natural rights were based came from the pre-Christian Anglo-Saxons.  But in today's climate, literalism is in, nuanced readings are out, and I suspect reading the original sources is out as well.

I would like to think that if Romney doesn't win the Republican nomination, it is because others saw his betrayal of the principles of this country and rejected him for it, but I suspect it will be because of his religion, because most of the rest of America is just as narrow-minded as he is.  In a sense it would serve him right but it would be a hollow thing for those of us who don't happen to be one of the Peoples of the Book.

Comments

[anechoic.livejournal.com]

I would like to think that if Romney doesn't win the Republican nomination, it is because others saw his betrayal of the principles of this country and rejected him for it

Yeah, but consider his audience. That speech was all about convincing the Christian conservative base of the Republican party that Mormonism isn't a cult, and that he's committed to their goal of keeping religion tied to politics. If anything, I think that speech may bring him closer to the nomination.

As for the JFK reference, there were far more Catholics in this country when he gave that speech, than there are Mormons today. Romney has a lot more people to convince than JFK did.

[damiel.livejournal.com]

I just read your post after whining about the same thing in my journal. The carefully-spun parallels between this speech and JFK's is, frankly, a little revolting. Thanks for putting that emphasis there!

[tisana.livejournal.com]

"Freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom"

The hell it does. Freedom may require ethics based on personal morals, but that doesn't require faith in a higher being.

Ugh.