In an AP story published just 20 hours ago, it was released that Sen. John McCain would prefer our next president to be Christian. He backs up his statement by saying that our country was based on Christian principles and that he would like the next president to have "a solid grounding in [his] faith."
He then backs up himself up even more by saying, "I would vote for a Muslim if he or she was the candidate best able to lead the country and defend our political values."
At first I was semi-bothered by his statement but then I thought about who he was interviewed by. The interview was conducted by Beliefnet, a Web site that covers religion and spirituality, so it kind of makes sense to me why he said this. He obviously felt comfortable in the interview to say what he wanted to say at first. He then covered himself it seems as the article shows.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
This is an interesting topic. I've always wondered about the boundaries between politics and religion. I don't exactly think it's fair that McCain would select a person from a specific religion to be our next leader, so I guess it "semi-bothers" me too. But then I wonder if he should even be talking to interviewers who ask these questions. He knows that he has to cover himself, and so he never gives a clear answer, which doesn't benefit anyone...right?
There needs to be a complete separation between politics and religion. This is what our founding fathers died for (amongst other principles). I am not saying that people shouldn't be religious - if you believe profoundly in something, then practice it. Don't preach it our let it interfere with the way we govern our country. By McCain saying this, it seems he sees nothing wrong with a Christian leader representing a melting pot of religions in the USA. A devout Christian cant speak for a Jew or a Muslim. Separation of church and state? Anyone remember?
Post a Comment