According to various sources, the Obama administration and its allies in the MSM pressured Mitt Romney into publicly repudiating a potential ad campaign by an independent Super PAC that would have tied Obama to Jeremiah Wright. Their argument was that religion should be off the table.
The decision by Governor Romney was wrong.
It is perfectly valid to examine and question the religious beliefs of a political candidate. Religious beliefs are by definition deeply held beliefs that shape how a person views the world and are thus good indicators of how a candidate may govern.
Religious beliefs often attempt to answer the higher story questions of life: Who am I? Why am I here? What is the purpose of life? What is the value of life? What is the nature of man? etc. How these questions are answered will directly affect not only the governing philosophy of an administration but the practical policy applications. The difference can be rather striking. We must remember that our Declaration of Independence begins with a theological statement about God as the source of equality and natural rights.
Religious beliefs can also point directly to policy applications. For instance, we know that Jeremiah Wright taught Black Liberation Theology and explicitly condemned the founding principles of the United States. Black Liberation Theology touches directly upon the need for government directed social justice, taxation and redistribution of wealth, and racial policy preferences. It also teaches the inherent evil of western civilization and the need to destroy it so that a new – more equitable – society can be rebuilt amidst its ruin. Those familiar with Black Liberation Theology – and Liberation Theology in general – were not surprised by the actions of the Obama administration during its first term. Nor are they under any illusion that a second term would be any better.
Finally, religious beliefs and a person’s adherence to them can be a good indication of character.
Since Barack Obama and his religious beliefs have not received a proper vetting, many are confused as to what the President actually believes. The basic tenets of Black Liberation Theology are not commonly known and many would find it hard to belief the President truly believed such things – which is precisely why the Obama administration wants religion to be off the table. Obama wants to be free to construct his own narrative and to distort religion to support his election and his policy positions.
It is also worth noting the hypocrisy of the Obama administration and the MSM on the issue. While they may proclaim that religion should be off the table, that proclamation does not apply to Mormonism. Mormons and Mormonism are still fair game. President Obama may never raise the issue. He has surrogates in the MSM who will do it for him. The most recent example is a Washington Post article that connects Romney to the massacre of settlers from Arkansas by a Mormon militia in the Mountain Meadow Massacre of 1857. Another example is Bill Maher’s attack on Mormonism as a cult. Barack Obama will not silence or publicly repudiate his surrogates when they outlandishly attack Mormons. Why should Romney repudiate his supporters when they raise valid questions about Obama’s religious beliefs? Unilateral disarmament worked so well for John McCain.
Let me close with two caveats. Religious beliefs should be discussed with tact but discussed nonetheless. Atheism and agnosticism are also religious beliefs and should be treated the same as other such beliefs.