There are a couple of things plaguing me at the moment about two potential Republican nominees: Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney.
As loyal readers will know I detest Mike Huckabee for several reasons, number one being his cutting of higher education funding for high school students in Arkansas. Number two on my list of Huck pet peeves is the fact that he’s a Baptist minister turned politician for reasons set out in this article in the Washington Post today. Robinson says it better than I could but number one on this list is the potential for Huck to take away a woman’s right to choose reproductive options. No way, no how, uh uh.
Mitt Romney, on the other hand, has crept onto my shit list this week for similar reasons: religion. I know I’m way late on this but I’m talking about his recent faith speech in which he said, “Freedom requires religion, just as religion requires freedom.” What a load of bollocks. If anything religion and freedom mix like oil and water. Most religions–in this case Romney is probably referring to Christianity–are very prescriptive on what you can and cannot do. Take the example of Huckabee potentially taking away a woman’s right to choose: I’d say that’s pretty un-free. Islam too, as we’ve all seen, can be very freedom hindering.
On the flip side, religion can have some free will. One usually chooses to follow a religion. Christianity, for example, teaches that God gave humans free will with which to choose to follow its teachings. The problem, though, is that I just don’t see religion requiring freedom. You can have freedom to express yourself through a religion as the first amendment in American guarantees but apart from that, they are not reliant upon one another as Romney implies. It is simply rhetoric to get him more votes. This article on Washington Post sums it all up very well.
So, apologies for the touchy subject today and for being away for so long. At least I’ve announced my return with a bang!