At the risk of heresy, let it be said that setting up the two presidential candidates for religious interrogation by an evangelical minister—no matter how beloved—is supremely wrong. It is also un-American.
For the past several days, most political debate has focused on who won.
The winner, of course, was Warren, who has managed to position himself as political arbiter in a nation founded on the separation of church and state. The loser was America.
Both Obama and McCain gave “good” answers, but that’s not the point. They shouldn’t have been asked. Is the American electorate now better prepared to cast votes knowing that Obama believes that “Jesus Christ died for my sins and I am redeemed through him,” or that McCain feels that he is “saved and forgiven”?
What does that mean, anyway? What does it prove? Nothing except that these men are willing to say whatever they must—and what most Americans personally feel is no one’s business—to win the highest office.
I predict Bob Barr gets four million votes in November.
Somehow, somewhere, the great past Presidents of the US are sitting around playing cards and laughing at these buffoons.
So much for separation of Church and State.
Although I would love to point the finger at Warren for this debate, I can’t.
Nor can I point the finger at McCain.
This “debate” was solely Barack Obama’s fault. That’s right, point the finger at Obama.
Why? It’s simple. Barack has refused to have any type of traditional public debate with ANYONE. Not McCain, not Hillary, no one.
McCain has consistently challenged Barack to numerous Town Hall type meetings, only to be universally rebuffed.
http://tinyurl.com/6py9hx
Is it as worrysome to you as it is to me that there been no debate at all?
So how are we going to get to know these guys without someone putting them to the test?
Warren was the only guy who proposed a “get to know the candidate” forum that Barack would accept.
So yes, the author’s points are valid, but what else can we do when Barack won’t cooperate?
And this is a very good short editorial on the Proposed Town Hall debates from Mother Jones Blog.
http://tinyurl.com/5dkxzu
How is this “un-American.” He asked questions that are genuinely important to a large number of Americans. As for this, “separation of church and state,” (which is a phrase never found in neither the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution) it’s not like this debate is the establishment of a national religion. You’re not forced to give money to the Church or even accept their beliefs. So why can’t a pastor ask some questions and you, the voter, draw your own conclusions about the validity of those questions or the answers given by the candidates?
I think it’s long overdue that these religious organizations start paying taxes.
This is a very weak argument and to call it un-American is absurd. Why would any voter be opposed to a forum that can get these guys to talk.
Most of what we see now in ads is staged resulting in the very pandering many complain about.
I suspect that the only valid complaint here is that Obama’s performance was not very impressive. So in an attempt to divert this fact from the voters the church is attacked instead.
Why are religious questions off the table? I mean, when Huckabee was in the race (relatively speaking) all anyone talked about was his religion. Same with Romney. Why, all of a sudden, can this question not be asked? If we had a candidate that was a level 12 Scientologist, wouldn’t we want to know that? Wouldn’t we want to know how much of a nutbag he/she is?
The only reason this can be seen as off the table is if the candidate bows down to the pressure and claims religion when they have none. This shows that yes, they will say anything to get elected. This bursts the bubble of anyone foolish enough to think either one of these guys was anything but a politician.
Some say a candidates religion (or lack thereof) shouldn’t matter. I disagree. What they believe and follow says a lot about him/her. If they were new agers who believe in tarot cards and Reiki….I would want to know that.
What would have happened to Thomas Jefferson?
“It does me no injury for my neighbor to say that there are 20 gods, or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.”
Thankfully, there was no SwiftCanoe.org when our nation was founded. Pandering to these characters is not necessarily bad. A Taliban like organization as this should have the attention of candidates like any other.
** The issue is this crowd and like minded want to extend this ritual nationally and codified into law. THAT is what we need to protect from.
Hmmm… “separation of church and state”…
I didn’t realize that Warren’s church was a federally sponsored organization.
Ah, ye of short memories….
I recall GWB and his first debate with AlGore. I also recall feeling ashamed that I was a better public speaker than this apparent idiot, the potential leader of the free world. (And being a better speaker than him isn’t saying much.)
So it just goes to show that elections don’t go to the better debater, they go to the guy who’s bullet points appeal to the most voters. And besides…how many debates does a president have while in office?
#12 “I also recall feeling ashamed that I was a better public speaker than this apparent idiot, the potential leader of the free world. (And being a better speaker than him isn’t saying much.) ”
Which idiot GWB or Gore? They both sort of sucked as public speakers.
In Dvorak we trust?
Well, more or less.
Only reason for this article is that Obama performed so poorly vs McCain.
If the Messiah came through with a slam dunk, the newspapers would be heaping praise on the terrific debate format.
#4–Ah Yea==well done. You sucked me in with my kneejerk disagreement and won me over by the end of your short piece. Kudos.
Why is this meeting before religious inquisitors bad? Because religion is bad. It would be like have the questions asked by the Head Dragon of the KKK. It doesn’t matter what the questions and answers are, it matters who is being pandered to.
To #9
Personally, I think ANYONE who believes in invisible people (pretty much EVERY religion) is a nutbag. Not just the level 12 Scientologists.
Jefferson is spinning in his grave.
Candidates’ church chat erodes U.S. principles.
“U.S. principles”, what’s that?
the founding fouthers are spinning in their grave at about 10,000 rpm…
odd that we are at war with a bunch of conservatives, (taliban, muslam extremists, etc) but “christian” groups like this are spoken to…
frightening.
I’ll only say this- http://www.ffrf.org/
If this type interview becomes standard, I weep for the future of this country.
Why should a presidential candidate have to submit to this? What if the person was an atheist? Where does it stop? Does our president have to be a religious zealot to lead our country? Total BS.
Both candidates lost credit with me. This makes our country look more like Iran than the free country it supposed to be.
I didn’t see the debates, but judging by the complaining the libs on this blog are doing, it sounds like McCain won. I guess they can’t handle that their Messiah is no good without a teleprompter.
Gee, I though your picture was “Homeland (In)Security” at work !!!
#16, Bobbo. Thank you. I hoped someone here would be astute enough to appreciate the way I put my comments together!
Actually, I think this was very relevant. It clearly reveals that both candidates are delusional. Do we really need another president who thinks he can talk to God?
The only one this is upsetting to would be paranoid atheists. What’s the difference between these two doing this at an evangelical church vs doing this at an NAACP conference, NRA meeting, or GLAD?
The evangelicals are a huge voting block, what is wrong with getting in front of them and letting them ask you questions? Just because one evangelical leaders is media/political savvy, and held a forum on national tv vs having a sponsored $5,000 a plate dinner like these things normally are shouldn’t mean the END OF THE CONSTITUTION THE BEGINNING OF THE NEW THEOCRACY.
Give props to Obama who is getting in front of people his party wouldn’t normally go after. Is he doing it because he is pandering to these people? Is he doing it because he might actually agree with these people on a spiritual level?
So if there was a GLAD forum that these two showed up at would we call the questions asked “Homosexual Interrogation”? Hyperbole abounds whenever Christians do anything it seems.
#27 “So if there was a GLAD forum that these two showed up at would we call the questions asked “Homosexual Interrogation”?”
I’d call that even more stupid as GLAD is even smaller and more fringe than evangelicals.
#27–Jason==if the candidates appeared before GLAD for a one hour conversation each don’t you think they would be “Homosexual Interrogation?”
1. Do you think gays should be allowed to marry?
2. Should gays be allowed to be open in the military? —etc.
You don’t think there is evil in the forum selected?
“Why should a presidential candidate have to submit to this? What if the person was an atheist?”
Ya, what if? Did Pastor Warren state only non-atheist were invited? Not that I have heard. Are atheist candidates afraid of entering a house of worship?
I saw most of Obama’s interview and about 10 minutes of McCain. Was there an indication that religious belief of any kind is a requirement for President? No, there was not. Either candidate could have just responded “I don’t believe in the divinity of Christ.”
And where is the debate hosted by Richard Dawkins or Christopher Hitchens? These guys need votes to get elected and they are simply going where the votes come from. A 2005 Ipsos survey found 2% of respondents as atheist. This may not be entirely accurate, but, even within the range of error, that’s not worth much effort top get their vote.
We live in country with freedom of religion, not freedom FROM religion. The real question here is why are people so afraid of ANY religious belief? The old canards about “all the ills of the world being the fault of religion come out,” but these people never want to discuss the overwhelming good which is the product of people of faith. The Greeks and Romans from whom Western civilization owes its founding believed in all sorts of “invisible beings.” That didn’t stop them from developing philosophies and systems of government which gave us the life we today enjoy. Not to mention that the Founders of the US were believers. Yes, I always hear “they were Deists, not Christians” or whatever claptrap the Left trots out. The bottom line is the freedoms we enjoy in the US are the universal principles with which we are endowed by our Creator.