Meacham: A New American Holy War | Newsweek Politics: Campaign 2008

A New American Holy War

NEWSWEEK

Email To A Friend

Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.

SPONSORED BY

Three weeks away from the Jan. 3 Iowa caucuses, it seems clear that we have not moved very far beyond where we were in the Taft-Bryan race. In November, voters in Iowa and in New Hampshire received mysterious calls known as push polls, in which the questioner "pushes" an often hostile point about a candidate in the guise of asking a polling question. According to The Boston Globe, Ralph Watts, a state representative in Iowa who backs Romney, got just such a call. The voice on the other end of the line said: "Some people say the Mormon Church is a cult; would that make you more or less likely to vote for Mitt Romney?" Then came favorable questions about John McCain. (The calls stopped once they were reported in the press; they have been traced to a Utah-based company. The McCain, Huckabee and Giuliani campaigns deny any involvement, and the New Hampshire attorney general is investigating.)

The calls are the most egregious manifestations of a larger anti-Mormon bias. Romney had long resisted making a big speech on religion; he and his advisers believed it would only attract attention to a complicated and distracting issue. The new NEWSWEEK Poll of Iowa voters shows why he had to change his mind: Huckabee is now leading Romney among likely caucus-goers, 39 percent to 17 percent. Among evangelicals—who are likely to make up roughly 40 percent of the vote on Jan. 3—Huckabee is ahead 47 percent to 14 percent. Among non-evangelicals, the two are tied at 24 percent each. Half of evangelical voters say they do not consider Mormons to be Christians, and a third say Romney's faith makes them less likely to support him.

In College Station, Romney avoided explaining the particulars of the Mormon Church, focusing instead on the broader history of faith and politics in America. "Any believer in religious freedom, any person who has knelt in prayer to the Almighty, has a friend and ally in me," he said. "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." In articulating the Gospel According to Mitt, though, he never explicitly endorsed a critical element of the American tradition: the right of any person not to believe.

In a telephone interview with Romney on Friday evening, I asked him why he had, to many ears, seemed to fail to reach out to those of no religious belief: "I was struck that you did not explicitly extend the definition of religious liberty to those who believe nothing at all …"

"I don't think I defined religious liberty," Romney replied. "I think it spoke for itself … but of course it includes all, all forms of personal conviction."

"Or the lack thereof?"

« Prev Page

Meacham: And when they did,they got kneecapped by the same leftwingers who now say that there is no problems with Obamas serial appearences under large Christian crosses,[complete with neon],rustling up Christian God Squads to advise the neophyte politico,ignoring Falwell-like bombast eminating from Obamas blackrobes,and running photos of the prayerful Obama. Make no mistake. NEWSWEAK would [and has already when it was Huckabee running Christmas cards with a faded cross in the backround,and stoking Mormon know-nothingism in the case of Romney],come unglued if this was a GOP candidate. The only thing separating the Obama-sychophantic NEWSWEAKS of the world from the Pharisees,is the amount of drivel both spilled. One,to the consternation of most Americans. The other,to the amazement of Jesus Christ,who readily regarded their patent hypocrisy in the Gospels.

There are people who abuse the term or concept ???freedom of religion??? without really understanding the true depth of the words involved. Lets start with the word religion. What is a religion: the belief, habit, ritual, thought, or faith? I believe all synonyms would apply to the definition of the word. Religion could be how I tie my shoes, my political ideas, my thoughts on science, or my feelings toward a particular brand name (in some cases consumerism qualify as religion). Many only argue that religion is strictly a word with a monopoly pertaining only to God or the Church. If you can make the argument that even atheistic approaches that of a religion; then one has to accept that my views on foreign policy or free trade qualify as a religion. Religion is a single or series of repeated behaviors and or thought. That is why we have a freedom of speech, privacy, and the freedom of religion within the constitution. All the concepts of the document from our revolutionary era uphold one another. They cannot exist without the other. These rights are all a form or relative or thought. They are all an attempt to protect the freedom of thought. Such wording of the constitution has to be interpreted with the full meaning of the word. For words are ideas, concepts, or theologies in and of themselves. Now think about the word freedom. I hope we all understand what freedom is. As well we should also think about what we do not have the freedom to do. There are many thoughts that are originated within Biblical religion that people do not have the right to do; consider many verses of Deuteronomy, Leviticus, Revelation, and other books of the Bible. (I would hope we all know which verses they are) We do not have a total freedom for Biblical Church based religion. If we did, we would be living in a world of chaos, torture, and general madness including witch burnings, stoning, forced conversion, or beheadings. There are concepts in the secular world that are beliefs which are illegal they are the current laws on the books. Those laws are a record of what belief or thoughts you shall not hold. So beware when Biblical religion claims they have the power, the right, or the protection to conduct their actions when in conjunction with the government. There are some who would claim that Biblical religion has the freedom of religion as to fuse with the government or take on the responsibilities/functions of government with tax dollar support. My faith-based program is the issue and unconstitutionality of faith based programs and any vicarious use of those programs for the potential of converts via the heading of people to faith based services. The Church should function independently from government at all times. This serves the society in protection of the true freedom of religion, our freedom of thought.

Member Comments

- Reply
- Report Abuse
Posted By: Alvy @ 06/11/2008 4:46:38 PM

Hey stupid. Did you get that from your super-secret, classified government sources that no one else has access to?
- Reply
- Report Abuse
Posted By: Lee Holmes @ 06/11/2008 3:08:16 PM

Meacham: And when they did,they got kneecapped by the same leftwingers who now say that there is no problems with Obamas serial appearences under large Christian crosses,[complete with neon],rustling up Christian God Squads to advise the neophyte politico,ignoring Falwell-like bombast eminating from Obamas blackrobes,and running photos of the prayerful Obama. Make no mistake. NEWSWEAK would [and has already when it was Huckabee running Christmas cards with a faded cross in the backround,and stoking Mormon know-nothingism in the case of Romney],come unglued if this was a GOP candidate. The only thing separating the Obama-sychophantic NEWSWEAKS of the world from the Pharisees,is the amount of drivel both spilled. One,to the consternation of most Americans. The other,to the amazement of Jesus Christ,who readily regarded their patent hypocrisy in the Gospels.
- Reply
- Report Abuse
Posted By: Johndavidprince @ 03/17/2008 9:51:54 AM

There are people who abuse the term or concept ???freedom of religion??? without really understanding the true depth of the words involved. Lets start with the word religion. What is a religion: the belief, habit, ritual, thought, or faith? I believe all synonyms would apply to the definition of the word. Religion could be how I tie my shoes, my political ideas, my thoughts on science, or my feelings toward a particular brand name (in some cases consumerism qualify as religion). Many only argue that religion is strictly a word with a monopoly pertaining only to God or the Church. If you can make the argument that even atheistic approaches that of a religion; then one has to accept that my views on foreign policy or free trade qualify as a religion. Religion is a single or series of repeated behaviors and or thought. That is why we have a freedom of speech, privacy, and the freedom of religion within the constitution. All the concepts of the document from our revolutionary era uphold one another. They cannot exist without the other. These rights are all a form or relative or thought. They are all an attempt to protect the freedom of thought. Such wording of the constitution has to be interpreted with the full meaning of the word. For words are ideas, concepts, or theologies in and of themselves. Now think about the word freedom. I hope we all understand what freedom is. As well we should also think about what we do not have the freedom to do. There are many thoughts that are originated within Biblical religion that people do not have the right to do; consider many verses of Deuteronomy, Leviticus, Revelation, and other books of the Bible. (I would hope we all know which verses they are) We do not have a total freedom for Biblical Church based religion. If we did, we would be living in a world of chaos, torture, and general madness including witch burnings, stoning, forced conversion, or beheadings. There are concepts in the secular world that are beliefs which are illegal they are the current laws on the books. Those laws are a record of what belief or thoughts you shall not hold. So beware when Biblical religion claims they have the power, the right, or the protection to conduct their actions when in conjunction with the government. There are some who would claim that Biblical religion has the freedom of religion as to fuse with the government or take on the responsibilities/functions of government with tax dollar support. My faith-based program is the issue and unconstitutionality of faith based programs and any vicarious use of those programs for the potential of converts via the heading of people to faith based services. The Church should function independently from government at all times. This serves the society in protection of the true freedom of religion, our freedom of thought.