2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumSeparation of Church and State is for peasants.
Hillary Clinton showed up for church today. Will faith help or hurt her on the campaign?https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2015/09/13/hillary-clinton-showed-up-for-church-today-will-faith-help-or-hurt-her-on-the-campaign/
Note: She didn't just show up, she preached the sermon.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)oasis
(53,693 posts)Last edited Sun Sep 13, 2015, 06:05 PM - Edit history (2)
the Democratic Party can do without.
haikugal
(6,476 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)I left a little something to cheer you up back at the evil atheist lair.
haikugal
(6,476 posts)LWolf
(46,179 posts)is that her faith seems propelled by her campaign, rather than authenticity...like so much of what she says and does.
Who knows if she is "a person of faith?" I don't, one way or the other.
Anyway, being a "person of faith" does not lose my vote. Positions on issues earn, or lose, my vote.
oasis
(53,693 posts)Sam Brownback to demonstrate true faith. Putting Hillary under the microscope to measure her level of faith is beyond ridiculous.
I'm not putting HRC under a microscope.
It's her own words and actions over decades that lead me, and perhaps some others, to doubt the authenticity of anything she says.
I really don't give a shit, one way or the other, whether any POTUS is "a person of faith," as long as that faith doesn't lead to a connection of church and state while in office, or to discrimination of any sort.
Her "level of faith" was not my point at all.
oasis
(53,693 posts)question Hillary's motives for attending church.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)probably because her poll testing told her she needs to be "more authentic"- and instead of displaying actual authenticity- by like, say, coming out with a slate of actual policy and issue proposals- she's decided that nothing says authenticity like a public declaration of religious faith.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)The ridiculous over-Jesusification of politics is a well-established problem in this country.
No one says candidates cant be religious (although they should be able to NOT be religious, as well) but a healthy recognition of the principle of church state separation is a fundamental Democratic Party, AND American, value.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)mak3cats
(1,573 posts)oasis
(53,693 posts)Btw, Hillary and I believe the separation of church and state is a good thing and should be preserved under our constitution.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Still included outlawing flag burning?
I'm glad to hear you are committed to the principle
but unless you are Hillary or officially qualified to speak for her campaign (if you are, please PM me- you guys are doing a crap job right now, but I can help, and I work cheap) i will wait to hear her positions directly from the source.
Ron Green
(9,870 posts)is a bad thing. Rather than a candidate's cynical church-going I would rather see, for example, support for the sweeping social, environmental and economic dicta in Laudate Si of Pope Francis.
Bernie Sanders has voiced such support. I don't know about Ms. Clinton.
Old Union Guy
(738 posts)Separation doesn't mean establishment of for *good* religion.
Ron Green
(9,870 posts)"Cynical church-going" is not what I'm including as a desirable part of public discourse. I agree that her pulpit speech is not what we need.
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)This still seems too close to the meme that the US won't elect an old socialist Jew.
oasis
(53,693 posts)is for a "gotcha" photo op against Bernie? I seeeeeeeee.
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)How many sermons and sunday scholl classes has she given in the past year?
oasis
(53,693 posts)an honored guest or member to do that.
If your really interested in finding out, check with Hillary's campaign.