With the current election cycle now in full swing, and two leading candidates on the Republican side subscribing to different faiths – Mormonism and the Baptist Church – there is talk in Conservative circles of the Constitutional prohibition on “Religious Tests.” I have even heard criticism of potential voters who have decided they don’t like one or the other based on his profession of faith. More often, it is the Mitt Romney critics that are lambasted for not liking him because of his Mormonism.
One commentator in particular, a local guy here in Minneapolis, doesn’t like Romney for policy reasons, but loves to lay into Evangelicals that choose not to support a Mormon (cultist). He loves to run to the Constitutional prohibition of Religious Tests for office as the heart of his criticism for those Evangelicals. What he fails to grasp is that that Constitutional prohibition doesn’t apply to voters, nor should it. It prohibits Congress from passing laws requiring adherence to a particular Religious denomination or sect in order to qualify for political office.
The First Amendment’s protection of the Freedom of Association permits voters to reject candidates for any reason, including religious. As we have seen throughout Bush’s administration, especially earlier on in his first term in office, criticism of a politician on religious grounds is considered fair game. Bush being a self-professed Evangelical Christian (he never convinced me, but that’s beside the point) has drawn him criticism from the Left on everything he has done, even when what he has done has been exactly what they wanted.
I dislike Mitt Romney for a whole host of reasons, at least as a politician (I don’t know him personally). Among them is his Mormonism. However, if he had a political record I was comfortable with and was running on a political platform I could support, I would give serious consideration to voting for him. In fact, as a Ron Paul supporter, if I learned that my favorite candidate were a member of a religious group I considered a cult (such as the Jehovah’s Witnesses or Mormons), I would likely not be swayed in my support for him.
I just wish these commentators would be consistent. So often they rightly recognize that the Constitution was constructed to limit the power and scope of government, but when they can misapply Constitutional principles to attack those with whom they have differences they show themselves to be much more shallow than they first appear.
Mitt Romney, a Mormon, has every right to run for office, including that of the President; but I and every other voter have just as much right to vote against him, even if the reasoning is as shallow as not liking his religious affiliation.