Religion and Politics

Judging form the comments of late, I see no one is reading my blog. Which means this is as good a time as any to bring up something controversial on my mind. Religion and Politics. And this has, of course, been on my mind since the Romney speech on faith last week. If you missed it, you can go here. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/06/us/politics/06text-romney.html?ex=1354683600&en=3f39c611df00349e&ei=5124&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink

I have never claimed to be a Romney supporter, and I don't plan to suddenly start fawning over him. But, I was for the most past impressed with this speech. As a Mormon, I have waivered between wishing Romney wasn't running so people wouldn't be constantly brining up his religion and indignation that simply because Romney is a Mormon people might not vote for him and gratitude that this has opened the door to a somewhat greater understanding of the Latter-day Saint faith.

A few comments on what he said:
"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." I know that there are people out there who are concerned that because Romney is a Mormon and we believe in latter-day prohpets, that he will be directed by the prophet. I know that President Hinckley, the current prophet, loves liberty, and has an incredibly strong devotion to a seperation of religion and politics. It would be stepping beyond his authority as president of the church and a prophet of God to tell the presidnet what to do. He has not done so with prior presidents, and he would not abuse a president's personal beliefs to gain power. That would only damage the image of the church. The church leaders encourage us to fulfil our civic responsibilities and vote and be responsible citizens, but they will not tell us how to vote (although, there have been certain moral issues that they have very strongly encouraged members to look at and vote on). Besides, I've heard that President Hinckley is a Democrat.

"There are some for whom these commitments are not enough. They would prefer it if I would simply distance myself from my religion, say that it is more a tradition than my personal conviction, or disavow one or another of its precepts. That I will not do. I believe in my Mormon faith and I endeavor to live by it. My faith is the faith of my fathers – I will be true to them and to my beliefs." A paragraph earlier he said that if elected as president, his highest covenant to God would be that oath of office. I don't know if I could do that, but hey, I'm not even a citizen so that will never be an issue. In any case, I am glad that he mentioned his religion and his commitment to it, and that he would not be swayed from it. I am sure it would be so easy to disavow it and hard to defend it-- unless he really had a testimony of the truthfulness of it.

"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. 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." I like that he focused on moral principles, rather than theological doctrine, bringing people together to bring about positive change. I really think that, at least for me, that is what religion is-- it has brought to me a greater awareness of my fellow humans and the desire for everyone to be treated equal, and my own potential to do something about it. However, while this speech focuses so much on the postive, unifying aspect of religion, I think that he glossed over the many times when religion has been used as a justification for those exact social ills mentioned in the speech. Religion and God, or the practices of people, have not been moral. There is truth and beuty in religion and it is meant to bring us heaven-ward. But all too often, instead of raising people up to become like Christ, people raise themselves up above others. People used the excuse, and still do, that God makes some people better than otheres because of race, ethnicity, religion, sexuality, social class. It is used as a justification for hate and terror and close-mindedness. No wonder when a candidate declares him/herself as a person of faith, people of intelligence and a knowledge of history shudder. I wish it weren't like that. But unfortunately, it is.

"In such a world, we can be deeply thankful that we live in a land where reason and religion are friends and allies in the cause of liberty, joined against the evils and dangers of the day. And you can be certain of this: Any believer in religious freedom, any person who has knelt in prayer to the Almighty, has a friend and ally in me. And so it is for hundreds of millions of our countrymen: we do not insist on a single strain of religion – rather, we welcome our nation's symphony of faith." Again, the unity. I like that he places the burden of the responsibility on the people, the voters, to look at themselves and see their own prejudices against a particular religion. I hope that it does make people realize, hey now, maybe I should look a little bit deeper at the person (and could we say that maybe this could also open the eyese of peopel to look past their prejudices against the gener or race of a particual candidate as well?). But, this is also my major sticking point with this speech-- what about those who don't believe? I know his audience was evangelical Christians in Texas, but this goes to the whole country-- I read this in the New York Times. There are so many people of faith in this country, more than we sometimes think, but ther are also people who don't believe in a God or organized religion. For whom the term "prayer" is something unfamiliar but meditation to center their lives and simply a desire to do no harm leads them to live lives of great contribution and kindness towards others and the earth.

These were jsut a few of the things that I was thinking about when I read the speech. My opinion isn't worth a hill of beans amongst all of the political pundits on the left and right and middle who are analyzing every inch of it. But, though Romney might not be the frontrunner in my book, I am deeply interested in how he conducts himself in his campaign and how it will go and why. Personally, when I think about religion and politics, in the same sphere, I find that they are nearly impossible for me to seperate. Religion plays such a role in who I am. On this foundation I am building the person that I will become. This underscores the work that I do every day. I think that is how it is for so many people. It isn't something seperate inside of us to be turned on on Sunday, nor is it a flag to be waved constantly. It is simply something that motivates me to do well on my exams coming up next week, soemthing that lets me see my potential in a career, and helps me to see the small role that I play on this life to simply lead a good life and to do good.

Whatever the case, let's remember that while Romney is a Mormon, so is Harry Reid. And those two think very, very differently. And with that, I should probably get motivated to go finish my MPSO reading.