Christianity

Cruz, Rubio Tie God to Governing

Let's not treat Christian faith as a requirement for being a good president.

|

Ted Cruz
Credit: DonkeyHotey / photo on flickr

If you attend a Republican presidential event on the campaign trail, you may come to wonder if you made a wrong turn and ended up in church. If you are not a believer—an evangelical Christian believer, that is—you may feel ever so slightly unwelcome. 

The deity-centric approach is working for Ted Cruz, who began his victory speech in Des Moines Monday by pointing heavenward, pursing his lips and uttering an especially unctuous line: "To God be the glory." 

Among all the glorious wonders that his Creator has wrought, delivering slightly more than a quarter of the vote in an Iowa caucus has to fall pretty far down the list. You would think the Almighty would be powerful enough to produce a comfortable majority, or even a unanimous vote. 

Cruz finished first on the strength of his appeal to evangelicals, who made up two-thirds of all caucus-goers. His success was not entirely the work of the Big Guy Upstairs. During the campaign, Cruz has done everything but run ads identifying him as "The Official Candidate of the Son of God." 

He launched his campaign at Jerry Falwell's Liberty University, where he celebrated "the transformative love of Jesus Christ." During the campaign, he has missed no chance to quote the Bible and hoist the cross. 

Ben Carson said he would not accept a Muslim as president, but Cruz goes even further. "Any president who doesn't begin every day on his knees isn't fit to be commander-in-chief of this nation," he thundered. That rules out atheists, agnostics, non-Christians and any faithful churchgoer who feels perfectly capable of praying while seated. 

At one event, the Texas senator urged his audience to pray every day as follows: "Father God, please, continue this awakening. … Awaken the body of Christ, that we might pull back from the abyss." 

With his trademark gift for hilarity, he said the job of a military chaplain "is to be insensitive to atheists." If this political gig doesn't work out, he'll do fine as a televangelist. 

Though Cruz is the most overbearing candidate in his religiosity, his general theme is not unusual. Marco Rubio explained why his faith will play a large role in how he will govern: "Because in the end, my goal is not simply to live on this Earth for 80 years but to live an eternity with my creator." 

He put out a video of a town hall encounter he had with a man identifying himself as an atheist. The senator insisted he would respect the guy's right to disbelieve—while somehow managing to make it sound as though he posed a threat to Rubio's religious freedom. The ad could have been titled: "St. Mario vanquishes the infidel."

Mike Huckabee is a former Southern Baptist minister whose announcement speech last summer recalled the good old days when students were taught the Lord's Prayer—in public school. He also insisted that its liberal enemies are on the verge of "criminalizing Christianity." 

The contenders often frame their sectarian appeals as promises to protect religious liberty. But when they talk about threats to religious liberty, they aren't thinking about municipalities blocking the construction of mosques or a Jewish student being forced to listen to Christian prayers at public school events. Christian religious liberty, expansively defined, is their sole concern. 

About the only consolation for non-Christians in this campaign- a very small one—is the popularity of Donald Trump, despite his impious lifestyle and obvious indifference to religion. But even Trump made the obligatory pilgrimage to Liberty University and touted his endorsement by President Jerry Falwell Jr. 

The problem is not that politicians invoke faith to bond with audiences, attest to their good character and explain their motivations in public life. Even Hillary Clinton has been known to do that. So has Barack Obama. But they don't use it as a club against those whose beliefs are different. 

Republicans often convey the impression that God is their exclusive property and that everyone else doesn't belong. But treating Christianity as a de facto requirement for office amounts to making nonbelievers second-class citizens. It suggests that Christian candidates owe nonbelievers no logical rationale for the policies they champion. 

The Constitution, which Cruz and his rivals claim to revere, forbids any religious test for office and makes no claim to fulfill the word of God. Somebody ought to take the hint. 

© Copyright 2016 by Creators Syndicate Inc. 

NEXT: The Ground Under Clinton Continues to Crumble

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Eh, let’s overlook all those religious bananas, steve. As long as they don’t raise taxes on billionaires or, you know, come for our guns like Great Satan Obama did, I’m good.

    Now that Stand with Rand is no longer a tenable option, I’ve come up with some libertarian alternatives while I was on the crapper…

    Let’s get fed with Ted…
    Let’s smelt lead with Ted…
    Let’s get on the sled with Ted…
    Let’s End the Fed with Ted…
    I want to interbred with Ted…
    Let’s all spread our legs for Ted…
    Isis: do not behead my good friend Ted…
    Don’t be a sorehead. Vote for Ted.
    Ahead with Ted!

    Any good?

    1. Welcome to Retardation: A Celebration. Now, hopefully, I’m gonna dispel a few myths, a few rumors. First off, the retarded don’t rule the night. They don’t rule it. Nobody does. And they don’t run in packs. And while they may not be as strong as apes, don’t lock eyes with ’em, don’t do it. Puts ’em on edge. They might go into berzerker mode; come at you like a whirling dervish, all fists and elbows. You might be screaming “No, no, no” and all they hear is “Who wants cake?” Let me tell you something: They all do. They all want cake.

      1. Neither Cruz or Rubio have a chance at beating Hilary?or Bernie for that matter. Or any democrat.

        The evangelical’s Wars on Women, Gays and Drugs the last 50 years have alienated the majority of the population from the republican party. Thus, the GOP will continue to lose presidential election after presidential election

        (Note: If you don’t accept the War on Women terminology, as the majority of women and their supporters in the US do, just pretend I said War on Reproductive Rights. Do you feel better now?)

        The fact remains that the GOP hasn’t won the female vote in a presidential election since 1988.

        They’ve never won the gay vote.

        And I can’t even remember the last century they they won the youth vote.

        Evangelicals/ Catholics/ Religious Right/ Moral Majority would rather their children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren live the life of a 1950s Russian than allow other folks to live their own life.

        Because that’s where it’s headed people. The hard-core religious community is handing our somewhat capitalist society over to the socialists.

        But everything is going to be all right. Ted was looking up into the sky this morning and one of the clouds formed the shape of the Blessed Virgin Mary. If that’s not a sign Christianity is going to save the day nothing is!

        1. Not a chance, eh?

          Team Red’s record is so bad, they control a record high number of governor’s offices and state legislatures, and they control both houses of Congress. They are predicted to safely control the House in 2016, and probably control the Senate still – although if they lose it they will only lose it by a couple of seats. They also stack up pretty well in national polls vs. either of the Team Blue candidates.

          You may not be aware that the House of Reps is considered to be the branch of the Fedgov most responsive to the public mood. Team Red isn’t popular with gays, but gays are a tiny percentage of the population and they tend to congregate in districts and states that are already firmly in the Team Blue camp anyways.

          I will be voting for Johnson this year and have no use for Team Red for the most part, other than that they are able to occasionally thwart Team Blue’s more base impulses. To claim Team Red has no shot at the White House in 2016, however, is laughable.

          Oh, and the notion that there is a War on Women is a joke.

          1. Last — My hat is off to you. You are the ONLY libertarian on this site in the last 8 months who would tell me who they will be voting for. You must not have received the memo. As much as I love Gary Johnson, he doesn’t have a chance. But I have to hand it to you. At least you ARE voting. That’s more than I can say for most of Libertarians here at this site.

            Now allow me to destroy your flimsy non-arguments:

            “Team Red’s record is so bad, they control a record high number of governor’s offices and state legislatures, and they control both houses of Congress.”

            I was talking about PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS. Get with the program. And I presented an argument as to why they will lose. Let’s see if you can produce an argument to counter mine. Bet you can’t.

            “To claim Team Red has no shot at the White House in 2016, however, is laughable.”

            Again, present an argument as to WHY they will win.

            “Oh, and the notion that there is a War on Women is a joke.”

            Your really are having difficult with this whole presenting/refuting an argument thing, huh?

            Tell us WHY “the notion that there is a War on Women is a joke.”

            Again. Bet you can’t

            1. Define the terms first, asshat. What exactly is the “war on women”? Is it the already debunked salary crap? What is it?

              1. ShitBreath — I guess next you’ll want to know what the meaning of is is.

                Again, for the stupid people out there:

                The War on Women is the term women and their supporters have given to those old white men (for the most part) who want to tell women what they can or cannot do with their bodies.

                I know if ANYONE tried to tell me, a man, what I can or cannot do with my body, I would try with every fiber of my being to kill that person. Much the way I imagine women think.

                That sounds like a WAR to me!

            2. If it makes you feel any better, I’ll probably end up voting for Johnson. Of course, I’m not a libertarian/Libertarian, and wouldn’t be voting for him based on his policies, but mostly doing it because (A) living in California, my vote isn’t going to matter, and (B) to give third-party candidates higher numbers in the hopes of more air-time in 2020.

              I mean, as long as my vote isn’t going to matter, I may as well make it not matter in a more noble direction, right?

              1. Escher — I have talked my brother-in-law and sister in California into doing the same thing.

                Great minds think alike.

    2. You are super clever. We all agree with you now!

      Thanks for thinking of us.

    3. I like smelt lead for Ted. Maybe ammo prices could come down.

    4. Wet the bed with Ted!

      1. I butter my bread with Ted… scratch that one.

    5. I’m curious AmSoc, what makes a man like you, do what you do? Do you think you’re going to convince libertarians and anarchists to see the light of socialism? Is it because you think you bother people here with your silliness? Is it because you have a great big hole through you, that you can never steal enough or kill enough to fill?

      1. He might have started out like that, but like all trolls he broke on the rocks of our arguments and then our insults. He’s just a gibbering troll now, capering for attention. Unlike your rash, if we ignore him he will eventually wander away.

        1. I keep putting wet poultices on my rash and it just keeps getting worse. That think that old woman down by the river may not be a legitimate witch doctor.

          1. I keep telling you that Florida medicine is not real medicine. You need antibiotic cream and a good wax.

      2. He’s like a kid who likes poking sticks into fire ant mounds.

        1. Amateur. Everyone knows you transplant ants from one colony to a foreign colony to start an ant war. That’s where the real entertainment is.

          1. I didn’t say he wasn’t a retard.

    6. Lol. That was good Amsoc.

    7. How about “Better dead than Ted”?

      It may have a familiar ring to you.

      1. Bern

    8. Eh, let’s overlook all those religious bananas, steve. As long as they don’t raise taxes on billionaires or, you know, come for our guns like Great Satan Obama did, I’m good.

      I’d settle for not getting shoved into Sanders’ ovens (“Feel the Bern”) or having Hitlary open up an Eastern Front.

  2. It’s almost as if candidates for public office are pandering for votes.

    1. I heard Hillary on the radio this morning trying to claim she was more ‘progressive’ than Bernie. I’m sure once she gets the nomination she won’t run from that as hard as she can for the general election.

  3. I consider faith neither a requirement nor a disqualification for office. If you are a fiscally conservative federalist, you might get my vote whether you pray in public or not.

    1. I do consider humility and restraint a requirement for the job of Prez because there is no job where the temptations of an arbitrary exercise of power are so significant. Unfortunately Eisenhower was probably the last Prez who viewed his faith in that light. And the only institution that seemed able to secularize/interdenominationalize that idea (Freemasons) no longer has any membership.

      So it looks like our only choice now is to vote for sociopath A or sociopath B.

  4. Any president who doesn’t begin every day on his knees

    That makes Muslims at least 5 times better. Especially because for Christians “getting on your knees” is not mandatory.

    1. You’re not Catholic, are you?

      1. His point stands. Some protestants stand and look towards the sky to pray.

        1. Growing up in the South, I always got a little freaked when people started raising their hands with closed eyes. Pure mysticism.

          1. He can’t hear you if you look down and mumble! You have to talk directly at the man to get your wish granted!

      2. When it comes to reborn gods my preference is Osiris.

    2. How about if he has an intern who…

      1. I believe that is worth 100 Lewinskys.

    3. You know who else starts each day on their knees?…

        1. “Touch me Jesus”

    4. I like to start my days on my knees, but sometimes my husband isn’t in the mood.

  5. da christians!

    1. Now I have an image of Jesus as a panda on the cross. Thanks.

      1. He gave His life for your bamboo.

  6. ? Copyright 2016 by Creators Syndicate Inc.

    So this is just an extended whinge by other gods who don’t get a look-in. Got it.

  7. The God stuff will sink either of them in a general.

    1. Only if they are obnoxious about it. Most people don’t care if you’re religious, just don’t push it on them.

      1. Agreed. Tuna Can Ted could apparently preach his way out of a potential victory.

      2. Watch New Hampshire. I bet Cruz is far less preachy there. Congregationalists aren’t Evangelicals despite the names on their churches,

        1. FWIW, in German ‘evangelisch’ just means ‘Protestant’ (mostly Lutheran). No holy rolling implied.

    2. It’s interesting how people will believe that politicians don’t really lie and pander if they are saying something they don’t agree with.

  8. WTF! The home page calls the author of this fantastic piece “Reason Staff” and then when you open up the article is says “Steve Chapman”.

    I always thought that the excuse for carrying the horrible and Leftist Chapman was that “he wasn’t staff”. More mask slippage.

    1. The STAFF wrote the intro.

    2. Chapman’s just terrible and yet Reason continues to try to ram him down our throats. I’ve come to the disturbing conclusion that they might just agree with with the slimy fuck.

      1. But are you on your knees?

        1. It’s not the weekend and I’m not at a truckstop bathroom, so no.

      2. Chapman or Richman, which is worse? It’s an interesting debate.

        Or not.

        1. At least Chapman isn’t a closeted anti-Semite…

          1. I don’t think that Richman is ‘closeted’. “Self-hating Jew” seems most descriptive.

  9. Republicans often convey the impression that God is their exclusive property and that everyone else doesn’t belong. But treating Christianity as a de facto requirement for office amounts to making nonbelievers second-class citizens. It suggests that Christian candidates owe nonbelievers no logical rationale for the policies they champion..

    What? Helping get things ready for Jesus’ Second Coming isn’t a rational foreign policy aim with respect to Israel and the Middle East?

    1. He never stopped coming. That is why he is a GOD.

      1. Never stopped? Guess that whole “lasting more then four hours” warning doesn’t apply to him, huh? Must be nice.

  10. These clowns should go into specific detail about how God actually guides them, so as to distinguish them from Democrats who merely follow their feelings.

    1. They decide what they want to do, kneel down, stand up and say God agrees.

  11. During the candidate selection process the Reps cozy up to the evangelicals and various other far right factions while the Dems cozy up to the far left. It’s called pandering, something all pols do, and good luck getting elected to anything without a heavy dose of it. When there’s a Rep nominee the God stuff will be toned down because that doesn’t play in the general. The Dems, on the other hand, might just double down on their idiotic leftist tripe. Whether or not he gets the nomination, Bernie’s success practically guarantees that’ll be the case.

    1. Hillary’s gun-banning speeches will make perfect Republican ads in most of the country.

      Cruz’s primary God-talking won’t offend anyone in a swing-state.

      1. His absurdist views on abortion and taxes will however.

  12. These guys are pikers. Th y need to learn the art of arm waving and changing their accent in a black church if theyr gonna properly pander for evangelical votes.

    Shit, Cruz can’t even begin to act negro.

    1. When a politician is melanin rich or is pandering to the melanin rich it’s folksy, inclusive, empathetic, and genuine (even when the politician in question sounds like she’s trying to do a bad impression of female Louis Farrakhan).

      1. I hooe she hasn’t mastered the softshoe. Because she’ll be a lock for the black vote then.

      2. +1 John Edwards

    2. My favorite Hillary moment ever.

    3. “Cruz can’t even begin to act negro”

      He can act Canadian black.

      1. So… white?

  13. Not to worry. They’re all on da joos payroll.

  14. I’m not sure why I should care about candidates talking about their religious beliefs or trying to appeal to religious voters. The problem with these candidates isn’t that their Christians or appealing to Christians, its that their authoritarians. Hell, I’d be happy if any them actually protected some liberty even if its just religious liberty.

  15. The problem with these candidates isn’t that their Christians or appealing to Christians, its that their authoritarians.

    Maybe those two categories aren’t really all that distinct. If you don’t think you should have to bake a cake for a gay couple, but you do want to shut down all Muslim immigration, are you really a proponent of religious liberty?

    1. I don’t think they’re proponents of any sort of liberty. And that goes to the real point, the problem isn’t that their Christians or appealing to Christian voters. Rand Paul, Mike Lee, Justin Amash, and Thomas Massie are all Christians who appealed to Christians through their socially conservative views.Yet no one seriously believes that these guys plan to ban or close down mosques.

      The problem with Rubio isn’t that he disagrees with an Atheist on protecting religious liberty. The problem is that Rubio believes the Federal government can and should intervene in places it has no business in. The problem with Ted Cruz isn’t that he “thanked God” for his victory in Iowa, it’s that he’s a fair weather friend on the 10 Amendment.

      The problem isn’t that their Christians, they’re Authoritarians.

      1. Rubio just worships Mars.

    2. Shutting down Muslim (or any other religion) immigration has nothing to do with religious liberty. They are still free to practice their religion, just in a different country.

      1. Ted Cruz was on the “ban Ground Zero mosque” bandwagon. So I’m not sure it’s unfair to say he’s against American Muslims practicing their religion in *this* country.

  16. Republicans often convey the impression that God is their exclusive property and that everyone else doesn’t belong.

    because…

    Democrats often convey the impression that God is an idiotic fantasy and that everyone who believes is a gibbering moron.

    and pandering to the religious/spiritual majority is more intelligent than pandering to the atheist minority.

    1. You don’t think pandering to a small hated group is the road to victory? Newsletter. Now.

    2. It’s all bullshit that says nothing about the fitness of a candidate for office. I’m just tired of all the signaling.

    3. Lol. Democrats talk about faith too. Maybe in my dream world someone would actually call it stupid in public, but not real life.

  17. Cruz’s overt Christian evangelism is very annoying, and could well cost him the election.

    1. He’ll put a lid on it in the general. If he doesn’t you’d be right but he doesn’t seem to be that stupid.

      1. At that point, it will be too late, because moderate Christians and others will not trust him.

      2. If it were 20 years ago I’d say “sure”, but it’s becoming increasingly difficult for politicians to pull that “swing towards center” for the general election. I’m not saying he won’t try (if he gets the nomination), but that it’ll be a much more delicate maneuver.

  18. “Now class, please turn to the chapter on the early 21st century.”
    “I have a question, teacher, and Google didn’t yield a satisfactory answer.”
    “Share your question with the rest of your Cadre.”
    “Why did the strongest nations of the world still allow religion in their governmental representatives when the obvious history of religious activity inevitably led to derision, hate, and infringement of civil liberty?”
    “The answer is simple: fear.”

    1. So sad.

      Why hope for such a horrific dystopia?

      Are you sure that you, a person who sees regulated thought as a good thing, are on the right site?

      There are thousands of leftist site that you and your ‘cadre’ can enjoy regurgitating goodthink on.

    2. allow religion in their governmental representatives

      Because all elected officials should first be sent to a re-education camp to disabuse them of the notion that they or anyone else has any right to their own religious beliefs.

  19. (Disclaimer: I don’t believe in government-employed chaplains, I think the government should let outside civilian chaplains minister to soldiers who wish it, and the taxpayer should not be billed for it)

    “With his trademark gift for hilarity, he said the job of a military chaplain “is to be insensitive to atheists.””

    And he added, “To welcome them into the forgiving arms of a loving god.”

    Of course, to a true atheist that makes Cruz’s comment even more shocking and evil.

    But to other people, it makes the remark seem much…nicer…than the media hype would indicate.

    And at the time, in March 2014, Cruz was speaking to the Network of Iowa Christian Home Educators.

    He also said “”school choice is the civil rights issue of the 21st century,” which is kind of what Reason says.

    And he warned that the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child could be used as a back-door to undermine parental authority over their children.

    Which is so paranoid, because nobody is trying to undermine parental authority over their children, certainly not the United Nations.

  20. I am a Christian and a Libertarian. The two are not mutually exclusive. That some use their faith as a governmental weapon is lamentable, but every fool wishes to use his or her basic beliefs as a governmental weapon. Replace Christianity with Atheism, and you will have similar problems. Same with Global Warming Alarmism, Islam, Socialism/Communism, race promoters, etc.

    The evil does not come in the personal belief system. It comes in the desire to enforce those beliefs on others.

    1. ^^^This. I’m also a Christian and a Libertarian and believe that the belief sets of each compliment each other. God gave us free will to do as we please and unless it harms another it is not my right to intervene or judge. My responsibility is to live a life of self-reliance, love, and charity.

      1. Cruz is using your religion as a costume and making sensible religious people look stupid. It’s people like him that are turning people away from religion in general.

        1. Perhaps. In that case, both Cruz and those who would be turned off just by the actions of fellow humans, are misguided and wrong.

          Would you stop being a libertarian just because certain people, who would claim libertarianism, acted boorishly, rudely, or ignorantly? Thomas Jefferson did a great many things wrong, but that doesn’t mean he was wrong about his political philosophy. Throwing out the baby with the bathwater is rarely a good idea.

          1. Would you stop being a libertarian just because certain people, who would claim libertarianism, acted boorishly, rudely, or ignorantly?

            For any who would, I have two words: Bob Barr.

            1. From Prohibitionist to Weedy. Amazing.

          2. “Would you stop being a libertarian just because certain people, who would claim libertarianism, acted boorishly, rudely, or ignorantly?”

            I would speak out against them, not shrug my shoulders and allow them to constantly seize the narrative.

            1. What do you think we do? Do you actually think that they give the mic to Christian Fundamentalist An-Caps*?

              I’m their worst nightmare; not only do I tell them that God exists, I tell them that their “god” is evil!

              *I don’t know what the other commenters call themselves, obviously I’m speaking only for myself.

              1. ^This. I tell every Christian who seeks to impart their beliefs on others that their desires of those of control and authoritarianism, something God wanted to free man from. God did not seek to put us in bondage. He wanted to free us from it, both physical and spiritual. God = freedom.

                1. I’m not gonna tell you that you aren’t a Christian, but look at the bible.

                  Over and over again people are punished for questioning God’s authority, for not following his instructions, absent any explanation or reason, to the letter. From “original sin” to pillars of salt to having Moses kill his bull-following-former-followers, God of the Old Testament is all about control and authoritarianism.

                  So while you can argue that New Testament God is much kinder and less vindictive, supposedly New Testament God and Old Testament God are the same God, and God is unchanging, so it’s perfectly fair to judge God by God’s actions regardless of whether it was New Testament or Old Testament.

                  So I’m not gonna say you aren’t a Christian or that you’re doing your religion wrong. But I am gonna say you shouldn’t be surprised when Christians (and non-Christians) disagree with your characterization of God.

    2. It does also come to mind that libertarianism is God’s preferred method of governance, as shown all over in the book of Judges and 1 Samuel 8.

      The evil is not “mixing religion and government”, it’s using force-of-arms against those who haven’t aggressed. If the person aggressing uses religion, philosophy, or selfish ambition as their motivation, it doesn’t really matter, now does it?

  21. Cruz goes even further. “Any president who doesn’t begin every day on his knees isn’t fit to be commander-in-chief of this nation,”

    I begin many days on my arms and knees, usually the result of a hangover. Does that count?

  22. I don’t know a single candidate that has claimed God was on the candidates side. A lot of them claim they try to be on God’s side, but that is not the same. As for required christianity for a President, that is not a constitutional requirement, but as Ben Carson indicated, it is a perfectly legal for a voter to require it. The voter does have that liberty and a lot of voters think it is a good thing.

  23. “Any president who doesn’t begin every day on his knees isn’t fit to be commander-in-chief of this nation,” [Cruz] thundered.

    So he favors a gay president after all?

  24. “Republicans often convey the impression that God is their exclusive property and that everyone else doesn’t belong. But treating Christianity as a de facto requirement for office amounts to making nonbelievers second-class citizens.”

    This is more a caricature of a Conservative/Republican than not. I am not “of the faith”, as they say; I don’t see this in any way, shape or form; and I don’t feel “left out” of conservative circles owing to my atheism. My libertarian leanings feel more at home with this group than with the statists.

    In short, this is just more left-wing blather.

  25. Even God can’t make Cruz and Rubio natural born Citizens.

    1. There is no such thing as “natural born” as the election in 2008 showed. I think that Arnold should run and simply claim “If you say that I am not natural born you are a racist” I mean, it worked for the Turd sitting the White House right now.

  26. “The deity-centric approach is working for Ted Cruz, who began his victory speech in Des Moines Monday by pointing heavenward, pursing his lips and uttering an especially unctuous line: “To God be the glory.” ”

    *Barf

  27. Government shall have no religion but the one True Religion, and his Prophet is Marx.

    Amirite Steve?

  28. “And then God would tell me ‘George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq’. And I did.”

    Well then, I don’t like God.

  29. One way of neutralizing the religious right and stopping their efforts to turn the US into a Christian theocracy is through Deism. Many of the supporters of the religious right are not aware that some of America’s key founders were not Christians, but were Deists and that the US was not founded on Christianity. Educating and winning over the sincere supporters will greatly weaken the religious right while strengthening free-thought and progress. The American founder and Deist Thomas Paine called for a revolution in religion based on our innate God-given reason and Deism in The Age of Reason. I think Paine was correct.

    Progress! Bob Johnson
    http://www.deism.com

    1. Actually, more Founders were later claimed to be Deists than would have claimed the title for themselves (though some certainly were Deists). That being said, Deism really has no leg to stand on, because if you’re going to reject most of the Scripture, Occam’s razor leads you quickly to rejecting the rest of it. That’s why there aren’t many Deists today.

      (From a Christian An-Cap)

    2. turn the US into a Christian theocracy

      Apparently, that tinfoil is a little tight.

  30. I’ve made $76,000 so far this year working online and I’m a full time student.I’m using an online business opportunity I heard about and I’ve made such great money.It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found out about it.

    ?????? http://www.Wage90.com

  31. municipalities blocking the construction of mosques or a Jewish student being forced to listen to Christian prayers at public school events.

    ONE OF THESE THINGS IS NOT LIKE THE OTHER…..

    THE WORDS. THEY HURT ME. MY EARS AND DELICATE SENSITIVITIES! YOU CAN’T PRAY BECAUSE MY BRAIN HURTS FROM HEARING THINGS I DON’T AGREE WITH..

  32. I’ve made $76,000 so far this year working online and I’m a full time student.I’m using an online business opportunity I heard about and I’ve made such great money.It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found out about it.

    ?????? http://www.Wage90.com

  33. You would think the Almighty would be powerful enough to produce a comfortable majority

    God gave you free will, and now you want him to prevent voters from using it? In fact, all of the evil done by the American government can be laid at the feet of the American voter. We get the government, and the ensuing punishments, we deserve.

    As for the rest of the article, perhaps you should read the speeches and letters of the people who wrote the Founding documents of these united States and maybe rethink your indignity! Sheesh!

    1. Being anti-Christian is just way cooler, though.

      1. Followers of Osiris are feeling neglected.

    2. If you read Revelations, the last book of the Bible, God is not going the choose a majority, most will be cast aside.

  34. The absolute LAST thing we need is a religious anything as President.

    Unless the idea of a guy with one hand on the Big Red Button, and the other hand furiously yanking his pud while fantasizing about his bible’s End of Days scenarios has some sort of sick appeal.

  35. God and government: what a combination. Funny these same candidates will criticize the “heavy handed” Islamic influence on African and Asian nations, calling for more “freedoms” for their people, yet think nothing about applying heavy handed evangelical influence on the US Government.

    Go figure…

    1. Christians vote their values like everyone else. People are imposing their values when they vote for pro choice candidates, or for gay marriage rights. In fact all rights in the constitution are value based. The same is true with Islamic values, like subservience of women and death sentences for homosexuals. In the US they could vote for candidates willing to change the Constitution to impose those values. That is how the system works.

    2. Christians vote their values like everyone else. People are imposing their values when they vote for pro choice candidates, or for gay marriage rights. In fact all rights in the constitution are value based. The same is true with Islamic values, like subservience of women and death sentences for homosexuals. In the US they could vote for candidates willing to change the Constitution to impose those values. That is how the system works.

  36. Religion aside – the New Testament informs us that Jesus preached individual freedom, compassion, and personal responsibility. His nemesis, the Pharisee, were big government ideologues who felt threatened by Jesus’ libertarianism. We know what happened.
    Times may change but people don’t.

    1. And the Old Testament has God punishing people for every slight transgression of his whim.

  37. just before I saw the receipt that said $7527 , I accept that my mom in-law woz like actualey making money in there spare time from there pretty old laptop. . there aunt had bean doing this for less than twentey months and at present cleared the depts on there appartment and bourt a great new Citro?n 2CV . look here…….
    Clik This Link inYour Browser.
    ???????? http://www.Wage90.com

  38. Ben Carson said he would not accept a Muslim as president, but Cruz goes even further. “Any president who doesn’t begin every day on his knees isn’t fit to be commander-in-chief of this nation,” he thundered. That rules out atheists, agnostics, non-Christians and any faithful churchgoer who feels perfectly capable of praying while seated.

    I’ve read similar statements by Hit and Run commenters about religious believers.

    1. Neither Carson or Cruz said they would not accept a Muslim as President. Only that they would not vote for him. Cruz is not saying that it should be made illegal if a non Christian was President, only the country would be worse off. He is quite free to have that opinion. A lot of evangelicals agree with him, for that matter a lot of Catholics do as well.

  39. If you believe in God, he is tied to everything. That does not mean a specific religion has to be. Christians are supposed to believe in freedom of the individual. Christian are supposed to offer the good news, and if you don’t accept it, shake the dust off their sandals and move on. You do, however, vote your values. Modern western civilization, and democracy are derived directly from the reformation and its insistence that the individual, not the state, and not the church is involve with salvation and must make his own choices.

  40. Appealing to any group of voters is always a two-edged sword; courting Christians is no different. Do Cruz, Rubio, Huckabee and others use their faith to garner votes? Of course they do, and that’s expected in any political contest. I think Cruz believes that Christians need to come out in record numbers in the primaries if he is to be the nominee. I also think Cruz believes that Christians need to turn out in larger numbers than in the past in the general election if the Republicans have any chance to win the White House. In Iowa, it is always a smart political move to court Christians and win, hopefully to set yourself up as the “most Christian” candidate.

    But this process can backfire, and there will always be the “sheep in wolf’s clothing” candidate(s) who will suddenly announce how religious they are, simply to get the vote. We do need people of good character to be elected to office. In the time of the Founders, good character meant being a good Christian. Today, it’s actually more important for the voters to be of good character. If voters are more concerned with whatever goodies they can be promised by politicians, then we will never select people of good character to represent us.

    Maybe Mr. Chapman can write articles in the future about the candidates’ appealing to other groups besides Christians.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.