Does a Candidate's Faith Matter in Politics?

Published on May 10, 2007 By Gideon MacLeish In Current Events

I grew up LDS.

Through the years, my faith has become something I could most tactfully describe as NOT LDS. For reasons that are not at all relevant to this blog, except to establish the fact that if anyone had a bone to pick with the LDS church, I would.

And yet, if Mitt Romney wins the GOP nomination, my vote will probably be cast against him, but because he is a Republican, NOT because he is a "Mormon". See, Mr. Romney's religious persuasion is as irrelevant as his hair color. It is interesting trivia, but not enough in itself to qualify or disqualify a voter.

I find it highly ironic that the anti-LDS rant came out of a mouth of someone who purports to follow the dream of a man for whom content of one's character was meant to be the utmost standard of the worth of a man. Someone who has collected millions in bribe money to overlook the racial affronts of various US companies and individuals.

I would say that I have known as many Mormons over my lifetime as I have other religions. And while there are certainly bad apples in the LDS faith (as there are in all) , there are also good, decent, honorable and loving people in the LDS faith(as there are in all). The truth is that, while the spiritual values of a faith may be measurable to an ethical standard, the actual practice of that faith is not.

Oddly enough, one thing many Christian Coalition types overlook as they evaluate Mormons is that our basic values are exactly the same. While there are theological differences, the Mormons believe point by point the same as "mainstream" Christians do on most moral matters (and if you EVEN bring up the Mormon practice of polygamy which was abolished in the 1800's, I'd be happy to throw in the Salem Witch Trials, the Inquisition, and a host of other offenses by members of various "Christian" factions).

Mitt Romney should be judged by one basic standard: can he do the job? If you feel he can, his faith is immaterial. If you feel he can't, likewise.

Comments (Page 1)

Dr Guy

on May 10, 2007

WAAAAAHHHH! DAMN! You skunked me again!

We are going to have to do a number if you keep marginalizing me! I am offended! I am outraged! BUT....

I am appreciative that I am not the only one that thinks this way.

But to answer your question, NO.

Somehow I dont think that will surprise you.

PlausibleDeniability

on May 10, 2007

To answer your question: It shouldn't, but it does.

As a very non-LDS living my whole life in Utah, I initially wanted to say I wouldn't vote for a Mormon, with all acknowledgment of unreasonableness. But then I realized, I just wouldn't vote for Mitt Romney but if I lived in Nevada I'd probably vote for Harry Reid. You're right; for me, at least, it's not about the religion its about the qualifications I deem best suited for the job.

So here's the next question: does a candidate's not-faith matter in politics?

KFC Kickin For Christ

on May 10, 2007

I would not not vote for someone because of their affiliation unless it was truly very offensive to me. In other words, I'd much rather vote for a very moral Mormon than I would an immoral Phelps kinda guy.

But......if it came down to a very moral Mormon and a strong Christian Believer who believed in Jesus as triune God, then there would be no question. I would vote for the one closest to my belief. To me Romney sounds better than Bill Clinton did to me already and supposedly Clinton was closer to my religious belief system (but he didn't fool me one bit).

We have to remember we are voting for President, not elder. Now that would be a whole nuther discussion.

Gideon MacLeish

on May 10, 2007

So here's the next question: does a candidate's not-faith matter in politics?

Can they do the job? My answers remain.

Gideon MacLeish

on May 10, 2007

I would vote for the one closest to my belief

See, and there's the rub. Based on what I know, I assure you Romney's beliefs are FAR closer to yours than, say, Hillary's.

KFC Kickin For Christ

on May 10, 2007

assure you Romney's beliefs are FAR closer to yours than, say, Hillary's

yep....but then again she's about as bad as it gets for me and what I believe in.

Gideon MacLeish

on May 11, 2007

Really? I never woulda guessed.

(Cue evil grin here)

Larry Kuperman

on May 11, 2007

If a candidate's religious persuasion is irrelevant, would you vote for a Muslim? Assuming that other than religious beliefs, all things were equal between that candidate and their opponent?

Dr Guy

on May 11, 2007

would you vote for a Muslim? Assuming that other than religious beliefs, all things were equal between that candidate and their opponent?

Yes, as well as a Hindu, Taoist, or Buddhist.

The sad fact of politics in America is also one of its strong points in America. Religion is secondary to political agenda.

CharlesCS

on May 11, 2007

If a candidate's religious persuasion is irrelevant, would you vote for a Muslim? Assuming that other than religious beliefs, all things were equal between that candidate and their opponent?

That was my first thought when I started reading this article. I would not necessarily vote for someone based on their religion, but it would play a factor in my decision. For example, because of some cultural beliefs based on the Koran, I would not vote for a Muslim if his intentions were to punish, say, women for not covering their faces. But if his intentions were to better this country based on the foundation of this country then, depending on what the other candidates have to offer I could be persuaded to vote for him. After all, we have Arnold Schwarzenegger as the Gov. of California. Of course in the real world this would not happen, I wouldn't vote for a Muslim right now if they had 10 nukes aimed at the US. Just can't tell who wants to be our friend and who's acting anymore.

Gideon MacLeish

on May 11, 2007

If a candidate's religious persuasion is irrelevant, would you vote for a Muslim?

What did I just say?

You are correct when you say most people wouldn't, though

cactoblasta

on May 11, 2007

The sad fact of politics in America is also one of its strong points in America. Religion is secondary to political agenda.

It's not, really. Religion is a very important part of the political process in America and that becomes even more obvious when you compare it to somewhere like Australia, which has had atheist prime ministers and quite a few important members, ministers and PMs who never went to church. Try that in the US and your electoral chances reduce dramatically.

Dr Guy

on May 11, 2007

That is a common misconception. I see your atheist and show you JFK, Ted kennedy, Joe Lieberman and john Kerry.

No, Religion gets headlines (and much to the chagrin of others), it does not dictate in politics.

We have not had an Atheist leader for the simple reason that here, it does not matter, and for the most part, they dont care.

cactoblasta

on May 12, 2007

We have not had an Atheist leader for the simple reason that here, it does not matter, and for the most part, they dont care.

Really? I'm doing a course on religion and politics at the moment (three weeks left til I graduate...yay me) and the clear consensus seems to be that attending church is extremely important to American voters, as is referencing God in speeches (God bless America etc) and swearing on bibles.

Google 'religion in American politics' and you'll see it's widely considered an important issue with a strong chance of influence on voting patterns.

I wouldn't vote for a Muslim, regardless of their qualifications.

Then again, I wouldn't vote for an Evangelical Christian, either.

Neither would I. Strongly religious people make terrible decision-makers - they spend too much time believing in books and not enough time talking to people.

kingbee

on May 12, 2007

Religion is very important in politics, especially when it comes to the 'Christian Right' which consists of a considerably LARGE blog of voters who are very influential. (as they should be...)

you meant 'bloc' rather 'blog', right? (although at times it does seem as if either/both could be equally appropriate/accurate.)

no question but that democracy favors all such large blocs. it's the reason our government spent much of the last half of the 20th century doing its best to prevent or subvert democratic elections in dozens of countries around the world.

(replace the word 'christian' with 'muslim' in your statement and it'd be equally applicable to nearly all of the middle east and central asian nations should they be hit with a sudden outbreak of democracy.)

i'm thinking the more germane question (for republicans anyway) might be: "who cares whether a candidate's faith matters to you if you aren't jerry falwell?'

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!