He characterized secularism as a religion.
He said that secularism is a religion he could not tolerate.
Since he has thus declared himself to be a religious bigot, why should he command any tolerance from others?
2007-12-07 00:54:56 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Romney made religion an issue in his campaign, yesterday.
2007-12-07 00:59:12 · update #1
I noticed his passionate tolerance for all religions doesn't quite extend to those who have no religion.
2007-12-07 01:04:37 · answer #1 · answered by nileslad 6 · 4⤊ 2⤋
Religious freedom means that the practice of every religion is legal, as long as the religious practices don't conflict with existing laws. Within existing religious structures, there is no obligation to grant freedom, nor is it necessarily a positive thing. To say that a religious institution has to allow religious freedom for its members is, in fact, restricting. Any religious organization can accept or reject whomever they want based on their own particular belief system. In larger society, of course, people are free to change religion, reject religion, or whatever. However, you can't say that Muslims have to accept somebody who doesn't believe in Allah, for example. Also, I will not give my children absolute religious freedom because I believe Christianity to be the truth, and I want them to be raised knowing the truth.
2016-05-22 00:00:39 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
First, Romney is not asking anyone to "accept his religion" he is asking you to vote for him.
Secularism is a belief system and as such can be accurately described as a kind of religion. It is not tolerable for a president to be a secularist. Here is why.
Our nation is founded on the belief (or self-evident truth) that all men are endowed by their Creator with rights. I am sure you have heard this many times.
But do you understand it? What it means is that our rights come from God. That means that those rights are not granted by any earthly government nor can they be taken away by any eartly government. The power to govern is endowed in each and every citizen, not to the government directly. We, the people, lend that power to the government every election day.
Anyone who does not believe in God or accepts secular humanism as his philosophy flies in the face of what this country is based on. Secularists are flawed in that they do not believe in the moral absolutism that only a belief in God can present. The Secularist has only moral relativism as a guide.
For such people, there cannot be a firm belief in the basic founding principles of America. No Creator, no unalienable rights, no moral absolutism, no rule of law. It is as simple as that. Romeny is exactly right in this case. A secularist is not tolerable as President of the United States anymore than a Capitalist could be acceptable to lead a Socialist society. The two are incompatible at the most basic level.
.
2007-12-07 01:13:40 · answer #3 · answered by Jacob W 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Assemble all religions, including atheism. Yes, atheism is a religion. It's a belief, unproven and unprovable. The individual then makes a religious choice from the assemblage, thus rejecting all others from his selection. Romney does not expect everyone to accept his choice, otherwise we would all be Mormons.
2007-12-07 03:47:14 · answer #4 · answered by robbie 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think it's galling that he had to hold a press conference about his religion so he could address the blatant religious bigotry in the media. At the meeting tv producers were telling their staff to "get everything we have on Mormons". Excuse me? They couldn't just, oh I donno, ask a Mormon? Last I checked Mormons are ecstatic to share their beliefs with others. The media are so bigoted against Mormons it's not even funny.
As for his stance against secularists, I agree. A secularist has no belief system to help support his moral values. I don't want a secularist anywhere near the White House.
2007-12-07 01:32:51 · answer #5 · answered by The Man from Nowhere 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
majority of americans will not be biased by what religion a candidate is . Romney has people looking at this issue with him (he brought it up ) because of his previous record -like handing out pamphlets with john kerry supporting gay pride-increases in taxes - pro life /prochoice (stated he would never be prolife because he had a family member die from recvg illegal abortion)-against illegals yet he employs them -and he would rather fight the battle of religion than have people looking at all the contradictions in his platform which is really the reason no one should vote for this man
2007-12-07 02:04:33 · answer #6 · answered by rooster 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
If he's bringing religion into his debates, addressing it and saying he can't tolerate secularism, he is planning to bring religion into his administration.
He is just another example of a president who wants to determine the morality of his people and judge them against his own personal morality. Definitely not who I want for president.
2007-12-07 01:35:50 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
He expects religious tolerance in non-religious situations. No religion is particularly tolerant of others in a religious situation. But Romney's notion that only a religious person can be truly free is absurd, and is sufficient reason to not vote for him.
2007-12-07 01:01:41 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
Think of it as Romney working for Coke.
He will try and tell you that working for Coke won't influence any drink decisions that he would make, but you really think he'd let Pepsi get more market share?
When people have those kinds of loyalties to organizations, it will always influence them.
2007-12-07 03:34:41 · answer #9 · answered by Geico Caveman 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
All religions reject other religions or beliefs...the question we need to ask is about respect of peoples rights to believe as they wish.
2007-12-07 01:01:11 · answer #10 · answered by Erinyes 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋