My good buddy BrianR has a policy that he does not involve himself in the religious debates that explode at Townhall from time to time. He doesn't see where they are usually profitable, and he sees them as oftentimes being a distraction from larger political issues. I can respect that position, and the debate at Mike Gallagher's thread about Mitt Romney was a perfect example of what BrianR happens to have articulated in the past. The thread quickly devolved from Mike saying that he didn't particularly appreciate being called a bigot for saying that Romney's LDS faith was a sticking point for him, into a debate about the theology of the LDS church.

And that was a shame, because the larger point that Gallagher was trying to make was important in my view. It is of great import to know what type of religious beliefs a man holds, or how he applies that faith in his life when deciding on a presidential nominee. And using that type of criteria to help make a decision is, in my opinion, absoultely valid and does not mean that you are some type of bigot.

You see, the type of religious beliefs a man holds goes to the very heart of that man. A person's religious faith will, or at least should, be a defining part of his character. What he believes will impact the way a person lives his personal life, and it will impact the political choices and positions of politicians. Your religious faith is supposed to inform not just your religious life, but all aspects of your life...including your worldview.

And that is why individual voters are justified in applying their own religious tests to the people that we are being asked to give our votes to. People are usually not going to vote for people that have nothing in common with them, and are especially unlikely to vote for people who hold religious views that are at odds with theirs. That is the very reason that many evangelical Christians are uncomfortable supporting Mitt Romney, why conservative Catholics are squeamish about Guiliani, and why Christians, Catholics, and Mormons alike are opposed on general principle to supporting Muslims who may run for high office. They are opposed not because of hatred, but because of the fact that they cannot reconcile voting for someone whose religious beliefs are contrary to theirs; they simply canot ignore their religious compass and support someone they are not in tune with.

And truthfully, I have no problem with that; as a matter of fact I completely understand that sentiment, because I share it. I would have great problems if the government applied a religious test to office seekers, but I have no qualms about individuals applying their own religious tests to candidates. Personally, I would have a hard time voting for Romney not just because of his policy flip-flops, but because of his religious beliefs. I have been a Mormon, and while some of the best people I have ever met have been Mormons, that does not change the basic tenets of the LDS church. And because of those tenets, I would have to question the loyalty of the office seeker...is he totally committed to serving the country, or does his loyalty to the LDS faith trump all? It is the same question I would ask of a Muslim: are you committed to upholding the Constitution as you swore to do, or is your first and greatest loyalty to Muhammed the Prophet and his god? These are legitimate questions, and voters should not feel embarassed or ashamed to ask them of their candidates.

We are all different, we all have different likes, dislikes, beliefs, and positions. We have to feel free to make our judgements based on all the available information we have, and we should not be subjected to hectoring or name calling for using that information to make choices. I shouldn't have to justify or explain my giving or wthholding support to anyone; and I definitely should not be called a bigot for not supporting one candidate or the other.

I know that BrianR probably won't be commenting on this, as per the usual...although I would dearly love to get his take on this issue. But I can respect it if he doesn't want to talk about it and will accept his decision if he chooses to stay out of it. I just wish that others could give the same type of respect to those that see the linkage between a person's religious beliefs and their political lives. It is important to many of those trying to make a choice in this...and other...elections.

Because whether you believe it or not there is something that will give you more insight on a person than any number of speeches, policy reports, or media interviews. If you really want to make a complete decision on the quality of candidates, you have to look deep. You have to look at the soul of a man.