Well, he’s half right…
Published December 6th, 2007So, apparently Mitt Romney believes that “Freedom requires religion, and religion requires freedom.”
At the same time, he decried those who would remove from public life “any acknowledgment of God,” and he said that “during the holiday season, nativity scenes and menorahs should be welcome in our public places.”
I’m sorry - what? I have no problem with nativity scenes and menorahs and kwanzaa decorations and Festivus poles in public places - none at all. The PROBLEM is that jackass groups inevitably seem to think that THEIR symbols are better than someone else’s, so only THEIR symbols should be allowed. Well, the simplest and fairest way is to just have none of them. But that’s not a secularist’s fault - that’s the fault of the religious who can’t get along. Additionally - there shouldn’t be symbols in government institutions IF other symbols are disallowed. That is in DIRECT violation of the First Amendment - the government shall make no law favoring one religion over another. So either you let everything be displayed - or none of it. Again, that’s not the secularist’s fault - it’s the fault of the religious.
“The founders proscribed the establishment of a state religion, but they did not countenance the elimination of religion from the public square. We are a nation ‘Under God’ and in God, we do indeed trust,” he added.
Yeah, guess what - it wasn’t the Founding Fathers that came up with those words or mottos. Jerk.
“Our greatness would not long endure without judges who respect the foundation of faith upon which our Constitution rests,” said Romney.
Hey jackass, can you tell me how many times “God” or “Jesus” or even “Creator” appear in the US Constitution? Go ahead, count. I’ll wait. Figure it out? Yeah - ZERO. If it’s so important a foundation, how did the Founding Fathers so obviously forget to mention it?
“Freedom and religion endure together, or perish alone.”
My response to this is pretty simple: Bite me.
“We should acknowledge the Creator as did the Founders – in ceremony and word.”
Where do they do that, again?
“America faces a new generation of challenges. Radical violent Islam seeks to destroy us.”
Fair enough, can’t much argue with that.
“I believe that every faith I have encountered draws its adherents closer to God.”
Including radical violent Islam? Huh. Well I suppose it does then.
Crap like this pisses me off. It IS in the Constitution that there will be no religious test to hold office - Romney mentions that. But his whole speech is about how religion is necessary for freedom. Religion is necessary. Well guess what - it is NOT. Romney gave a whole speech about how religious he was and how important that is. For something that, Constitutionally, is IRRELEVANT.
Drives me insane. If I went out there and gave a speech about how religion is NOT necessary, that I have no religion, that I don’t care what religion you are or whether or not you even believe in a God - I’d be crucified. I’d be run out of town on a rail. As much as I’d love to, I can never run for public office, because even though the Founding Fathers tried as hard as they could to make religion and politics separate - this country has completely reversed it.
Here’s what some others have to say:
Greg Laden
Jim Fiore
Democrat Dad
MGL
No comments yet.