In the Pearce Brosnan/Rene Russo remake of The Thomas Crown Affair, Brosnan seduces Russo and has her standard breakfast prearranged in his home for the next morning because he is confident in his seductive capabilities. Russo mutters as she digs into the breakfast, “I hate being a foregone conclusion.” I could not help but think of that when I read this story:
Rep. Dale E. Kildee (D-Mich.), a Catholic congressman who endorsed Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) for president, told Cybercast News Service Wednesday that despite Sen. Barack Obama’s (D-Ill.) failure to capture Catholic voters in the Pennsylvania primary, the majority of Catholics will vote for the Democratic candidate in the general election, whether it’s Obama or Clinton.
My impression is that Catholics are far more diverse than this, not to mention that fact that such blanket statement makes religious people look thoughtless, because such levels of predictability imply such. Wouldn’t it be nice to read stories about how religious people consider the issues, read the information and make a decision based on the available facts?
Speaking of Political/Religious Diversity
Underwood and a growing number of other young, left-leaning believers are entering the political arena as campaign aides, lobbyists, grass-root activists and engaged voters. They are trying to expand the focus of faith-based politics beyond the religious right’s hot-button issues of abortion and gay marriage. And they are placing social justice issues, like poverty and war, at the intersection of their moral and political decision making.
There is some truth to that and we older religious conservative deserve much of the blame. We have allowed the younger generation to view “our” issues as foregone conclusions. I cannot help but think that the inter-sect bickering that we have engaged in has, in significant part, created the gap through which much of this has driven.
A View Of The Future?
Al Mohler, not shy about inter-sect bickering himself, looks at a potential future for religion and politics based on some writings out of the UK. I tend to agree with this particular analysis of his, and, in my book it is hard evidence for why we need to be able to overcome our inter-sect rivalries for matters of public policy. We just have to, the opposite result is too ugly to consider.
Grabbing for Religious Cred?!
The Washington Times and a Hillary/religion puff piece. I am troubled by this stuff. I am tired of people grabbing for religious credibility – I would really rather elect a good person of political and policy credibility.
John Hagee, yes the Revelations reading, Bible thumping, John McCain endorsing, TV preacher John Hagee, is trying to remove his foot from his political mouth again. I know McCain can do better than this, but I think this guy is enjoying the attention.
Some Quick Hits from Lowell
Here we have a mayor (of Birmingham, Alabama) who is overtly, aggressively, and in my view misguidedly playing to religion. I can’t find any criticism of his having done so. Could that be because he’s a . . . Democrat? Check out this lede:
Struggling to confront a worsening homicide rate, the mayor asked pastors and citizens Friday to don burlap sacks and ashes Friday in an Old Testament-style sign of biblical repentance.
Mayor Larry Langford said his “sackcloth and ashes” rally at Boutwell Auditorium was inspired by the Book of Jonah, where residents of the ancient city of Ninevah wore rough fabric and ashes as a sign of turning away from sin.
Just imagine the reaction if a Republican tried such a harebrained approach to fighting crime. (John: Local politics are a different animal.)
And here’s an interesting story (for a change) about John McCain’s faith – from the L.A. Times, no less. After reading this, I – no fan of McCain – actually think he gets it, in terms of the proper relationship between faith and politics.
And finally: I almost never watch 60 Minutes, but happened to catch this evening’s show and a very long and engrossing interview with Justice Scalia. (Highly recommended; video here.) During the segment on Scalia’s Catholic upbringing, Leslie Stahl just had to ask him about his faith’s impact on his role as a Supreme Court justice. His immediate, firm response: “It has nothing to do with how I decide cases.”
That was not enough for Stahl, of course, who pointed out that there are already 5 Catholics on the Supreme Court. “If there were a 6th Catholic on the Court,” she observed, “you can see that there would be a protest.”
Really? Would there be? Should there be? How could there be, in a country with a provision like Article VI in its written Constitution? John chimes in: Sadly, but relying on religious labels, we can also be victimized by them.