Compact Disco Says

Mitt Romney gives speech declaring that Freedom requires Religion

Ok, so I have a lot to say about this. Let's divide and conquer:

"There are some who may feel that religion is not a matter to be seriously considered in the context of the weighty threats that face us. If so, they are at odds with the nation's founders," Romney said.

You mean a non-Christian religion would be at odds with the nation's founders. You know, I read somewhere they have made something like twenty-seven (27!) fundamental changes to the Constitution written by the nation's founders. Imagine that. The founders (not of the Dominion, natch) also didn't think anyone but Europeans were real people. Trust me, Mitt. They weren't perfect. I'm sure we'll continue to make changes as necessary. Especially for something like your next comment!

"Freedom requires religion, just as religion requires freedom. Freedom opens the windows of the soul so that man can discover his most profound beliefs and commune with God. Freedom and religion endure together, or perish alone," he said.

Mitt, dollface. Ok, let's chat. Freedom does not require religion. Maybe you've forgotten what the word require means. Dictionary.com to the rescue. It offers seven distinct definitions of the word require, which you all may browse here. Now, I require oxygen to live. I require food and I require water in order to live. As much as it pains me to say so, I do not, in fact, require a computer to continue living. I do not require, and you do not require, nor does anyone need religion (Christianity the inference here) for freedom to exist and survive. That insinuation exists as a cheap ploy to defend neocon idealism to the masses at best, and a dangerous, self-sustaining viral ideology at worst. I'm not religious. Does that mean I'm not free? I'm not a Christian. Am I somehow less free than my church-dwelling neighbors? If I were a Buddhist or a Hindu or Shinto... am I somehow less free than a Christian?

I will say that I believe freedom, like people, does absolutely require faith. Faith in themselves to find their own answers. Faith in their peers to understand and respect them enough to know that while, you disagree on things and may not see eye to eye on everything, that it is their own choice to live as they do, just as it is your choice to live as you do. Faith in our leaders to understand that the dogtrine (dogma+doctrine, fuck you all, it's my word) of one religion does not belong in defining a government supposedly built on equality and freedom (religious and personal) to all.

Religion does not equal morality, Mr. Romney. Nor does morality equal atheism, agnosticism or any other form of belief, religious or otherwise. Morality doesn't even equate to logic. Morality, a common belief of right and wrong, is a human creation. Ever changing, ever evolving. God does not equal absolute morality, no matter how many times nutso religious zealots shake their fists and scream at the top of their lungs at rallies and oh yeah, funerals.

Sorry, I got distracted there. Let's continue.

Like Kennedy, Romney told the audience that his church would not influence his presidential decisions. Romney said he did not "confuse" religion and politics as governor and he would not do it as president. "If I am fortunate to become your president, I will serve no one religion, no one group, no one cause, and no one interest. A president must serve only the common cause of the people of the United States," he said.

Well, damn, Mitt. I'm glad to hear that. But, wait a minute. Didn't you say just a few minutes before that religion has a definite and inalienable role in government? That freedom requires religion? So, ok, if your religion will have no bearing on what decisions you make, then why bring it up at all if it's such a non-issue? I mean, far be it for me to belittle anyone's beliefs...er, much, but I think that the fact you believe that Native Americans are directly descended from.... Jews of Jerusalem and that Jesus was born in Missouri might, uh, offend some Christians. Are you trying to gloss over Mormonism at the same time as trying to curry the undecided middle America Christian vote? You sly dog, you. Well, just like Family Guy says, "Undecided voters are the biggest idiots on the planet." God, I love that show.

"Each religion has its own unique doctrines and history. These are not bases for criticism but rather a test of our tolerance. Religious tolerance would be a shallow principle indeed if it were reserved only for faiths with which we agree," he said.

I guess that's why federal government, since religion is so important to freedom, represents aspects of all faiths. Wait, you mean it doesn't? Oh, that's right. It just represents and sustains Christian ideology in government. Shallow principle, indeed.

I think this one is my favorite though. Mitt, you slay me.

Romney said he thought some have taken the idea of separation of church and state beyond its original meaning by trying to remove any acknowledgment of God from the public arena. "It is as if they are intent on establishing a new religion in America -- the religion of secularism. They are wrong," he said.

But I thought religion was integral to freedom and that differences in religion were not bases for criticism, but rather a test of our (your) tolerance. Isn't this, uh, Secularism, just another school of thought required (there's that word again) for freedom? Doesn't this belief system, different from yours, deserve the merits you touted just a few minutes ago? No, I guess not. We're just wrong. Man, that stings.

Thanks, Mitt. This speech has been very enlightening for me. Best of luck on that primary bid.



Let me ask you: What did you all think of Mitt's speech? Sound off!