By Mark Esposito, Guest Blogger
Even as we watch the violent collision of politics and religion at American embassies around the world, here at home Presidential politics took a decidedly religious turn. Mitt Romney, trailing in several decisive purple states, has resorted to the “God Card.” Capitalizing on the omission (and later reinsertion) of God into the Democratic Party platform, Romney has recently added God into his stump speech, “I will not take God out of my heart, I will not take God out of the public square, and I will not take it out of the platform of my party.” [Insert Amen! here].
Here in Virginia, Romney raised the specter of a “godless” Obama removing “In God We Trust” from the currency and from the Pledge of Allegiance. Standing before the Military Aviation Museum in Virginia Beach amid throngs of veterans and their families (mostly all white and very conservative), Romney remarked, “Our pledge says ‘under God. I will not take God out of the name of our platform. I will not take God off our coins. And I will not take God out of my heart.” Never you mind that Obama wears his religion like a ribbon or that the President never suggested removing “God” from the Pledge or off of US currency, God is good politics.
Romney’s strategy appears to fit hand-in-glove with his new-found anti-abortion policy. In 1994 while running for office in deep blue Massachusetts, Romney extolled the virtues of guaranteeing women their reproductive freedom under Roe v. Wade:
“One of the great things about our nation … is that we’re each entitled to have strong personal beliefs, and we encourage other people to do the same. But as a nation, we recognize the right of all people to believe as they want and not to impose our beliefs on other people. I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country. I have since the time that my mom took that position when she ran in 1970 as a U.S. Senate candidate. I believe that since Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years, that we should sustain and support it, and I sustain and support that law, and the right of a woman to make that choice, and my personal beliefs, like the personal beliefs of other people, should not be brought into a political campaign.“
However, Romney’s position has “evolved” and by 2005 he said:
“I am pro-life. I believe that abortion is the wrong choice except in cases of incest, rape, and to save the life of the mother. I wish the people of America agreed, and that the laws of our nation could reflect that view. But while the nation remains so divided over abortion, I believe that the states, through the democratic process, should determine their own abortion laws and not have them dictated by judicial mandate.”
At the Republican Convention he furnished new red meat to anti-abortionists saying he would nominate Supreme Court justices who would overturn Row v. Wade. While it’s fairly obvious that Romney has no firm convictions on the issue, he does firmly believe that the issue is a winner among the religiously conservative base that now grips the Republican Party.
But the question remains about how well this strategy of placing God squarely on your side will do among the general voting population. Polls show Americans are more and more rejecting traditional religion for something spiritual but less dogmatic. Atheists/agnostics are the nations’ fastest growing “religion” category even though their numbers are still quite small at 15%. There is no reliable data showing that a candidate’s religious beliefs sway voters one way or the other. If they did, Romney’s Mormonism would be more of a handicap to his election bid.
But there remains a more fundamental question highlighted by violent religious protests from Libya to Australia. Will Americans, seeing the carnage that religious fanaticism has wrought at America’s foreign outposts, begin to question the wisdom of electing leaders who pursue political goals through religious rhetoric?
Source: CNN
~Mark Esposito, Guest Blogger
SwM and gbk,
It’s good to have the vid and the link to the article … thanks to both … next installment coming soon. Oct. surprise.
BTW: “… if Democrats can eke out some narrow wins in key districts, their performance could be a lot better than expected. Republicans are very “exposed,” in the sense that they hold a lot of seats, many of them in uncomfortable territory, and this year will likely be a better one for Democrats than 2010.” (http://themonkeycage.org/)
gbk, I pay plenty in taxes and receive no entitlements.
SWM,
Wow, sorry.
I have flash blocked in my browser so I can’t see what any posted video is unless I click on it, I just see a black rectangle with a play button until I click on it.
gbk, I put the Mother Jones video up.
OT here, but Mother Jones has a breaking story concerning Romney and a secret video taped during a fundraiser with very wealthy donors. Link is here:
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/09/secret-video-romney-private-fundraiser
Pat:
“While a treaty can’t override the Second Amendment, it can become the law of the land either directly—equal to any law passed by Congress—or through implementing legislation. Even if a treaty isn’t ratified by a two-thirds majority of the U.S. Senate, it never dies, and can still affect your rights. The U.S. Senate could take a signed treaty off the shelf and vote to ratify it 10, 20 or 50 years from now—as we know from experience. Just two years ago, NRA fought a push to consider a 1997 Organization of American States (OAS) gun control treaty in the Senate. Although the U.S. never ratified that treaty, the Clinton administration used it as an excuse to restrict exports of gun parts and accessories to Canada.
In a 2010 speech to the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Hillary Clinton’s Under Secretary for Arms Control told the audience: “We will work between now and the U.N. Conference in 2012 to negotiate a legally binding Arms Trade Treaty, and we’ll need your help in achieving it. We have made that a fundamental policy commitment.””
I wouldnt trust Obama or Hillary with the ATT. the 2nd amendment is problematic for some.
“pencils make mistakes, people dont.”
http://www.buzzfeed.com/mckaycoppins/romneys-new-strategy-turns-right “More God less economy”
Pat:
you do know that snopes isnt necessarily right dont you?
Pat:
I appreciate your candor.
mezpo727272
I stand corrected. I thought this backed my statement, but apparently it doesn’t
mespo727272
Here’s your utter nonsense since you don”t believe Hillery signed a gun control agreement with the UN that would take away your right to own a gun. See for yourself.
snopes.com: U.N. Arms Trade Treaty
http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/untreaty.asp
Jul 28, 2012 – A U.N. small arms treaty signed by the U.S. provides a ‘legal way around the 2nd Amendment’? … crises, Hillary Clinton signed the small arms treaty with the UN. … The Obama administration intends to force gun control and a …
Malisha, LOL, I have some of them at step 2 in the construction process in the ‘frige now. 🙂
Mark Esposito: “Will Americans, seeing the carnage that religious fanaticism has wrought at America’s foreign outposts, begin to question the wisdom of electing leaders who pursue political goals through religious rhetoric?”
Romney will play any card, at any given time, and repudiate his own game-play the next day if that’s what it takes. The wisdom of electing religious fanatics (and liars) is THE issue with some bloc of voters in this country; they will without hesitation to advance whatever fevered agenda the voices in their head compel them to follow. I think most of the rest of us are already clued in to the danger. In fact, the kind of violence we see in Libya will harden their determination: we need a bigger god-inspired army to defeat their heathen army. Their entire world view is dictated by their fanatical religious beliefs.
Anyone see the Onion article?
firefly:
“Pat:
The Pledge of Allegiance was written, in 1892, by Francis Bellamy, a Socialist.”
Matt Johnson: I have never written a book.
I speak of a poster named Matt, not Matt Johnson. sorry for the confusion
Seems like it would be more logical to claim the democrats are playing the “God Card”, by taking God out, and then later voting God back in, even though the anti-God kooks outnumbered the other kooks in the DNC. Romney is being consistent, since his party has a strong background in recognizing God anyway.
Mespo,
You are spot on about Pat’s false statement about the taking away of guns. This lie(and others) has been spread in order to sell more guns.
Chocolate with pecans. It doesn’t look like turtles.
The implication, of course, is that the other guy intends to strip God from the places Romney would keep. Clever. My hearing isn’t as good as it used to be, but I can hear this dog whistle loud and clear.