Saturday, December 8, 2007

Mitt Romney is no friend of mine

I hope most of us got a chance to review Mitt Romney's speech on religion. There is no comparison to the speech that JFK gave in Houston promising to uphold separation of state and church.

I disagree wholeheartedly with this statement:

"Freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom. Freedom opens the windows of the soul so that man can discover his most profound beliefs and commune with God. Freedom and religion endure together, or perish alone."


I'm not religious and yet I experience freedom and commune with nature. Curious. Also, he seems to forget countries where freedom and religion do not endure together: Saudi Arabia and Iran to name only two. We can look back on the Dark Ages to see how Christianity stifled human freedoms. We don't even need to go back that far: women's suffrage is a prime example of how Christianity was used to keep women from voting; a right we now take for granted.

He also says:

"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's 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."


This is the only time he mentions Mormon in this speech. He knows this religion will sound crazy if mainstream Americans find out too much about it, so he focuses only on the fact that he believes in Jesus. But did you know he doesn't believe in the Trinity? Google Mormon and learn about this cult and be very afraid.

Again he says:

"But in recent years, the notion of the separation of church and state has been taken by some well beyond its original meaning. They seek to remove from the public domain any acknowledgment of God. Religion is seen as merely a private affair with no place in public life. It's as if they are intent on establishing a new religion in America -- the religion of secularism. They are wrong."

Sorry, but Mitt is so very wrong here.

From Dictionary.com:

sec·u·lar /ˈsɛkyələr/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[sek-yuh-ler] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective 1. of or pertaining to worldly things or to things that are not regarded as religious, spiritual, or sacred; temporal: secular interests.
2. not pertaining to or connected with religion (opposed to sacred): secular music.
3. (of education, a school, etc.) concerned with nonreligious subjects.
4. (of members of the clergy) not belonging to a religious order; not bound by monastic vows (opposed to regular).
5. occurring or celebrated once in an age or century: the secular games of Rome.
6. going on from age to age; continuing through long ages.


We have freedom of speech in this country and anyone can say or do anything anywhere. Secularism is not a religion and he seems to forget that our Constitution is a secular document and that our founding fathers were secularists. Our secular government was designed not to interfere with religion and vice versa. This has nothing to do with what we can or cannot do in public life. He is so wrong here that it boggles the mind!

"Nor would I separate us from our religious heritage. Perhaps the most important question to ask a person of faith who seeks a political office, is this: Does he share these American values -- the equality of human kind, the obligation to serve one another and a steadfast commitment to liberty?"


Article 6 of the US Constitution: The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

As I have pointed out in earlier letters, being religious doesn't automatically make you a good person. Being non-religious doesn't either. Being a good person makes you a good person, regardless of what religion you consider yourself or god you choose to worship. We all have the ability for much goodness and much evil. Mitt Romney has said in another speech that we all have freedom of religion but not freedom from religion. This makes no sense; for us to have freedom to do something you also have to have the freedom not to do something.

What Mr. Romney is doing is pandering to people who are not knowledgeable about the US Constitution and the US Government. He's taking advantage of people who don't have the privilege of knowing what he knows about government. In other words, he's lying to us. (Oh no! He's a religious man, he wouldn't lie!) He knows that this very large voting group gets very emotional about religious issues such as creationism, stem cell research, and same sex marriage and will come out in large numbers to vote for God. If pastors and ministers were really interested in the truth they would strive to educated themselves and help their flocks to understand our secular government. It is in your best interest, not just mine, to keep religion separate from our government.

/end of rant

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

I'm from Australia, so don't know much about him, but he sounds like a fuckwit.

How does that South Park song about Mormons go? "dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb".

I read an article about Mitt the other day and it mentioned that one in five voters in the States is a white evangelical. Fuck me, that is scary in itself (if true, of course some journalist may have just made it up).

The Super Sweet Atheist said...

Hi Tex,

Yeah, one in five sounds too low. I live in an area that is very religious and very right wing so I may not have an good feeling about the numbers.

tina FCD said...

I bet it's way higher! Scary indeed. Mitt Romney is an ass.

The Super Sweet Atheist said...

Watch out for Mike Huckabee. He's a blowhard too.

tina FCD said...

I have already commented on this but I wanted to let you know you have been tagged by me at misterjebsblog.

I was leaning towards Kucinich, what do you think?

Tommykey said...

How about a fusion ticket? John McCain and Barack Obama! with a Democratic majority in Congress to keep McCain from going too far to the right.