After months of resisting suggestions to publicy address his Mormon religion, Mitt Romney gave an impressive speech this week at College Station, Texas stating his position on what role if any, religion would play for him as president. I say it was impressive because, in my view, it should put to rest any doubts about Mormon influence upon public policy in a Romney Administration.
Some critics (such as Barry Lynn, who has made a career out of the issue of separation of Church and State) are complaining that Romney made no mention of atheists in his speech since he did mention Protestants, Catholics, Jews and Muslims. Similar sentiments appeared in the editorial pages of the Washington Post, New York Times, Seattle Post Intelligencer and Portland Oregonian. I think that is nitpicking. All in all, I thought Romney's speech was convincing and given in a forceful and sincere style.
I also find it interesting that Romney is being singled out for a religious test. No one seems interested in Hillary Clinton's religious convictions. Nor Obama's even though his church in Chicago is thought by some to be rather Afro-Centric. The pastor, Jeremiah Wright, is a controversial figure. His appearance a few months back on Hannity and Colmes was pretty confrontational.
As for Romney, I want to state here that I am not a Mormon. I also want to state that I don't know a great deal about their beliefs and practices. One reason is that many of their practices are kept secret from the public. However, when I look at Mormons that I have known, I am quite impressed with them as fellow citizens. So I would have no problem with a Mormon being in the White House as long as he or she adhered to the principles laid out by Romney in his speech.
Do all Americans feel that way? Apparently not. I remember seeing one gentleman refusing to shake Romney's hand on a campaign stop due to the Governor's religion. I think that was unfortunate. A recent poll suggests that a high percentage of voters would not vote for a Mormon, Jew or Muslim.
Now for a confession: In thinking about religions that I would not vote for, while I have no problem voting for a Mormon or Jew, I have to admit that under present conditions, I could not vote for a Muslim. (Apparently, about 80% of the population would also not vote for a Muslim.) Is this racism or religious bigotry? I don't think so. In my view, it's more nationalistic since a significant segment of Islam is at war against America and its very way of life. Until that situation passes from the world, I would not vote for a Muslim. Sorry, but that's the way it is. We currently have one member of Congress who is Muslim-Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN). From what little I have seen of him, I am not impressed. I can give him a pass on insisting on being sworn in on a Quran instead of a Bible. Where he really turned me off was with his behavior as a committee member during recent hearings on the Jena 6 imbroglio. On that occasion, he was very condescending and belittling in his treatment of the black US Attorney for New Orleans over that office's refusal to indict white high school students for hate crimes. Ellison basically implied that the gentleman was an "Uncle Tom".
But back to Romney. I am willing to judge him on his merits, beliefs and policies. I am yet undecided on whom I will vote for in the primary, but Romney is near the top of my list. If he gets the nomination, I will certainly vote for him against Hillary or any of the other Democrats.
At any rate, I think we should put the religious issue to rest for Romney.
No comments:
Post a Comment