Mitt Romney delivered his "I'm a serious-but-not-that-serious Mormon" speech today in College Station, Texas. Intending a JFK-like address on how his religion interacts with his duties as a public official, most of Romney's speech reads like a (well-written) civics lesson in religious pluralism.
And let me say at the outset: Romney could very well be a fine President (though I would certainly not vote for him in a primary). One of my biggest objections to Romney is that he seems to be the Republican version of John Kerry -- a stuffy, aristocratic fellow trying desperately to look like a common Joe -- who would ultimately be beaten soundly by the Democratic nominee.
One of the primary differences between JFK's and Romney's speech is that Kennedy actually declared he would resign his office if there was a fundamental conflict between his beliefs as a Catholic and the duties of the Presidency. That is a startling claim, and I couldn't imagine a candidate today making it. (Kennedy actually made a much more vigorous case for a bright line between Church and State than Romney - so don't take this as a full endorsement of JFK's Houston speech over Romney's more moderate stance).
But Romney's religious problem is intractable: Many of the voters to which he is appealing want a candidate whose actions as President are informed directly by their (Christian) faith. Because Romney is self-conscious about his religion (and broad public acceptance of it), he feels the need to make the opposite claim: that his Mormonism will not directly influence how he governs the country from the Executive Branch. How this furthers his cause with politically conservative Christians is not at all clear.
BC
No comments:
Post a Comment