Secular Elation

For some time now, campaigns for such local races as 2nd and 4th supervisor district seats and state assembly positions have been in full action. Every week a pamphlet from one of the candidates is left on my doorstep, and there are frequent campaign ads on our local station.

One thing has particularly irked me. Many of these candidates, besides the typical campaigning on the issues they stand for, have placed special importance on expressing their religiousness and support of traditional morals. For example, one of the 4th supervisor district candidates' pamphlet's includes a paragraph describing his committment to moral values and he describes how he attends a local church. A few other candidates have done the same thing.

What irritates me is that they place such significance on those points. The real issue is what they will do for us, the people, when they are elected to their respective positions. Sure, they will campaign by expressing their positions to the people, but why an emphasis on expressing their religion and morals?

When I think of it, it's only obvious. I live in a city that is overwhelmingly conservative Republican and is substantially religious. These candidates know that the people will be looking for these things, such as support for 'traditional moral values.' Of course, the candidates truly are religious, but it's a shame that it plays an integral part of their campaigning.

The problem is, what about those who do not believe in the same religious beliefs that these candidates believe in? Sure, I may vote for one candidate because of what he says he will do to protect local industry, but I roll my eyes whenever they spout their ubermoralist nonsense.

Article VI of our constitution bans religious tests for candidates running for office, but the people of the community are imposing their own religious test. Their test isn't official, but it is obvious that a person will vote for a candidate especially if that candidate professes his personal religious beliefs. I can guarantee you that, if a nonbeliever was running for office, s/he would definitely lose.

GaryP

I cxan empathize with your thoughts. The same is true in my city.

Also, a few years ago, the president of city council and one other council member, were attendees of the most right wing church in town.

The council president decided to hold the swearing in ceremonies for new members at his church! It was an official meeting of council.

The local paper actually questioned this practice. (They seem to have no such problems with creches on public property.)

Thankfully, both these guys are no longer office holders. However, the council continues to open meetings with prayer. They do it just before the meeting is called to order to avoid any messy legal problems.

On a related topic, the Columbus Dispatch publishes little biographical blurbs about the local candidates. They list age, political affiliation, marital status, # of children and , of course, religious affiliation.

Ab_Normal

I use phrases such as "family values" and "for the children" as filters to exclude candidates for consideration. I'm glad they're honest about their religious affiliations so I can pick the least-objectionable ones - because, of course, no candidate is about to say that they don't have an affiliation.

atheist_in_foxhole

There are actually quite a few state legislators (and a congressman or two) in states like WA and OR who don't claim a religious affiliation. But there aren't any who are openly atheist or agnostic. Yet.