With the Democratic and Republican conventions and the campaign season in high gear, there are increasing signs that this presidential race will present the American public with a profoundly unsettling infusion of religion and religiosity.
The signs of this growing insertion of faith into the presidential race are everywhere around us.
The agenda for the Democratic National Convention indicates that the program includes panels on “How an Obama Administration will Engage People of Faith,” “Moral Values Issues Abroad,” “Getting Out the Faith Vote,” and “Common Ground on Common Good.” Members of the clergy from across the religious spectrum will have a significant presence at the convention, not only conducting scripture readings at a multifaith “kickoff event,” but also offering invocations and benedictions.
While the complete agenda for the Republican National Convention has not yet been finalized as of this writing, religiously themed events and prayer events will almost certainly play a prominent role in Minneapolis. As Republican spokeswoman Yohana De La Torre recently said in response to a question regarding the GOP convention, “faith-based initiatives and family values are at the heart of our party.”
Appealing to religious voters appears to get votes. And it is an easy road to follow: Men of faith, like Obama and McCain, are simply swimming with the current when they sit in a church and forthrightly answer Pastor Rick Warren’s questions about their personal relationship with Jesus. Renewed faith-based initiatives, religious outreach teams, and religious programming at the conventions all work to curry favor with those who care which party is most favorable toward the religious.
There comes a point, however, when being open about faith crosses a subtle line into pandering. Some of what we have been seeing in this campaign is excessive and aggressive. It goes beyond a candidate’s discussing how religion shapes his or her worldview. Rather, it’s saying “vote for me because I’m a person of faith” — and that is directly contrary to the constitutional principle that there shall be no religious test for public office.
This is not to say that we should be opposed to candidates who are religious, or that candidates shouldn’t feel free to discuss their religious beliefs with the body politic. It is understandable that candidates, from time to time, will need to express their religious beliefs — and how their faith will inform and influence their policymaking. And there’s nothing wrong with a candidate expressing his or her religious perspective — especially when confronted with misinformation, innuendo and rumor.
However, appealing to voters along religious lines can be divisive and contrary to the American ideal of including all Americans in the political process. It is deeply troubling when religion is no longer just an element in understanding the character of a candidate, but becomes a central part of the party’s efforts to win votes or to pander to a certain religious group or constituency.
Voters should be encouraged to make decisions based on their assessment of the qualifications, integrity and political positions of candidates, and not on how religious they are. Anyone who legitimately aspires to public office must be prepared to set an example and to be a leader for all Americans, of all faiths or of no faiths.
When debate moderators ask the candidates to discuss their personal relationship with God, it would be refreshing to hear an answer similar to the one President Kennedy gave nearly 48 years ago, when he confronted questions about his Catholicism: “I am not the Catholic candidate for President. I am the Democratic Party’s candidate for president who happens also to be a Catholic.”
Religion, he was saying, is part of him, but it does not define him, and it should not be the primary lens through which Americans view him.
In this season, it is important to remind all political players that there is a point at which an emphasis on religion in a political campaign becomes inappropriate and even unsettling in this religiously diverse nation.
Abraham H. Foxman is National Director of the Anti-Defamation League and the author of “The Deadliest Lies: The Israel Lobby and the Myth of Jewish Control.” EDITOR’S NOTE: This online-only guest commentary has not been edited. Guest commentary submissions of up to 650 words may be sent to openforum@denverpost.com.
