Hemant Mehta
Author, blogger

Hemant Mehta

Hemant Mehta is the author of "I Sold My Soul on eBay" and a blogger at FriendlyAtheist.com.

 ALL POSTS

Obama's religious label shouldn't matter; his actions should

In the wake of his weekend rally, Glenn Beck kept up the drumbeat of criticism about President Obama's religion, calling it a "perversion" and saying that America "isn't recognizing his version of Christianity," which Beck characterized as "liberation theology."

Despite critique of Obama's Christianity, a recent poll showed that nearly 20% of Americans believe falsely that the president is Muslim.

Why is there so much attention on Obama's religion? Does it matter what religion the president is?

Barack Obama is often called a "post-racial" president, but he may be a post-religious one, too. He is frequently "claimed" by atheists who insist that he's one of them, despite his persistent claims that he's Christian, and yet he's still accused of being Muslim. Truth be damned; everyone wants him in a particular religious camp, whether it's their own or not.

Does any of it matter? Would it matter for any president?

Yes and no.

Everybody wants their president to believe as they do, and there's an assumption that people who worship in different ways from you (or who don't worship at all) can't possibly share your values. Practically speaking, religion matters.

But should it matter? Not necessarily.

Former Secretary of State Colin Powell said it so well on Meet the Press right before the 2008 elections, regarding his own (Republican) party's attacks on Obama's faith:

I'm also troubled by, not what Senator McCain says, but what members of the party say. And it is permitted to be said such things as, "Well, you know that Mr. Obama is a Muslim." Well, the correct answer is, he is not a Muslim, he's a Christian. He's always been a Christian. But the really right answer is, what if he is? Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country? The answer's no, that's not America. Is there something wrong with some seven-year-old Muslim-American kid believing that he or she could be president? Yet, I have heard senior members of my own party drop the suggestion, "He's a Muslim and he might be associated [with] terrorists." This is not the way we should be doing it in America.

Powell is right. There's no reason being a Muslim, Mormon, Hindu, or atheist should disqualify you from political office, but we live in a country where it usually does. And you can bet that if Obama's policies were more aligned with the Religious Right's agenda, no one would be accusing him of being a "secret Muslim" or "not Christian enough." The Constitution says that there can be no religious test for office and society needs to catch up to that idea.

But there is a point when religion should come into play.

Do you really want a president who could launch a nuclear attack... who also believes he/she will be in "God's glorious presence" in the afterlife?

Do you really want a president who can appoint important positions in the field of science like the head of the National Institutes of Health... who also believes the Earth was created about 6,000 years ago and that evolution is a lie?

Do you really want a president who has the power to veto legislation regarding women's health care... who also believes abortion is equivalent to murder and that life begins at conception?

I wouldn't feel comfortable voting for those people. It has nothing to do with the labels they give themselves and everything to do with what they will do with those beliefs. I want a president who makes decisions after hearing from experts on the issue, not after hanging up on a conference call with a group of pastors.

I'm an atheist and I don't care if Obama wants to call himself a Christian or not. I didn't care what label George W. Bush gave himself, either. Their actions in office tell me everything important I need to know about them.

I would urge fellow voters to be cautious anytime politicians start using their faith as a selling point in a campaign. To me, that's code for them dodging the real issues and laying the decision-making responsibility on a personal god instead of on themselves. We're voting for leaders, not pastors -- legislators, not theologians.

John F. Kennedy memorably expressed this point nearly 50 years ago when he spoke to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association:

I believe in an America that is officially neither Catholic, Protestant nor Jewish; where no public official either requests or accept instructions on public policy from the Pope, the National Council of Churches or any other ecclesiastical source; where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials, and where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against all.

How far we've strayed from that in recent decades.

We need leaders who can be religious (or not) while adhering to our laws.

Maryland State Senator Jamie Raskin knew this when he said:

People place their hand on the Bible and swear to uphold the Constitution; they don't put their hand on the Constitution and swear to uphold the Bible.

We need politicians like that, regardless of where they sit on the theological spectrum.

If President Obama can keep his personal religion separate from his public policies, then he can call himself whatever he wants.

By Hemant Mehta  |  August 31, 2010; 9:28 AM ET Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati  
Previous: It's unconstitutional! | Next: Writing about Beck: God made me do it

Comments

Please report offensive comments below.



Blocked "WOODSTOCK-41" et al from Posting?

MARTHA WOODROOF & CO., Is So Jealous;

That She/He Suuucks!

RESPONSE When POSTING:

"Other views on religion in the news.

Thank you for commenting.

Your comment has been received and held for approval by the blog owner.

Return to the original entry.

Note: WAPO: STOP Steeling BLOGGERS WORK/Ideas/POSTS!

It Is High Time That WE Old Time Blogers Bloggers Should start Getting paid {via Pay Pal] For Providing "CONTENT" to THIS/These Parasites on ONFAITH or WAPO et al and posting "iNTELLECTUALL Ideas as WE[i] Post!" W/out US bloggers YE art DEAD! DEAD! Please File For Bankruptcy!

LAST TiME

Fuuuck Jon Meacham, David Waters, Lisa Miller & Sally Quinn & CO (ONFAITH.NET). in VA. somewhere & D.C!

Else "ONFAITH" Ye Will DIE For Blogger-Abuse!

Posted by: woodstock-41 | September 6, 2010 8:29 PM
Report Offensive Comment

1 of 2

Shame on self{serving CO{Defendants or Part{ners within the Federal, State & Local Governments in Crime who got away Scott free during the Depression and laughing at US Voters while Laughing all the The way to the Bank Worry-Free, for Causing AMERICAN's financial HARDSHIP's (Broken Hearts, mind Anquish, Broken-Spirots, mass homelessness, Embarrassment, Humiliation, low esteem etc] via Selfish Elected-Officials [as if GANGS/Hooligans/Bandits] thus creating Sweet America's (opps Sour'd) Tsunami" via them U.S. FED RESERVE people & U.S. TREASURY too! Includes the, turning other Cheek, S.E.C. & I.R.S. & CO., gang/people.

Secret: Psychology: All Those U.S. Victims, Especially U.S.A. Kids Whom was a Victim & their Parents For What Happened during Bush's & Clinton's, Will Become Extremists, Radicals & Worse Revolutionaries! a/k/a America's Silent future CIVIL-WAR!? And

Pleazza, BUSH & Clinton Lovers, Do NOt call these good American Kids who will eventually grow-up [Terrorists when ye have to turn the Malitia against them] when they Rise-Up against US, the Establishment in the Next 10 Years! It will be like a bunch of Frankin-Steins or Worse a Bunch Of TiMOTHY McVAY's (Clinton/Bush made) going mad all at once or sporadically. Soo

Only SARA PALIN & Or MITT ROMNEY Can Help Them [Prevent Future Terrorists to not be terrorists] by Correcting The Clinton Admin & Bush/Reagan Admin & Bush Admin SINS of the National-Fathers; To Heelll with Bibles story's! Atleast i[WE] warned You. Note: This is NOt a Cartoon. It is More Than That!

Note: If This was China, They All Would/ve Been Shot Already. And If It Was Russia They would be working in the Gulags. And If it was Saudi Arabia, They [COMMISSIONERS] Would've already got their Hands Chopped-Off for STEALING/Enriching selves!

Posted by: woodstock-41 | September 6, 2010 12:52 PM
Report Offensive Comment

2 of 2

PS: And Now; It is highly Recommended That the CIA & The NSA & The PENTAGON Take Over The "WHITE-HOUSE". And that this Current Presidency's "EXECUTIVE POWERS" via "Executive-ORDERS" (Abuses,& Recklessness) should Be Snuffed-out or Stopped!

AMERICA Should Have a "GENERAL ELECTION" In 2011, Not 2012: Under NATIONAL [Financial] EMERGENCY Reasons or Find some Other Pretexts to do so, "INSTEAD OF CONSTITUTION"! AND

The U.S. Constitution Needs To Be REPEALED, or Fixed or Tweake'd for the 21/22nd Century+; Especially To ONLY ALLOW a President to Serve up to 2-Two, 3-Three Years-Terms (max of 6 years not 8)! Or Maybe up to 3 Times 3 (for 9 years Total if HE or SHE is really good, Like Roosevelt {pbuh}, Lincoln {pbuh et al})

AND Congress Shall Establish a "U.S. RELIGIOUS POLICE" with Powers to "LIMIT" Mosques, Synagogues, Temples Building etc.. so to Police Their "Tax-Exempt" Leaderships More Closely! AND

Ex- SEN. Hillary Rodman Clinton should be IMPEACHED for Usurping U.S. CONST. 1:6 et al. And Prez Borack H. OBAMA should be Censored for Kissing The Hand Of a G-d Player, King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia & for other Oss kiss'ngs or negotiating with Foreign Terrorists agents.

Posted by: woodstock-41 | September 6, 2010 12:51 PM
Report Offensive Comment

DEAR Fellow American(s) & Friendly's:

Note: As Ye/Yo can See; Once WE[i], i[WE] Elect these two-face WORD-MERCHANTS of certain Politician-GANGs aka "USURPER"s, Then THEY DO WHAT They WANT. So There is

NO U.S. or State CONSTITUTION!! YES, Things Must Change, Not only Yes We Can hot air. DO, No Talk!!

Maybe SARA PALIN Ms. RIGHT is right (Not Wrong)?! Sarai Ain't Afraid to Break or Dirty Her finger Nails. Now That's Tough; So Sara Ain't No "Manicure-Babby", but a Lipstick Momma! eeeeeehaaaa!

Note: Sisstar SARAi is starting to look really good ('Platform/ticket', not only Lipstick & looks) soo maybe she should be our 1st LADY President, OR V. Prez, aye? OR/b>

Maybe Brother MiTT ROMNEY is the ripe Mr. RiGHT (NOt Wrong). Likewise; MITT is looking & Sounding GOOD too. A Good Politician & a Great BUISINEES MAN Who Will Save AMERICA from Poverty & out of Debt? Fix Amerika MITT! [Maybe "Joe The Plumber" can fit-in Somewhere, aye].

Note: MITT maybe should be our 1st MORMON (A New-Age Xrstian, from a Persecuted 'People', NOt only AFRO-Americans) as Prez OR V. Prez, aye??.

"WE, The People" Need To Take Our Nation Back & fix the Sick Constitution? This is NOt a Test! This is Real!!

Note: And GLENN BECK might be 1/2 or 3/4 right (NOt Left, oopps Wrong)? Hint; HE needs to REPLACING 'God', NOt "Restore" God" That's the Problem.

See What Happens When Obama & Ventriloquists Negotiate With Terrorists Orgs contrary to Policy's???

SUGGESTION: Maybe Ms. Sara Palin & Mr. Mitt should Marry (Politically) and Run as PREZ & V.PREZ ALL IN ONE (1 Ticket, 1 Platform!) aye? PS: With Obama & Clinton, There Will NO [permanent] PEACE in MIddle-East Just Yet. Maybe only a Patch-up Job so Hillary & Gang/Crony's can Fool "The-People" again? and get RE-Elected on a slate.

___VOTE:

"Peace/Huggs Rock-n-Roll, MiTT Romney"!!!

"Peace/Huggs Rock-n-Roll, MiTT Romney"!!!

"Peace/Huggs Rock-n-Roll, MiTT Romney"!!!

___ OR

"Peace/Dance Rock-n-Roll, With SARA"!!!

"Peace/Dance Rock-n-Roll, With SARA"!!!

"Peace/Dance Rock-n-Roll, With SARA"!!!
--
GOOD-BYE OBAMA & CO! GOOD RIDDANCE NEPOTISTic Hillary et al!! Time fo a Real Man, or a Real woMan Prez!! Ya Ya!
--
Hailaluya! Praise the Holyi NO MON/WOM!

LOVE AMERICA, LOVE AMERICA, THE 1 WE USED TO KNOW, THE 1 WE USED TO KNOW..!

Posted by: woodstock-41 | September 6, 2010 9:00 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Hear hear, Hemant.

Posted by: Renacier | September 2, 2010 7:24 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Well said. But news reports should focus less on the % who think Obama is a Muslim, and more on why they think it should matter.

Posted by: EvilOverlord | September 2, 2010 7:20 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Thank you, Hemant. Beck should take a good look at his own version of religion. The one that starts with, "there's two n's in Glenn; spell it right on the check."

Posted by: butterflyfish_ | September 2, 2010 2:49 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Fantastic article. This is the kind of reasoned voice we need to hear more of.

Posted by: cjphipps | September 1, 2010 9:22 PM
Report Offensive Comment

"Do you really want a president who has the power to veto legislation regarding women’s health care… who also believes abortion is equivalent to murder and that life begins at conception?"

Yes, as a matter of fact I do.

Posted by: jbone128 | September 1, 2010 1:01 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Great essay! It's important to remember that the reason this country has always had a problem adhering to the concept of separation of church and state is not because the state wants it's hand in the church, but because the church is always trying to get it's hands into the government. The avowed constitutionalists and secularist never pose a threat. The religionist always do. Thus, the religionist politicians are one of the greatest threats to democracy.

Posted by: mrbutton | August 31, 2010 4:31 PM
Report Offensive Comment

allow me to join in the UNanimous praise for a Wise and Moral and Well-crafted column.

This IS an issue that seems to have a pretty clear "right" answer, and our columnist has presented it.

Posted by: jsmith4 | August 31, 2010 4:27 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Obama is great at checking his religion at the door of the White House. After all, he's had years of experience checking his brain at the door to his church. But the thing he checked most often at church was his Blackberry...

Posted by: Noshwat | August 31, 2010 4:24 PM
Report Offensive Comment

There are really two issues that I want to address concerning this week’s the Washington Post’s “On Faith” topic is: Does Obama's religion matter? First, I want to address the issue of whether the President’s religion does actually matter and second, I want to address Glenn Beck’s claim of Obama’s “perversion” of Christianity.

So, does the President’s religion matter? YES! I know it is not politically correct to say that, but what delusion the leader of our Nation embraces does actually affect what that leader does and where his priorities lie. The fact is that our President opposes gay marriage purely for religious reasons. For the most part, he is a pretty secular President and that is great, but anyone who claims that any president’s deeply held belief in ancient supernatural stories has no bearing on how they lead is delusional. George W. Bush is a good example and if Sarah Palin does decide to run for President, that would be an even better example.

You can read the rest of this response to the topic:
http://www.examiner.com/atheism-in-philadelphia/on-faith-beck-or-obama-who-is-perverting-christianity

I will be responding to every issue posted in the 'On Faith' section. If you would like to be notified when my new response is up, please subscribe.

Posted by: dangeroustalk | August 31, 2010 3:38 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Well said, Hemant. It is my dream to live in a world where religion was always kept private, being respectful of one another, and in political affairs, an unbiased view is kept. Alas, it is only a dream.

Posted by: Moltzan | August 31, 2010 3:38 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Does it matter what religion Obama is? No. That's why Article VI of the Constitution reads "no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."
The folks trying to make the president's faith an issue are unAmerican and undermining the plain text of the Constitution.

Posted by: ClearPursuit | August 31, 2010 3:30 PM
Report Offensive Comment

This is exactly correct. Though the truth of the matter is that we, as a nation, have never been very good at separating church and state. I might also hazard to guess that it is better now than it has been at many times in the past. However, we still have a long way to go.

Posted by: Data_Jack | August 31, 2010 3:15 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Thank you for writing this, Hemant.

According to a report I heard on NPR, the fastest growing group is not those who think that Obama is a Muslim, but rather those who do not know what religion he is. And that's as it should be.

My ideal situation: the personal religion of politicians (and political candidates) would never be brought up in public; nor could it be divined (no pun intended) from the policies they enact.

Posted by: aynsavoy | August 31, 2010 3:10 PM
Report Offensive Comment

A very enjoyable article and I agree wholly with your sentiments. This is precisely what Thomas Jefferson and John Adams were aiming for by building a "wall of separation between Church and State" and it constantly amazes me that the religious right conveniently forget this when questioning the religious convictions of their opponents.

Posted by: jimbobthomas | August 31, 2010 3:09 PM
Report Offensive Comment

I couldn't agree more. Thank you, Hemant. More needs to be said along these lines and less from those who would have their religious beliefs driving the country's political agenda. By the way, isn't that what we endured for eight years under the Bush administration?

Posted by: maressabrown | August 31, 2010 2:48 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Spot on! I wish many more Americans would heed this.

Posted by: r_dimitri22 | August 31, 2010 2:39 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Thank you. Well said!

Posted by: lifeonmars | August 31, 2010 11:58 AM
Report Offensive Comment

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company