home

John McCain Wants a Christian President for Our Christian Nation

In an interview published Saturday, Republican presidential hopeful John McCain said we are a Christian nation and he prefers a President of the Christian faith.

"I just have to say in all candor that since this nation was founded primarily on Christian principles ... personally, I prefer someone who I know who has a solid grounding in my faith."

.... He added that "the Constitution established the United States of America as a Christian nation."

Jewish groups roundly criticized him. The American Jewish Committee released a statement:

McCain should know that the United States is a democratic society without a religious test for public office.

"To argue that America is a Christian nation, or that persons of a particular faith should by reason of their faith not seek high office, puts the very character of our country at stake," Jeffrey Sinensky, the group's general counsel, said Monday in a statement.

Who came to McCain's defense? Joe Lieberman. And of course, McCain is now backtracking.

More...

While campaigning in New Hampshire on Sunday, he said that the most qualified person could be president, no matter his or her religion.

"It's almost Talmudic. We are a nation that was based on Judeo-Christian values. That means respect for all of human rights and dignity. That's my principle values and ideas, and that's what I think motivated our founding fathers," McCain said.

I don't think the Talmud and Judeo values had a big part in the Constitution or the beginnings of our country. The Jewish population in America was quite small then. Nor were Jews treated very well.

Most scholars agree that the first Jewish settlement of any significant size in the new world occurred when a small band of refugees, 23 Sephardic Jews (or Jews of Spanish heritage) from Brazil, came to New Amsterdam (New York) in 1654. They came seeking the rights of free men and women in a place where they could worship without restraint and avail themselves of both the opportunities and obligations of a liberal society.

Once in America, they found that New Amsterdam in many ways was no different from where they came. They were treated as separate citizens. They could not engage in retail trade, practice handicrafts, hold public position, serve in the militia or practice their religion in a synagogue or in gatherings.

By the time of the American Revolution over 100 years later, the size of the Jewish population in the new world had grown by only small measures, and at a fairly slow pace. In 1789, Jewish immigrants in America had established only five major communities. All of them were in the large cities at the time such as New York, Boston, Philadelphia, Charleston, and Newport.

So while John McCain is now willing to extend the Presidency to Jews as well as Christians, it seems he still believes Muslims, Buddhists, Agnostics and Atheists need not apply. I'm being a bit sarcastic and cynical here but the point is McCain is trying to recover from a serious fumble and he did it poorly,

Update: Arianna weighs in.

< Late Night: You Ain't Going Nowhere (New Passport Rules) | Senate Approves $150 Billion for War in Iraq, Afghanistan >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Thirty to Forty (5.00 / 0) (#8)
    by jondee on Tue Oct 02, 2007 at 04:28:40 PM EST
    percent automatically vote for the candidate evokes Jesus the most times; another smaller percentage would vote for Hitler if he "favored" tax cuts and deregulation (usually the Jesus guy in spite of the whole camel/needle thing); another significant percentage seemingly refuses to vote under any circumstances..And the upshot is Apocalypse and Ayn Rand win again.

    They've got those demographics down to a science.

    Bottom Line (5.00 / 2) (#11)
    by Repack Rider on Tue Oct 02, 2007 at 07:02:36 PM EST
    McCain is an idiot.

    Everything else is window dressing.

    Well said! (none / 0) (#13)
    by Molly Bloom on Tue Oct 02, 2007 at 09:24:24 PM EST
    et al (1.00 / 0) (#12)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Oct 02, 2007 at 08:48:18 PM EST
    Some interviewer for Beliefnet asked McCain what he would think of a Moslem President. He answered that while he, as a Christian, personally preferred someone grounded in that faith, he would vote for whoever was best suited to lead this nation

    Wow. Sure looks like this guy is a raving nut case to me! (sarcasm alert)

    Link

    Not a raving (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by jondee on Wed Oct 03, 2007 at 10:38:14 AM EST
    nut case, just another oppurtunist willing to vulgarize and pimp religion (or anything else) if it'll stir up his base.

    Your kinda guy, in other words.

    Parent

    Stir up his base???? (1.00 / 0) (#15)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Oct 03, 2007 at 03:14:46 PM EST
    Can you read??? He said he would vote for whoever he thought would do the best job. Even a Moslem.

    Really jondee. You astound me.

    Parent

    the real litmus test (none / 0) (#1)
    by diogenes on Tue Oct 02, 2007 at 08:00:53 AM EST
    What the bloggers here really want is a president who acts like a secular humanist.

    I'd settle for a president.... (none / 0) (#3)
    by kdog on Tue Oct 02, 2007 at 10:18:30 AM EST
    that acts like a human being that leaves their religion at home when they go to work for others.

    Parent
    Somehow (none / 0) (#10)
    by jondee on Tue Oct 02, 2007 at 05:16:32 PM EST
    I dont believe the historical Diogenes would settle for quoting Bill O'Reilly as a substitute for discourse.

    Parent
    What is a secular humanist? Why are they evil? (none / 0) (#2)
    by Molly Bloom on Tue Oct 02, 2007 at 09:16:24 AM EST
    On the topic of McCain's statement-

    Your religion or lack thereof is your business. Feel free to go to church, or synagogue, or mosque or dance around a campfire for all I care. See first amendment.

    That said, you may not give your religious views force of law. See first amendmant also. Don't like it? Move to a theocracy.

    Well put Molly (none / 0) (#9)
    by john horse on Tue Oct 02, 2007 at 04:45:57 PM EST
    Well put Molly.  I think you capture the basis of the separation of church and state.  

    Membership in a church should be based on one's conscience.  If you don't like what the preacher is saying you can form your own church or go join some other group.  

    The state on the other hand possesses coercive power.  If you don't want to follow the rules of the state, the state can throw your *ss in jail.

    Parent

    How does (none / 0) (#4)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Oct 02, 2007 at 01:35:26 PM EST
    personally, I prefer someone who I know who has a solid grounding in my faith."
    equate to:
    persons of a particular faith should by reason of their faith not seek high office
    ?

    In case it wasn't clear, (none / 0) (#5)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Oct 02, 2007 at 01:39:09 PM EST
    how does McCain's comment:
    personally, I prefer someone who I know who has a solid grounding in my faith.

    equate to Sinensky's characterization of that comment:

    persons of a particular faith should by reason of their faith not seek high office

    ?

    In case it wasnt clear (none / 0) (#7)
    by jondee on Tue Oct 02, 2007 at 03:38:47 PM EST
    This thread isnt solely concerned with an expansion and defense of Sinensky's particular characterization.

    Parent
    Christian principals" (none / 0) (#6)
    by jondee on Tue Oct 02, 2007 at 03:35:22 PM EST
    Is, of course, a gross oversimplification on the part of another polished sound-bite surfer.

    Christian principals (if not Christian acts) deeply informed by Socratic, Platonic and Enlightenment principals would be more accurate; but these game show hosts dont want the rabble to be deeply informed about ANYTHING themselves: they, Fox and talk radio will do our thinking for us.

    Btw, Who started this "secular humanist"/wedge crock of sh*t anyway, Jimmy Swaggart, or was it some Imperial Wizard concerned with "preservin' our culture 'n heritage"?