More On Mitt's Pandering -- I Mean, Speech

Stanley Kutler, via HuffPo:

Mitt Romney's evangelical Christian friends and foes alike can only rejoice. His speech on his faith and religion has resounded in the public square and blown a heavy whiff of religion into our political life. He offered an impassioned account of his devotion to Jesus Christ, his Lord and Savior -- "of mankind." That is his inclusive vision for America.

Romney predictably made a bow to John F. Kennedy's famous speech to Houston ministers in 1960, in which Kennedy promised to fulfill his obligation to the Constitution (a secular document, Romney, et al. notwithstanding), and in the event of a conflict between its commandments and those of his personal conscience, he would resign. Romney made no such commitment.

Kennedy boldly stated that we had far more critical issues to discuss than religion: the spread of communism, the erosion and respect of our power abroad, hunger, and education -- those were the "real issues" to decide the election. War, hunger, education, and despair, Kennedy reminded us, "knew no religious barriers"; he understood they were obscured, and deliberately so, by those who would exploit the issue of his Catholicism.

Kennedy turned to the nation's founders and our subsequent history to argue that separation of church and state had served us well. Not so Romney, who favors a more opaque wall and pointedly rejected the historical meaning of separation. He complained that it had been distorted beyond its original intent. Portraying so-called secular elements and anti-religious groups as straw men menaces, he denounced those who see religion "as merely a private affair with no place in public life. It is as if they are intent on establishing a new religion in America -- the religion of secularism." Well, at least he didn't capitalize it.

The founders, Romney said, "did not countenance the elimination of religion from the public square." Many of the revolutionaries and founders indeed were religious; but many likewise believed in religion as a "private affair." Romney's "originalism" is deeply flawed. What is undeniable is that the founders moved with a calculated purpose and disestablished religion as it had existed in colonial times. Religion would not be the central component of public life, much as Kennedy had said in 1960.

JFK ended his remarks promising to "faithfully execute the office of president" and would "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution . . . so help me God." Romney's peroration is more in tune with our times. "Let us give thanks to the divine 'author of liberty'," he said. Finally, with words approaching an anthem: "God bless the United States of America."

Shades of the early 1950s, when Senator Homer Ferguson (R-MI), a flag-waving Cold Warrior insisted on adding "in God we trust" to the Pledge of Allegiance. Ferguson summed up the congressional mood: "We know that America cannot be defended by guns, planes, and ships alone. Appropriations and expenditure for defense will be of value only if the God under whom we live believes that we are in the right. We should at all times recognize God's province over the lives of our people and over this great Nation." Amen.

In 1962, the Supreme Court struck down a state-mandated and authorized prayer in the public schools. Two days later, President Kennedy deftly defended the decision in a nationally-televised press conference, one of the first of its kind. (Eisenhower's were given on a tape-delayed basis.) "We have in this case a very easy remedy," Kennedy said, "and that is to pray ourselves. We can pray a great deal more at home, we can attend our churches with a good deal more fidelity, and we can make the true meaning of prayer much more important in the lives of our children. I would hope that as a result of this decision, all American parents will intensify their efforts at home, and the rest of us," he concluded, "will support the constitution and the responsibility of the Supreme Court in interpreting it."

Can we imagine a president today -- or a presidential candidate -- speaking with such candor and historical understanding of American pluralism? (Let alone wit!) The mind boggles.

In 1980, Ronald Reagan's "social agenda" included restoring mandatory school prayers. Five years later safely immune from an election campaign) he called for a constitutional amendment to allow prayer in the classroom. Alas! it was not an election year and the Senate rejected it. Barry Goldwater as a presidential candidate had vigorously denounced the Court's ruling in the early '60s; but in 1985 he voted against Reagan's amendment. Goldwater's turnaround offers a preface to understanding the political manipulation of religious values as a manifestation of symbolic politics.

Jack Kennedy had an eye for history; Romney has only a tin ear. Kennedy de-emphasized the role of religion in politics; Romney only wants to amplify it. God knows there is neither silence nor an absence of religion in the public square.