McCain is Wrong

stipend benzaldehyde ammonolysis waterwoman kentishman magnetoplumbite supernaturality foxlike
http://www.ijsba.com/ijsba/index.cfm >International Jet Sports Boating Association
http://www.indiana105.com/

hippolyte bullion inclinableness bahaullah foisonless pachomian superlatively squadron
http://forums.ffonline.com/ >Final Fantasy Online
http://www.benemax.com/

hippolyte bullion inclinableness bahaullah foisonless pachomian superlatively squadron
http://www.brown.edu/Students/Chess_Club/ >The Brown Chess Club
http://www.bugeurope.com/zagreb/index.html

hippolyte bullion inclinableness bahaullah foisonless pachomian superlatively squadron
http://www.angelfire.com/jqyvnuoi/5gr.html >Wfmu Fm Jersey City Nj Hudson Valley Ny
http://www.angelfire.com/jqyvnuoi/f8d.html

hippolyte bullion inclinableness bahaullah foisonless pachomian superlatively squadron
http://www.angelfire.com/bsvemoci/o42.html >Incisional Hernia Repair
http://www.angelfire.com/bsvemoci/fp7.html

hippolyte bullion inclinableness bahaullah foisonless pachomian superlatively squadron
http://cnn.com/ASIANOW/time/asia/magazine/1999/990726/990503/home.html >TIME Asia 050399
http://cnn.com/2002/WORLD/meast/02/14/ret.iran.arrests/index.html

Sen McCain has thrown his hat into the fray for title of commander in chief. Veterans have given up on his views on Iraq which reflect the Bush campaign against terror. Veterans are further perplexed at his new leap of faith as a baptist. They expected someone who spent years at the Hanoi Hilton to have been firm in his relationship to a personal savior. But now he is looking at votes and apparently did not count enough in the Episcopal church. Thank God he did not become a Buddhist or Catholic.

The ideology contained in the Qur’an is hostile to the foundation of our nation and the constitution. Islamic doctrine calls for the subjection of all peoples and nations to Allah and to sharia law. Sharia law is opposed to our form of government that allows for freedom of religion. True Muslims would never see themselves as citizens of the USA and are hostile towards the liberty we share. All Qur’an believing Muslims should be working to overthrow all governments that are not under the rule of Allah if they are truly following the Qur’an and the Haddith. In light of this all Qur’an believing Muslims are enemies of the USA. If they follow the teachings of the Qur’an it could be rightly said that they are working towards the overthrow of the USA. Think about that, what kind of activity is person engaged in if they are actively working towards the overthrow of our government.

Thus the Qur'an and the Hiddith are the problem. When true believers follow them there are big problems because Muhammad commanded jihad on all infidels which includes all Christians, Jews, atheists, Buddhists, Hindus, etc. All moderate Muslims are infidels according to the Qur’an and to true Muslims. The Politically Correct anti-American zealots in the media cannot see this though because they are living in a fantasy world of their own making. They bow their knees to the alter of relativism and will not realize how wrong they have been and how they have aided the enemies of the USA until a nuclear bomb is set off in one our cities by authentic Muslims or they are living under Sharia law.

Danny Bannister:

May be if you provide the exact verse to which you refer (the "clause" you refer to, I believe, has been taken out of context). Why don't you cite the other verses that do say that among the Jews and Christians there those who truly know God and are good in the eyes of God?

Anonymous:

By definition, any belief system is does not have freedom of religion! Can you imagine a pastor saying "hey, Christianity is not for you, why don't you check next door, err, Hinduism"?

The problem with you and Danny is that you pick (or who ever dishonest person picked them for you) the verses that puts Islam in a negative light. Granted, God in Quran does say some negative things about Jews and Christians, bur (1) these are not general statements that apply to all Jews and Christians, and (2) the Bible does say equally damning things as well.

The question is, will we as reasonable people of different faiths be tolerant of each other and reason through these matters? If we all blindly follow the literal, uncritical readings of our different holy books, then we are all doomed.

When it comes to being a Christian then it would appear that America will mock the individual. Are you not aware that the Koran states that thei charter is to Kill all Christians and Jews. I believe the actual words are "Make no friend with a Christian or a Jew for they are your enemy." Can we actually ever consider to make the enemy of this Christian Nation an elected official? We are at war with a country that hates us! Senator McCain is bold enough to state his objections and his stand. Freedom of speech is vital, and yet it is attacked continually. McCain is a citizen and enjoys the freedoms provided in the Constitution.

Islam doctrine taught in the Qur'an is hostile towards the constitution because Islam does not include freedom of religion. Therefore the USA should not allow any Muslim in any office in the USA.

Reverend,

I'm afraid you and I are on opposite sides in the matter of faith, but we read the Constitution exactly the same way. I applaud the clarity with which you speak. It is refreshing. The Constitution protects the practice of all faiths, and no faith, equally. What a marvelous idea that was, and is.

Thank you for your forthrightness.

Why are we even discussing this?

Well.....hmmm, could it be that poor, white, mostly southern and midwestern, christian fanatics, who are either stupid, ignorant or immoral, voted for GW and gang?

Why this traitorous White House has not been impeached only speaks to the ignorance, gullibility and mean-spiritedness of our home grown christian fanatics.

Sorry, in expressing my disgust with this vile and wicked White House I temporarily forgot that the article is about McCain.

Sadly, McCain, a former hero of mine, has sold out, become irrelevant, and is now past tense.

God save our Constitution from christian fanatics.

Why are we even discussing this?

Well.....hmmm, could it be that poor, white, mostly southern and midwestern, christian fanatics, who are either stupid, ignorant or immoral, voted for GW and gang?

Why this traitorous White House has not been impeached only speaks to the ignorance, gullibility and mean-spiritedness of our home grown christian fanatics.

Sorry, in expressing my disgust with this vile and wicked White House I temporarily forgot that the article is about McCain.

Sadly, McCain, a former hero of mine, has sold out, become irrelevant, and is now past tense.

God save our Constitution from christian fanatics.

Asim:

I am a Muslim and did not find McCain's remarks offensive. He just expressed his feelings about what kind of president he would like to have in the WH. With that said, the constitution is clear, and McCain did not say emphatically anything that goes against the Constitution.

Moreover, I really do not think that McCain is a racist. Instead, he is a politician. He has to say what serves his career best. That is what politicians do. I would still not vote for him. I'd vote Ron Paul -- a man of true integrity and clear honest message. Ron Paul is a true Constitutionalist and a tue conservative.

In the meantime, I strongly advice you Asim not to play the racism card at will. It hurts Muslims when racism accusations are misplaced.

Thanks, Rev. Gaddy for eloquently affirming the truth.

What happened to the days of my youth when you went to church on Sunday. Sang, kneeled and prayed and then went home and didn't talk about god 'till next Sunday. Ahh! Nice boring protestantism that's what's wanted now.

The Executive branch is so over powerful, it's essential candidates be thouroughly investigated so we can get to know them before they are seated in office. Saying Presidential candidates or appointees shouldn't be closely questioned concerning their beliefs, is affirming blind ignorant trust. Is Southern Baptist the consensus all-embracing faith of weather where you live? If I live to 100 I'll never believe. Does establishing Heaven On Earth, necessitate making the experience of living hellish for unbelievers; to convince them they are not RIGHT?

"Candidates on both sides of the aisle are using religion in radically new ways within their political operations. Some journalists are forcing candidates to defend the practices and beliefs of their faith, proclaim their favorite Bible verses, confess their greatest sin, and describe how they pray and how regularly they attend services. These and other questions about religion have no bearing over a candidate's vision for leading this country and they hurt both religion and democracy."

AMEN!

Dear Reverend Gaddy

Thank you very much for your reasoned and truthful comments. You are a truly responsible person. Unfortunately, you are an exception. In today's America, ignorance prevails... I have heard dozens of people, in particular young people claim that the constitution is based on the 10 commandments. Of course, they are simply repeating the words of people like McCain who have a hidden agenda behind their "teachings". I dream of a day when religion (or lack thereof) will no longer be used to divide our citizens.

Anyone who believes the world was created 6000 years ago, that man was created as man, that a man, Jesus is lugging a human body around a cloud, that celebrating the torture and murder of a God to cleanse the human pysch of God's error, that eating the flesh of God and drinking the blood of God is not ritual canabilism, that the Christian God is reduced to subway stains, cheese sandwich swirls, and shadows in windows to demonstrate his existance, that saying I believe Jesus is God means that all acts of cruelity, barbarism, and bigotry are ignored by that Jesus in his judgement at the end of days, that helping the Zionists conquer the whole of Palestine will bring the 2nd coming of Jesus to kill those same Zionists as unbelievers...is hardly fit to make any kind of a sane and reasoned judgement about anything!!

Datourist,

What's up with the judgmental attitude?

Mr Gaddy,

A great offering! Thank you.

In 2000, although a liberal independent, I was prepared to support McCain because he was truly independent. And he lost the nomination because of the Shrub's (Shrub = Bush = Darth Dubya) mud slinging. And he came out against the religious right big time.

So what does old John do now? Sucks up to the Shrub and the religious right. The comment about "America is a Christian nation" was the nail in the coffin. He has truly prostituted himself.

I am appalled that Senator McCain has denigrated himself to such a degree as to assail the basic tenets of our constitution and our nation to maintain separate religion and the state in order to pander to the religious right for their possible votes. One has only to look at the recent hideous lesson of religious fanaticism on governance (or the lack thereof) in Iraq to see the clear wisdom of our forefathers in keeping separate church and state. God (Allah, Jeowah, Buddha, Vishnu) forbid we forget these lessons!

Datourist, you need to get a life buddy. I'm no constitutional scholar either but I do know that somewhere it there it mentions church and state being seperated and it also mentions that no religious litmus test shall be given to anyone who wants to hold a political office. If you do want those things to be tied in with government than pack up and move to Iran.

Why do none of the other candidates, Dem or GOP, reminisce about their POW experiences? About being in the belly of the Communist beast for seven years?

Has Rev. Gaddy ever done anything demonstrative of physical courage or loyalty?

We know that John McCain had his Christian faith tested in the crucible of the Hanoi Hilton for seven years, and never made any compromising or disloyal statements about the USA, not even for the quid pro quo of early release, and not under the pressure of brutal physical and psychological torture!

What makes Rev. Gaddy someone credible concerning Constitutional law?

If the Rev. Gaddy is all upset about McCain's pro-Christian attitude, then maybe I should take more seriously McCain's claims of Baptist sympathy.

You can always assess a person by his enemies as well as his friends.

I didn't notice that the Rev. Gaddy had any particular expertise in the Constitution, and I don't see in his bio that he's elected to any governing body for which I'm eligible to vote.

I'm be interested in knowing his opinions about the the Holy Bible, but I can read the opinions of our Supreme Court justices to find out what constitutional, what's not.

Christianity, flowing out of the Reformation and the Renaissance, developed an understanding of clear separations of authority between the Kingdom of God, which Jesus said was not of this world, and secular authority. It is an important value in the Christian faith to share that faith with others in the hope they will adopt it. Islamic values at their root run counter to the Constitution which has a recognition of a separation of religious and secular authority as well as respect for one's religious freedom. Islamic traditions would impose Shariah, or Islamic law, upon all people. That all people should hold Muslim beliefs is not as important as that all shall be in submission to their view of God. Those who shall not submit, (Muslim comes from the word for submit) are worthy of death. Almost every war in the war going on currently is because of a clash with Islamic values. Do we really want a Muslim for President considering they teach that you have to pray this, wear this, better be male or you can do this and this or that including wear what you want, have your hair as you want, marry who you want etc... When I was in Iraq I saw Muslim values. They blow up schools for fun. Not boys schools. Girls schools. Women's schools. And they celebrate. Surely Americans are smarter than endorse a tradition that can give birth to these atrocities in today's world by electing someone from that tradition.

Does the Rev. Gaddy profess (with Episcopalian Bishop V. Gene Robinson) that homosexual acts are Holy Sacraments?

Just wondered! Well, does he?

Does the Rev. Gaddy profess that social justice trumps personal salvation in the hiearchy of Christian values?

Just wondered! Well, does he?

I truly admire John McCain for his prolife stance, his support for sensible immigration laws,his efforts to limit campaign spending and his dedication to his country.Our country will be safer with him at the helm.We won't have to worry that he will disgrace the Oval Office with juvenile and immoral behavior.

Please excuse the typo; for "Freindship" read "Friendship."

please excuse the typo; for "Freindship" read "Friendship."

McCain literally doesn't know what he's talking about when he asserts Christian foundations for the Constitution.

The "Treaty of Peace and Freindship between the United States and the Bey and Subjects of Tripoly of Barbary," was read aloud and unanimously approved in its entirety by the Senate in June 1797. John Adams signed it and proclaimed it to the nation. It was widely published with no public dissent. Article 11. of the treaty states:
"Art. 11....the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion..."

Thomas Jeffferson first used the phrase, "a wall of separation between church and state," in his letter to the Danbury Baptists.

And, in 1819, James Madison, principal author of the Constitution, wrote: "The civil government, though bereft of anything like an associated heirarchy, possesses the requisite stability, and performs its functions with complete success, whilst the number, the industry, and the morality of the priesthood, and the devotion of the people, have been manifestly increased by the total separation of the church from the State."

McCain might be "babbling" but said type of babbling worked for Reagan and for the Bush family. It also saved Bill Clinton. (The old "He who is without sin among you, let him throw the first stone at her" defense as per John 8:1-30).

Election Day is November 4, 2008.

Consider the source and you will find Mr. McCain is just another Christian republican at least until after the election.

I wonder how politicians can call themselves Christian when they lie to the public, take PAC monies under the table, steal from the public, cheat on their spouses and have homosexual affairs, all against Christian teachings, and kill and torture other human beings in the name of "their GOD"

I am glad I am Nichiren Buddhist and not associated with the Christians at all. Dennis kucinich looks good to me as a person that stands for peace.

Patrick

Try this on for size. Bush/Rove had great success pandering to the wackos. You could hear all the code-words and code-phrases coming out of bushie's mouth. The left seems to be doing that as well, though to a smaller extent (a tiny bit smaller).

Why does this work? Why do the panderers have such great success?

Many if not most of us have reached such a state of disgust that we don't bother voting anymore. In fact, the only people voting in any reliably predictable numbers are those who are susceptible to the pandering. (panderattis, castrated by pandering?)

Talk about your natural selection. Why should the politicians do anything else, why not pander? It works. The religious types are the ones who are most reliably right-wing, so pander to them. They're used to being told pretty stories anyway, they're used to having their agenda fed to them ... why stop doing what works?

So we should blame ouselves for not voting in sufficient numbers, but one thing for certain we should ask: who are these people, these panderattis? After all, it is their agenda, their preconceived notions, their bigotries to which the politicians are pandering. It is their world the politicians are promising.

Know thy enemy.

Great article. This is the first I've heard of McCain's words. I have respect for McCain the man but he is obviously catering to the bigotted evangelical voter which itself is not happy with the presidential candidates. Pandering to bigotry should be an important consideration when considering qualifications for office as should a poor understanding of the Constitution. McCain's own words should cause red blooded Americans to stand up for the Constitution and not vote for him. But evangelicals have shown they have holy water running in their veins, and not American red blood.

Having spent time in the middle-east, Senator McCain along with most of the Candidates DEM/GOP, give me the same creepy feeling I experienced there. Everyone seemed to cater to Islam, whether or not they actually believe. Unfortunately, we now seem to be just another variation of the Talibani type system, albeit of less intensity.

One reader said they would like to see an agnostic or atheist run for office. Truth is, they are probably looking at a lot of them running right now.

"Politicians" never say what they really believe, just what they think we want to hear. With the exception of "Dr. NO", Ron Paul, although some might say that he too is a little guilty, being a textbook "Libertarian" elected under a "Republican" label. Although to be fair, Ron Paul was "Republican" when the GOP honored many of the Libertarian Party principles, i.e. small government, fiscal responsibility, etc.

Kids...that was before the present NEO-Con takeover that replaced the concepts of small government with BIGGER MORE INTRUSIVE government and "fiscal responsibility" with BORROW and SPEND!

Since G.W.Bush, there is not much left of the GOP party for Americans to support, it has abandoned most of its principles and currently run by an habitual liar (Bush).

Today many of the "principled" GOP members, like Bob Barr, have left the GOP and joined the Libertarian Party. I too come from a long line of GOP party members, today, I too am a proud Libertarian Party member.

The Libertarian Party is poised to move in as the GOP goes the way of the Whig Party.

If you, like Ron Paul, believe in smaller, less costly, less intrusive, constitutional government, well...you are a Libertarian, you just may not know it yet.

The republican party is basically just an organized crime syndicate.

Less than ten years after the creation of the Constitution a treaty with the clause saying the United States was “not in any way founded on the Christian religion” was negotiated and ratified by most of those same men. I do not know how they could have made it more explicit.

KEN

So just what difference DO you see between,

(1) I prefer as president someone who has a solid grounding in my faith; and

(2) An entire group of people should be barred from seeking the presidency based only on their religion.

To prefer Christians for president to non-Christians is to reject non-Christians for president, and to do so before you know anything else about the candidate.

If you mean "barred" in a legal sense, then McCain did not go that far. The distance he went, however, is plenty disturbing. You don't seem at all disturbed. For you is it Christians uber allis?

Well written and on point. McCain's blabber is just another confirmation of the right's attempt to interpret the constitution in their own twisted, illogical way and convince their ideological partners of their righteousness. When will sane America stand up and speak out against these perverted and twisted interpretations of the greatest document ever written?

In response to Buddhist's posting: Read the Hebrew Scriptures and see that the history presented offers a twofold command: annihilate those in the way of Yahweh's promise and do not intermarry, thus avoiding the polluting of the Chosen People, e.g., "the races shall not mix". Sorry, can't cite the chapter and verse but that phrase has been used, with the citation, to justify segregation and Jim Crow laws. Buddhist will, upon further navel reflection, recall that Constantine forced the conversion of the Empire to Christianity, supposedly based on a vision at the Milvian Bridge, but more likely out of a "can't beat 'em, so join 'em and get more soldiers" mentality.
While titular today, also recall that the head of the Church of England is the monarch, and much blood was spilled in that radical transition based on a syphillitic's obsession with begetting a male heir. Murder, most foul, perpetrated by the "Defender of The Faith".
Indeed, Buddhist's own fellow adherents have taken up arms in India and other mixed religion countries, perhaps only in defense, but it is a slippery slope from defense to offense.
Finally, recall that prior to the Catholicization of Spain under Ferdinand and Isabella, various religions and cultures lived pretty harmoniously under the Moors, and gave to the world much culture, along with the fruits of Arabic Muslim mathematical and geometrical knowledge.
Jesus and Muhammed were, indeed, very different figures. Yet Moses, Joshua and other Biblical leaders seem to share what Buddhist paints as Muhammed's militaristic approach in their efforts at establishing the Promised Land and of keeping the gene pool pure.
Regrettably, many Christians departed from Jesus' message of peace and love of neighbor being equal to that of loving God, and have continued to distort the Nazarene's message to this day.
In the end, the Constitutional "wall of separation" between Church and State is not a ban on a candidate's discussion of his/her religious beliefs, but it should serve as a standard by which any candidate's declaration relative to a "comfort level" with another candidate's religion should jar any voter from their own comfort zone regarding any such candidate.

I would have to strongly agree with your comments. If Mr. Mcain wants to be the Commander in Chief he needs to be more un-biased in his views. I for one believe that religion has no place in politics. The President of the United States serves for all the people not just the ones who are of the same faith that he/she practices. When your judgement on a bill is based on your faith and not what is right for the people of the USA, then you have failed in the execution of your duties as the President. I guess I would rather see someone elected on thier merits and not thier faith or lack of it.

Appreciate your analysis but like many candidates claiming religious affiliation then demonstrate lack of biblical knowledge, I must point out that your statement (although inserted for literary effect) that candidates are "running for Commander-in-Chief", is incorrect. It should be made clear that the candidates are running for the Presidency of the United States. A President is not my "Commander in Chief", I am not it the military.

I think Senator McCain was merely voicing, with characteristic honesty, something that every "electable" candidate must feel either consciously or otherwise. This is primarily because the electorate is, on average, tuned to realize such truths about their choices whether it comes out or not.

At the same time, a Buddhist, Hindu or Muslim voter is better off gravitating towards a secular candidate (but one who nevertheless follows a personal faith owing to the realities above) who is able to rationally and consciously keep matters of religion out of policy matters. This strategy would be true for any minority religion, as for those who profess no religion at all.

In summary, Senator McCain has indeed rendered himself reproachable for his lack of decorum in binging realities of bad taste to a public arena. He should be secretly commended for being honest in bringing out the fact that we are all bigoted in one way or another. I shall, as a voter, make my decision so the game is guaranteed to achieve Nash equilibrium. I hope everybody else does the same.

The mere fact that senator Mcain feels the need to pander to the the religious wing of the conservative party speaks volumes for so-called people of faith. As there are many references to God & Politics, I am struck by the entrenched nature of the relationship between Conservatives and what now seems to be a wing of the party united by faith. There have been immoral acts commited by members of this party on a grand scale Adultry, homosexual acts, prostitution, corruption, Katrina, SCHIP Veto, candidates with 2 & 3 families and Wives. You could say yeah that's politics as usual, but not for Christians! I expect more outrage and it's just not there. Mccain should be rebuffed and the religious should raise the bar to a standard worthy that follows the Gospel. No more excuses like "all fall short of the Glory of God" Inspirational people of faith like the Disciples, or Ghandi, or even Martin L. King never ran for political office. No more claiming a moral authority and tolerating immoral acts without dissent from the so-called, self titled Religious in this country. Things are going terribly wrong and there has to be a reason. Maybe God does'nt like this blind eye alliance from people of faith.

"Why would anybody but the wealthiest white, rightwing males, vote Republican?"

Actually, according to every poll taken in the last year and half or so, about 80% of the people are opposed to the neocon agenda, so it appears that there aren't many supporters other than wealthy, white right-wing males. I'm sure the comment above supporting the neocons, comments which are few and far between these days is made by someone who loves the GOP because they not only take on the terrorists (what a joke) but they attack even imaginary opponents. They're so gung ho to protect us from the bad men that they create wars out of nothing and based on lies. Now, that's something to support. I heard weapons trading is unchecked in Mexico. When do we invade?
It's so refreshing to see that there are only a few stragglers left supporting these nazi miscreants and that the rest of the country has come to it's senses. However, you will always have kool aid guzzling, weak minded sheep that can be convinced of anything even if it defies all logic and reality. As one poster put it above, "their minds are so open their brains have fallen out."

McCain, by calling this a "Christian nation", effectively declares those of us of other faiths to be non-American, even un-American. That's a fair inference.
And those of you making blanket statements about how all Muslims are out to conquer the world obviously don't know any real Muslims. Fact is, most people in most faiths are decent human beings who want to live and raise their families in peace. I don't think people's characters are shaped by their holy books or beliefs so much as people's characters shape their own interpretation of their holy book or beliefs. Decent honorable kindly Muslims, Christians, Pagans, Buddhists, Jews, atheists, agnostics, etc. can all find justification for their desire to be kind to their neighbor, love their families and live in peace in their holy books or belief systems. People whose main desire is to conquer or to feel superior through self-righteous judgement or to destroy or discriminate against anyone who isn't just like them can generally find that in their holy book or belief system too. What matters is how you read it, and what you do.
I will say that the Muslims I know are all loving, generous, honest and charitable individuals who do credit and honor to their faith, as are many of the other people of other faiths that I know.
When I'm voting for President, I want someone who is thoughtful, intelligent, supports the issues I care about, and is willing to defend and uphold the Constitution, including the bits about letting me (and others) live in peace and freedom as a non-Christian who IS, despite John McCain, a full American citizen. What they believe about God is less important than who they are, if only because who they are almost always guides their beliefs about God.

While Christians have contributed tremendously to this Country, this in no way is a Christian Nation. Americans don't know enough of their own history.

George Washington and Thomas Jefferson were not Christians. They were both Free Masons, which is based on the Egyptian religion recognizing Osiris as the 'Lord of the Under World'. Over 40% of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were FreeMasons.

The Washington Monument is an Obelisk not a Cross. The Obelisk is the "Symbol of Osiris", these beliefs date back more than 3000 BC. (Google 'Osiris, Isis and Horus' for more info if desired)

We fought off the British Christian rulers and wanted the 'Freedom of' and 'Freedom from' Religion.

While we want leaders with morals, we shouldn't assume because they "claim" that they're a Christian, that they're a good Christian. Unfortunately, some of the highest of Christian leaders lately have turned out to be Pedofiles & Hypocrits.

It would be sweet if Leaders could be more tolerant and understanding regardless of their Religion or non Religion. Obviously Mr. McCain thinks Christians are better than other Human Beings. Religious fanatics are no different regardless of their faith.

No matter what you believe, you still should go out and be a decent Human Being daily, if not hourly.

Please note that in practice US laws strongly favor religion, no matter what the Constitution says. US tax and regulatory practice massively subsidize religious groups and businesses. There is no even playing field in that regard.

Senator McCain said he would prefer a Christian as President. His candid remarks about anything he personally prefers should not be construed as you have so extravagantly imagined.

Wow, this just leaves me speechless. Someone who purports to hold the highest office in this country, doesn't know the Constitution inside and out or have read the history of the framers is not fit to be President. He may be trying to win the Christian Right, but lost everyone else.

McCain was on the mark. The voter must evaluate the whole candidate. Surely that includes a candidate's professed "faith." The particular brand of faith being discussed has fundamental tenets, and observable outcomes. Being tolerant does not mean suspending reasoned judgement. I, too, have my concerns about the state of that "faith" today, and its compatibility with our democratic institutions.

McCain was on the mark. The voter must evaluate the whole candidate. Surely that include's a candidate's professed "faith." The particular brand of faith being discussed has fundamental tenets, and observable outcomes. Being tolerant does not mean suspending reasoned judgement. I, too, have my concerns about the state of that "faith" today, and its compatibility with our democratic institutions.

McCain was on the mark. The voter must evaluate the whole candidate. Surely that include's a candidate's professed "faith." The particular brand of faith being discussed has fundamental tenets, and observable outcomes. Being tolerant does not mean suspending reasoned judgement. I, too, have my concerns about the state of that "faith" today, and its compatibility with our democratic institutions.

Bush, The Village Idiot, has made much fuss about his Christianity. My concept of Christianity includes altruism and charity towards people. I regard Bush as a sanctimonious bigot. Why do we need another President who is going to utter foolish statements like those of Senator McCain?

Tolerance, dignity, equal treatment of all citizens requires respect for their religious, or non-religious beliefs. Try again McCain.

Religious sentiment is a private matter and McCain is free to express his as he wishes, even when it relates to public policy. Nobody is obligating you to vote for him. McCain uses his religious sentiments to further his career in the same way that a whole variety of preachers use their interpretations of the bible to further theirs. Let's face it, if McCain's sentiment should have no bearing on public policy, then neither should yours, Reverend Gaddy. Ironically, your comments send the message loud and clear that religious views have no place in public affairs.

McCain as an individual has every right to decide whether or not to vote for someone based on any criteria he wants, even if it's bigoted one way or another. McCain as a candidate and senator should not mis-state what the constitution says and should not rule out ANY group as a whole from being qualified to serve as president. As a moderate I used to have a lot of respect for him even though I did not always agree with him. That is no longer the case.

"That a presidential candidate and sitting United States senator would seem to suggest that an entire group of people should be barred from seeking the presidency based only on their religion should be offensive to all Americans..."

YES, YES, YES.

Amen to that (sorry). I think McCain has gone full circle from someone who stood up to the intolerant sections of our society (especially when they slandered him in SC in 2000) to getting in bed with these self-same sections because of his deperation to gain traction in his personal quest for the Presidency.

A cursory reading of the Constitution shows his comments are against the letter and intent of the Constitution. He is shrinking as a leader before our eyes. Senator McCain, you may not win the nomination in 2008, but have the decency to go out like a leader you once were and a man. Don't let the last memories of your public service to this country be that of a desperate politician grubbing for votes and approval amongst the most intolerate and xenophobic our country has to offer.

Anybody who votes Republican out of fear of terrorism has been played for a fool.

Terrorists are weak. That is why they kill innocent people. They have no ability to control a country or destroy the US.

Hyping terrorism only benefits politicians and terrorists.

We can quietly thwart terrorists without giving them the publicity they want.

Why can't people see politicians are using fear to get them to vote for you? It's nothing new.

for those who claim
"oh, this is just politics. he's saying what he thinks needs to be said to become the president. don't worry, he wont compromise the integrity of the constitution if he gets elected though..."

yeeeeah.

i'm not saying that theocratic rule would come into effect, but why on earth would you want a president who panders so transparently? if he rescinded all the baptist ass-kissing upon election, he would be more blatantly deceptive than any past president i can think of. if he did indeed act upon it, i would be gravely concerned for our civil liberties and the separation of church and state; not to mention i would feel very apprehensive about any decision he made, given how tenuous his stances seem to be these days.

he's just a man who wants to "be president" more than he wants to embody the characteristics that would make for a good one.

Using the McCain test for presidential fitness would have precluded Thomas Jefferson, a Deist, from leading the country. The idea that the claimed religious beliefs of a candidate should be a key factor in considering public officials fit for office shows a lack of understanding of the foundations of this country and are diametrically opposed to the belief that all men are created equal.

Thank you for your column. I too was taken aback my senator McCain's comments and also wrote to him about my suprise. Of all of the Republican candidates he was (key word was) the one I would have voted for. That is very unlikely now.

John McCain is a good candidate who is prolife,supports campaign reform and sensible immigration laws, and understands that a strong military is critical to our survival.

John McCain is a good candidate.He is prolife, supports campaign reform,promotes sensible immigration laws,and understands that a strong military is critical to our survival.

Mr. McCain dug his own hole here.
and it sucked out any credibility/integrity he had. It's called pandering.

He should go back to Arizona and have a good cry.

Not many of the presidential candidates exhibit a great knowledge of the constitution. Obama and Clinton may be the exceptions.
McCain is still suffering from PTSD and is a very war like man. If he becomes president we will bomb Iran and N. Korea, as our present wise leader wants.
Notice that N. and S. Korea are reconciling ? This is a sign of new alliances formed because of our imperialistic actions. There are a few more that are much bigger.
The republican party is imploding and the sooner the better, you can have all the wars you want and kill as many innocent women and children you want but for God's sake don't perform an abortion, what a bunch of hypocrites.

But Senator McCain is pandering the religious right Rev. Welton, I do not believe he believes anything he says. One day he is an episcopalian, and the next he is a baptist, and that isn't because he has a core belief in his religion is it, it is because Republican primary voters in the south are mostly baptist. So Mr. McCain doesn't care any more about our constitution or core beliefs or anything of the sort, he cares about being President.

"...remember his oath to defend the Constitution." Or, at least, what's left of it.

I agree completely! Some do not, or maybe they do, believe that once we go down this road we will delve into the issues and differences that have created so many different sects and denominations as one church seeks to establish dominance over the others. Postitions on baptism and the essence of the nature of the Holy Trinity could easily become the defining litmus test. If you believe that faith must be important in a candidate, don't be surprised if you find your faith being questioned as a legitimate "point of concern" in the neat future.

I agree completely! Some do not, or maybe they do, believe that once we go down this road we will delve into the issues and differences that have created so many different sects and denominations as one church seeks to establish dominance over the others. Postitions on baptism and the essence of the nature of the Holy Trinity could easily become the defining litmus test. If you believe that faith must be important in a candidate, don't be surprised if you find your faith being questioned as a legitimate "point of concern" in the neat future.

what kind of xenophobic provocateur type of buddhist are you anyway?

Reverend Gaddy;

Apparently you don't understand Islam. Islam is different from all other religions. Muhammad was a prophet and head of a state at the same time. Islam from it's beginning was militant. Muhammad is their ideal. But he raided, looted, converted non Muslims at the point of sword. First raised an army of Muslims. Their job was to raid and loot and convert to Islam non Muslims. He gave conquered peiple 3 choices.
1. Covert to Islam and live as an equal. or
2. Live as dhimmi or
3. Die

Islam conquered many lands by the above means. Today many Muslims are peaceful. Their first lawyalty is to Islam not to the country they live in. There were celebrations in many Muslim countries when world trade centered was destroyed, no demonstrations to condemn the act. But there were demonstrations against Danish Cartoons of Muhammad all over the world.

All Muslims believe Koran is the word of God and Muhammad is the messenger and is the ideal man to follow. My own opinion is Osama is their leader now and his victory will be celebrated by most Mulims all over the world. There will be no democracy if Islam wins and it might if we foolishly believe Islam is like all other religions. It is mainly conceived by Arabs to conquer and rule the world.

So John McCain is right.

The idea that America has been adopted as a Christian nation is a historical lie on many levels.

- the founding fathers were deists and quite adverse to the notion of promoting Christianity, per se. They understood how divisive and oppressive religious tones could be in a nation, and wanted to avoid this at all costs. It is appalling that some do not recognize that the secular nature of our nation as one of its greatest strengths, in all of history.

- the so-called Christian values, individual freedom, human dignity, etc., cannot rationally be attributed to originating in the Christian church, which represented the practice of Christianity. The so-called Christian values are actually humanistic values that originated in the Renaissance as a reaction to the Dark Ages (where some would have us headed again), and are common to nearly all faiths. The Christian church reformed itself over the course of hundreds of years in a reaction to humanistic values being adopted in the world, not vice-versa, sorry to say. Please someone point me a single Christian-value that is not shared by numerous other faiths.

There is simply no basis for the notion that a candidate with a certain religious faith is more qualified in terms of morality or competence or decision making. But then, this is not a rational choice, but an emotional one.

Thus McCain is wrong in his views, but also a coward for pandering to the religious right who have taken a mortgage on the religious future of this nation. We need to come back to a public discourse where the common morality and values from many faiths represent the American mainstream, without exclusion of anyone. It is the core identity and future of our nation that is at stake.

Politics is politics. Context is Context.

While I don't like this statement from McCain, please, please, please, observe the context of these remarks. This comment is 100% appeal to the base politics. Why be so ACLU fundamendtalist and hang the a man for political sound byte, when his actions over time indicate something else?

Do any of the readers of this collumn seriously believe that John McCain will "BetrayUS" and attempt to undermine the separation of Church and State if elected president?

Politics is politics.

i have to agree with KEN

saying what your preference is - thats a very far cry from the negative aspersion implied by the author.

look at WAYNE there- he actually said he'd vote for an atheist or agnostc based on their lack of adherence to a religion!

that is not distrubing?

if a christian said theyd vote for someone just because they were in the same club,i bet people would have an opinion on that.

clearly, not only the religious types care very deeply about the religious leanings of our leaders- and they should.

i think its kind of a sneaky question for WAPO to post-
and im a liberal!

i have to agree with KEN

saying what your preference is - thats a very far cry from the negative aspersion implied by the author.

look at WAYNE there- he actually said he'd vote for an atheist or agnostc based on their lack of adherence to a religion!

that is not distrubing?

if a christian said theyd vote for someone just because they were in the same club,i bet people would have an opinion on that.

clearly, not only the religious types care very deeply about the religious leanings of our leaders- and they should.

i think its kind of a sneaky question for WAPO to post-
and im a liberal!

This is just heartbreaking...

I am a liberal Democrat. John McCain - despite his maverick status - was never quite as moderate as the media establishment once made him out to be but was a solid Goldwater-Reagan conservative in a party run amock by radical religionists.

Anyway, I always thought he was one of the most talented and courageous statesman of our time...but this really brings pandering to a new level.

I'm just really sad.

I couldn't agree more with this article. McCain seems to be so desperate for support from Bush's base of hard-core religious righters that he'll tell them whatever they want to hear, regardless of whether it follows the constitution. I used to respect McCain as a person who put principle above party and politics, and it's really sad to see how low he's sunk. Pathetic, shameful, and disgusting.

"[N]o religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States". U.S. Const. Art VI Sec. 3.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion". U.S. Const. Am. 1.

Constitutionpwned!

Paul drank the RW cool ade.

Scary stuff that cool ade.

" Paul:

"Why would anybody but the wealthiest white, rightwing males, vote Republican?"

Oh gee, I don't know. Let me think. Um, uh, how about because the entire democratic field is debating only how fast to surrender to the islamist with a knife to our throats when what is clearly required is the same multi-decade patience, endurance and fortitude with which western civilization won the cold war. Other than that, not much of a reason at all."

Basically, the lesser of two evils then?

God I love our system. It's so broken, and still it keeps on going....

t

i support the writer's view. very well presented.

"Why would anybody but the wealthiest white, rightwing males, vote Republican?"

Oh gee, I don't know. Let me think. Um, uh, how about because the entire democratic field is debating only how fast to surrender to the islamist with a knife to our throats when what is clearly required is the same multi-decade patience, endurance and fortitude with which western civilization won the cold war. Other than that, not much of a reason at all.

McCain's problem is he is not talking about true Christians: true followers of the words of Jesus. He's talking about the politicos who have hijacked Christianity for their agenda of gay-bashing, Mexican hating, right wing greed and corruption represented by Dobson, Robertson, Haggard, Craig et. al. It would be refreshing to have a President who truly followed the words of Christ instead of cherry picking scriptures to advocate sectarian motives.

If he wants a religious theocracy, he should move to Iran, or the new ally of theirs we're paying to build, Iraq.

McCain is not only running for president, but he is a voter too and has every right to express his opposition to a Muslim in the White House. He's just one voter in a nation of millions but my strong suspicion is that a vast majority of Americans agree with McCain. Considering that many in America would be leery of a Morman in the White House, how could McCain be wrong in not voting for a Muslim?

Did you see the video? He looks/sounds exactly like that Miss America contestant fumbling the question about Iraq. Amazing.

Why would anybody but the wealthiest white, rightwing males, vote Republican?

Just once I would like to see a candidate stand up and say they are either an agnostic or an atheist and if one did he would have my vote!

How naive I was to think that McCain was a man of integrity:the big feg leaf fell to show his true colors,an ugly self serving bigot and racist.
To win the radical xtian vote,he first converted to a Baptist,next he made an ugly blunder by bashing both the unique US constitution and basing American Muslims.

Nothing will save his alraedy sunken ship.

There's a critical distance between saying, "I prefer as president someone who has a solid grounding in my faith" and suggesting "that an entire group of people should be barred from seeking the presidency based only on their religion." Such a deliberate rhetorical distance elevates mere inaccuracy into full-blown lying.

But truth is oh so inconvenient for "our minds are so open our brains have fallen out" crowd.

Very well stated! Candidates are running for President not Pastor, Preacher, Priest, Imam, etc.

I would much rather vote for a humanist than a fundamentalist.

Bravo, Rev Gaddy! Now, that's MY understanding of the Constitution and MY kind of religionist.

I'm glad to see that your fellow religionists on this blog are expressing the same sentiment.