Politics: and Islam is more than up for discussion despite the paper op-ed writers having a hissy fit. Via the Corner
|Damon Linker raises the alarm (TNR again, sub. req'd). He makes the point that under some circumstances, a citizen might have to weigh the theological beliefs of a political candidate against him. As an abstract point, that is correct. Linker may also be correct in warning that the beliefs associated with Mormonism could, under certain circumstances, pose a particular danger. But as he also points out, to debate these matters at a high level of abstraction obscures more than it reveals. And when we come down from those heights, we can see that Linker's article is just more secularist hysteria. E.g.:
Does Romney believe that the president of the Mormon Church is a genuine prophet of God? If so, how would he respond to a command from this prophet on matters of public policy? And, if his faith would require him to follow this hypothetical command, would it not be accurate to say that, under a President Romney, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints would truly be in charge of the country—with its leadership having final say on matters of right and wrong?|
Ellison already said Islam would be the guiding force behind his politics.
|"I'm not a religious leader ..." Ellison said inside Holy Redeemer Catholic Church in Detroit. "I'm not here to be a preacher. But in terms of political agenda items, my faith informs these things."|
I don't think either are religious nutjobs, but if you go at Romney, Ellison should be held up to the same sort of scrutiny.