Saturday, December 8, 2007

"Freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom"

The famous Romney quote in his JFK like speak on religion.
Slate has shat all over it, and with good reason. Both clauses aren't necessarily true.

Freedom requires religion - obviously atheism breaks the truthiness of this statement, but the implication behind such an assertion, IF it were true, are frightening. It feels like Romney is pushing the Christian card a little hard, and such a fervent support of religion seems inappropriate for such an esteemed office.

Religion requires freedom - this sounded right, but you only have to travel a few thousand miles to a dusty holyland to know that this statement is more ideal than real.

While critics have generally trashed his speech, it reveals a frightening vision of the presidency if he were to be elected. Faith alone cannot heal our wounds or fix our problems.

I wonder sometimes if we're all too enamored with the idea of leadership within a single man. Perhaps we should consider voting for teams than candidates - realistically, every candidate has a team behind behind him/her, but so much responsibility is placed on that one person.

But then again, who really wants to share power?

1 comment:

Dave said...

I think this is actually true from a theological standpoint, although he doesn't make the case for it whatsoever.

First of all, "freedom requires religion" is true if you realize that free will is a religious concept, and is ill-defined within the concept of atheism, as it implies the existence of a controlling presence, i.e. a soul.

"Religion requires freedom" is true in the case of true religious belief. Forced belief cannot be belief, in the same way (and for the same reason) that forced love cannot be love.