Last Friday we heard from President Obama that, “This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakable.” The next day, his spokesman clarified his statement, saying that the president was not actually advocating the building of the mosque in New York which was at the center of the controversy, but was merely saying that the Muslim community had a right to build it. Detractors were quick to say that Obama was “walking back” his earlier statement, blah, blah, blah.
What nonsense. Of course he would not advocate building a mosque anywhere, nor should he; no more than he should advocate building a church or a synagogue.
What part of “regarding” do people not understand? The constitution says that our government “shall make no laws regarding the practice of religion.” That means no laws that interfere against it and no laws that promote it. That would seem to mean that politicians should speak neither for or against religion in a governmental context.
There are, of course, many who favor laws that promote religion, but…
that they had a right to build it and no one should (or could) say no, just because it is a certain religion. and politicians should no be speaking for or against it in an official context.
ReplyDelete