Should Religion have a part in who we vote for?

Religion has always been a disputed topic between different cultures and different people. There are 19 major religions in the world, which are subdivided into hundreds of other smaller groups. The view of every different religion varies and many times those differences can cause disputes and even wars. However, there is no right religion, because there is no way to substantiate or prove which beliefs are right and wrong. In the United States, for the most part, everyone has a right to believe in what they want to believe. So, should religion be a part of the presidential campaigns and whether or not we vote for someone?

A breakdown of the religious views in the United States
(http://www.religioustolerance.org/worldrel.htm)

It is understood that each presidential candidate has their own beliefs and religious affiliation. It is also understood that each candidate attempts to appeal to everyone in different ways. Whether it be through their religious beliefs or their stance on immigration or any other relevant topic.

This past week, a born again Christian pastor from Texas, Robert Jeffrees commented, that he thinks “Mitt Romney’s a good, moral man, but those of us who are born again followers of Christ should prefer a competent Christian”. Although, in reality he may agree with Rick Perry’s views more than Mitt Romney’s, in this statement, it is as if he is telling all born again Christians not to vote for Romney solely on the fact that he is a Mormon, not on his political views and ideas.

If everyone took this advice, most of the United States would not vote at all. As seen above in the pie chart, only 33% of the United States is Christian and only a small part of that 33% is born again. The other 66% of the United States is not Christian at all and usually not represented by their religion in the primaries or the general election. Who are the Muslims and the Jews and all the rest of the population supposed to vote for if they should only vote for a representative of their own religion.

Although religious views and values could have a part in whom a voter chooses it should not be the only reason someone votes for a candidate. Robert Jeffrees says, that he believes “that as a Christian, we have the duty to select Christians as our leaders”.

I would like to hear his views on the other topics such as immigration, jobs reform and the EPA, not just on his religious views. Rick Perry and Mitt Romney, whom Jeffrees mostly talks about, have different views on different topics, especially immigration, which Rick Perry has been getting a lot of criticism for.

It is one thing to vote for a candidate based on their stances on federal and governmental issues and have the deciding factor be their religious views but to choose a candidate based solely on the religious aspect doesn’t make sense.

Just because someone’s religious views are the same as your own, your political views can many times be very different. As long as a candidate’s religious views do not over shadow or leak into their political views, the issue of religion should not have anything to do or only have a small part to do with whether or not you vote for a candidate.

After President Obama was elected, he got a lot of criticism for the church he attended and who his pastor was. It is everyone’s own choice whom they choose as a pastor or religious leader, and it is a person’s own choice what religion they choose to practice and believe in. President Obama’s political views did not seem to be clouded by his religious views, so why was he criticized so much for where he chose to practice his religion?

Religious views are our own, and no one has all of the same views on religion, so why let religion leak into the presidential campaign?

Online Articles:

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/10/07/pastor-to-gop-dont-vote-for-romney-because-hes-mormon/

Third Party Politics

This video is talks about third party politics. The socialist party, the libertarian party, and the taxpayers party are represented in this video. They talk about their views and what they would do if they were elected. 

Failure of the Two Party System???

Although this video is from 1989, it talks about the growing difference between the upper class and the lower class. This presdiential election, the idea of addressing the working class, and the poorer people in the United States has been a big topic through out many people. In terms of the two party system this former socialist mayor is talking about, do people vote Democratic and Republican because they feel they have too. 

Christian Republican Conservative Views

This video talks about the family research council which is a republican organization and its views and well as the Democratic  views and ideas that President Obama has. This video is also talking about the Christian republican views.

Here's to the First Lady!

Throughout all my blogs I seem to venture back to Michele Bachmann, but there is one Michelle whom I seem to have been neglecting.

Michelle Obama.

I don’t think anyone can deny how amazing Michelle Obama is. She is the diamond behind President Obama. Although she is only the First Lady, it is definitely a plus for Obama to have her standing by his side. 

Just recently she has created a program called Let’s Move! She goes to schools around the United States and has had commercials promoting this program. This program is to promote healthy lifestyles and works to get healthier foods in schools. The whole point is to tackle the problem of childhood obesity by not only targeting the children but getting their parents, teachers and schools involved as well. 

For all those thinking she is only doing this because her husband is president, don’t!

She has always been involved in community service and in promoting community togetherness. Being the First Lady only gives her more opportunity to do this.

She was not only the founding executive director of a program called Public Allies in Chicago, which is part of AmeriCorps, but she also developed the first community service program at the University of Chicago.

You may be asking why I am talking about Michelle Obama and not the president or the republican candidates.

Well, the president is important but the First Lady or First Husband (hopefully someday) is the person that stands behind the president and is the most reflective of the presidency outside of the president. Their views and thoughts undoubtedly reflect on the presidents views as well. 

Former Governor Rick Perry attempted to pass an executive order in Texas to make all girls in sixth grade to receive the HPV Gardasil vaccine. This caused a lot of controversy and did not end up getting passed. However, his wife Anita Perry is a nurse and an advocate for the HPV Gardasil vaccine. Will this help or hurt the presidential hopeful? At the moment it seems it may hurt him more than help him. 

I could go either way on whether or not we should take the rights of the parents to choose what is best for their child away from them. However, many people have been criticizing him for attempting to take away what should be a parent’s choice. One person with strong views against this was Michele Bachmann who brought it up at the Florida GOP debate. 

The idea that Perry’s wife’s views may not be widely accepted by many voters could hurt his campaign. While all the good that Michelle Obama has done during and before president Obamas term in the white house could significantly help his campaign. 

I don’t know about most people, but the person someone chooses to spend their life with does show a little about who that person is as well. Whether you are a Democrat or a Republican it is hard to deny all the good that Michelle Obama does and would continue to do whether or not her husband is the President. Michelle Obama is the embodiment of the perfect First Lady. 

Let’s Move! Website: http://www.letsmove.gov/

Voter Turnout- The Hispanic Vote, Crucial to Democrats?

Brent Wilkes talks about getting the Latino vote and trying to make more enthusiasm between the group. They talk about how the Latino vote could be important for the Democratic vote. However, the topic of immigration has not been focused enough and is causing the enthusiasm for voting to go down. If Hispanic and Latinos favor Democrats 65% to 22%, if Obama increases his focus to Latinos and Hispanics, could this be the swing vote  like they talk about?

More????? and the EPA

Apparently, the Republican Party is just now realizing how poor their choices of candidates for the bid for the 2012 presidency really are. Recently, the governor of New Jersey, Chris Christie has been getting an overwhelming amount of support and motivation to join in on the run for the 2012 President of the United States.

The Republican Party seems to think the more candidates they have the better chance they have of winning. In the end there is will only be one republican candidate, and one democratic candidate, meaning the capability of the nominees is all that matters not the amount. More is not always better. They already have eight strongly possible nominees for the republican candidate and none of them seem to have the capability of becoming our next president. 

First, there is Michele Bachman, who can’t seem to get her facts straight. In the past few months she has commented on the HPV Gardasil vaccine, claiming it can cause mental retardation. Where are the studies and proof that shows that Gardasil causes mental retardation? Just because a mother comes up to you and tells you her daughter is now mentally retarded after taking that vaccine does not mean there is a direct correlation between the two.

She has also made comments claiming the EPA is a job killing agency and that CO₂ in excess is not harmful. A naturally created gas can still be harmful. The fact that it is natural doesn’t necessarily mean anything. First off, she obviously does not know enough about this topic to be talking about it, seeing as she is not so subtly reading off her notes on the podium in the video below talking on the house floor. 

Rick Perry also seems to think that, if not every scientist agrees that humans are responsible for climate change and pollution, then it couldn’t possibly be true. Science is not always 100% and there is barely ever a consensus between all scientists, but that does not mean that something isn’t true. In a 2009 survey among almost 4000 scientists 97% of the climatologists agreed that humans played a role in global warming and pollution. Perry talks about how much his regulations have reduced air pollution and how the EPA’s laws and regulations just get in the way and kill jobs. First off, why does he deny that we pollute the air and have a part in climate change when by putting in regulations such as flexible permitting has he somewhat decreased his states Ozone emissions and cleaned the air? If he can do something about the problem, obviously we do play a role in pollution and climate change.  

Although he has undoubtedly decreased the Ozone emissions and emissions of toxic chemicals in Texas, denying that humans and companies have any part in it, is just ignorant.

Most of the republican candidates including Newt Gingrich, Herman Cain, Ron Paul, and Jon Huntsman, have followed in on the trend of bashing the EPA, claiming it is job killing. It is an ongoing trend to want to shut down it down or drastically change the way the EPA works.

Jon Huntsman wants to put aside environmental regulations until the economy improves. That is completely ridiculous, because who knows when the economy will improve. If we ignore a problem such as our environmental state it will not just go away. 

The views on the environmental protection agency and the environment itself, shows the ignorance of many of the candidates.

Who knows if adding Chris Christie will add to the ignorance of the republican candidates or make an actual challenge for Obama?

However, Obama shouldn’t concern himself just yet, due to the fact that if Christie does join the race, he will only have a little over 11 months to launch his campaign and raise money. However, he may appeal to the democrats who are not pleased with Obama seeing as some of Christies views are a little more liberal than most of the republican candidates. However, Christie holds a 54% approval rating in New Jersey and with all the criticism Obama is getting for his 44% disapproval rating; Will Christie really add any competition for Obama?  

We will just have to wait and see.

Articles associated with this post:

http://articles.cnn.com/2009-01-19/world/eco.globalwarmingsurvey_1_global-warming-climate-science-human-activity?_s=PM:WORLD

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/10/02/cain-christie%E2%80%99s-too-liberal/?iref=allsearch

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/30/us/politics/epa-is-perrys-favorite-target.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/18/us/politics/18epa.html?scp=1&sq=bashing%20epa%20is%20new%20theme%20in%20GOP%20race&st=cse
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/28/us/politics/gov-chris-christie-keeps-political-fans-guessing.html?scp=2&sq=wealthy%20influential%20leaning%20republican%20and%20pushing%20a%20christie%20bid%20for%20president&st=cse