Skepticum

I have my political favorites but regardless of where I find my votes may go I will stay true to my belief that only through separation of religion and politics can we create an environment conducive to economic and intellectual progress as well as freedom and justice for all.  I also believe societies should be inclusive, not exclusive if we are to achieve the most societal and economic health.

While I will not have the time to make a case here on how most except a few religions predominantly promote exclusionary and segregationist ideas (us vs them, black and white thinking, etc) I would like to point to how in the current political discourse Republicans (not surprisingly) and Democrats (somewhat surprisingly) are getting dangerously close to a church-like religion and politics blend, to the potential exclusion of 10-12% of the population who openly claim agnosticism and/or atheism (and those who don’t claim it because it’s not acceptable in the circle in which they live in).

Sally Quinn of the Washington Post illustrates this:

On Sunday, Tiernan attended the first event at the Democratic National Convention, an Interfaith Gathering attended by some 2,000 people at the Colorado Convention Center. Speaking were distinguished priests, rabbis, imams and religion scholars. “I sat through, I guess I’d have to call it, a service,” says Tiernan. “People were responding in unison. In the middle, Leah Daughtry (a pastor and CEO of the Democratic National Convention Committee) spoke and said that despite what the media says, Democrats are people of faith.”

Tiernan says he couldn’t stand it any more. “I stood up and said, ‘I’m a democrat but I’m not a person of faith.’ I said, ‘This looks like a church service to me and I never thought I would see the Democrats doing something like this.” (…)

The Interfaith Gathering was the first of several interfaith events scheduled during the convention. The Secular Coalition of America had written to Daughtry to ask that atheists, agnostics and secular humanists be included in these events. The Associated Press reported that she received the request but never responded.

The Democrats are in a real bind this year. In recent elections, the Republicans have owned religion. The evangelical base has helped Republican presidential candidates win elections while the Democrats have stood by helplessly. This year, the Democrats are bound to show they are just as religious as Republicans, but at what cost? (…)

At various times in years past, women, blacks, Jews and gays were the political outcasts in one or both parties. Now it seems the only group of untouchables are the atheists.

Tags: atheism, democrat, faith, Politics, Religion, republican

…says Isaac C. Rottenberg in a Rocky Mountain News Speakout commentary.

Rottenberg starts by quoting Washington University professor Jonathan Turley,

“This election, the candidates are talking so much about faith that one would think they wanted to be in the College of Cardinals rather than the Hall of Presidents.”

He doesn’t explain his secular nonsense comment , so I fear while he’s trying to bring a new commentary to the extensive debate of religion and elections Rottenberg is just rehashing (in new words) what many political commentators have said, that Constitution prohibits any religious test for office.

Rottenber is right about one thing, that this campaign has been overridden by pious silliness.

Charles Krauthammer in his Washington Post column called the phenomenon an “overdose of public piety.”

Mitt Romney declares, “Freedom and religion endure together, or perish alone.” Barack Obama opens his speech at his South Carolina Oprah rally with “Giving all praise and honor to God. Look at the day that the Lord has made.” Mike Huckabee explains his surge in the polls thus: “There’s only one explanation for it, and it’s not a human one. It’s the same power that helped a little boy with two fish and five loaves feed a crowd of 5,000 people.”

This campaign is knee-deep in religion, and it’s only going to get worse. I’d thought that the limits of professed public piety had already been achieved during the Republican CNN-YouTube debate when some squirrelly looking guy held up a Bible and asked, “Do you believe every word of this book?” — and not one candidate dared reply: None of your damn business.

It would be interesting to try to find the source of this piety (some of which I believe to be just purely rhetorical, and some with consider a lie). Is it fear of the evangelical right’s ability to rally the troops and make their voices (irrational as they many be) heard louder than those who try for a balanced approach?

There is a communication theory that says it is easier to persuade from the middle to one extreme, than from one extreme to the other. So maybe all of our candidates are trying to balance themselves on a pin in the religious middle, thus all the piousness.

Tags: elections, Politics, Religion

Americans don’t often get to hear the realities of public health care in other parts of the world, even with the recent debate on universal health care.

Pajamas media reported today that according to UNICEF Romania holds the leading position in child mortality rates, and mothers’ birth-related deaths in the developing world. The costs of universal health care in Romania range from lives lost to underground cash economies where bribing doctors and nurses is the rule without guarantee of good care:

In some hospitals, patients are required to bring their own cotton pads or needles, food is mostly provided by caring relatives, rooms are overcrowded, hygiene is poor. The daily bribe for a nurse is around $40, a surgeon might ask you for $500 or more to perform an intervention. Although employees pay 6.5% of their income and employers another 6% to the public health insurance, the Romanian health care system is grossly underfinanced. While other European countries spend 7-8% of their GDP for health care, Romania only dedicates 3.5% of a much lower GDP ($257 billion).

Not surprisingly, Romanians see the only solution in the private sector:

In this grim picture, the only hope comes from the growing privatization of the medical sector. Although still chaotic and fragmented, the private market is growing faster than in neighboring Bulgaria or Hungary, where public services are better and thus the need for private alternatives less stringent.

Interesting how in one part of the world we see the solution in universal health care, and in Romania some see the solution in private health care. I guess when it comes to death or life situations humans prefer to pay and have some assurance of good care, than not pay at all and play Russian roulette with their lives.

It certainly reminds us that when talking about health care cost is not the only issue, and quality of care, and industry regulation also play a critical roles.

Tags: health, international, policy, Politics

Romney discussed his candidacy and religion today,…. sort of. He mostly made numerous vague statements and managed to brush off comparisons of Mormonism to other Christian groups.

The most rhetorically shrewd part of his address was his mention of freedom:

“Freedom requires religion, just as religion requires freedom. Freedom opens the windows of the soul so that man can discover his most profound beliefs and commune with God. Freedom and religion endure together, or perish alone.”

In other words, you cannot be truly free without religion.

Mormonism prescribes many of these “cannot without religion”–you cannot be truly happy, you cannot be truly free, etc.

Here’s how the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints views freedom, in the words of LDS General Authority, Elder Enzio Busche:

My dear brothers and sisters, in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, many new members, specifically when they come from countries other than the United States, learn for the first time the true dimension of the word freedom. Freedom for most people of the world means “freedom from” the absence of malice or pain or suppression. But the freedom that God means when He deals with us goes one step further. He means “freedom to”—the freedom to act in the dignity of our own choice.

Let me summarize this point. Non-Mormons, new Mormons and especially foreigners who are new to the church don’t get the whole truth about freedom.  These folk know what they may be free from but not what they’re “free to.” The probability is that American Mormons who are not new to the church know about freedom best.

It’s this concept of “free to” that appears in Romney’s quote as well when he says, “Freedom opens the windows of the soul so that man can discover his most profound beliefs and commune with God.” But do not be led to think that by “act in the dignity of our own choice,” they mean that we can do whatever we choose. The word dignity is there for a good purpose, and it’s tied in with Jesus Christ (as you will see below).

Also don’t be fooled into thinking that the mighty genius of Romney come up with this concept. The Mormon church has numerous writings on this topic. Here is how freedom to and freedom of choice are defined by Mormons, in the words of the same LDS General Authority, Elder Enzio Busche:

As we open our hearts to the message of God’s truth, as it was restored in our time, we begin to understand why there was, and still is, so much misery, pain, suffering, and even starvation. In the same dimension as we are learning to accept the revealed truth in our own life, our faith in the living Son of God will grow, and therefore we will receive spiritual gifts of heretofore unknown capacity. We will learn that nothing is impossible for those who believe in Jesus Christ. False bondages will be loosened. Narrow thinking born in tragedies of false traditions will disappear.

In conclusion, Romney’s words are almost perfectly in line with his church’s teachings that one cannot be truly free without Jesus Christ, because only religion can open one’s soul to allow communion with God, and release the bondages false traditions keep us under.

For example, if you have a glass of wine with your meal you are not truly free because you allow a false tradition to bond you. If you choose to express your love for someone of the same sex you are not truly free because you chose to bond yourself in something ungodly.

If Romney replaced Jesus Christ in his speech with a generic term of “religion” he did it for political reasons only.

He said, “I believe in my Mormon faith and I endeavor to live by it. My faith is the faith of my fathers — I will be true to them and to my beliefs.”

So, if he is to be true to his beliefs he would have to say that Jesus Christ brings freedom (to) , however, that would exclude all other non-Jesus religions from being able to bring freedom (to).

My final conclusion is that Romney is throwing empty, yet Mormon-influenced rhetorical language hoping to create some “ethos of Romney” and convince the religious folk of America that he’s a freedom and religion loving guy, and he’s non-threatening and he just only sees the similarities in people, not the differences.

The notion that freedom and religion can’t exist one without the other is a fabrication stemming from his church’s moral teachings. And his church’s teachings are nothing but an attempt to manipulate the concept of freedom of choice, by saying that Jesus gives one the freedom to choose what Jesus says is right, and that’s the only true freedom.

Tags: feedom, Mormon, Politics, Religion, Romney

Recent poll calls in Iowa and New Hampshire that were allegedly  critical of Mitt Romney’s faith have resulted in press discussions on whether or not Romney should publicly discuss his allegiance to the Mormon church. The only recipients to have come forth about the calls though, were all on Romney’s payroll.

Controversy aside, the Romney campaign claimed it is unamerican to question a candidate about his religion.

Atheist Christopher Hitchens made the case on Fox News that Romney should not be surprised by questions about his allegiances, and that the least he could do is to discuss the intersection between his church’s authority and law, as well as questions related to the Mormon church’s racist and polygamist past. All of these can potentially have political consequences and Hitchens believes it would be unpatriotic to not touch upon these topics.

As a former resident of the state of Utah, I can say the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is highly politically aware and involved. Utah policies are heavily influenced by the Mormon church. However, Utah does not stand alone when it comes to high religious influence in politics. Larger states that get a larger number of ballots, such as Texas are also heavily influenced by their majority religion.

Some have claimed that Romney looks like a leader, however, the emphasis on looks signals to Mormon culture as well. The Mormon church raises its men to look like leaders, as a proselytizing attraction tool. All men who serve missions are taught how to dress, groom, talk, act and behave in the most persuasive ways. Mormon return-missionaries make great sales-men and have a strong reputation in the corporate sales-world.

Looks aside, would Romney be a good leader? Can one who avoids reasonable conversations related to his controversial church be a good leader, in a country where difficult international conversations happen every day?

While I think Romney should answer questions related to how his religion may influence his policies, just as Carey had to answer questions about his take on abortion, I think there is a Christian double standard at play in America. The mainstream Christian candidates are not challenged based on their religion, yet they should be equally questioned, regardless of religious affiliation. By the same token, Romney should expect and answer questions about his religion.

No one should be fooled into thinking that religious organization don’t influence politics, or that religion can be completely eliminated from politics. But just saying my church is just as Christian as yours is not a valid reason to skirt religious questions.

When your church owns the downtown block of Main Street in Salt Lake City you should be expected to answer tough questions. And when your church decrees same-sex couples can’t hold hands on this same Main street block, you may really want to answer how many of your decisions your church may influence. And if you can’t give an answer you may not be a good enough leader.

Tags: atheism, christian, church, Hitchens, Mormon, Politics, Religion, Romney