Seperation of Church and Vote

This topic came up during a recent discussion of Colin Powell's comments made when he made his speech supporting Barack Obama for President. Powell made the statement, "What if he (Obama) is (Muslim)?"; "Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this county?"

Before delving deeply into the topic at hand, I'd like to preface it with this thought, "Separation of Church and State" does not apply to my individual views, but in a broader context of the intrusion of government into church affairs and the intrusion of church affairs into government. As an individual, I am not precluded from qualifying any judgment without the full measure of my religious convictions.

I would not have supported Barack Obama had he been Muslim. I always consider the religious beliefs of candidates who are running for office. Although potentially perceived as close minded, the majority of people professing a faith, hold that faith close enough to their hearts to guide them in the decisions faced on a daily basis. A personal religious conviction ought to mold the social, cultural, and political perspective of their immediate world. These same religious judgment of conviction will lead a President to make decisions that will have consequences for a nation. To suggest that a person of faith ought leave their religious convictions outside the voting booth, or a political office is credulous. The assumption of separation of church and person is a galling request.

Just as I would not have voted for Barack Obama if he was Muslim, I would not have voted for Mitt Romney for his beliefs as a Latter Day Saint. When a candidate offers up his religious faith as part of their personage, the religion must be understood and reviewed as to the teachings within which may or may not affect the policies of that administration.

In fact I was more concerned about Barack Obams's religious views that were exposed during the campaign. Even though he distanced himself from Rev. Jeremiah Wright after much pressure to disavow his relationship, the 20 years he spent under Wright's tutelage is dangerous for our country. When anyone sits under a religious minister for that long, he will bury those teachings in his heart. If he truly found Wright's teachings repugnant, he would have disavowed his relationship with long ago and with personal judgment, not public scorn.

Colin Powell asked, “Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this county?" No, I do not believe there is. Just as there is nothing wrong with being a Voodoo priest, or Wiccan, or Jehovah's Witness, however when it comes to positions of leadership in our country, I firmly believe that their religious beliefs must be inspected, for it is the religious beliefs that will shape the actions of the leader. I propose this question. Would you vote for a presidential candidate that strictly practiced ahisma? Ahisma is tenant of faith that prevents the killing or injuring of living beings, and is found within Buddhism, Hinduism and Jainism. How would this person lead if our nation was attacked? Being honest with yourself, you would not want a leader with that level of pacifism to guarantee the protection of America's citizenry. Powell is wrong, and religious background does matter, and it is not un-American. It is foolish to ignore religious beliefs that are at the core of a candidate for the President of the United States, or any publicly held position, for it is those beliefs which guide the heart and mind.