For too long, American presidential candidates lure voters with the promise of a faith-based term. But Barack Obama and John McCain have the chance to break from tradition and widen the space between church and state.
Digital Journal — “Say nothing of my religion. It’s known to my God and myself alone.” Thomas Jefferson’s words would ring hollow today if he was in the race for the White House. Today’s presidential candidates realize how their religious affinity will be embraced by voters, and it’s not a new tactic: for years, American politicians have played the religion card in an effort to court the public while also closing the gap between church and state. But politics and religion create an unholy mix.
Dropping the G-bomb into presidential rhetoric has been commonplace in U.S. politics. Since 1980, the number of references to God in major presidential speeches rose 120 per cent, according to David Domke and Kevin Coe, author of The God Strategy: How Religion Became a Political Weapon in America. While only one president (Nixon) referenced God between 1933 and 1981, from Reagan’s inauguration through the six-year mark of the current Bush Administration presidents gave said “God bless America” 49 times, the authors found out.
It’s rare to find a current political rally foregoing the usual practice of mentioning Him in every speech, whether it covers the economy, education, free speech or tainted tomatoes. Religion is no longer a way to set yourself apart from the competition; it’s how you look “normal” in the face of critics who want to find any ounce of religious ambiguity.
It’s a lesson known to John McCain, who is lecturing to Catholics in the Rust Belt. Or Barack Obama, who wants to court evangelicals in an effort to convince skeptics he’s on their side. Then there’s the vice-presidential hopefuls, such as Mike Huckabee who wanted to tweak the Constitution to align it with Biblical principles. And let’s not forget how Rev. Wright muddied Obama’s path to the nomination with his acidic commentary on religious morality.
For too long, Americans have been subject to Bible-thumping blended with baby-kissing. Politicians hungry for the religious vote are saying anything to be respected by God-fearing Christians, as if embracing Jesus is the new American flagpin to proudly display. Remember how the Democratic Party first showed its religious stripes in 1992? At the national Democratic convention, Bill Clinton introduced the idea of “The New Covenant,” a phrase steeped in Biblical leanings. Clinton said the New Covenant would be “a solemn agreement between the people and their government” to address economic downturns and educational problems. He dropped verses from Scripture and peppered his speech with “God” several times.
As Domke and Kevin wrote in the God Strategy, “Clinton had well learned what has become perhaps the most important lesson in contemporary American politics: to compete successfully, politicians need not always walk the religious walk, but they had better be able to talk the religious talk.”
They call this a strategy to pass the “God and Country test”: tell Americans you’re a righteous God-fearing politician, let the press know you’re committed to upholding religious values, and watch the votes pour in. It worked for George W. Bush, just like it worked for Ronald Reagan.
In 2008, Obama and McCain have a chance to break from tradition. They can campaign on platforms devoid of Biblical shades; they can talk to the American public as people, as opposed to as congregations. They can assure evangelicals they aren’t atheists while at the same time telling atheists they aren’t in the pocket of evangelicals. For the first time, two powerful presidential candidates can widen the closing gap between church and state.
Last word goes to John F. Kennedy, who stood up for religious tolerance and the basic principles of free speech. He also said this nugget, a quote that should be plastered on the campaign offices of every future presidential candidate: I believe in a President whose views on religion are his own private affair, neither imposed upon him by the nation, nor imposed by the nation upon him as a condition to holding that office.
