Obama's Invocation Of Faith To Promote Health Reform 'Refreshing,' Opinion Piece Says
"The fight over health care took the most interesting turn last week" when President Obama "briefly switched from wonkish frippery about bending cost curves to speaking of faith," columnist Jonah Goldberg writes in a Los Angeles Times opinion piece. This "would be an easy opportunity to call attention, once again, to the double standards applied to Obama," Goldberg writes, adding, "When President George W. Bush invoked God as his inspiration, many liberals lamented the shattering of the wall between church and state by our theocrat in chief. When Obama does likewise, it's inspiring, spiritual leadership." Goldberg writes that he finds Obama's invocation of faith "refreshing" because "[o]f all of the silly arguments that have been passed off as deeply profound in American politics, the notion that politicians can't 'impose' their personal morality on others has to top the list."Goldberg writes, "We have abortion politics in general, and former New York Gov. Mario Cuomo (D) in particular, to thank for that." In 1984, Cuomo "gave his famous address at Notre Dame in which he laid out the notion that a politician can be 'personally opposed' to abortion but should refuse to translate that conviction into public policy," Goldberg writes. He continues, "As political rhetoric, the speech was compelling," but "[a]s a serious philosophical, theological or moral argument, it was a terrible mess. For instance, Cuomo found inspiration in the Catholic Church's relative silence on American slavery as justification for keeping religion out of the abortion debate." He adds, "Never mind that abolition was the most religious of political movements."
Goldberg writes that Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) "captured the inherent contradictions of Cuomo-ism nicely" during a 2004 presidential debate. Kerry said that his faith spurred him to address poverty, environmental issues and other topics. However, Kerry added that when it came to abortion, "What is an article of faith for me is not something that I can legislate on somebody who doesn't share that article of faith."
In recent years, however, "Democratic rhetoric has been changing, for several reasons," Goldberg writes. He adds that "many voters are put off by such double-talk. Another reason is that many smart liberals have noticed that some religious Americans are more activist on economic and environmental issues but are turned off by what they perceive as pugnacious secularism."
According to Goldberg, "Politics has always been a contest of values, and religion remains the chief source of those values." He adds, "Our political discourse has long been cheapened by the canard that only conservatives try to use the state to impose a religiously informed moral vision, while liberals are guided by science, reason and logic as well as some secular conception of decency and compassion." Goldberg concludes, "No party has a monopoly on such resources, and it's about time we all recognize that" (Goldberg, Los Angeles Times, 8/25).
