Religion
Related: About this forumObama and Romney offer differing views of God
Do you believe in a God who protects the individuals freedoms against the encroachments of the state? Who answers personal prayers and who intervenes, as he did for Paul on the Road to Damascus, to make believers out of skeptics and heretics? This God rewards his favorite sons and daughters with prosperity, and he bestows blessings, to paraphrase the aphorism, on those who help themselves.
Or do you believe in a God whose first priority is to care for the weak and the helpless, who teaches people to do unto others as they would have others do unto them? This is the collectivist God of the Hebrew Bible, who sees humanity organized into tribes and families of brothers and sisters who must work together to discern and follow his will.
With their rhetoric, Mitt Romney and President Obama are forcing voters to consider this choice. And as Occupy movement activists prepare to protest income inequality, among other issues, at the Group of 8 summit in Camp David, Md., and the NATO gathering in Chicago this weekend, the dilemma is far from academic.
More:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-faith/obama-and-romney-offer-differing-views-of-god/2012/05/17/gIQA7XuwWU_story.html?wpisrc=nl_headlines
Goblinmonger
(22,340 posts)need to offer ANY view of God? Who gives a rat's ass what they think about God? Sometimes this country pisses me off.
CrispyQ
(36,221 posts)Thats my opinion
(2,001 posts)Try reviewing the Court decisions about this matter. Candidates, do not lose their "free-exercise" rights. Government does lose the right to make any religious dogma or structure the law--just because it is religious..
laconicsax
(14,860 posts)His comment merely states that their religious beliefs are irrelevant to the office for which they are running. At no point did he say that they lose their free exercise rights. At no point did he comment on the prohibitions on governmental interference in religious matters nor did he mention that the Government is allowed to "structure the law--just because it is religious."
The comment you replied to simply said that neither Obama or Romney are required to share their beliefs on the divine as part of their Presidential bid because those beliefs are wholly unrelated to the job.
Did you misread the comment or are you trying to manufacture conflict?
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts).... hammered into their heads from birth....
cbayer
(146,218 posts)It's this kind of shallow nonsense, false dichotomies fitted for the election season media cycle masking as legitimate religious debate that makes me emphasize the agnostic label. Why all the certainty? It isn't a real dilemma, and anyway, if it WAS academic, at least it would have some nuance.
dimbear
(6,271 posts)Work hard, you can do it.
Get used to the new Mormon reality, evangelicals!