Well, please answer me this:
Why are the posters who are so quick to toss out the "B" word (bigotry) because some voters take religion as either a sole or primary basis for at least eliminating some candidates -- why don't we see them hurl the same "B" word @ Mormon voters?
We know from CNN exit polls and other data that 90-95% of Lds Utah voters -- and AZ as well -- voted for Romney. A Feb. 2008 Salt Lake Trib article said that exit polls of Utah voters say they bucked national trends (re: voting on issues) and voted for Romney based upon "personal qualities." (Personal qualities was Mormonese for "Romney's a fellow Mormon.")
You know & I know that the 60% of Utah citizens who are Mormon voters may often -- like they did with Romney in '08 -- vote for a Mormon primarily or solely because he's Mormon.
When are you -- as well as members who have come out of the closet as part of the FREEPER bigotry patrol -- going to hunt down these Mormon voters for using religion as their key yardstick for voting? When are you or the Bigotry Patrol going to start excoriating them?
You see, to me, if Mormon voters want to do that...hey, it's a Free Republic.
Likewise, if Jewish voters in CT consistently voted for Joseph Lieberman over other candidates -- and they used his faith as a primary or only reason -- shouldn't the Bigotry patrol be attacking that? Or what about Catholic voters who have voted for Catholic candidates taking their Catholicism into primary (or only) consideration?
Why the inconsistency? Why the rampant hypocrisy?
I know in your last post(s) you seemed to moderate your original stance & recognized that religion was indeed an "OK" criteria. But what about voters who use that as an "only" or strong primary consideration for their "yes" vote? (Not their "no" bypass?)
Are all these voters operating anti-Constitutionally as your earlier posts implied? Really?
You and most of the others who replied to my original post here misunderstood it -- or saw only half of the point. (Unfortunately, lack of comprehension on internet forums is rampant because we're communicating through a flat, one-dimensional means. It lacks all the other cues we take for granted in the three-dimensional world: body language and gestures, tone of voice, inflection, emphasis, etc.)
In my original post, I said:
Bigotry against any political candidate based on his religion has no place in our Constitutional Republic.
Now I'll break this down so it hopefully is more clear:
1. Voters are free to use whatever criteria they choose when making their decisions in the voting booth, but...
2. If a voter's SOLE -- ONLY -- criteria is a person's religion, then that's bigotry. That's true if the voter is making a choice because the candidate is a member of the voter's religion, or the candidate is a member of a different religion.
3. In earlier posts on this thread I was challenged on the notion of voting for a Muslim. ejonesie22 asked...
"So if there was a man running for office who said and agreed with every single political point you have ever stood for yet was a Muslim and firmly held to what the Koran said, his religion would play no role what so ever in your decision to support him."
MY ANSWER: The scenario makes little sense, because if a Muslim took every word in the Koran literally to the point of being an Islamofacist, s/he could not also support the principles in the United States Constitution. The two are antithetical to each other. Nevertheless, I try always to look at the totality of a candidate's record, position on issues and personal character when making my own voting decisions. Always have, always will. If an American Muslim ever rose to the point of being a serious candidate for president during my lifetime, I would have to take a very serious look at what that person stood for, but only if she was a Republican. If s/he was a Democrat, I'd dismiss the candidate immediately.
To close, bigotry does exist in this world. We can pretend it doesn't. We can close our eyes to it, but it does exist. The way I look at it, individuals are free to be bigoted or not. It's part of the human condition. I'm bigoted against Democrats and the political Left. :)
I oppose it only when bigotry rises beyond the individual level to impinge on our constitutional rights. Also earlier on this thread, Godzilla said that "my application of the 'religious test' is flawed." He/she missed the point as well. There are two aspects of the Constitution -- the strictly legal one and the broader principles enshrined in it. Godzilla looked only to the former, while I was considering the broader principles.