And THIS is coming from people who “claim” to be “constitutional conservatives”.
Just like the Left, some are apparently willing to ignore the Constitution when it doesn’t conform to their own beliefs about what “should” happen.
Not good.
The First Amendment provides that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ....” and Article VI specifies that “no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”
Article 6 of the Constitution
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall Ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
<>
During his 2008 bid for the presidency former Governor Mitt Romney was incessantly questioned about his Mormon faith. It was so bad he had to give a famed “Faith in America” speech specifically declaring that electing him was not the same as putting the LDS church in charge of the nation
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=16969460
<>
Christianity Today
October 19, 2011 9:44AM
GOP Presidential Contenders Face Religious Test Questions at Debate
http://blog.christianitytoday.com/ctpolitics/2011/10/gop_presidentia.html
The question of faith and its influence for determining a presidential candidate came up Tuesday night in a GOP debate that was marked by heated verbal battles.
Former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who are both Roman Catholic, argued that faith says a lot about a candidate.
“It’s a legitimate thing to look at as to what the tenets and teachings of that faith are with respect to how you live your life and how you would govern this country,” Santorum said. “With respect to what is the road to salvation, that’s a whole different story. That’s not applicable to what the role is of being the president or a senator or any other job.”
Gingrich offered a similar view. “None of us should rush in judgment of others in the way in which they approach God,” Gingrich said. “But I think all of us would also agree that there’s a very central part of your faith in how you approach public life. And I, frankly, would be really worried if somebody assured me that nothing in their faith would affect their judgments, because then I’d wonder, where’s your judgment — how can you have judgment if you have no faith? And how can I trust you with power if you don’t pray?”
Texas Gov. Rick Perry simply said his faith is ingrained. “I can no more remove my faith than I can that I’m the son of a tenant farmer,” he said.
Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, as a Mormon, faced public resistance to his religion during his 2008 run for the nomination. The issue has only recently haunted his candidacy this cycle, highlighted again with comments made by a Southern Baptist pastor—and Perry supporter—Robert Jeffress’ that ignited a controversy at a summit hosted by the Family Research Council.
Romney argued for tolerance of religion.
“I don’t suggest you distance yourself from your faith any more than I would,” Romney told Perry. “[But] the founders of this country went to great length to make sure — and even put it in the Constitution — that we would not choose people who represent us in government based upon their religion, that this would be a nation that recognized and respected other faiths, where there’s a plurality of faiths, where there was tolerance for other people and faiths.”
Romney took advantage of the topic to criticize “the concept that we select people based on the church or the synagogue they go to,” which he called “very dangerous and an enormous departure from the principles of our Constitution.”
Romney added, “With regards to the disparaging comments about my faith, I’ve heard worse, so I’m not going to lose sleep over that.” ....
<>
PRUDEN: A religious test for a president
By Wesley Pruden
The Washington Times
Friday, September 2, 2011
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/sep/2/pruden-a-religious-test-for-a-president/print/
We’re getting close to the beginning of the new presidential election cycle, so we must get back to Sunday school. The pundits are parsing religion again. Somebody has to pose the liberals’ religious test for public office.
Bill Keller, executive editor of the New York Times, thinks the nation is in peril because several Republican candidates - and the incumbent president as well - are men and women of religious faith.
Mr. Keller likens religious faith to claims “that space aliens dwell among us” and says presidential candidates should be put to a faith test to determine whether they’re fit to hold public office. A belief that extraterrestrial creatures have visited Earth doesn’t necessarily disqualify a candidate “out of hand,” he says, but a careful voter “would certainly want to ask a few questions.”
It’s not easy for liberals like Mr. Keller to live in a corrupt, rotten society like ours, where every four years right-thinking citizens who read the New York Times, vacation on Martha’s Vineyard and eat their organic peas have to take a primer on what the crazy church folk, with whom they’re doomed to share the planet, believe is important.
This year it’s Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry who populate the worst nightmares of good and worthy folk. Four years ago it was President Obama and whether he shared the kooky racist beliefs of his Chicago pastor. He said he didn’t, and he gave a Christian testimony that would satisfy a fundamentalist test of faith.
Eight years ago, Joe Lieberman had to demonstrate that his Orthodox Judaism wouldn’t prevent his getting the lights turned on at the White House on a Saturday. Before that it was Jimmy Carter’s born-again faith, a straightforward description of spiritual conversion that the chattering class never could quite get straight (though it did sympathize with the lust Mr. Jimmy said he held in his heart).
Religion just doesn’t frighten Americans who live south and west of the Upper East Side of Manhattan. Three of 4 Americans tell pollsters they pray, a majority attend religious services at least occasionally, and many are there every time the church doors swing open.
We’ve got two dozen kinds of Baptists, millions of Roman Catholics, nine kinds of Methodists and Presbyterians, seven brands of Mennonites, five flavors of Quakers, a dozen denominations of Orthodox Christians from the East (some not necessarily very orthodox), 10 Lutheran bodies, four organized varieties of Jews, enough Muslims, an assortment of two dozen kinds of Pentecostals, and there’s even Bill Keller Ministries Inc., which advertises itself as “the world’s Online Church.” You can find it on the Internet. There’s no indication whether this is another Bill Keller or whether Bill the Pundit is moonlighting from his day job at the newspaper. That’s just the list of flavors from the World Almanac; there are others. God talk doesn’t frighten most folks because it’s the basis of the moral codes that still guide most of us.
Americans have a right to ask a presidential candidate about anything, and there are no dumb questions. Only dumb answers. A lot of ex-candidates who gave dumb answers could tell you that through scalding tears of bitter remembrance. Mr. Keller thinks he sets traps for Messrs. Perry and Romney and Mzz Bachman with devilishly clever questions, such as: Do you think America is a “Christian nation” or a “Judeo-Christian” nation? Would you appoint a Muslim to the federal bench? Should the theory of evolution be taught in the public schools? Is it fair to hold offensive remarks by a candidate’s pastor against the candidate?
These are perfectly legitimate political questions, easily answered by legitimate political candidates. The culture, the zeitgeist of America, is obviously Christian, both Judeo and otherwise.
That’s exactly what infuriates Mr. Keller and his like-minded unbelievers. A Muslim is as qualified as a Methodist to be a federal judge if he is qualified in the law and holds only to the Constitution and shuns Islamic law. Evolution should of course be taught in the schools as a scientific theory, but not as a quasi-religious doctrine. We’re all responsible for the reputations we make, and if we hang out with crackpot pastors and unrepentant killers, we have to take the consequences.
But some of the people who imagine they’re honest skeptics only pretend their questions are about politics, when they’re really about mocking religious belief. John F. Kennedy put such questions to rest, and the rest is history. Rick Perry, Mitt Romney and Michele Bachmann have a solid precedent.
• Wesley Pruden is editor emeritus of The Washington Times.
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ....” and Article VI specifies that “no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”
- - - -
It says CONGRESS. It doesn’t say anything about individuals not having a religious test. There cannot be laws stating that a certain faith cannot run. HUGE difference there, buddy.
Can you point to a single call among any sane Freepers who say that the law should be changed?
You say much to prove that you do not understand what you are talking about.
As a side note I may use ANY criteria I choose to pick a candidate, that is constitutional.
Listen you want to support Romney be my guest.
Do not try and teach people on FR about the Constitution, we know the Constitution.
You want to vote for him because he is lds, go ahead.
Do not try and tell people here on FR, that we can not choose the issues we want to choose.
Romney is a stink’n liberal BASED on his political record.
Romney’s world view is important to how he governs.
Romney’s belief system is important because it is the core of who he is. Romney believes by his own involvement in mormonISM by his own rise to power in the organization
What his belief system and world view is, it is who he is at his very essence.
Romney’s belief system as well as his governance is important.
Why you do not see that is curious.
Are you are supporter as the other 94% are, or do you actually find him a decent candidate?
It is very true that the Constitution says no religious test for holding office shall be required. This has to be understood in the context of the Stuart attempt to force everyone in the UK to profess according to the precepts of the Anglican Communion. When read with the 1st Amendment, we can see the FFs were concerned with the FEDs establishing a Church of the USA and making folks swear allegiance or pay taxes to it before they would be entitled TO RUN FOR OR HOLD HIGH OFFICE. The Constitution restricts the US government, and in certain small matters, the several sovereign states. It emphatically does not restrict the voters’ choices. We cannot legally prevent Mormons or Muslims from the ballot, but we do not have to vote for them, either, if we find their cults offensive and hold them suspect.
I lump Mormons and Muslims together because unlike almost every other faith tradition, they seem to think it is ok to lie to infidels.