Former Gov. Mitt Romney — or, more accurately, his capable speech writers — was given a fairly daunting task. With his position in the polls faltering, and much of the Republican base unwilling to support a Mormon candidate, Romney apparently decided it was time for “The Religion Speech,” which purportedly would settle anti-Mormon anxieties.
For months, the media has raised the specter of this being a JFK-like speech, modeled after the address Kennedy gave in 1960 to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association in which the then-senator proclaimed, “I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute.”
Except, Romney found himself in a tough spot. He couldn’t embrace the Kennedy model, because the Republican Party’s far-right base rejects the principle of church-state separation. He couldn’t defend his specific theological beliefs, because the GOP’s conservative activists aren’t going to grow more tolerant after learning Latter-Day Saints’ doctrines.
Instead, Romney split the difference — and sang from the religious right’s hymnal.
“We separate church and state affairs in this country, and for good reason. No religion should dictate to the state nor should the state interfere with the free practice of religion. But in recent years, the notion of the separation of church and state has been taken by some well beyond its original meaning. They seek to remove from the public domain any acknowledgment of God. Religion is seen as merely a private affair with no place in public life. It is as if they are intent on establishing a new religion in America — the religion of secularism. They are wrong.
“The founders proscribed the establishment of a state religion, but they did not countenance the elimination of religion from the public square. We are a nation ‘Under God’ and in God, we do indeed trust.
“We should acknowledge the Creator as did the Founders — in ceremony and word. He should remain on our currency, in our pledge, in the teaching of our history, and during the holiday season, nativity scenes and menorahs should be welcome in our public places. Our greatness would not long endure without judges who respect the foundation of faith upon which our constitution rests. I will take care to separate the affairs of government from any religion, but I will not separate us from ‘the God who gave us liberty.'”
This wasn’t the JFK speech; it was the anti-JFK speech.
Kennedy believed in an “absolute” separation of church and state; Romney believes government neutrality on matters of faith is a mistake. Kennedy believed in leaving religious institutions free of government aid or favor; Romney believes the government must take an active role in preventing secularism from taking over. Romney didn’t echo the wise words of John F. Kennedy; he repudiated them.
The political strategy behind all of this isn’t subtle — Romney is appealing to right-wing conservatives by telling them he may share a (slightly) different faith tradition, but he’ll embrace their worldview and promote their ideas as president.
The question, of course, is whether any of this is going to work. Given the landscape, I seriously doubt it. The speech seemed designed to address a problem that doesn’t exist — Romney sought to remind Republicans that when it comes to matters of faith, he may not agree with theologically, but he’ll stand with them politically. But that’s a misdiagnosis of Romney’s electoral problem — the GOP base has already heard Romney offer similar assurances throughout the year, but many of these activists simply aren’t comfortable with a Mormon candidate.
Today’s speech was filled with warm rhetoric and well-written turns-of-phrase, but I watched the speech trying to imagine what a conservative, 60-year-old evangelical Iowan who thinks Mormons are cultists would conclude if he were in the audience today. My hunch is, he was impressed with the message, but not the messenger.
Other assorted observations from my notes:
* “Freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom.” Really? What on earth does this mean?
* “Americans do not respect believers of convenience. Americans tire of those who would jettison their beliefs, even to gain the world.” Really? Didn’t Romney jettison his pro-choice, pro-gay, pro-stem-cell-research beliefs, just to gain the presidency?
* “There is one fundamental question about which I often am asked. What do I believe about Jesus Christ? I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Savior of mankind. My church’s beliefs about Christ may not all be the same as those of other faiths.” It’s that last part that evangelicals don’t seem to like.
* “Religious tolerance would be a shallow principle indeed if it were reserved only for faiths with which we agree.” True, but why, then, did Romney vow to discriminate against Muslims when choosing cabinet members?
* “There are some who would have a presidential candidate describe and explain his church’s distinctive doctrines. To do so would enable the very religious test the founders prohibited in the Constitution. No candidate should become the spokesman for his faith.” In other words, stop asking him about Mormon stuff.
* “These American values, this great moral heritage, is shared and lived in my religion as it is in yours. I was taught in my home to honor God and love my neighbor. I saw my father march with Martin Luther King.” A subtle reminder that while the LDS Church has a racist past, Romney wants people to overlook it.
We’ll see how all of this goes over.
Update: The AP is running this headline: “Romney vows Mormon church would not run White House.” And that’s true, Romney did make that vow. But that captures the speech in a JFK frame — Kennedy promised that the Vatican wouldn’t have undue influence over his presidency, and Romney is making a similar promise now.
But therein lies Romney’s problem — in 1960, Kennedy critics were genuinely worried about the Catholic Church having too much power in the White House. In 2007, Romney’s critics aren’t particularly concerned about LDS leaders having the president on speed-dial; they just don’t like Mormons because of their theology. In this sense, assuring Americans that the “Mormon church would not run the White House” is utterly meaningless; it’s addressing a fear that doesn’t exist.
Second Update: In 1960, Kennedy referenced Catholicism 20 times. This morning, Romney used the word “Mormon” just once. Interesting.
