"Don't Ask, Don't Tell" Re: Religion and Politics!

I too believe in the Separation of Church and State. One would think that Presidential candidates would be careful about high-profile preachers and their backgrounds and words. Sens. Barack Obama and John McCain have already slipped up on the preacher side. They have both been embarrassed by the support of preachers who have gone far over the line from the pulpit and beyond. McCain is the latest to suffer humiliation. The Rev. John Hagee of San Antonio has stepped over the bounds of propriety not once but twice. His support was sought by the presumptive GOP nominee long before his rants were made public. A search of Hagee's sermons found that he said God had sent Hitler to deliver Jews to the Promised Land. That was too much for McCain, and he denounced his words and disavowed his endorsement. Earlier, Hagee had made disparaging remarks about the Roman Catholic Church that McCain disavowed. But he said he couldn't be responsible for everything a supporter might say. Obama was put to the test, and failed at first, on fiery words said by the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, his pastor in Chicago. Wright damned America for its treatment of African-Americans during the nation's history. Obama separated himself from those words but not his pastor. He was ripped by Republicans and their pundit allies in the media. Wright compounded the problem with some ridiculous comments during a speech at the National Press Club. He seemed to be enjoying his time in the limelight. Obama finally freed himself from his ties to the preacher. Another reason religion should be taken out of politics is because many politicians make many promises to people of faith and never deliver. Basically they used them for votes. Lloyd

About religion and politics. Now I am a Christian, does that mean that in the public eye, although the pastor says that "thou shalt not covet also applies to gambling," that when I go out in public, I cannot show my Christian nature and I must gamble if our government says the proceeds are to feed the hungry? Now this is a simplistic idea. But lets take Bush for instance. He is a Methodist Christian, not the same view that I hold, and he is against abortion, therefore he has a right to say he is against it publicly. Stating one's religion when one is a candidate also shows the people what the candidate is living up or down to. For instance, if Obama suddenly said, "I converted to the Islam religion," then we would expect him to go to the Mosque on Fridays, and follow their precepts. If McClain said, "I will not open an abortion clinic," and then we see a photo of him cutting the ribbon at an abortion clinic, then his standards are in question and I would expect to see a news report saying , that the McClains were at Church on Sunday as usual.. So you may want ah President who lets you do what you want in the gray area, but I would want who stands up to the standards his religion preaches.

For the most part, I do agree with you on this. I don't care what ones religious beliefs are and I've always wondered why that was an issue in politics. When Mitt Romney's being mormon was an issue, i thought it silly. I did not like mitt romney and it had nothing t o do with his being mormon. to me it was a non-issue. Obama however is another story. His religion is very obviously anti-white and anti-american. When you go to church, it is because you subscribe to the beliefs of that church. If a man is running for president of the US and the church that he has attended and been very devoted to for 20 years is anti-american....well, that does cause me concern and I think it is very relevant in the election.

Hi anniepa, I agree with you completely, separation of church and state is very important. Isn't that why many people came to America in the first place? Some people can't seem to separate the two, and I think that is just too bad. Candidates should be judged on their political views only and and not if they they attend church or not, much less which one. Politics and religion should have nothing to do with each other. Blessings.

My thoughts exactly. The days of passing "laws" of what is right and wrong that are grounded in religion, mainly Christianity, should be over. Some issues that are grounded in religion (for those that don't know)- gay marriage and stem cell research are the first ones that came to mind. I would claim that at this moment, seperation of church and state doesn't exist in the states. Though it is supposed to.

I am a Christian who believes that seperation of church and state is good for the protection of both and all citizens. The US government is not supposed to support or enforce a State religion - an establishment of religion. Our founding fathers knew the perils and persecutions that occured in England as a result of an established State Church - The Church of England. To be free, the citizens of the US must be free to worship as they choose as long as that does not harm or infringe on the BASIC rights of others. (Some people get confused and think one of their basic rights is to not have to hear about, think about, or be aware of any beliefs outside of their own.) I don't believe that public life needs to be completely sanitized of religion. Our leaders should be held to a higher standard and should expect higher levels of scrutiny. Their physical exams and medical tests are a concern to the public, as well as their moral beliefs, personal practices, and emotional constitution. We should be informed about our candidates. If most people choose to vote or not vote for someone based in whole or in part on that person's religion - well, hey, it's a free country! If a majority vote that way - that's how our democracy works; rule by the majority. By the way, most of the Founders of our Constitution were more properly defined as Theists, not Christians. And even though I consider myself a fairly conservative, but a little moderate, Christian, I would not vote for someone who wanted to establish this country as a "Christian nation".

I accept and agree to you about religion ! None should force another to take their religion. God will judge whose religion is better or not ! God sent me in a religion and another to another religion what is my fault or what is his/her fault? Who is religious who respect human and do lot of welfare for human ! Cruel have no religion though he born in a religion.

anniepa you just said a mouthful and I totally agree. ones religion is one's own business. It should not have anything to do with choosing a President of the USA at all.I too would love to hear a candidate say that' their religion was nobody's business but their own. Religion and politics should not mesh. they are separate things.

The character of a canditiate and his/her moral values are extremly important. He/she should not shove their beliefs down the other persons throat. It's not a big deal what the other persons religious beliefs are as long as they have an impeccable character an an excellent moral/value system. Alot of ground experiance and they will make excellent choice for the top position. it does not matter what religion the person is, wheather he/she is black/white/or anyother colour as long as they are the naturally born citizen of the country.

Hear hear, Annie!! This is fantastic, I couldn't be more pleased if I wrote this myself! I feel much the same way as you do and have the same convictions. I am not against anybody having their own personal religion, but I am of the mind that it has as much to do with a person as the color of their hair or whether they have freckles or not. It is not a basis to choose somebody to associate with, it is not a basis for how well (or not) anybody will perform a job - well, as long as they never allow their religious beliefs to get in the way of their job duties. I believe presidential and other government candidates should remain neutral - because that will make them appeal to all sides and there is less chance of them being supported by just one side or the other. I'm not sure if we even are predominantly Christian any more, are we? If we are, why and how did statisticians come to that conclusion? People want to feel that their government represents them, so in this way I would prefer someone who doesn't lean too far one way or the other, they need to be open to reason wherever it may lie. While a person can certainly use their faith based beliefs in order to make decisions that only affect them, when they are dealing with something that affects other people, that needs to be considered and maybe they need to take a moral back seat. One example I am thinking of involves the pharmacy tech who refused to dispense a prescription for birth control pills to a client. This was extremely wrong and basically meant she was NOT fulfilling the duties of her job - which is to dispense prescrptions no matter what they are! Her personal beliefs and moral code should not impact another person, ONLY HER. If the actual legal laws of the country follow along with something that is morally correct, that is one thing, but if not, we do not need these misguided people playing God. Things like this anger me a lot, where do people get off behaving like this? I think she was fired, I really really hope so. I would have pulled her license and not allowed her to work in a pharmacy again unless she made a public apology and wrote in a contract that she would never do such a thing again.

WOW! you guys wright alot! COOL! I will give it to you simple.. CHurch and Government has divided our world. They also have created wars the day this two started. Way should we even follow or believe all what they say?? Amen

Well said.

I believe that separation of church and state has been widely used to quieten Christians. I think the original intent was for the government to not interfere with any religion/choosing leaders, etc., and church leaders were not to come into government using their religion as a tool to get their way. Religion is a part of most of our lives. God is within us, so how can we separate our religion from the life we live? I agree that we are a diverse nation with many different religions, but with politically correctness, I see Christians more and more being sifted out and other religions appeased. I believe we should know what a presidential candidate believes. It is part of his character, and I want a president that is strong in his faith and relies on God to get him through the day. I appreciate the way President Bush has not been ashamed to admit he is a Christian and that he prays daily over this nation.

Unfortunately you have overlooked the fact that almost all of our substantive laws are based on religious beliefs. Thou shalt not steal, thou shalt not kill ect. Religion has given us the moral code we live by and thereby been forged into the laws by which we govern ouselves as a society. The rapid moral degeneration of this country is commensurate with the attack on religion. I am not saying that athiest ro those of differing beliefs are amoral, to the contrary, most are of the highest moral standard. What I am saying is that while the specific faith of a candiate is not the most important factor it is a factor in as much as they will govern according to thier beliefs. I for one am much more comfortable with a president that has the same moral convictions and beliefs that I do. This country is still a representative democracy and to me that means those elected to govern us should be representative of the majority. While the elite are quick to say otherwise the majority of this country are people of faith.