Define regular attendance of church cause' a whole lot of you ain't showing up if the church across the road is any indication...beware public figures selling their brand of religion, fear it in fact...

I could care less about religion.  What a person does in his own space is his own thing.  People should vote for the best candidate based on their record and the way they conduct themselves.  What religion has to do with it should have no bearing on the election.
If you believe in god, that fine and dandy, if you don't that's fine and dandy as well.  I look at whether the candidate is truthful or trusting enough to deserve my vote.

jerry, I am with you on that 100%

jerry/corpus christi texas for once you make sense.
Rick, WS, NC could not agree more. I am always weary of people selling religion and used cars. Watch what a person does because their words are meant to be a distraction.

a whole lot of you ain't showing up if the church across the road is any indication -- Rick, WS, NC

Rick, that's because they are all at the mega-church mega-business industrial complex down the road from me.

Now I have watched a few of Joel Osteen's shows and he does make sense......

Go out there and be somebody, not somebodies statistic.

In other words, put down the TV remote, put down the chicken wings and budweiser, don't wait for the government to save your miserable butt; get out there and prove you are an adult and not a 10 year old....

He seems to be somebody liberals could learn a few lessons from......

Jerry - we agree at last.

Far worse than someone with no religion is someone who claims to be "Godly," but pays nothing but lip service to it, if that happens to sound like anyone we know in the White House.

Joel Osteen is as queer as a nine dollar bill, even though he screams antigay crapola. Typical relgious man on the right.

"He seems to be somebody liberals could learn a few lessons from...... "

Ooops - back to standard practices, I see.

If you have any doubt about the religous right coming unglued, i suggest you this past weekend's( 9 pages)article on where there support has gone.For me, i attend the Church of whats happening now every wednesday nite & all day sunday, my religion aint none your business, so lets keep it that way.

Another organization funneling propaganda to the First Read Clinton machine for their instant distribution.

There is no roll for religion in politics. Except for OH MY DEAR GOD TAKE THIS SINNER BUSH HOME TO JESUS!

TEC-Spring-Tx (Sent Tuesday, October 30, 2007 1:42 PM)
................
You spoke to soon, see his comment that follows...
Be more careful next time you think about giving him a compliment.

Best quote from the 9 page article:

When you mix politics with religion, you get politics.

Look where religion got us with Bush. Religion is your own business not the whole worlds.

The following is a roundtable of ideas of the GOP front runners and what they bring to the table:

Rudy brings his prostate and the remains of a 9-11 victim;
Mitt brings phony family values and his special religous underwear;
Thompson brings the latest DVD of Law & Order;
McCain brings some geritol.

Ah, yes, this is what the other side has to offer.

Jerry has put down the kool-aid. Suddenly...lucid posts! Thank you!

Rick, jerry, TEC -- ditto

jerry, I think your description (TV remote, chicken wings, bud) could fit a few conservatives too.  You have a lot of wisdom in some of your thoughts but you throw it way when you get divisive.

Improbable as it may seem, with regard to religion being a factor in politics, I actually agree (for thinfirst time) with Jerry!

Improbable as it may seem, with regard to religion being a factor in politics, I actually agree (for the first time) with Jerry!

Improbable as it may seem, with regard to religion being a factor in politics, I actually agree (for the first time) with Jerry!

Is anything that doesn't please you ever NOT propaganda?

And aren't you one of the non-lemmings that bought into Bush's ceaseless propaganda about Iraq?

Jerry,

For once you were doing okay.  Until you got to the Joel Osteen reference.  You said that liberals should learn something from him and go out and make something of themselves.  Does this mean all liberals should wait around until their daddy builds a mega-church and TV broadcast and gives it to them?  Honestly, Jerry, not the best example for your lesson of self-empowerment.

As a religious person, i believe that politics and religion should be separate. The Republicans are giving religion a bad image.

Hillary saved us on 9-11...she's my religion...

It seems that many have forgotten that this country was intended to be a secular state where policy is not directed by religious ideologies. Remember Jefferson's line about a "high wall separating church and state."  To those who endorse a Christian theocracy, be careful what you wish for as the policy direction may not be to your liking.  

On another note see Ron Paul tonight on Leno.  The only candidate I can see that makes any sense.

"There will always be good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. For good people to do evil things, that takes religion."

This is my first ever posting on msnbc/first read.

I have got in habit of expecting initial negative post from jerry/corpus christi. So much so that most of the time I don't even bother to read what he writes. Imagine my surprise when I saw a very sensible and a balanced post from him.

jerry, my view about you has suddenly changed. I am still wary but next time I will not outright ignore your post.

Polarization is an unavoidable consequence when religious beliefs are allowed to infiltrate politics and government. Lacking is a government “by the people and for the people”.  When religious organizations successfully leverage their influence, there is no common ground for all the people. Individuals that are seeking public office should have a poor regard for those who make an effort to impose their will.

If people dislike religion they are free to express their belief. However, do not think that history or the Constitution will back you up in this endeavor.  If America was not founded as a Christian nation, why were the very first two acts of Congress to print Bibles to convert American Indians and to establish that Congress be opened with a prayer before every session?  The Left would like you to believe that history and our perception of it began approximately in 1947.  Why don't you look back at the words and actions of the actual founders and not what revisionist historians have to say about them a century and half down the road.

In response to Pat in NY.....Hillary saving us....what a joke....Hillary is for Hillary....

Jerry - By golly there is hope for you, couldn't agree more. Glad to see you on board with the rest of us. Peace brother

I agree with Andrew to some degree.  People should not be flaunting their religion as a point to vote for someone.  I believe that there are many factors that make up a person's way of thinking; religion could be one of them like it is for me.  On one level, people use religion to connect with other people.  I have trouble believing that when it comes to the country that has a wide range of religions, one would focus on religion as a sole reason to vote for a person.  If you look at Harry Reid and Mitt Romney, they are both Mormon but don't agree on much.  They are most likely on opposites of many issues.  Would one vote for the other; unlikely at best I would think.  

RELIGION DOESTN'T BELONG IN POLITICS AND VICE VERSA. IF THE RULE APPLIES TO SEPARATE CHURCH/STATE AFFAIRS IT SHOULD APPLY HERE ALSO. WE'RE NOT LOOKING FOR SAINTS AMONG THE CRAP OF RUNNERS RUNNING FOR OFFICE. JUST SOMEBODY DECENT.

In History the secular power has always used religion
to control the populace, it seems that that lesson was used during the elections before 2006. The recent article on the value voters show that their power is weakening and for good reason, they do not speak for true believers. Remember when a king was coranated it was a church member who placed the crown on his head. Our fore fathers did not want a leader to also have to be beholden to the leaders of the church. It should still be the same today. Any church leader who suggests that they speak for god is a charlatan, any secular leader who uses their religion to seek and gain power is not a supporter of democracy. I think many people today see fundamentalism for what it is a fearfull reaction to change. I also think that many religious bigots see what is on television and take that as reality and see that the whole of our society as one big DESPERATE HOUSEWIFE SHOW. Television sometimes is a reflection of society but the fiction on TV today is just that, fiction. Jack Bauer is a fun story but no one saves the world at the last minute, reality is so much less interesting than the made up stories that keep us up at night. If you talk to your neigbors and families you see that they are just average americans, that is what makes up the bulk of our society, average americans. Paris and Britney are so much fun to watch, what famous human train wreak isn't but they are an aberration not the average. Religious leaders looking for attention have used the destruction of our social fabric as a shrill message throughout history, the childrens crusade is a very good example of that.

It always amazes me that liberals think they are the only ones with first amendment rights to freedom of speech. Christians have as much right to voice our opinions about politics and yes even run for office. I want to know if the man I intend to vote for is a man of character not like Bill Clinton who has no character. This country if you will study it for yourself and not believe what atheist tell you was founded on Christian principles. I hope this country will once again be a great country that says and believes "In God We Trust."

Richard in Idaho you hit the nail right on the head at 3:41.  "When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross." -- Sinclair Lewis

Go to godandstate.com if you are interested in seeing the candidates'stance on religion in politics. I think you will like what John Edwards has to say.

Separation of Church and state as our founding fathers intended, today religion IS part of politics and it should not be. Religion or the mention of religion should have no part in politics, yet today it is one of the major issues, this is wrong, the founder would be ashamed.

This is NOT a Christian Nation nor was it established as one, all a person needs to do is read the Constitution, it clearly states that religion has no place in government nor politics.

It sickens me that today it is such an issue when it should not be, the talk of religion in a government office should not be allowed to happen, nor prayer nor the disclosure of a government official's religious affiliation.

As I said, read the Constitution!

Whether it is a priest withholding communion, an Evangelistic Christian leader egotistically advocating their opinion is right, Osama bin Laden calling for jihad or any cleric setting themselves up as final authority it just doesn’t matter.  Whenever anyone with a myopic focus on a limited set of criteria uses their position of influence to advocate others follow their decisions in politics, there is significant reason for real concern.  As if al Qaeda isn’t proof enough, consider George W. Bush and the support he has manipulated from the Christian Right.  I won’t fault their sincere concern for honest issues but there is a ‘blindness’ that is a drastic problem.  First, it should be recognized that while a sociopathic personality is quite capable of impressively faking most anything they are literally incapable of being sincerely concerned for others, are totally self-indulgent, are without a conscience, have no guilt, will do/say whatever without hesitation, are grossly dishonest and just can’t possibly be a sincere Christian.  The enthusiasm created for Christians to support George W. Bush was based mainly on the issues of stem cell ethics, marriage sanctity and opposition to abortion rights.  To date Bush has responded with appointing a couple conservative judges, a veto of a stem cell bill, a lot of rhetoric and the stroking of a few Christian leaders (which has cost him nothing) to keep them ‘in the fold’.  Now in contrast, what has he and his administration done that would be considered non-Christian?  Let us consider just a few very serious items like: ignoring the warnings before ‘9/11’ when the administration was totally focused on Iraq (3000 dead and costing billions of dollars); falsely justifying attacking Iraq which was aimed at benefiting Special Interests and a select few (near 4000 Americans dead and 21000+ injured, 10s of thousands others killed and who knows how many injured, plus an estimated eventual trillion tax payers' dollars to be spent); prematurely pulling resources from Afghanistan to attack Iraq and thereby allowing the Taliban and al Qaeda to regroup and continue (unknown additional deaths and costs, with much more to come); and the constant gross dishonesty and arrogant self-indulgence as documented in the partial list that follows (subtly always neglecting the average American and real responsibilities).  And for an insight into the Bush sociopathic personality, consider all of the failures experienced and the substantial costs incurred and all without once ever seeing any remorse, hearing an apology, seeing a change in the arrogant style or witnessing a change in the aggressive self-indulgent direction.  
The ‘blindness’ is found in being led by others who are egotistically consumed with attention to their maybe important but limited concerns while neglecting to objectively and conscientiously see and responsibly consider the total picture.  Whether someone is a Bush supporter or a radical follower of bin Laden, the problem is the same.  We are all challenged to simply do our own thinking and objectively come to our own decisions, ideally with our biases being set aside enough to avoid being manipulated.  I am personally afraid that the next time around (November 2008) it may happen again, as there are a couple of candidates aggressively competing just for the right to take over from Bush and to be the next ‘puppet’.  And of course, there are those powerful and extremely wealthy few who are ready to do everything in their substantial power to back and support their chosen ‘puppet’, including to again overtly and covertly manipulate public opinion and insure ‘more of the same’.  Hopefully the individual voter is actually smarter this time around.

[The gross dishonesty of the Bush administration, regrettably fully backed by the Republican Party, is totally offensive and then the arrogance just ‘adds insult to injury’.  Consider the following Bush administration’s positions (if you know the details, you know the boldness of the deception and then the arrogance in the repetition tells the real story): * tax cuts for the wealthy benefit the economy;  * warnings before ‘9/11’ weren’t specific enough; * attacking Iraq was justified; * our troops needed to find WMD and to get Iraqi prisoners to confess; * there is a real coalition sharing the costs and casualties in the Iraq War; * the Iraq War didn’t take away from the effort and focus on the War on Terror in Afghanistan; * the Iraq War has always been part of the War on Terror; * importing American drugs back into the USA is unsafe; * Global Warming wasn’t a problem; * ‘private accounts’ will solve the Social Security problems; * policies benefiting ‘big money’ and encouraging the exportation of American jobs and taxes doesn’t hurt the average worker; * the growing deficit and balance of trade deficit aren’t problems affecting the economy; * energy companies need government incentives and tax breaks even though they are making humongous profits; * there isn’t any fault with giving no-bid contracts and favored treatment to Halliburton, the defense contractors and others; * turning our port security over to Dubai Ports wouldn’t be a problem; * the administration had no part in the disclosure of the CIA agent's identity; * the squelching of the ‘wiretapping without a court order’ story in an election year was done for security and not political reasons; * the heightened warnings of terrorists attacks before our elections and then disappearing afterward, wasn’t using government to manipulate public opinion; * Homeland Security has achieved significant advances and hasn’t wasted tax payers money; * America is safer and not actually worse off today because of the Bush administration’s actions * the administration’s response after hurricane Katrina wasn’t just apathetic at best; * Iraq hasn’t generated into a civil war; * by next summer bringing home less than the number of troops sent over in the surge is a reduction; * the Iraqis are making progress and not just pursuing their sectarian and individual interests; * the Bush administration fairly represents all of us and is not just focused on a private agenda benefiting Special Interests and a select few who are significant Bush supporters and who provide overt and covert public opinion manipulation; * even considering all of these things and the necessary contradiction of a sociopathic personality, President Bush is strong on Christian values; * the loss of international prestige, the costs of nearly 4,000 Americans dead, 21,000+ injured and the estimate that a trillion dollars will be spent is really justified even when 190,000 weapons disappear, $4 million a day in Iraqi oil money is diverted, Iraqi police readily fire on American soldiers, Iraqis are fighting Iraqis,,;  * faulting the ‘moveon.org’ for their ‘General Betray-us’ ad wasn’t just the often used tactic of ‘aggressively attacking the critic to avoid answering the criticism’; * having the Bush sponsored seminar on Global Warming, with the agenda being to discuss concerns, then go home to think about everything and decide what you can do without anything being binding, is a responsible approach and not just camouflage for continuing to do nothing; * and on and on as these few items are only a small sampling.]

"It always amazes me that liberals think they are the only ones with first amendment rights to freedom of speech. Christians have as much right to voice our opinions about politics and yes even run for office. I want to know if the man I intend to vote for is a man of character not like Bill Clinton who has no character."

Joe Sapp Oklahoma (Sent Tuesday, October 30, 2007 4:22 PM)

Not all who have found religion possess character. And not all who choose not to believe lack it. I believe that Christians have as much right to freedom of speech as I do, but that doesn't obligate me to respect you for using religion to choose your politicians.

Thanks REG,
You are so precise in all your points, this is the reason many see the light of day. Licoln was right "you can fool all of the people some of the time, but not all of them all of the time". Yes the fore fathers used christian principles to establish this great nation but they also put up the wall of seperation of church and state. With so many different religious denominations in our country, what one would you theocrats like to be the state sponsered religion? Most likly yours, that is why there is the wall, yours is not mine.

The pro-life - capital punishment advocates - christian leadership who declared war on a country which posed no threat to them and then proceeded to profit off the humanitarian crisis created.  

The advocates of teaching our children intelligent design over evolution because it is "the truth" (or so they have decided) - yet the same person makes his money off of fossil fuels.

This Christian leaders will run to save the life of a person in a vegitative state whose name they can't even pronounce while presiding over the most death penalties of any governor in Texas with a justice system that has proven highly fallible now, with DNA testing.  

A Christian leader who vacations - another who buys 2,000 dollar shoes while an entire American city drowns and burns and thousands of people go with it - but they are compassionate.

A christian administration who advocates torture even though jesus was apparently tortured to death.  

He's tough on crime except when it happens within his own administration and amongst his own wealthy friends and then it is pardon city - pardons for the elite wealthy, treasonous, double agents but death for the poor, black, accused (not necessarily guilty) of being murderers on death row.

The compassionate Christian who vacations more at his texas ranch then works - and won't take the time to answer a question for a morning mother of a fallen soldier sleeping in a ditch outside his ranch.

The compassionate Christian leader who can't make it to the funeral of one fallen soldier during his entire presidency, a first for any president, not to mention a war time president but he sure made it to the funeral of his old pal Kenny Boy who presided over the country's largest corporate scandal stealing the hard earned retirement money and investments off of millions of hard working middle class americans who got NO compensation.  

If that is being Christian and this is what religion does for people, I'm proud to say, that I am not religious.

CitizenJ: '..."There will always be good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. For good people to do evil things, that takes religion."...'

...or a 'War on Terror'
Good point, CitizenJ

Well of course they must be approved, you are part of MSNBC, right - which is part of the mainstream media, right?  The laughing stock of the American people - a few years ago - only few people thought the mainstream media was a joke, these days more the 50 percent know what pathetic journalism and how seriously you all take your oaths - which is why your faces, names and careers will soon hit the disgraceful bottom of the barrell and each and everyone of you will be a target for public humiliation.  Pathetic - this entire corporation, industry and every single pathetic person who works for such a disgraceful enterprise.  Seriously - whoever is reading this - have some freakin integrity and do something about the censoring news, the blatant twisting of truths, distortion, the lack of coverage regarding important information, the lack of investigative journalism - each and every one of you - from the ceo to the camera man and website editors are all supporting somethng that has disgraced this country and all of it's people and you will be shamed and humiliated if you aren't already - count on it.  

This is your mind on Kool-Aid:

'...Hillary saved us on 9-11...she's my religion...
pat huntington ny...'

Don't drink the Kool-Aid !!
It would be better to join the Church of the Gooey Death

To all those who hope that repeating a lie enough times will convince everyone into believing it, I challenge you to find the words "separation of church and state" in the Constitution.  "Separation of church and state" was written by Thomas Jefferson in a letter to a southern Baptist as a means of assuring them that the federal government would not establish a state "denomination" as had happened in England with the Episcopal church.  When the founders use the term "religion" they mean "Christianity."  It never crossed their minds that any other religion would be vying for our national attention in this country.  Read the writings of the founders and the legislation they passed.  Don't rely on modern day historians to tell you what the founders said.  Go straight to the source.  

The founders held church services every Sunday on the floor of the house of Congress. Now, I understand that a fair number of people dislike or disapprove of Christianity having an influence on public affairs, but this is not as it had always been.  

I believe people with anti-religious sentiments have a right to speak their mind, but I am irritated by the fact that they try to use as evidence the founders themselves by spreading falsehoods about the founders words and actions.  The founders (99% anyway) were decidedly Christian, not deists as many would like you to believe.  And they very much intended their religion to permeate all aspects of public life.

I only want to support true Christian candidates as this is what the founders intended in order for our society to endure.  

"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people.  It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." -- James Madison (author of the Constitution)

"We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it.  We have staked the future of all of our political institutions...upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves to the Ten Commandments of God." -- James Madison (author of the Constitution)

I hear alot of statements about the separation of church and state.  We are told that the founding fathers were either diest or non religious.  I think John Adams would qualify to expound on the intendended purpose of the Bill of Rights Amendment.  He says "We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion... Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people.  It is wholly inadequate to the govenment of any other."   Noah Webster, one of the first who called for the Constitutional Convention and was personally responsible for specific wording in the Constitution, wrote in a textbook he authored for public shcools, "All the miseries and evils which men suffer from vice, crime, ambition, injustice, opression, slavery, and war, proceed from their despising or neglecting the precepts contained in the Bible."  Sounds like their religion played part in their politics to me and I am personally glad they did.

I'd rather have a commander in chief who follows the 10 commandments(unlike the Clintons)than some one who puts on a show to win over everybody for a vote which means nothing in an election until a state's electoral votes are at a stale mate.  At which point they turn to the votes of people of that particular state.  Whatever happened to "We The People."

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):