[Reaganesque]

Mitt Ping!

• Send FReep Mail to Unmarked Package to get [ON] or [OFF] the Mitt Romney Ping List •

[Vigilanteman]

We know the religion of the leading Democrat candidates is Lieberalism, despite any fig leaf they may claim to the contrary.

[donna]

I didn’t read Peggy’s whole sermon.

Did she say whether she would vote for someone of the Islamic persuasion, or not?

[hoosierham]

For the U.S. to have a chance at prosperity and freedom the politicians must not be of a faith which denies freedom like Islam.

[FastCoyote]

[..It’s never wholly unimportant, but you should never see a politician as a leader of faith, and we should not ask a man who made his rise in the grubby world of politics to act as if he is an exemplar of his faith, or an explainer or defender of it.]

In other words, a man’s religion is completely and utterly meaningless. Therefore everyone from Jihadis to Scientologists to Buddhist pacifists to Satanists are peachy.

[We have the emphasis wrong. It’s out of kilter. And the result is a Mitt Romney being harassed on radio shows about the particulars of his faith, and Hillary Clinton—a new-class yuppie attorney and board member—announcing how important her Methodist faith is and how much she loves wearing her diamond cross.]

I think the emphasis is just fine, if a politician doesn’t believe in their own religion, or their religion is bizarre, that is a big piece of the presidential puzzle (not the only one, but a big one). Hillary’s hypocrisy is just as important as the man-God beliefs of Romney.

I find this a bizarre distortion of the prominent place religion plays in the moral fiber of our nation.

[VOA]

People Before Prophets We're making too much of politicians'
religious faith.

Yes and no, IMHO.

Yes in that the politicians, if sufficiently "slick" might dupe
voters "on the cusp" in to voting for them by some well-rehearsed
(inauthentice/FAKE) profession of their religional "worldview".

No, in that voters that really care about faith/moral compasses
should pay attention to any signs of moral fiber AND/OR moral deficiency
before casting their votes.

Although he won...people should note that Australia's "value voters"
did shy aware from the fellow that beat John Howard in the recent election.

Suppossedly, this challenger pimped for votes from the religious/value
voters, saying that Christianity was all about "social justice".
BUT...apparently he did get asked in an interview if he believed if
Jesus was "the son of G-d". Observers said he froze for a couple of
seconds and then launched into a diverionary monologue about his
"well-known church attendance".
And like all great politicians...he didn't answer the question.