Romney’s Faith Speech Fudges God and Politics

As tightrope walks go, Mitt Romney’s speech in Texas yesterday on faith and politics was a fairly well executed performance. On the one hand, he had to be non-sectarian to avoid offending the majority of Americans who care not a bit about a politician’s religious belief. On the other, he had to assuage the suspicions of the radical religious right, who hold that the Mormon Church isn’t even Christian. At best, he achieved a partial success but likely, he changed very few minds.

Near the beginning, he observed, “Almost 50 years ago another candidate from Massachusetts [JFK] explained that he was an American running for president, not a Catholic running for president. Like him, I am an American running for president. I do not define my candidacy by my religion. A person should not be elected because of his faith nor should he be rejected because of his faith. 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.” Frankly, he could have quit there, but that is too short to make the front page of today’s paper.

On the side of religious tolerance, he said rather wisely, “It is important to recognize that while differences in theology exist between the churches in America, we share a common creed of moral convictions. And where the affairs of our nation are concerned, it's usually a sound rule to focus on the latter -- on the great moral principles that urge us all on a common course.” The state cares not why a citizen is good, only that he is good. Indeed, the founder of modern Germany Frederick the Great said, “All religions must be tolerated... for every man must get to heaven in his own way.”

Yet in the very same paragraph, Mr. Romney added, “Whether it was the cause of abolition, or civil rights, or the right to life itself, no movement of conscience can succeed in America that cannot speak to the convictions of religious people.” The right to life itself is, of course, a signal to the religious voters who care passionately about banning abortion – as if voting for the GOP in every election since Reagan’s 1980 victory got them anywhere. Mr. Romney has a bit of a befuddled track record on the issue, but by mentioning it here, he has put his marker down. By conflating it with the abolition of slavery and civil rights, he is acknowledging that many in the ban-abortion crowd view their cause as the moral equivalents of those other fights.

In giving the speech, Mr. Romney probably didn’t do himself any harm. He isn’t going to get very many votes from Democrats in the general election – after the last seven years of Bushevik misrule, there will be few Romney Democrats. He has kept himself viable with independents (who can vote in the New Hampshire Republican primary). And it is doubtful he turned off any of his GOP supporters. By the same token, he probably didn’t budge many of those who won’t vote for a Mormon.

According to an AP-Yahoo poll last month as reported on MSNBC, “fifty-six percent of white evangelical Christians -- a major portion of likely participants in the early GOP presidential contests in Iowa and South Carolina -- expressed reservations about a Mormon candidate. Among non-evangelicals, 48 percent said it troubled them. Almost a quarter -- 23 percent -- of evangelicals said they were very uncomfortable with the idea.” Perhaps they should open up the Gospel of Matthew and read chapter 7, verse 1, in which Jesus of Nazareth says, “Judge not, that ye be not judged.”

© Copyright 2007 by The Kensington Review, Jeff Myhre, PhD, Editor. No part of this publication may be reproduced without written consent. Produced using Fedora Linux.

Home