–By Heather Cirmo. Cirmo is a mother, and part of The Kitchen Cabinet’s Washington team.

A couple of months ago, my left-leaning friend said, “I don’t think religion should play a role in politics. All I care about is that a candidate lives by The Golden Rule–do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” I bristled at this notion and fired back with, “One’s faith informs one’s political views. Religion matters!” However, as the Republican race for the presidency has started to mirror “American Idol” with endless performances (i.e. debates) where candidates are asked stupid questions like, “If you were talking with two gays in your living room…,” I’ve begun to reevaluate my response to my thoughtful liberal friend. What, if any, is the role of faith in politics?

We haven’t always probed candidates’ faith. Our founding fathers had a reverence for God. Some were Christians, others Deists. Their writings and speeches often referred to God or the Almighty, but they knew they weren’t in charge of a church. They didn’t consider themselves spiritual leaders. In fact, they were keenly aware of the problems associated with church and government intermingling!

Today, you can find many books laying out the religious beliefs of all of our past presidents–examining in great detail just how genuine their beliefs were–but that is because our modern society has created a market for this, not because Americans have historically thought it essential knowledge. It was assumed up until the mid-20th century that presidential candidates had at the bare minimum a respect for God.

Then, in 1960, a Catholic ran for president. Protestants voiced concern that the Democratic nominee John F. Kennedy would be a puppet for the Catholic church rather than a servant of the people. The pressure was on Richard Nixon, a Quaker, to make religion an issue. In response to a question from “Newsweek” magazine about the likely role religion will play in the race, Nixon replied, “I hope that religion will not have any effect upon the election. The constitutional provision that there shall be ‘no religious test for office’ is wise, and I am hopeful that the American people will agree…the leaders of the Republican Party have indicated that they did not want religion discussed.”

In a major speech to the Greater Houston Ministerial Society on September 12, 1960, Kennedy said, “…contrary to common newspaper usage, I am not the Catholic candidate for president. I am the Democratic Party’s candidate for president, who happens also to be a Catholic. I do not speak for my church on public matters, and the church does not speak for me…”

After Kennedy’s death, his vice president Lyndon B. Johnson took the reins. He was a member of the Disciples of Christ denomination, his father was well-known in Texas Baptist circles, but LBJ was not subject to the intense probing of his predecessor.

Fast-forward a few years and Jimmy Carter enters the scene. He was a member of the Southern Baptist denomination, which had a long-standing tradition of separating religion and politics. However, Carter’s admission that he was an evangelical born-again Christian was earth-shattering.

As Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne described it, “he was treated in a lot of the press as if he were some sort of Martian.” He garnered the evangelical vote, though, and was elected president.

All the while, Jerry Falwell was also on the rise, and it was partially anger over Carter’s liberal views that the Moral Majority was conceived. Shortly after, Ralph Reed’s Christian Coalition emerged followed by Family Research Council (full disclosure: I worked there) and a host of other conservative groups that freely mingled faith and politics. These groups have accomplished wonderful policy goals, and they persuaded many religious people to get involved in the political process. However, I can’t help but wonder if all the personal questions we’re asking of candidates to find out what makes them tick is causing us to vote for the wrong person.

We must remember that who we elect as president is not our spiritual leader. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t pray for wise–even godly–men and women to lead our country. As a Christian, I’m instructed to pray for all of my leaders (If the Christians persecuted under harsh Roman rule were able to follow the apostle Peter’s command, I can, too!). However, how he or she worships should not be THE deciding issue as we think about how to vote. Yes, we are entrusting him or her to make important decisions for our country, which is why looking at his or her track record as a leader is so important. This is why character and integrity are important.

Barack Obama claimed to be a Christian, but I didn’t vote for him because I didn’t support his views. Mitt Romney is a Mormon, but I find his record and character much more appealing than that of Newt Gingrich, who is making the rounds on the Christian circle talking about his faith and how his moral failings give him a better understanding of the human condition. Honestly, is that necessary for the presidency?

I’m not quite ready to admit that a commitment to upholding the Golden Rule is all that I need to know about a candidate’s faith. I will confess, though, that I’m guilty of expecting far too much from a political leader.

http://heathercirmo.com/2012/01/26/the-golden-rule-of-politics/

   Follow @TKC_US    

 

Filed under: Economy, Featured, Inside The KC, Politics by Heather Cirmo, Jan 28, 2012