A religious test for candidates

Damon Linker believes that political candidates should answer a series of questions concerning their religion. In the Outlook section of The Washington Post, he writes:

Every religion is radically particular, with its own distinctive beliefs about God, human history and the world. These are specific, concrete claims -- about the status of the religious community in relation to other groups and to the nation as a whole, about the character of political and divine authority, about the place of prophecy in religious and political life, about the scope of human knowledge, about the providential role of God in human history, and about the moral and legal status of sex. Depending on where believers come down on such issues, their faith may or may not clash with the requirements of democratic politics.

The questions he proposes are: How might the doctrines and practices of your religion conflict with the fulfillment of your official duties? How would you respond if your church issued an edict that clashed with the duties of your office? What do you believe human beings can know about nature and history? Do you believe the law should be used to impose and enforce religious views of sexual morality?

Posted by Jim Naughton on September 20, 2010 6:35 PM | |
Comments (3)

The answer to the last Part pertains to time honored Christian ethics and conduct. Thus we have the Articles of Religion and the Catechism which we accept as Episcopalians. My answer is YES!!!

Posted by Walter Rotsch [TypeKey Profile Page] | September 20, 2010 7:23 PM

Asking candidates about their faith should not be taken as a sign of anti-religious animus.

Oh come on, Mr Linker: that's EXACTLY what it is.

Getting at (testing) the specifics of religious beliefs is ABSOLUTELY going to convey "best not to have them" (in any specific sense) . . . and that's how candidates both can and SHOULD respond!

If this conversation/exploration were really to occur, it could only be in a way in which EVERY office seeker had to play: asking foundational questions much more basic than the specifics of religious faith ("How do you know what's true?" for example)

If religious faith has been privileged in this country, for much of its 200+ years---and regretably, it has---it's hardly logical to swing wildly in the opposite direction, wherein only "No Religious Belief" has the privileged position.

JC Fisher

Posted by tgflux [TypeKey Profile Page] | September 21, 2010 3:35 AM

What a truly horrible idea. We simply do not (or shouldn't, rather) vote for candidates based on their personal beliefs, but on their public statements, positions, and voting record.

ed. note-- billydinpvd -- please sign your name next time.

Posted by billydinpvd [TypeKey Profile Page] | September 21, 2010 12:36 PM

Add your comments

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

Reminder: At Episcopal Café, we hope to establish an ethic of transparency by requiring all contributors and commentators to make submissions under their real names. For more details see our Feedback Policy.

Advertising Space