Posted by Siamang on: 12.07.2007 /
A spokesman for the Mitt Romney campaign is thus far refusing to say whether Romney sees any positive role in America for atheists and other non-believers, after Election Central inquired about the topic yesterday
It’s a sign that Romney may be seeking to submerge evangelical distaste for Mormonism by uniting the two groups together in a wider culture war. Romney’s speech has come under some criticism, even from conservatives like David Brooks and Ramesh Ponnuru, for positively mentioning many prominent religions but failing to include anything positive about atheists and agnostics.
As other secularists have said, WE SUPPORT Romney in his bid to be treated with no favor or disfavor because of his faith. If he were a member of my political party, I’d go to the wall for the man, not because of his Mormonism, but because I believe in America as a nation where nobody should face discrimination because of their faith.
Wendy Kaminer said it just right.
Romney opposes bigotry in self-defense, not in defense of others, which is to say that he does not really oppose it at all.
Comment by: cautious
1Just a thought…
Politicians are talking to get votes and support for their positions. This usually means that they have to pick and choose their intended target audiences, trying to win the most popular support and offending the least number of people.
Romney might just be doing political calculus and realize that non-religious people are in such a minority that our votes aren’t worth the fight. I mean, when I look at the Republican platform I puke, so maybe he figures that all other atheists do.
The bright side to things…is that 20 years ago, a guy running for President said:
“No, I don’t know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God.”
Nowadays I don’t think any candidates are willing to be so blunt about their disrespect for us. Or, if they are, maybe this country has gotten to a point where they wouldn’t win the election.
Comment by: Richard Wade
2Romney knew exactly what he was doing in that speech. He’s kissing the asses of the Evangelicals because he wants their votes. But he has to shift the focus from their doubts about his Mormonism to unite with him against a common enemy. So he invented one, the evil “Secularists.” Now it’s not about his religion versus theirs but about religion versus godlessness. He’ll be subtle about it, but watch for more rhetoric about godless Democrats, godless liberals and godless seculars coming from his camp.
Now when atheists and seculars complain about being snubbed in his speech they will inadvertently alert more religious people to look to Romney as their new champion for god-in-government. It’s the same effect as that asinine boycott of the movie “The Golden Compass.” I had no interest in seeing it until people started saying I shouldn’t see it.
His speech reminded me of Mark Antony’s famous “Friends, Romans, countrymen” speech in Shakespeare’s “Julius Caesar.” Antony claims that his intent is to appeal for peace and acceptance, but his real intent is to incite enmity against Caesar’s murderers, and it works. In the same way, Romney claimed he was calling for religious tolerance, but his real intent was to focus intolerance off of him and onto the non-religious. He has a few unreligious Americans to lose and millions of church-goers to gain.
“Freedom needs religion” my ass.
Comment by: Ir (Helen)
3Here’s someone else courting the evangelical vote
Comment by: Doreen A Mannion
4don’t worry, as soon as you die, you’ll be a Mormon soon enough
that’s what they do, they baptize the dead into Mormonism
if you’re around after I die, would you promise to unbaptize me as a Mormon? PLEASE!
Comment by: Jim Henderson
5I agree with Wendys comment. She said it better than I could. He is playingnto the evangelical (and unsophisticated among them) vote
Comment by: Bob Gladstein
6The speech was disgusting, but it was nothing new for Mitt. He said something very similar as an off the cuff remark early in the year.