bleechers's Blog

True: Barack Obama's middle name is Hussein.

Question: Who cares?

Well, I would have to answer that I kinda care and I kinda don't care. Since most of us don't choose our own names we cannot possibly be held responsible for our middle names. My middle name has "religious significance"... but not for me. My youngest daughter's middle name has theological significance for me (as does my other daughter's first name), but it may mean nothing to her.

Barack may have been educated for a time in a madrassa. That may or may not be of relevance. If he says it means nothing and there is nothing in his life or in his rhetoric that points to madrassa-like positions then we must take him at his word. I was educated in a religious school, attended religion classes years after that and even taught such classes. However, no one would confuse my current beliefs for the doctrines of my former faith.

I hope this idiocy concerning Barack's name will end soon. If he starts quoting Muhammad then we should take a closer look at his affiliation, but until then the topic should be dropped.


It's a Choice

Is one's choice of religious affiliation relevant? Of course it is. Mitt Romney chooses to affiliate with the Latter Day Saints (Mormons). That's relevant. Whether you like the doctrines of the LDS or not, his choice is a legitimate issue.

Let's say I choose to affiliate with a group that teaches that God lives on Mercury and he has chosen the people born in 1966 to become gods. Further, our founder stated that all other religious beliefs are heresy and anyone not born in 1966 is the spawn of demons. We also hold that Estonia is the center of the universe. Does asking me about the beliefs of the church of my own choosing amount to bigotry or "religious hatred?"

What if our founder stated that our church is superior to the Constitution? Would my choice of affiliation not be relevant?

Please note, I am not saying that the LDS holds these beliefs or anything similar. I only use Romney as an example because he's current and anyone who questioned the doctrines of his choice of affiliation (or who dared to actually quote Brigham Young or Joseph Smith) was immediately labeled a "bigot" or worse. Hey Mitt, if you're a Mormon, be proud, be loud!


Good Americans

I have supported and voted for Presidential candidates that were affiliated with churches that I find theologically wholly unacceptable (and rejected candidates who hold views far closer to my own). However, I did so because I knew that they did not necessarily accept all the doctrines of their own churches. If I believed that the candidate was a patriotic American who honored the Constitution I felt comfortable with my support.

Many of my heroes held religious views contrary to my own. Washington, Adams, Jefferson all were affiliated with theological organizations or movements that I find objectionable. They understood the concept of a republic. They took their vow to uphold and defend the Constitution seriously. They were guided by religious and moral statutes yet they did not govern as adherents to sectarian distinctives.


Why Not Just Answer the Question?

All candidates should gladly answer questions about their choices of affiliation. Religion is not a race, it is not a gender, it is not an ethnicity, it is a choice. We should all be willing to answer for our choices. Romney's refusal to defend his own church was the reason I didn't support him... and my faith has little in common with the LDS.

As a candidate, I would happily answer for what I used to believe and what I currently believe. Hey if somebody wants to reject me because he is not comfortable with my answers, so be it.

The last thing I'd say as a candidate is "don't ask me about my faith," but once I've answered a question thoroughly, I would hope that whatever my answer does in terms of support of lack of support would suffice.

The last thing I'd want in a campaign is for someone to assume things about me because of my middle name. The candidates should welcome questions about their affiliations (sectarian and secular) and welcome whatever comes with their answers.