Apparently the Katie Couric vice-presidential interviews crossed paths with our class this week. Watch and learn (?), as you get ready for tonight's debate (The Donnybrook on Delmar! The Skunking on Skinker!) at Wash. U. in St. Louis:
Palin actually makes a halfway decent point about Jefferson at the beginning of her answer, about on par with Couric's poor quotation, then goes downhill from there.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I think Gov. Palin did alright with this question. She pointed out that Jefferson didn't want religion imposed on people by the government, that the wisdom of the people shouldn't be underestimated (truth will prevail when liberty is freely exercised), and people have the right to publically and personally express their religious beliefs.
However, I think it isn't completely accurate to say that this notion was always “ingrained in the foundation of our country.” When the Bill of Rights was adopted, there were 6 of 7 states with an established religion for their state. I think this is a phenomenon that isn't exactly clear for all Americans still today. I think many Americans would like an established religion in their state (or at least a list of a few that aren’t established!). However, Jefferson definitely had an opinion on the matter, which is outlined in the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom. I think Palin sidestepped the hard-and-fast answer on whether or not there should be complete separation of church and state, which Jefferson would have certainly agreed with. Also, I think Couric was trying to draw out a conflict with the use of an extreme/permanent symbol of a wall between the two.
Based on her answer, I think she alluded to a more judicial approach, which Jefferson would agree with also, which defines separation of government and religion as being based on thought and action with regard to where the law can be applied. For a politician, it is less controversial, and even “deferential,” to refer to the precedent of Supreme Court cases like Reynolds v US and Davis v Beeson, which involved litigation regarding separation of government and religion. Then again, I could be reading into it. Of course, no one asked her opinion of Jefferson’s thoughts. She is likely far more conservative!
As for Biden, if he is a foreign policy guru, maybe he should take note to Israel, where religion has an impact on governance and they have a wall…oh wait, wrong wall…never mind (joke). Also, not every country that has religious influence on governance is in a state of turmoil. However, I do agree with the point he is making. I just wanted to point out that if your state has a religious character it had better have a very religiously homogenous population, or your better have an autocratic government. Biden did good too.
Blogs are like letters to the editor in comic books, without the "No Prize".
That's probably an insult to comic book letters pages, Jed. At least back in my day, the kids who wrote in "Iron Man" and "Daredevil" and such were seriously well-informed about their chosen subject.
No Prizes would be a great idea for the political blogosphere. For those who do not get this reference, a No Prize was what the Marvel Comics editors would "award" a reader who came up with a clever explanation for an inconsistency they found in the stories: how a dead character came back to life, why a certain place looked different, etc. Politicians really need fans who can do that kind of work for them.
Post a Comment