What does it say about the GOP when their candidates must explain their religious faith to be accepted?

Question

Mitt Romney will address head-on suspicions about his Mormon faith in a speech he plans to deliver on Thursday in Texas.
http://www.startribune.com/587/story/1587216.html

I thought the US Constitution protected US citizens' freedom of religion. What gives?

ret_roch (below) Agreed! I don't like Mitt. However, I don't hold his personal religion against him as a candidate.

Answer 1

I don't like Romney (flip flopper) but is sad that he has to give a speech about his faith. I always knew that there was going to be a point in his campaign that he was going to explain his Mormonism. Sad but I was right. This proves that the GOP has given so much power to the evangelical right that they now decide who is going to be nominee. The Constitution says no 'religious test' shall be held for public office but the evangelicals have created their own test to the office of the Presidency. They've undone the principles of which this country was founded on.

Answer 2

Yeah, that's what I thought too, but many, particularly on the left, have changed the meaning of the Constitution not to protect our freedoms as it was intended, but to protect others FROM them. So it goes.

But even among conservatives, some people have a hard time with the Mormon faith. I understand that. It's a whacky faith, but those who practice it are some of the finest folks you'll ever meet. Still, it's a religion that the vast majority of Americans, left or right, don't understand. Personally, I welcome the dialogue and the information. I'm sure others do too.

Compare this to left. The left wouldn't even let Romney in the front door, let alone give him a chance to speak.

Answer 3

LoL at the Cons claiming the GOP doesn't care what religion you are...That's just priceless...That must explain their universal hatred of Muslims...and the fact the GOP heartland (the South) will ABSOLUTELY NEVER elect Romney. They view Mormonism as a cult, and have repeatedly taken that claim.

The fact that Romney feels inclined to justify himself and his religion speak to how disgustingly intertwined the GOP is with "Jesus". And how shockingly distant they are from the true ideals of the Constitution of the United States of America.

Answer 4

This has nothing to do with freedom of religion or the constitution. It has to do with what all the candidates are doing - trying to get votes, and Romney is no different.

Answer 5

John Kennedy, the Dimocrat, had to explain his Roman Catholicism to the American public when he ran for president in 1960. Many Americans view Mormonism as a cult and do not consider Mormons to be Christians. It would be wise of Romney to explain to us that he will not govern by his religion.

Your question is loaded and not worthy of you. Thumbs down on this question.

Answer 6

It's not the GOP, it's the electorate! People have always used religion as one of their benchmarks for judging a candidate. Look at the things that were said when John Kennedy ran, or Joe Lieberman.

Answer 7

It says that the GOP has (long since) been hijacked by the agents of religious intolerance and don't care how ill-informed and brutal a candidate's policies are as long as he talks the Christian game and goes to church on Sunday. I mean, they can't have a smart, well-informed atheist, can they?

It also says they don't know a whole lot about the Constitution, considering many of them are doing their best to shred it and conveniently forget that the Constitution requires that there be no religious test for office.

Answer 8

Because this country is headed for disaster and conservatives want to make sure the candidates get it right. The US contsitution is supposed to protect freedom of religion, but thanks to the ACLU that protection is being torn apart so we need a leader who can step up to the challenge and take America back to its Christian heritage.

Answer 9

Evolution is technology, no longer faith. Neither technology nor evolution is a few thing one blindly believes in, yet is a device of gaining knowledge of in which we note organic phenomena, theorize as to why they behave as they do, and attempt those theories to work out this is genuine. there is little to no faith or perception in technology. And no matter if you settle for this or no longer, there is a few distance better actual data and shown theories than you imagine that help evolution. human beings, without modern-day clinical information, do no longer continuously want to be able to exhibit screen some thing on to entice desicive conclusions. faith and have self belief, compared, are the very tenants of religion, and by ability of volume, Creationism. the perception is that your faith should be reliable, as there are few, if any, products of knowledge to help it. you've basically were given to *have self belief* that God is at paintings. the concept of creation is faith, and as such, is a few thing to position self belief in, no longer some thing to be examined. this is the very idea in the back of Christianity; if God descended onto the White domicile backyard day after today, it would not be faith anymore, and the point of the religion might want to be out the window: God's existance might want to easily be clinical actuality. You look to have technology and faith puzzled, so i will say it once better in shorter words; Evolution is technology, this is to be suggested, hypothesized, and examined. creation is faith, this is to be believed in regardless of a lack of tangible data. they are 2 aspects of a similar coin, and do not genuinely contradict one yet another as many times as you'll imagine. they are no longer meant to be taken as one interior a similar, because they are no longer. in short, technology and faith are equivalent, no longer interchangeable.

Answer 10

I'll be in town so I'm going to this speech. It will probably be the funniest thing in the world for a Morman to roll into College Station to defend his beliefs.

Once again I encourage you to leave your sniping for when the GOP actually selects a candidate. You should have enough to do bashing Hilary or Obama depending on which one you support.