Religion in the Public Sphere

This year’s US presidential election features the first time a major party has nominated (well, soon to nominate) a Mormon (aka Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints).  There’s lots of chatter about whether a Mormon should be president and whether his Mormon faith could or should affect his decisions as president.

Now whether or not Mr. Romney would let his faith affect his decisions, the first item to realize is that the US Constitution forbids any religious tests to hold public office; you cannot disqualify anyone from office because of their religious beliefs.  If one believes that those beliefs are not consistent with the Constitution or that their beliefs show a lack of judgment, that is a completely different matter and a different set of standards.  It also requires the individual making those judgments to understand the person’s beliefs well enough to make an informed decision rather than acting out of ignorance and bigotry.

The second issue I see arising is a sense that some people believe that a person can, or would be better off to, act without regard to their beliefs.  If I hear someone say this, I am immediately suspicious.

One’s beliefs are an inner moral compass; they affect who you are and how you see the world.  To act without regard to one’s beliefs is to act without have a moral guide.  The only type of person I know of that can do this is a psychopath.  No offense, but America has enough problems keeping her politicians honest without electing psychopaths.  Clearly, most people do in fact make decisions based on some set of moral values.  The person who says otherwise either isn’t telling the truth or doesn’t realize what they are saying.

Some politicians will say that their personal beliefs will not get in the way of performing their elected duties.  That may be possible to a limited degree, but I contend that such a person really doesn’t hold the level of commitment to their beliefs that they think they do.

Very well then, what about those who would reply that, if you  believe that Christianity is the only way to God, then if you’re not seeking to pass a law declaring everybody should be a Christian, then you aren’t a very good Christian?  This approach has been tried before and failed (the Roman Empire under Constantine) because Christianity is a personal choice that cannot be forced on someone, so no ,the question does not apply.

In our constitutional republic (sorry folks, we’re really not a democracy), our officials owe the public the benefit of acting as who they are; all of who they are.  But a second question arises: doesn’t this run afoul of the separation of church and state?  Unless the official is trying to set a religion in which citizens are required to participate.  Besides, the second part of the religion issue in the First Amendment also applies – US law cannot deny the free exercise of religion either.  Once again, just because someone had religious convictions cannot disqualify them.