hmm...hippocracy?

Friday, December 7, 2007

So Thursday was Romney’s “big” speech about religion in which he attempted to do the same thing John Kennedy did during the 1960 presidential election. Both wanted to tell voters how their religion would not control the White House and that because we have the freedom, a person’s religion shouldn’t matter. That this country was built on tolerance for all views and beliefs
Well this where is where Romney dived and I have issues with. First off he stated that “freedom needs religion and religion needs freedom” ummm….excuse me? Does that mean that if you aren’t religious you can’t be free? What about if you aren’t part of the dominate religion? What about people who have different beliefs such as polytheistic or newer/smaller monotheistic ones? The last I checked the United States is not a theocracy. The other thing he said I cringed at was his attack on secularists who think religion has no place in government.
According to him if you don’t talk about god or preach or whatever, then you can’t run for any office. So me being agnostic I have no place in a government by the people and for the people? By that logic does he think that John McCain should never have been elected a U.S. Senator, much less be running for president? McCain is a Baptist (if I remember right) but during his campaigns he doesn’t make it the focus and by that I mean he doesn’t really mention it much, or sit and pander to certain groups. I would suggest Mr. Romney take a look at something called the establishment clause and the declaration that no religious test will be given to hold any office in the U.S. Constitution if he is going to consider that line of reasoning.
But I digress; this speech was about religious tolerance so even though he attacked me I can’t attack him.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CchMtS3odDQ