For Discussion: Voters Must Follow Their Faith LEXINGTON, KY (WEKU) - Should people vote according to their religious convictions? There are some who argue that the religiously motivated voter is improperly imposing his or her belief on society. In considering this claim, let's think about the larger issue of politics and religion in general.
You may have seen this bumper sticker: The last time we mixed politics and religion, people got burned at the stake. It's a catchy turn of phrase, and it taps into the concern of some people that if religion is allowed any role in politics, we will be on a dangerous path toward an oppressive theocracy. But is this a legitimate concern?
The truth is, the vast majority of religious people I know are not interested in government imposed religious loyalties or practices. Rather, because their religious perspective imbues life with a transcendent ethical meaning, what they are seeking is not the endorsement of a sectarian theology but laws and policies that respect certain inviolable principles about life and humanity.
What some ardent secularists seem to forget is that irreligious people also believe in, and vote in accordance with, a transcendent moral framework, even if they don't always recognize it. For example, most people, religious and irreligious alike, look back on slavery as a great moral evil, a conviction not rooted in verifiable data but in a self-evident perception that no human being is to be owned by another. More recently, the contemporary pet virtues of tolerance and fairness are also non-scientific, incongruous with a Darwinian concept of animalistic competition.
As Americans, in fact, we inhabit a nation whose very founding is rooted in invisible, unverifiable ideals about human life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Thus, it would seem obvious that both religious and irreligious people should be free to articulate, and even lobby for, their ethical convictions within the public square.
As a Catholic, for example, my faith imbues me with the convictions that all persons are entitled to just treatment, that human life is worthy of protection from the moment of conception until natural death, and that marriage is by nature the exclusive union of a man and a woman. Furthermore, my Catholic belief in religious freedom affirms the right of those with other perspectives to argue their convictions in the public square.
Frankly, I've never understood the claim from political candidates that their religion won't influence their politics. If they mean that their votes will remain unbiased toward sectarian self-interest, that's one thing. But if they mean their religious convictions are not relevant to the values they advance through governance, they are begging the question, What is it, then, that guides their values political expedience? So much for courage.
In essence, religious voters who are told to keep their faith-formed convictions out of the voting booth are asked to dismiss their deepest convictions and effectively disintegrate themselves as persons. A mature human being, after all, is not a disconnected collection of competing identities. Instead, we are to bring our whole selves to bear when we exercise the voting privilege, while affirming the right of those who believe differently to do the same.



Click here to share your thoughts with us and read other reactions to this commentary.

© Copyright 2009, WEKU