NEWT: Does Faith Matter? Absolutely.

www.youtube.com ^ | 10/18/2011 | Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich

[Yosemitest]

At 12 minutes 30 seconds into this video at the Western GOP Debate, Las Vegas, NV, started a question
that Newt Gingrich gave the most important and best answer in the whole debate.

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN ANCHOR AND DEBATE MODERATOR: And welcome back to the CNN GOP debate live from the Venetian in Las Vegas.
Let's continue. We've got an e-mail question that was left at cnnpolitics.com.
This is from a Mike Richards who says:
"With the controversy surrounding Robert Jeffress, is it acceptable to let the issue of a candidate's faith shape the debate?"



Senator Santorum, this is in reference to a Baptist pastor who, at the Values Voter Summit, after introducing Governor Rick Perry, said of --
said that "Mitt Romney is not a Christian," and that "Mormonism is a cult."
Those were his words.

Should...

(BOOING)

COOPER: Should voters pay attention to a candidate's religion?

SANTORUM: I think they should pay attention to the candidate's values, what the candidate stands for.

(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)

SANTORUM: That's what is at play. And the person's faith --

and you look at that faith and what the faith teaches with respect to morals and values that are reflected in that person's belief structure.
So that's -- those are important things.

I -- I'm a Catholic. Catholic has social teachings.
Catholic has teachings as to what's right and what's wrong.
And those are legitimate things for voters to look at,
to say if you're a faithful Catholic, which I try to be --
fall short all the time, but I try to be
-- and -- and it's a legitimate thing to look at as to what the tenets and teachings of that faith are
with respect to how you live your life and -- and how you would govern this country.

With respect to what is the road to salvation, that's a whole different story.
That's not applicable to what -- what the role is of being the president or a senator or any other job.

(APPLAUSE)

COOPER: Speaker Gingrich, you agree with that?

GINGRICH: Well, I think if the question is,

does faith matter? Absolutely.
How can you have a country which is founded on truths which begins
we are endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights?
How can you have the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 which says
religion, morality and knowledge being important, education matters.
That's the order: religion, morality and knowledge.

Now, I happen to think that none of us should rush in judgment of others in the way in which they approach God.
And I think that all of us up here I believe would agree.

(APPLAUSE)

But I think all of us would also agree that
there's a very central part of your faith in how you approach public life.
And I, frankly, would be really worried if somebody assured me
that nothing in their faith would affect their judgments,
because then I'd wonder, where's your judgment --
how can you have judgment if you have no faith?
And how can I trust you with power if you don't pray?

(APPLAUSE)

Who you pray to, how you pray, how you come close to God is between you and God.
But the notion that you're endowed by your creator sets a certain boundary on what we mean by America.





Western GOP Debate Part 1





Western GOP Debate Part 2





Western GOP Debate Part 3





Western GOP Debate Part 4

[68stanger]

Besides other issues with Newt (or Rudy) I have to wonder ... if he cannot honor a vow he made to his wife in front of God and witnesses, why would I expect him to honor the pledge to “us” to uphold the constitution? I can forgive him on a personal level sure, but I don’t have to put him in position to potentially betray my trust. I see it as a very severe “character issue”.

[dragnet2]

In fact, you have absolutely no idea what he told his wife or what their private conservations regarded.

And you bringing this up, is nothing but absolute speculation, which should be reserved orchestrated stupid television shows like Dr. Idiot, or Jerry Springer and his audience slackjawed morons.

[sanjuanbob]

What an uplifting story. Proud to be on the same board as you.

[andy58-in-nh]

Boy would he cream Obama in a one on one format. An educated man against an affirmative action disaster.

Man, that's the truth. You could put them in a ring and charge for drinks. It wouldn't be like Muhammad (Cassius Clay) Ali vs. Sonny Liston, but more like Liston vs. Primo Carnera, or perhaps, this:

Yeah, I know all about Newt's "baggage", but man: is he brilliant. Lights out, Barack.

[SoldierDad]

This would be as opposed to the marriage of convenience of someone like Billy Jeff Clinton, or a marriage where the wife actually runs the country like with Jimmah Carter? Or, how about the infidelity of Jack Kennedy? I’m quite sure that in this country’s 235 year history there have been Presidents for whom faithfulness to their spouse was not a priority. Yet, for most of these Presidents, their ability to abide by and for the Constitution have rarely been questioned. I would gladly exchange Newt for Obozo, despite their differences when it comes to marriage. Newt, at least, isn’t working overtime to change our Republic to a Marxist/Communist regime.

[SoldierDad]

Thank you.

[Gator113]

SoldierDad,

Thank you for your story. I can personally relate to some of it, not all, but some.

It is clear to me that you were a good son, you’re a good dad and a good and fair man.

[savagesusie]

Newt comes up with the most perfect answers a lot of the time....that he doesn’t always live up to these principles is fact. We need to never venture off the path to truth and justice-—which is outlined in our Founding documents....it is very clear-—our inalienable rights come from God and as such we ALWAYS use his standards for our legal system (not Barney Frank’s standards).

That said, we have gone off the path since the progressive Oliver Wendell Holmes destroyed our “Rule of Law” and created arbitrary laws (Positive Law) not based on “Right Reason according to Nature” which is the foundation of our legal system (and Natural Law Theory).

Faith matters—and our system has to have people who believe in God....that was understood by all the Founders. Atheists could not honestly take any of the oaths for government positions. Allah doesn’t take the place of God either, so the Koran that advocates shariah laws should NEVER be used because it goes against all the principles of our government and is in direct conflict with our Constitution. We used to have to take oaths to be citizens of this country and not all belief systems were accepted.

Communism/atheism was one of them. Fundamentally in direct conflict with our Constitution. Freedoms were only available to those with the concept that their are higher laws than man-made up laws which are not based on the idea of nature and God—Supra Positive Law.

[BenKenobi]

“Time to open your heart; forgive and move on. It’s not healthy for you to hold grudges for another’s personal indiscretions for so long.”

As an unmarried young Catholic, I find this statement offensive.

Yes, faith is important, and it’s important to obey what the church teaches, especially when it goes against your natural inclinations.

[La Enchiladita]

Santorum’s answer is much better. He is absolutely spot-on correct. As usual, Newt obfuscates because he thinks he’s the smartest person in the room. He’s not. I guess Newt has reason to feel uncomfortable with Santorum’s emphasis on values, eh?

[uncbob]

For the most part politicians are arrogant egotistical power hungry and will do or say what ever it takes to attain and hold power

Their God is themselves or think they have been ordained by the Creator to rule

[Yosemitest]

"Santorum’s answer is much better. He is absolutely spot-on correct"

Are you nuts?
Let's review:

COOPER: Should voters pay attention to a candidate's religion?

SANTORUM: I think they should pay attention to the candidate's values, what the candidate stands for.

(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)

SANTORUM: That's what is at play. And the person's faith --
and you look at that faith and what the faith teaches with respect to morals and values that are reflected in that person's belief structure.
So that's -- those are important things.

I -- I'm a Catholic. Catholic has social teachings.
Catholic has teachings as to what's right and what's wrong.
And those are legitimate things for voters to look at, to say if you're a faithful Catholic, which I try to be --
fall short all the time, but I try to be
-- and -- and it's a legitimate thing to look at as to what the tenets and teachings of that faith are
with respect to how you live your life and -- and how you would govern this country.

With respect to what is the road to salvation, that's a whole different story.
That's not applicable to what -- what the role is of being the president or a senator or any other job.

Let summarize:

COOPER: Should voters pay attention to a candidate's religion?

SANTORUM: That's not applicable to what -- what the role is of being the president or a senator or any other job.

[La Enchiladita]

With respect to what is the road to salvation, that's a whole different story. That's not applicable to what -- what the role is of being the president or a senator or any other job.

Absolutely right. What do you not understand about this? Our government is SECULAR. It is not, and should not be, a theocracy. That is what the islamists do. We are a free society. Therefore, the individual voter is certainly free to determine who they vote for based on religion; but a candidate's religion or lack of it is not a qualification or disqualification for office.

[stormer]

Absolutely correct. The whole issue about relative morality is the worst kind of dog-whistle politics. We're hiring an administrator, not somebody who can talk a good game when trying to peg the sincere-o-meter...

[Yosemitest]

Santorum avoided the question.
You're reading it wrong.
You're reading into the question what you WANT to see.

"but a candidate's religion or lack of it is not a qualification or disqualification for office."

You couldn't be more wrong, even if you tried.

John Adams said it best on October 11, 1798:

"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people.
It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."

Wallbuilders' article titled Importance of Morality and Religion in Government has many documented proofs of the necessity for religion in our leaders and our government, and is well worth your time to read.

[La Enchiladita]

I guess it’s going to be up to you to determine who is religious enough to become POTUS, because I know I am not qualified to determine that. I look at convictions, track record and values.

And, btw, just how religious was John Adams? And, did George Washington attend church regularly, a church that YOU would approve of? I have no idea.

[sanjuanbob]

You’re a complete fraud.
http://community.wizards.com/benkenobi?pref_tab=profile

[SumProVita]

Indeed it was an excellent answer! Newt Gingrich has certainly made mistakes in his life....as have WE ALL...but I get the sense that he has grown from that.

I know that I DEFINITELY like how he is doing in these debates.

I also like Rick Santorum.
Both understand the important issue and WHY they are important.

We are praying for this nation....and that God will grant us the blessing of good leaders.

[Yosemitest]

This country is in the HELL that it deserves BECAUSE its people have bought into the LIE of "Separation of Church and State".

[SumProVita]

Thank you for posting this:

You can tell when someone has not received the life-changing experience of being saved & forgiven when they point to someone’s “old man” and assume that the person is still the same as they were.

2 Cor 5:17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come!