Comments on: The Separation Of Church And State http://www.chrisweigant.com/2007/12/06/the-separation-of-church-and-state/ Reality-based political commentary Wed, 10 Jun 2026 12:30:14 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Chris Weigant http://www.chrisweigant.com/2007/12/06/the-separation-of-church-and-state/#comment-1554 Chris Weigant Tue, 11 Dec 2007 02:18:41 +0000 http://www.chrisweigant.com/index.php/2007/12/06/the-separation-of-church-and-state/#comment-1554 I invite you all over to today's column for a continuation of this subject... -CW I invite you all over to today's column for a continuation of this subject...

-CW

]]> By: akadjian http://www.chrisweigant.com/2007/12/06/the-separation-of-church-and-state/#comment-1550 akadjian Sun, 09 Dec 2007 17:28:15 +0000 http://www.chrisweigant.com/index.php/2007/12/06/the-separation-of-church-and-state/#comment-1550 As a member of a group who have felt themselves persecuted, Romney does seem much more sensitive to some of the realities of our country's religious history. The irony of his message is that it appeals to groups that have a tolerance for religious freedom, much of the secular world, for example, and not to the evangelical base that he seems trying to respond to. Unfortunately for him, I think he made a big political mistake by giving this speech at all. I think the evangelicals will see the speech as an inauthentic attempt to be something that he is not. He is at the same time saying that he is for religious freedom while also believing that "Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Savior of mankind." Why is this message inconsistent in the evangelical world? Because a true evangelical would be preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ (converting people into believers) and not talking about religious freedom. The very argument many evangelicals are trying to make is that church and state should not be separate. So if the decision comes down to religion, do you vote for the former Baptist minister or the Mormon who thinks religion matters but should be separate from the state? His argument, like JFKs, plays more to centrists/liberals than the base who wanted an answer. And centrists/liberals already agree with this point of view so why give the speech? I realize Romney is trying to focus the debate away from religion, but if anything, his speech only seemed to validate that Huckabee and the evangelicals had struck a nerve. If you want to vote for an evangelist, Romney seems like the wrong man. Kennedy, when he gave his speech, had a different intended audience. His audience seemed concerned that separation of church and state might be threatened by a Catholic president. Romney's base audience seems more concerned that separation of church and state might be upheld. Sorry, Chris. I don't know how you were able to do it without comparing to Kennedy. As a member of a group who have felt themselves persecuted, Romney does seem much more sensitive to some of the realities of our country's religious history.

The irony of his message is that it appeals to groups that have a tolerance for religious freedom, much of the secular world, for example, and not to the evangelical base that he seems trying to respond to.

Unfortunately for him, I think he made a big political mistake by giving this speech at all. I think the evangelicals will see the speech as an inauthentic attempt to be something that he is not.

He is at the same time saying that he is for religious freedom while also believing that "Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Savior of mankind."

Why is this message inconsistent in the evangelical world? Because a true evangelical would be preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ (converting people into believers) and not talking about religious freedom. The very argument many evangelicals are trying to make is that church and state should not be separate.

So if the decision comes down to religion, do you vote for the former Baptist minister or the Mormon who thinks religion matters but should be separate from the state?

His argument, like JFKs, plays more to centrists/liberals than the base who wanted an answer. And centrists/liberals already agree with this point of view so why give the speech?

I realize Romney is trying to focus the debate away from religion, but if anything, his speech only seemed to validate that Huckabee and the evangelicals had struck a nerve. If you want to vote for an evangelist, Romney seems like the wrong man.

Kennedy, when he gave his speech, had a different intended audience. His audience seemed concerned that separation of church and state might be threatened by a Catholic president. Romney's base audience seems more concerned that separation of church and state might be upheld.

Sorry, Chris. I don't know how you were able to do it without comparing to Kennedy.

]]> By: benskull http://www.chrisweigant.com/2007/12/06/the-separation-of-church-and-state/#comment-1549 benskull Sun, 09 Dec 2007 16:04:38 +0000 http://www.chrisweigant.com/index.php/2007/12/06/the-separation-of-church-and-state/#comment-1549 Oh, my link didn't work. The Speech by Obama can be found here: http://www.barackobama.com/2006/06/28/call_to_renewal_keynote_address.php Oh, my link didn't work. The Speech by Obama can be found here: http://www.barackobama.com/2006/06/28/call_to_renewal_keynote_address.php

]]> By: benskull http://www.chrisweigant.com/2007/12/06/the-separation-of-church-and-state/#comment-1548 benskull Sun, 09 Dec 2007 16:01:56 +0000 http://www.chrisweigant.com/index.php/2007/12/06/the-separation-of-church-and-state/#comment-1548 Great post! Definately an important topic. I attended a 'non denominational' church for a brief stint out of curiosity, and the fact that my girlfriend at the time went. Being raised catholic turned me off a bit, as it was still pretty harsh when I was young, and yes as a kindergartner, I had my knuckles rapped with a ruler by 300lbs sister Delores. I never went back to my girlfriends church after a service right before the last midterm elections, when the Dems took over. They passed out pamphlets with the top Dem candidates and the top Repub candidates in a comparison, and the only info listed about each candidate was whether they were for or against abortion and whether they were for or against same sex marriage. I took one look at it and looked at my girlfriend, who knew my position and passion in politics and she knew I wasn't coming back. It was absurd and totally irresponsible. I still have a hard time understanding why those topics are so important. There are so many other topics addressed by those in public office that matter as well, not to mention that convincing the congregation to vote for these people on these grounds would continue a controversial war that was taking plenty of lives as well. I was equally as angered at Pat Robertsons announced support for Giuliani. What hypocrisy, or more-so an obvious sign of the lack of conviction in Robertsons actions, and the presence of power hunger, and the need for Christian Right and Repub partnership. I wonder too why Christians have not voiced support for Obama, knowing that he is christian. <a>This Speech</a> is a fine picture of religious and political cooperation, with room for everyone. In my opinion it is more sympathetic to a christian view then any of the repub candidates have to offer. If anyone has read Tolstoy, his book, The Kingdom of God is Within You, voices his opinions of the hypocrisy of christian nations going to war, when the Sermon on the Mount in the bible clearly states that a christian should not meet evil with evil, or non-resistance to violence by force. Makes you wonder how much of Bush's rhetoric about 'saving a few souls along the way' is material written by his cronies, because his actions surely do not resonate with "What would Jesus do?" so he shouldn't claim it. But I guess thats what its come to. Empty Rhetoric to gain the support of the Christian Right, and these Righties being taught by the Falwells and Robertsons that they have to vote Repub for God. Thanks for the post Chris, great topic. Great post! Definately an important topic. I attended a 'non denominational' church for a brief stint out of curiosity, and the fact that my girlfriend at the time went. Being raised catholic turned me off a bit, as it was still pretty harsh when I was young, and yes as a kindergartner, I had my knuckles rapped with a ruler by 300lbs sister Delores. I never went back to my girlfriends church after a service right before the last midterm elections, when the Dems took over. They passed out pamphlets with the top Dem candidates and the top Repub candidates in a comparison, and the only info listed about each candidate was whether they were for or against abortion and whether they were for or against same sex marriage. I took one look at it and looked at my girlfriend, who knew my position and passion in politics and she knew I wasn't coming back. It was absurd and totally irresponsible. I still have a hard time understanding why those topics are so important. There are so many other topics addressed by those in public office that matter as well, not to mention that convincing the congregation to vote for these people on these grounds would continue a controversial war that was taking plenty of lives as well. I was equally as angered at Pat Robertsons announced support for Giuliani. What hypocrisy, or more-so an obvious sign of the lack of conviction in Robertsons actions, and the presence of power hunger, and the need for Christian Right and Repub partnership. I wonder too why Christians have not voiced support for Obama, knowing that he is christian. This Speech is a fine picture of religious and political cooperation, with room for everyone. In my opinion it is more sympathetic to a christian view then any of the repub candidates have to offer. If anyone has read Tolstoy, his book, The Kingdom of God is Within You, voices his opinions of the hypocrisy of christian nations going to war, when the Sermon on the Mount in the bible clearly states that a christian should not meet evil with evil, or non-resistance to violence by force. Makes you wonder how much of Bush's rhetoric about 'saving a few souls along the way' is material written by his cronies, because his actions surely do not resonate with "What would Jesus do?" so he shouldn't claim it. But I guess thats what its come to. Empty Rhetoric to gain the support of the Christian Right, and these Righties being taught by the Falwells and Robertsons that they have to vote Repub for God. Thanks for the post Chris, great topic.

]]> By: Chris Weigant http://www.chrisweigant.com/2007/12/06/the-separation-of-church-and-state/#comment-1542 Chris Weigant Fri, 07 Dec 2007 20:16:00 +0000 http://www.chrisweigant.com/index.php/2007/12/06/the-separation-of-church-and-state/#comment-1542 There was a funny comment posted to a HuffPost article that is worth sharing here: "I could sum up his speech in three statements! 1. We should all be tolerant of religions, even ones we don't agree with. 2. Secularism/atheism is a religion. 3. Let's all hate on those traitorous, treasonous, blashpemous secularists/athiests! Circular logic if ever there was any" This was posted by "DemandTruth" and is the best commentary on Mitt's speech I've seen yet. -CW There was a funny comment posted to a HuffPost article that is worth sharing here:

"I could sum up his speech in three statements!

1. We should all be tolerant of religions, even ones we don't agree with.

2. Secularism/atheism is a religion.

3. Let's all hate on those traitorous, treasonous, blashpemous secularists/athiests!

Circular logic if ever there was any"

This was posted by "DemandTruth" and is the best commentary on Mitt's speech I've seen yet.

-CW

]]> By: Michale http://www.chrisweigant.com/2007/12/06/the-separation-of-church-and-state/#comment-1541 Michale Fri, 07 Dec 2007 13:15:30 +0000 http://www.chrisweigant.com/index.php/2007/12/06/the-separation-of-church-and-state/#comment-1541 My views on religion is clear. At it's base, religion is nothing but extortion, writ-large.. Romney's "this is who I am, vote for me or not, but I am not going to be something I am not just to get your vote" stance is refreshing and will probably HELP him more than it will harm him. I admire him for saying this and what CW mentioned above. It's refreshing to hear someone say things that are as they are, rather than saying what he thinks people want to hear.. Personally, I am uncomfortable with any exposure to religion and would be just fine with getting rid of all aspects of religion in public. In this regard, I am fully in the camp of the Liberal Left insofar as I believe that FREEDOM OF RELIGION also means FREEDOM ***FROM*** RELIGION. Religion is a crutch dreamed up by leaders in the Dark Ages to give the masses something to occupy their minds. Take their minds off the dreary conditions. I can just picture the pope saying, "Whaaa... We just wanted to give the people hope. Who knew they would take it so far???" Michale..... My views on religion is clear.

At it's base, religion is nothing but extortion, writ-large..

Romney's "this is who I am, vote for me or not, but I am not going to be something I am not just to get your vote" stance is refreshing and will probably HELP him more than it will harm him. I admire him for saying this and what CW mentioned above. It's refreshing to hear someone say things that are as they are, rather than saying what he thinks people want to hear..

Personally, I am uncomfortable with any exposure to religion and would be just fine with getting rid of all aspects of religion in public.

In this regard, I am fully in the camp of the Liberal Left insofar as I believe that FREEDOM OF RELIGION also means FREEDOM ***FROM*** RELIGION.

Religion is a crutch dreamed up by leaders in the Dark Ages to give the masses something to occupy their minds. Take their minds off the dreary conditions. I can just picture the pope saying, "Whaaa... We just wanted to give the people hope. Who knew they would take it so far???"

Michale.....

]]> By: fstanley http://www.chrisweigant.com/2007/12/06/the-separation-of-church-and-state/#comment-1539 fstanley Fri, 07 Dec 2007 01:39:26 +0000 http://www.chrisweigant.com/index.php/2007/12/06/the-separation-of-church-and-state/#comment-1539 Very interesting post. How has the concept of "separation of church & state" evolved thru the years? Members of government are "sworn" in over a bible, the supreme court has a mass, congress has a chaplin etc.... Religion seems to have become interwoven into society and it often seems that you are judged and found wanting if you do not believe in god. Can you be a good, ethical, moral person if you do not believe in the existance of a god? That is the question that seems to be out there these days. ...Stan Very interesting post. How has the concept of "separation of church & state" evolved thru the years? Members of government are "sworn" in over a bible, the supreme court has a mass, congress has a chaplin etc....

Religion seems to have become interwoven into society and it often seems that you are judged and found wanting if you do not believe in god.

Can you be a good, ethical, moral person if you do not believe in the existance of a god? That is the question that seems to be out there these days.

...Stan

]]>