
Religion in the 2012 presidential election is the topic that will launch a thousand PhD theses. The pre-Vatican II Catholic candidate, Rick Santorum, has risen largely on the support of evangelicals, who, before the Second Vatican Council, often regarded the pope as the Antichrist. The former Mormon bishop, Mitt Romney, won Ohio and Michigan (and thus probably the nomination) arguably because of Catholic support. Meanwhile, a significant portion of the Republican electorate regards a president who has affirmed “the resurrection of our savior Jesus Christ” as a closet Muslim.In light of these developments, Americans have every right to be confused. But they hold one conviction about the role of religion in politics with increasing clarity: There is too much of it. . . . Republican expressions of faith have been frequent and frequently crude. . . . It is difficult to imagine Bachmann or Perry in the same political universe as evangelical abolitionists and social reformers William Wilberforce and Lord Shaftesbury.
The poll, for example, found that GOP voters who believe there is too much religion in politics are far more likely to support Romney. Consider this a moment. At least among Republicans, Romney’s Mormonism is viewed as a haven from an excessive emphasis on religion.
The Pew poll also serves as a reminder that the Democratic Party coalition remains diverse on religious issues. Concerns about excessive public religious expression are concentrated among Democrats.
So maybe the message of Americans on religion and politics isn’t that confusing after all. They don’t like sectarianism. But they also reject secularism. There is, fortunately, a distinctly American alternative: religious pluralism, humanized by tolerance.
No comments:
Post a Comment