Ok, I shouldn’t be surprised by hypocrisy in the media, and pointing it out may be an exercise in futility, but I can’t help it.
For a long time now we’ve heard over and over from pundits that Mitt Romney’s religion should not be used as a test as to whether or not he is qualified to be the President. That’s been bugging me for a long time. Of course his religion should not disqualify him for being allowed to be the President. In this country you can be any religion or no religion and be the President; heck, a Satanist could be the President according to the Constitution. So, the fact that Romney is a Mormon would not disqualify him.
However, his religion can (and probably should) be a factor in an individual deciding whether or not to vote for him. When I think of all the variables that make up my decision on who to vote for, the candidate’s religion (or lack thereof) is part of that calculus.
But, back to the hypocrisy. For so many months we’ve been told that we should not hold Romney’s religion against him. Yet now that Huckabee is being discovered by more and more people it seems that I’m hearing more and more in the media saying that we shouldn’t vote for him because he is such an outspoken evangelical.
Let me get this straight: it’s wrong to have a negative opinion of Romney being a Mormon, but we should be wary of Huckabee because he is an outspoken Evangelical Christian? So he is not qualified because he is serious about his Christian faith? I’ve heard all kinds of commentators saying that the Republican Party is scared to death that a sincere Christian might actually win the nomination. If that is the case then the Republican Party is showing that they’ve just been using the evangelicals for their vote all this time. If your religion should not disqualify you, then Huckabee’s faith should not be such a talking point.
I’m really starting to believe that it’s true that Evangelical Christians are the last group that it’s OK to discriminate against.
The real problem is the media is beginning to realize that a coservative, God-fearing individual could actually become president. This scares them to death. They will do all they can to discredit anyone who stands opposed to their Godless views.
The religion-related concern is not that Huckabee is an evangelical or even an “outspoken” evangelical. The concern, rather, is that Huckabee — given his checkered ethical history and his tendency to emphasize his religion on the stump — will not be willing or able to distinguish his religious preferences and beliefs from the constitutional obligations of a President of the United States. There is a real, legitimate fear that Huckabee would discriminate in executive appointments and other decisions on the basis of religion. That kind of behavior in the Oval Office could quickly Balkanize the United States. Finally, for Republicans who care about winning the presidency in 2008, Huckabee would be a disastrous nominee. He’s just too easy a target for the Dems.
Jedijd,
I’m sorry, but that just doesn’t make sense. We’ve had a number of presidents in modern history who have been outspoken about their faith and they did not turn America into a theocracy. For crying out loud, Jimmy Carter was a Sunday School teacher! Now, while he may have been a bad president, he didn’t override the Constitution for the sake of his stated religious faith. Bill Clinton claimed to be a good Southern Baptist and his wife claimed to be a good Methodist. Bill DEFINITELY did not let his religion affect his actions in office, personal or public, and I don’t hear anyone crying about Hilary and her Methodism.
In our government, there is no way that a person could let their government overrule the constitution, there are simply too many checks and balances. Political appointees have to be approved, procedures have to be followed, and supreme power is not in the office of the president. Furthermore, why should there be a religious litmus test for Huckabee when all the pundits are screaming that such a test should not be there for Romney? Huckabee should be judged on his policies, not his religion.
Finally, I don’t buy that the Republicans are scared of putting Huckabee up against the Dems. The Republicans have been courting evangelicals for years… if they really believe their platform they should have no trouble putting up an evangelical. Things like freedom, sanctity of life, freedom of religion, morality, care for Creation and concern for the needy are all supposed to be a part of the Republican ethos: why not nominate a man who firmly believes in these things– not one who switches to those beliefs right before an election.
I don’t know what “checkered ethical history” you are talking about: it’s pretty bad when all Romney can throw on him is that he was too compassionate in pardoning criminals as a governor. As far as his “tendency to emphasize his religion on the stump”– I call that honesty. If only Romney could be so honest about what his religion teaches and believes.
Too easy a target for the Dems. I’m sorry, but if he’s too good, too honest, and too religious for the Republicans then the evangelicals need to find a new party.