So, in the speech Willard Romney gave to an audience of sympathetic listeners (as opposed to JFK's speech which was to an audience of people largely unconvinced of his ability to act as President outside of the Catholic church), we get this gem:
"Freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom..."
How does this translate for the millions of Americans who are not religious? As no questions were permitted after the speech,
there was no chance to learn more. Ought we conclude that for the non-religious there is no expectation of freedom?
Whether or not you believe that a leader has to have a religious background, the ideals and values of the US are intended to treat everyone equally, regardless of differences in religious belief. It's no longer certain if those values are apparent in Mr. Romney's world.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
"Freedom requires religion" doesn't mean that everyone has to be religious. On its face, the statement can be re-stated as: a nation which excludes religion is not free.
Of course, if no one wants to practice a religion, then to enforce the existence of a religion would be very non-free. That, however, seems a rather long walk from what he was saying.
As a Mormon, I would imagine that he's very concerned about freedom of religion, as his particular religion has duked it out with the U.S. Government and lost (on a matter of marriage rights, no less).
Post a Comment