As per our discussion in class today about Mitt Romney's forthcoming speech on his faith and the parallels between JFK's similar predicament In 1960, I pose a question: Is it in the interest of good journalism to raise questions about the basic character traits about a candidate? Should a story appear in a newspaper that questions whether or not a candidate is going to confuse his religion with public policy (even if that religion is largely misunderstood and there exists a national misconception of the tenets of that religion)?
By 1960, the country had been run by white protestant (some more fervent than others) males. Catholic doctrine states that all Catholics must believe that then pope is infallible and only those baptized in the Catholic Church are going directly to heaven. Kennedy then had some explaining to do...what if the pope tells you to do something on a public policy matter? Do you have to listen to him? Are all of your predecessors therefore going to hell? Kennedy successfully defused the issue by portraying himself as a staunch anti-communist and a patriot and said that his faith would not get in the way of public policy.
Romney is also called upon to answer similar questions on the tenets of his largly misunderstood religion. He says we are all united in that the constitution protects (and does not advocate) and single religion.
But what if the candidate is of not religious persuasion? It is hard to argue that this country wasn't founded with the firm belief in the higher power. ("In God We Trust" is on all the money and the forefathers clearly had a "reliance on the protection of divine providence")
So what if the guy is an atheist, or a Satanist? If he isn’t religious, is he against the basic tenets of this country and therefore a serious risk to our republic? Is a candidate’s religion as newsworthy as how many times he goes to the bathroom?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
No matter what a candidates religion may be it's important for me to know as a voter that he isn't going to use his religion as a guideline for how to run the country. He needs to be looking at what is going to help the country as a whole and not just those who believe there is a greater being. For this reason I don't think it's important to have news coverage on whether or not a candidate is religious but to more so focus that coverage on whether that candidate plans to use his religious views as a guide to reshape our country.
The focus on the religious preferences of the candidates is creating an issue that goes against what the nation's founders proclaimed, the religion is a choice and not a dominant influence. However, as it has become widely known the influence the evangelical movement has on President Bush, I feel some concern is to be expected, especially when it is a religion that is clouded by misinformation and controversy. If religion is going to be examined as a defining characteristic of a candidate, accurate information should be provided to explain that religion correctly, allowing readers, and voters, to make their own decisions. After all, holes in information can lead to misconceptions.
Post a Comment