Flame — HabitableZone

Flame » in reply to re: "Freedom requires religion" (Mitt Romney) - OK, regarding Romney:

Your mileage may vary
Robert — (archived)

Hi Marcia...I think what's bothering those of us who are bothered isn't the fear that Romney will push the Mormon religion on anyone. That'd be political suicide, and it'd be the Christian evangelicals who'd pull the trigger. In addressing them directly, he's trying to overcome a longstanding...how shall I put it? "skepticisim" toward his faith on the part of the more conservative Christian denominations.

It may be more evident to non-Christians--members of other faiths, agnostics, and atheists--that Romney excluded non-Christians from consideration. He went so far as to define them (well, us, as I consider myself agnostic) as members of the made-up religion of "secularism", and thunderously denounced it/us as unAmerican, immoral, and lacking in conscience. This in the midst of a speech ostensibly on religious tolerance. This rather undercuts his message, and actually doesn't bode well for religious tolerance in America, or at a minimum suggest he may be rather unclear on the concept.

Just not forcing a religion on somebody is good, but it's not everything. Excluding people who don't accept that religion is the flip side of the same thing.

Log in or register to post.

The whole thread (144 posts)