Meet The Press: Romney Backpedals On His "Freedom Requires Religion" Comment
By Logan Murphy Saturday Dec 15, 2007 8:02pm
Download | play 
Download | play (h/t David, Politics TV)
Mitt Romney raised more than a few eyebrows with his "freedom requires religion" line during a speech earlier this month, and on Meet The Press today he tried his best to clarify. Tim Russert asked him point blank - can an atheist be a moral person and participate in freedom?
Romney backpedals, saying that he was actually speaking in the spirit of John Adams, and that for this American experiment to work, it required strong morals - which required religion. As for an atheist appointee for a President Romney? He says he'd be ok with it, if they were the most qualified person for the job. Now, it's a different story if you're a Muslim...
Login or Register to post comments.
As Atheists, my family completely offended by the mind-bending stupidity of this comment.
Like Lie-berman dissing Atheists when he ran for VP. I wrote him an angry though polite letter and never had so much as a peep back from him.
Some sources say as many as 1/3 of Americans are non-believers. Time for these Jesus-freaks to treat us like the serious minority that we are.
*
Well, another trite and irrelevant campaign slogan bites the dust. What's next, Mitt---Arbeit Macht Frei?
I think it's obvious.
Romney is a political hack.
The political equivalent of a cheap whore.
By his own account, he shouldn't be president because there are not enough Mormons to warrant that.
Apparently, he measures who would serve in his cabinet by the percentage of the people. Muslims don't have enough - they don't deserve a high cabinet level position. I don't know how many American Muslims there are.
I know that roughly 10% of people are gay - would that be enough of a percentage for one of them to serve in his administration???
How about Jews?? Or, again, Mormons?? Are there enough?? Enough for one of them to become President???
Obviously, the so-called litmus test should not be about the percentage of the population.
It should be about skills, competence, know-how.
Duh, Mitt.
Archae @ 3:
Don't knock whores. They're good people.
Yeah, he's a person of "faith" - as in faith in the stupidity of his base to buy into his B.S. The only people who could possibly think this man is speakng honestly about anything are people dumb enough to still support Bush. Thus, why he is a front-runner.
And B. Clinton was called "slick"?
Romney is clearly worm-like.
If you need religion to experience freedom, is more religion more freedom? Is the ultimate pinnacle of freedom fundamentalism?
like I said earlier:
nothing can make this piece of shit worth voting for!!!!
JasonS @ 5:
And whores generally provide an honest service, unlike any politician.
NO RELIGIOUS TEST, DAMMIT!!!!!
BC @ 8:
-------
That's correct.
The ultimate freedom to obey their cruel king-god without question.
Note how Romney nods "no" while saying "Yes, [he] could appoint an agnostic/atheist..." and then nods "yes" when saying "No ...litmus test...." What a fraud! Why are folks so often fooled by the likes of Romney, Lieberaman, etc. Just watch their head fakes.
His excuse this time: it was opposite day at the Romneys!
CoIntelPro @ 10:
:lol: I certainly have nothing against prostitution. And hey, if it weren't for the integration of religious values into our laws, prostitution wouldn't be illegal in 49 states.
As for Mittens' being a pandering hack, I think that's exactly right. And if the truth be known, his brand of pandering politics scares me less than Huckster's brand of theocracy. When Huckster says things like, we need to "take the country back for Jesus," I think he's being genuine. Huckster really takes his theocratic ramblings seriously.
Of course, to say that Mittens is a notch above Huckster is not to say very much.
Trittydi @ 1:
One out of every three? I haven't heard that. Who are the "some sources" who "say?"
I've seen figures closer to 15% and growing. Haven't seen that we are one-third of the population, though. (I'd rejoice, of course, if it's true, but I haven't seen any figure quite so high.)
We do not need or want "people of faith" in government. We need "people of thought". Faith is useless to make decisions. It is a human weakness. Thought is a human strength.
I think actually reading Romney's speech that he *was* speaking in the vein of John Adams or some other Founder. Or at least in a vein that he *thinks* is the Founders.
That said, the speech was ridiculous and Romney should *not* be President.
Religion is not freedom and the idiot shouldn't bring up John Adams. Look up the "Treaty of Tripoli" and you will see Adams was not a Christian. Go to Amazon.com and buy Thomas Jefferson's bible. He thought Jesus was a good leader. A flesh and blood leader and not the son of God. He calls the Bible dung and says people should believe in REASON.
These guys are all making me sick with their god talk. Always be SUSPICIOUS of a person who always brings up god.
An Atheist president would be wonderful if he had political experience.
I'm also tired of hearing the word treason. Agree with us or it's treason.
Karen @ 15:
They all want to put their religion in our government, except for Giuliane (he's just a crook and a liar).
Underground Pirate @ 17:
SO TRUE!
RMHK @ 19:
The Treaty of Tripoli says that the U.S. is not, in any way, founded on the Christian religion. It says nothing about Adams' personal beliefs. Actually, Adams was a Christian.
Indeed. He even says that if god exists, he would surely value reason more than faith, and that the god of nature can be found through reason and scientific study. I don't quite understand why god would value one thing or another at all, personally, but hey, I do like Jefferson's take on things, and I love how he redacts all the supernatural claims from the Bible to make the Jefferson Bible. :)
In the political context, I absolutely agree.
Amen. ;)
I don't think he backpedaled. I think that may have been what he meant originally. Or he was just saying something that sounded "good" that he didnt really think through the meaning of.
The point about "freedom requires religion" is that, if yorue going to have a small, limited government that for the most part lets people free, then there needs to be something other than govt that keeps people civilized. Some think that is religion (I think alot of the Founders actually did believe that). I dont know if thats true or not, but I think that always was his point and that people didnt understand it and blew it way out of proportion. And Im an atheist btw.
Jonesy @ 23:
Whether Mittens or the founders believed that, it is absurd.
"Religion requires freedom; freedom requires religion."
Horseshit on both counts, Mitt.
Religion existed for tens of thousands of years before anything like political freedom existed, so obviously religion does not require freedom.
As for freedom's requiring religion, I'd say that the opposite is more the case--real freedom requires that one be free of mental delusions.
Real freedom of that sort is something Mitt will probably never experience.
Hearing him lecture us on the nature of freedom is like watching a chimpanzee try to explain Shakespeare.
"How would you define freedom, chimp?"
Chimp thinks for a moment, then holds up a banana.
The Republicans bring this on themselves.
Religion is not part of our politics.
Unless as the GOP has the past several decades, you make it an issue.
Let them choke on their bilious bile.
Nothing like a GOP stuffed suit proclaiming you need religion to have morals. From what we have been treated to, morals are something these fundie GOPS need in great amounts.
Boy, Romney really sounds like a mealy-mouthed ass in both of these segments. Maybe he should have said "9/11 made me do it," and he'd get away with it. I enjoyed Russert pulling out the yellow and orange flip flops and rapping them on the table.
Translation:
"...Look, I said what I felt I needed to say, at the time. Just like I'm saying what I feel I need to say, now. And tomorrow, I am going to say whatever I feel I need to say, as well. There's the sh*t, and here's my shovel. Just tell me how deep you want it, and you got it."
Romney has multiple personalities
i don't think mitt can get it together.
huck huckabee/ted nugent 2008!
Jonesy @ 23:
so am i. mitt's a queer.
Arguably, the stupidest think to ever come out of an American politicians mouth. If Romney is nominated, I plan to make freeway sign that says simply:
"Freedom REQUIRES religion?"
If elected, I'm outta here.
I'm not even sure what this means. Only people of faith feel 'the common bond of humanity?' Or his faith is the thing that allows him to feel 'the common bond with humanity?' Or his faith gives him a speshul, super-secret, faith-based bond that we without faith cannot conceive of?
Cause, I thought the only prerequisite to having a bond with humanity was to: a) be a human being, and b) have a sense of empathy.
Loooooooser!!
Complete doublespeak gibberish. What a totally transparent phony.
Russert is pitiful. As if Romney would respond in any other way to that softball.
That America is a Christian nation founded on Christianity is still quite unreasonable.
Christianity does not make it right because one invokes the name of a God.
"Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it".
Thomas Jefferson
Look up "empty suit" in the dictionary. It'll have his picture there.
Way to go Timmy!! Another one down. That makes two in two weeks with Rudy's nervous slime-ball answers last week and Willard's flip-flopping this week. Where was the question about Mitt's magic underwear?
He's lying. He's extremely calculated, and he was pandering to the religious right in his speech. Someone who actually honored the separation of church and state wouldn't have attacked non-believers so consistently throughout his big moment. His pitch essentially was, 'Even though I don't practice your faith, I'm a man of faith, and I'll fight the Europe-loving, godless liburals for ya.'
Jonesy @ 23: Romney does not deserve your charitable interpretation, and his text does not support it. Really, read through the speech. I've got a longer post on not long ago. Read through some of Romney's other statements this past year, and get a feel for his m.o. He did not misspeak. He was not misunderstood. As several people have noted, he delivered the anti-JFK speech, and that was precisely what he was aiming to do.
Trittydi @ 1:
hey, as a somewhat lapsed christian i'm also offended by the sheer stupidity of that comment and others of similar content.
since when did the supreme being (even if he/she/it exists) give a single religion the keys of utter theological certainty?
it's annoying as hell to constantly see one religion trying to one up another.
hmmph....string and m theory for universal creation is starting to look awfully tempting...
sassafra @ 42:
Well, if you believe in what your holy texts say - then yes, your religion is the only true one. And many people do believe they have the one "true" faith.
Plus, I wish people would stop assuming that atheism equals no morals. Being religious doesn't automatically make you good or "superior" in the ethics department. And for a nation that claims a majority of Christians, we're not exactly a "moral" place, are we?
songtraveler @ 25:
Leave George Bush out of this!!!!!!!
Most religions say that they are the only ones going to Heaven. If that is so, then I guess they all cancel one another out and we're all going to go to hell. I could never, ever worship some God who would sentence anyone to eternal torture just because they didn't believe in Him. THAT is just plain insanity. I keep hearing people say that they are God fearing Christians, what incredible stupidity. Why would anyone worship something that they feared. Why would anyone worship some insane deity who'd just as soon chuck their souls into burning pits of brimstone as look at them? Religion is totally senseless. People say that religion gives them comfort. Worshiping an insane God gives someone comfort? And they say that atheists are nuts. Sheesh.
fucking religionist biggots
not sure why my comment isn't showing but this is an example of the all too common religionist biggotry towards nonbelievers
Say what you will about Mitt, but I don't think that Huckabee would have said anything like that about atheists. I'd imagine he would have echoed the sentiments of Bush I and said that atheists shouldn't be allowed to be citizens.
Well said Dave at 46.
Also...What sort of god sends his greatest enemy to live with the children he loves so much? Why didn't he just send Satan to the other end of the universe or something?
Somebody should listen to Sam Harris's speech (Believing the Unbelievable: The Clash of Faith and Reason in the Modern World) from this years Aspen Ideas Festival where he dispels the myth that a culture's morality comes directly from the Bible -
http://www.aifestival.org/index2.php?menu=3&sub=1&title=172&action=full_...
The problem with religion is everything is either the other guy's fault, and/or the glom all the credit themselves.
When Mitt and his magical underwear are up in Celestial Heaven, and he is the God of his own alien planet - he can require all of the religion of his people as he likes. However, here on Earth he needs to simmah down.
Us atheists have moved up a notch. Now we're less evil than Muslims! Woohoo!
What a load. Why is it so hard for some people to understand that not believing in an afterlife makes it more imperative to be a good person in this life? The rewards and punishments are immediate and not something that can be put off until you die.
And why can't the religious right see how similar their leaders are to the so called "islamo-fascists" in regards to their political games, propaganda, xenophobia, self-righteousness, fear mongering, and miltarism?
This Romney bird is so full of shit! I would rather Huckabee even get the nomination rather than this sneaky pr*ck!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9IJUkYUbvI
Karen @ 22:
AN ATHEIST PRESIDENT? WHAT ABOUT THE "OATH OF OFFICE"? TAKE GOD OUT OF THAT, TOO?
I didn't like that 'religion requires freedom, freedom requires religion" bullshit.
Wow... that's got to set a record for both the highest profile Mitt-flop, as well as the fastest.
I had to include this quote:
"billabong96 (2 minutes ago) Show Hide Marked as spam 0 Reply | Spam I don't believe in The Rapture. Neither does Romney. That is one of the Christian right's fairy tales. Romney's rapture will be when he walks into the White House for 8 years. You got tire of him as governor? Well, here he comes again! "
He's the pro Romney moron posting here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9IJUkYUbvI
I'm SICK of all this religious crap and all this talk about Jesus!
Why can't we just leave religion at home or in the churches? It's all a load of crap.
These Jesus freaks are the reason America is so screwed up. It is the reason were at war all over the world. Moronic Jesus freaks who vote in these war mongering Republican idiots.
I wish the Christian right would just shut up and get lost.
Keep Religion Out Of Government
While some shallow and self-serving thinkers found Governor Mitt Romney’s campaign speech inspiring, many found it to be an appalling step backward for all freedom loving Americans. Reasons for keeping religion out of politics and ultimately government have been amply documented by the religious intolerance and religiously inspired bloodshed that has marked much of world history. When Thomas Jefferson wrote about a "Wall of Separation" between Church and State it was an attempt to put an end to the centuries of irreconcilable disputes and needless killing of innocents inspired by religion. President John F. Kennedy made it clear that religion was a private matter that should be separated from government. Romney’s assertions presented the opposite. He not only brazenly proclaimed that (his version of) religion should be a part of our government but that our freedom depended upon it.
His speech excluded the more than thirty-five million Americans who choose not to subscribe to a religion as well as the millions more who do not choose HIS Christian way of expressing their spirituality. For the millions of Americans who are not fuzzy reasoning fundamentalists or exploitive evangelists, religion or spirituality IS a private affair and not one that we want to hear prescribed by a politician.
If we are to invite religion into the “public square” as Romney suggests, which one will it be? On which day and at what time may we face east and kneel, meditate, erect a symbol, sacrifice a chicken or merely stroll impiously through the square? "When the government puts its imprimatur on a particular religion it conveys a message of exclusion to all those who do not adhere to the favored beliefs. A government cannot be premised on the belief that all persons are created equal when it asserts that God prefers some." Supreme Court Justice Harry A. Blackmun in the Lee v. Weisman ruling, 1992.
President James Madison wrote, "Strongly guarded as is the separation between religion and Government in the Constitution of the United States, the danger of encroachment by Ecclesiastical Bodies may be illustrated by precedents already furnished in their short history." Romney’s speech represents a dangerous encroachment on the separation of religion from government and consequently the freedom of all Americans. The founders deliberately created a secular separation in the Constitution of the United States to avoid future violence and bloodshed. Secular means, “not controlled by a religious body or concerned with religious or spiritual matters” as a truly democratic government should be. Religion, spirituality or the absence of either is a personal freedom afforded by the United States constitution to all individuals and one that politicians like Romney should not abuse or arbitrarily alter for personal advancement.
rain @ 56:
You mean this oath of office?
That's the official oath from the Constitution (Art. II, sec. 1, cl. 8). Note how "GOD" isn't in there.
rain @ 56:
Well, uh....yeah.
And actually, there's nothing to "take god out of" in the first place. It's been added in for anyone who would like to say it.
The Constitution requires the president to take the following oath:
So, uh, there ya go. Nothing to get all worked up about.
Or, wait.....were you kidding around?
Sam Harris is my god!
Sinto @ 60:
Of course it could be argued that because of Jesus "freaks" we have this country to begin with,, seeing that the people who founded it were,, ohhhhh, Christian.
mitt you are a freak
Old but true:
"You can tell he is lying, His lips are moving."
Build up that wall. www.ffrf.org
Login or Register to post comments.