Religion in politics
Since George W. Bush became president, his administration buriedthe word moderation in such a deep hole that nobody can even hearthe echo.
For Americans, a solution that lies in between two extremes hasdisappeared. After the tragic events of Sept. 11, people of thiscountry had to decide to be either “with us or with theterrorists.”
As we near the eve of the presidential election, the sameextreme language appears through a religious-political discourse.What other ideal moment would Bush choose if not this one when 69percent of evangelicals say they want Bush for the next four yearsand 60 percent of committed evangelicals say their religiousorientation influences their voting decision?
Bush is playing all his cards to make his victory possible, evenif it takes religion. It is, of course, politically convenient forBush to appeal to the religious voters this year, considering thevariety of moral issues dominating the campaign. Issues such asabortion, embryonic stem cell research and gay marriage are notonly the dividing lines between Democrats and Republicans, but alsoamong voters.
But it is politically incorrect to exploit religion in apolitical discourse to test Americans vulnerability in a time ofprofound electoral indecisiveness.
So Bush and the Catholic Church in particular seem to havesigned a treaty called “Let’s get rid of the moderatethinkers to spread extremism.”
Catholic Church officials like Archbishop Charles Chaput ofDenver deliver their own version of a good sermon by convincingyoung Catholics to vote for Bush because voting Democrat would beconsidered a sin that requires confession.
While religious officials like Chaput play their role of goodSamaritans, Bush ingenuously believes God is on his side. In theState of the Union address in 2003, he said, “With the mightof God on our side, we will triumph over Iraq. God will watch overour troops and grant us a victory over the threat of Saddam’sarmy.” A breathtaking statement.
Since when has any religion taught believers that God can be onwhoever’s side to win a war? Since when can any God accept awar and its terms? Bush has used religious rhetoric in a derogatoryway to justify an unjustifiable war.
The America of the 21st century is proceeding backward in termsof open-mindedness. In 1960, the only Catholic president, John F.Kennedy, won the election with the support of 78 percent ofCatholic votes. Americans elected a Catholic president who believedthat his duty was to serve his people and to keep the church asunobtrusive as possible.
Forty-four years later, the church invades voters’decision and political discussion. A country that was founded inthe separation of church and state now sees the religiousinstitution and Bush linked in a marriage of convenience.
And in this wave of political religiousness, even the filmindustry adds its contribution. The documentary movie George W.Bush: Faith in the White House, directed by David Balsiger,describes the Bush’s presidency as the “mostfaith-based administration in American history.” Very true,considering how many times Bush uses religion to justify hisactions.
But the movie brings disputable arguments when it affirms,”His [Bush’s] religious belief brings personal peaceand clarity in a time of terrorism and chaos across theworld.” Mr. Balsiger, who is going to spread your optimisticmessage to the 13,000 Iraqis who already lost their lives incombat? And to the lost U.S. troops in the Iraq war? To thekidnapped? The wounded? I really wonder if they’reexperiencing the “personal peace” you’re talkingabout.
But Balsiger continues his religious delirium when hefatalistically pronounced his stand on God’s will on aninterview with National Public Radio. “God’s will isusually God’s will. If he [Bush] loses the election, it wouldbe God’s will. If he wins the election, it would beGod’s will.” Evidently, Balsiger places God’swill before the people’s will in a democratic society wherethe citizens make their government during elections.
Bush is no different than Balsiger when he says that God wantshim to be president, that his goal is to spread democracy byoccupying foreign land with military forces.
It has now become common sense to believe that religion inextreme terms can be threatening and disturbing, especially inpolitics. This administration needs to unravel the intricacy thispolitical discourse has reached to liberate some moderate thoughtsand heal a political system that is gradually decaying.
Ivana Corsale is a junior journalism and internationalstudies double major. She may be contacted [email protected].
