Church & State, like beer & tequila, should never, ever mix.
Romney camp consulted with Mormon leaders
I guess the big fear that most people have regarding political candidates who belong to organized, hierarchical religions is the idea that the candidate's leadership would be tainted by the leader of their religion. Wasn't that the fear when Kennedy ran for president? That the pope would use Kennedy to promote the Catholic faith?
My big fear is not necessarily a mormon becoming president, but the repercussions in Utah of a mormon becoming president. An already warped and wacky place will become even more warped and wacky when they have an LDS president to gloat about.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I've been thinking about this whole LDS thing in Utah for several years. I guess I'm just outside of it enough. (as I am with most things) There's something of value to be learned there but I can't put my finger on it yet.
I'm a big believer in the separation of church and state. I thought Carter dealt with that issue well.
I think Carter was a good man. But he wasn't inside the bubble enough.
I think what "separation of church & state" means is quite different from what lots of other people think it means.
Personally, I think it means that a church or religion can't get entangled with state affairs to the point where the church is running the state. That's what I think the Founding Fathers were concerned about. So references to God, 10 commandments, etc. would be OK. The idea that we can love God (Allah, Mohammed, etc.) in His/(Her?) various forms and be able to express that love in our state affairs, but that no one particular religious mindset can gain control of state affairs.
What I feel the U.S. can learn from Utah is what happens when a church does gain control of state affairs, and what happens to the liberties of those who live in such a place. Quite a few (radical, I might add) ex-Mormons have called the LDS church in Salt Lake City the "American Taliban", and I've heard the same applied to the FLDS groups that practice polygamy as well.
The right has somehow managed to claim morality and religious values for themselves. Carl Rove was very skillful to align the bible belt to the Bush campaigns so they could come back into power.
Most bible belt people would never vote for a democrat and site abortion as the reason why. I'm a "liberal" and I'm against abortion.
The right has done a great job with the help of de-regulation and Clear Channel radio to feed a steady diet of propoganda to the blind masses who will never make enough money, for the most part, to actually benefit from the political affiliation.
As it was in the dark ages, those in power controled the masses and they do it through religion and limiting information.
They threaten to bring down our independent judiciary with their religious nonsense. It isn't enough that the admin can nominate judges to the supreme court while in power. They want more.
Mostly what they want more of is money.
But the divide between the haves and have nots is getting greater and America is starting to produce less than it consumes. This is what brought down the Soviet Union. It wasn't Ronald Regan like they would want you to think. It was corruption, and they consumed more than they produced.
I think Constance Rice, (liberal cousin of Condoleezza) is right when she says, "When you loose your middle class, you loose your democracy."
The bible belt people can take comfort in their faith because soon there might not be much else left for them.
I don't plan on voting for
I'm not going to vote for Mitt Romney (or any other LDS candidate) or Hillary Clinton.
Sadly, voting has become a statement of "who don't we want running our country" rather than "who should be running our country".
Post a Comment