Edwards: Religious faith should not divide voters

Professur

Well-Known Member
Edwards: Religious faith should not divide voters

By VICKI SMITH





WEIRTON, W.Va. (AP) -- John Edwards says voters should know that religion is important to him and to presidential candidate John Kerry but the issue shouldn't be used to divide people in the election.

"My faith is very important to me, and the same is true of John Kerry," the Democratic vice presidential candidate and son of a deacon said in a brief interview with The Associated Press after a campaign stop in West Virginia.

"The two of us talk about our faith -- with each other," he said Wednesday. "Our faith is important to us and it's always been important to us, and people should know that."

Edwards, a Methodist, said most Americans want a good leader -- a man who is a good husband and a good father -- "and if they're a person of faith, that helps."

"I don't think that faith should be used to divide us," he said.

As both parties battle for votes, their candidates are making multiple stops in West Virginia, a Bible Belt state with five electoral votes.

President Bush, who has visited West Virginia nine times since April, has found staunch support among conservative Christians. At rallies across the state, dozens have cited his faith in God as the main reason for their support -- more important than jobs, the economy and the war in Iraq.

The Democrats have protested the Republicans' recent distribution of campaign literature in West Virginia and Arkansas that contends liberals want to ban the Bible.

The literature claims that "the liberal agenda includes removing 'under God' from the Pledge of Allegiance." It also shows a Bible with the word "BANNED" across it.

Sen. Robert C. Byrd, D-W.Va., this week called the brochure "trash" and accused the Bush campaign of trying to hijack the issue of faith.

"God does not favor the particular position of any politician or political party," Byrd said.


Source

Interesting, no? Will your religious leanings influence your vote?
 
to some extent the honestly will. Bush tended to believe there is no separation and I like to believe there is one and I think Kerry or Nader would fit that idea.
 
Wouldn't having religious convictions force one to have their vote swayed?
 
I think "every" aspect should be a factor.
Putting the priority on the right thing is most important though.
So, I would have to disagree with Edwards.
 
bush has been quoted as saying that allowing Wicca in the military "is a mistake", so yeah, i think that my religion has some bearing on my feelings toward him. just the sentiment of that makes me go, "why do you exist and why do you have power?"
 
You got a link to that quote Ash?
Would be interesting.
So you disagree with Edwards too, but are going to vote for him huh?
 
ash r said:
bush has been quoted as saying that allowing Wicca in the military "is a mistake", so yeah, i think that my religion has some bearing on my feelings toward him. just the sentiment of that makes me go, "why do you exist and why do you have power?"




I did not hear that. when did he say it?
 
Professur said:
Interesting, no? Will your religious leanings influence your vote?

Actually, the "we gots religion too" kinda bugs me, but not enough to change my vote. I would say no, my lack of religious convictions will have nothing to do with how I vote.
 
Religious faith, and personal morality? Involved in making a choice in an election? How gauche... :rolleyes:

1. Vote your conscience. If motivated by religion, then go for it. If motivated by a complete lack of religion, go for it. The vote you cast is not for your party of choice...it's for your choice.

2. If you don't like your choices on the ballot, pencil in a choice you do wish to make. If there are no 'write-in' spaces, then vote for the candidate you find least offensive (good luck on that one)...
 
ash r said:
bush has been quoted as saying that allowing Wicca in the military "is a mistake", so yeah, i think that my religion has some bearing on my feelings toward him. just the sentiment of that makes me go, "why do you exist and why do you have power?"

Exodus 22:18 said:
Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.
 
Gato_Solo said:
Religious faith, and personal morality? Involved in making a choice in an election? How gauche... :rolleyes:

1. Vote your conscience. If motivated by religion, then go for it. If motivated by a complete lack of religion, go for it. The vote you cast is not for your party of choice...it's for your choice.

2. If you don't like your choices on the ballot, pencil in a choice you do wish to make. If there are no 'write-in' spaces, then vote for the candidate you find least offensive (good luck on that one)...

Pencil in....
Ain't no way for me man.
I don't like some of GW's home policies, but it scares the hell out of me
to think Kerry would be pres. :eek13:
A vote for GW is my Only option. He's the only chance we have at this point, the way I see it.

chcr says it doesn't "really" matter. That neither one is going to change things that
drastically. I strongly disagree there.
 
"I do not think witchcraft is a religion, and I do not think it is in any way appropriate for the U.S. military to promote it."
--george W. bush,
http://www.religioustolerance.org/wic_pres.htm

Witchcraft is NOT a religion, but as Wicca, not witchcraft, is what the military supports, we can safely assume that he is just one of the many people in positions of power who don't know the damned difference. *

now what i'm interested in is if anyone can give me Kerry's take on wicca...

* the difference is this: Wicca is a neo-pagan religion centered mainly around a goddess, a god, and a reverence towards things in nature. it does not have to include spellcrafting. Witchcraft is often just the mysticism and magic, with no religion involved.
 
ash r said:
now what i'm interested in is if anyone can give me Kerry's take on wicca...

I'm guessing he's both for it, and against it. :D

The way I read "Edwards" view on it up there, nothing would change
because he wouldn't deal with it at all.
(which is the frame of reference that Bush was speaking to)
 
BeardofPants said:
Wouldn't wicca be more aptly labled neo-pagan?
Umm... Wicca has been around a lot longer than, for instance, christianity, so neo-anything is probably a misnomer. For a long time it was not very smart to support wiccan beliefs (drowning, hanging, being burned at the stake...) so it kind of fell out of favor and out of view. It never really disappeared though.
 
Back
Top