Take morality out of the equation
Last updated 7/12/2007 at Noon
In a recent letter [“We need to focus on what matters,” Village News, 6/14/07], I suggested that we need to get beyond “hot button” topics when it comes to the serious chore of selecting a President of the United States. I won’t embarrass the person who took me to task on this proposal, but the response was exactly what is wrong with our choice of candidates to serve as public officials.
The respondent indicated that we must take expressed morality into account – the very thing that we shouldn’t consider! After all – whose moral values? Pat Robertson, Jesse Jackson, Farohan, the Bishop of Boston? Is your choice of candidate okay if he/she shares the same views you do?
Let’s face it: the candidate could be a far-out religious extremist but happen to be in agreement with your views on gay marriage, immigration, abortion or the like. Or, maybe they come from the extreme left but you like their particular views on the aforementioned topics. You see, that’s the problem with letting so called morality into the equation.
Taken to its extreme, we could elect a US squeaky-clean equivalent to the Archbishop of Canterbury to office – but would he know how to handle Congress, defense spending, immigration, foreign policy, education and social programs?
I repeat: the only common sense way to select the best person to serve as the US President is to consider what they promise to do while in office. If they don’t come through for us, well, that’s where the separation of powers and impeachment come into force. That’s the way it’s supposed to work under the Constitution. Unfortunately, big money gets in the way.
Robert F. Green