WHEN I was younger, watching "The Oprah Winfrey Show" used to upset me. I would watch as people told amazing stories of courage and achievement and were then praised for having "good Christian values." As a young Jewish girl, I would wonder if not sharing the religious views of the majority made me immoral. The fact that people based their views of morality on religious beliefs would practically bring me to tears.
Now, Jews have a candidate to represent ourselves - Joseph Lieberman, a man who brings his belief in Judaism to the forefront of American politics. Lieberman, however, is not using his role as a Jewish leader to benefit Jews or represent them in a positive way.
Lieberman encourages Americans to turn to "civil religion" for guidelines on how to behave morally. By doing so, he discriminates against people of different religious views - just like advocates of "Christian values" do - and blurs the fine line between church and state.
On the surface, it would appear that having Lieberman as a vice presidential candidate shows America has progressed in representing different minorities and beliefs. Lieberman is the first Jewish candidate to ever run on a major party's national ticket. But he also is a politician, and should know better than to advocate any form of religion in government, whether or not it is labeled "civil."
The idea behind Lieberman's call for "civil religion" is that the nation needs to draw values and strength from religious beliefs. Religion teaches morality, and advocacy of these common virtues can bind together America's majority of believers, whatever their faiths may be.
This goal of religious renewal is due to the "vacuum of values" many find apparent in American society today. With such topics as violence in the media and abortion playing major roles in the 2000 election, it is evident that Americans are concerned with the nation's decaying sense of morality. However, Lieberman's solution to this decay raises a controversial question: Is belief in God the basis of true morality?
Lieberman believes that religion provides a common ground for values, such as nonviolence and respect for others, that few would find objectionable. He says that "without connection to a higher law, it becomes more and more difficult for people to answer day to day questions that test us," like cheating or stealing (www.issues2000.org).
Many people do credit their faith as a guide for morality, but this is not the case with everyone. People base their values in a deep understanding of right and wrong. These values are a result of a combination of personal experiences, upbringing, personality, guidelines set up by the laws of our country and sometimes religion. Many Americans are not religious, which doesn't affect the morality of their actions. It is ridiculous to say that without faith as a guide, one cannot decipher between good and bad.
Lieberman says that American civil religion is inclusive. Civil religion may not single out one religion as the correct belief, but it does stress the importance of faith in God. He also claimed, "Religion is a source of unity and strength in America ... we are not only citizens of this blessed country, we are citizens of the same awesome God" (www.issues2000.org). Saying that all Americans are citizens of God and should follow his moral commandments is discriminating against those who do not find religion to be an important aspect of their lives.
Lieberman says of the First Amendment, "We know the Constitution wisely separates church from state. But remember, the Constitution guarantees freedom of religion, not freedom from religion" (www.issues2000.org). While Americans have the right to choose what they want to worship, they cannot escape the many different passionate views people have about religion. Lieberman's suggestion, then, is "to talk together, to study together, and to pray together"(www.issues2000.org).
This plea to pray together raises questions about the separation of church and state. One aspect of civil religion is that it advocates spirituality without specific legislation, so technically church and state are not mixing.
When a powerful political figure urges his citizens to believe in God, it can be viewed as the State almost commanding people to believe in God. Freedom of religion has been distorted when a leader tells his people to restore their morals through prayer.
Lieberman has the right intentions in his desire to restore morality to America, but the way to solve this problem is not by advocating religion. Lieberman may be part of a my religious group, and in the minority, but he is doing exactly what many Christian politicians and have been vilified for - saying that faith in God is the basis of morality.
So when you cast your ballot for the next leader of our nation, remember that religion belongs in a place of worship, not in the voting booth.
(Michelle Drucker is a Cavalier Daily viewpoint writer.)
Read More
SULLIVAN: Ramp up physical accessibility on Grounds
By Scarlett Sullivan | YesterdayThe University must take responsibility for the inaccessibility of Grounds and work to promote accessibility for all students despite misguided laws.
EDITORIAL: Scapegoating students will not stop hazing
By Editorial Board | 4 days agoInstead of retroactively responding to extreme hazing allegations, we, and especially the University, must begin asking more probing questions about the role of fraternal organizations on Grounds.
EDITORIAL: Celebrating and reflecting on The Cavalier Daily’s independence
By Editorial Board | April 18, 2024Our independence grants us the ability to ask the hard questions and to say what University representatives cannot.
