Did any of you notice...

[UnrepentantUnitarian]

...the one candidate who was missing from CNN's "faith and politics"coverage?

I mean, they didn't even mention Sen. Gravel...he didn't fit the neat and simple "faith-paradigm" the network wanted to portray. Now, maybe Mr. Gravel declined. As a fellow Unitarian Universalist, I understand just how strongly most of us feel about religion being inherently personal. (Remember former Sec. of Defense William Cohen of Maine, actors Christopher Reeve and Paul Newman...they've shown the same "UU" resistence to "wearing religion" like a billboard.) Still, I think it was interesting (and revealing) that no mention was given of whether Sen. Gravel was given the opportunity to participate or not.

As for the rest of the "faith and politics" programming, I too had some hopes that they would make a stronger case for diversity of faith as part of the "American way." It soon became apparent, however, that the programs were to be more of a "polite inquisition"--you know, do you pray daily? Sure, I do. Me too. Yep, so do I. Oh yes, me too--and I even do the rosary!!! Step right up and get your ticket punched! Everybody gets to ride on this faith train...well, maybe not so much.

Ron

[bklyncowgirl]

1. Maby Gravel told them his personal religious beliefs were nobody's business.

If he did I applaud him.

You'd sooner find the rest of them on TV singing the Star Spangled Banner in an American Flag speedo swimsuit (or string bikini depending upon gender) than stating that spirituality is a private matter and it's nobody's damn business whether they pray.

Pandering is the American Way.

[Buzz Clik]

2. They were discussing candidates who:

1. People actually have heard of before
   
2. Register greater than 0.1% on preference polls.

[UnrepentantUnitarian]

3. Funny, Buzz...

I never heard them say that. All other official "Democratic presidential candidates" were featured, either on the "all Protestant" first hour with Soledad, or the "all Catholic" follow-up with Paula Zahn. It sure appeared to be more about "faith-labels" than whether they were "viable" candidates or not.

Ron

[Buzz Clik]

5. You've made a couple of errors here --

Don't expect intelligent discourse from the parties in question. They think small for people who think small. Secondly, I really don't understand your complaint. If, indeed, the Universalist Unitarians wish to keep their faith totally personal, why does the exclusion of Gravel bother you? I would think you'd find it highly hypocritical if he actually participated.

However, I do agree with the general sentiment of this thread that these candidates are crawling all over themselves trying to appear the most religious. It's both amusing and sad.

[MuseRider]

4. Interesting.

I am away from any cable so I have not seen any of this. He was not included? Hmmm.

I don't care if there are 50 people wanting to run. It is not up to the media to decide who we should hear or see but it is our job, as citizens, to take the time to filter through all of them. If it takes us a while so what? We do not need to be fed the corporate favorites. This attitude makes me sick. I don't care how low in the polls someone is or how nobody knows who they are it is our job, OUR job to make these decisions. God I hate the media.