Faith In Politics (But Only The Acceptable Faith)

A few weeks ago, I blogged on Rick Santorum's hypocrisy regarding faith in the public sphere. For him, there should be more faith in the public sphere (he's not a fan of the separation of Church and State) but only the faith(s) acceptable to him and people like him.

Good religion (his) should be in, bad religion (Islam, not-his) should be out.

Still no word from Lil Ricky on how that gibes with this:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...

But I digress.

Needless to say, this feeling is widespread amongst our good friends on the other side of the political aisle. From Huffingtonpost:

While most eyes were on the Conservative Principles Political Action Committee conference in Iowa on Saturday, many of us who follow the religious right were more interested in another conference, also held in Iowa, on Thursday and Friday. This other conference was the Rediscover God in America conference, where all the same potential 2012 Republican presidential hopefuls that appeared at the Saturday's Conservative Principles PAC conference told us what they really think -- that America should be governed by biblical law.

Sure, there was a lot of talk about important issues like the economy at the Conservative Principles PAC conference, but it was at the Rediscover God in America conference that we learned that all of our economic policies should be based on the Bible. And who did we learn this from? None other than Christian nationalist pseudo-historian David Barton, who kicked off the conference with a lengthy presentation of his usual historical hogwash. Then, one by one, as the potential Republican presidential candidates took the podium to let the audience full of pastors know just how Christian they are, each began by gushing about what a great historian and good friend David Barton is.

Among them:

But the most outrageous statement by far came from Mike Huckabee, who expressed his admiration for Barton by saying that he "almost wished" that "all Americans would be forced -- forced at gunpoint no less -- to listen to every David Barton message."

While that last part should please our 2nd Amendment friends, again no word on how forcing someone to listen to a religious message meshes with the 1st Amendment.

But that's just on the Christian end, what does Huckabee have to say about Islam? From Politics Daily:

Just days after stirring Muslim ire for ripping Islam as "the antithesis of the gospel of Christ," Republican presidential contender Mike Huckabee again sharply critiqued the religion, telling an evangelical magazine that Muslims are receiving special treatment "at the expense of others" -- apparently referring to Christians -- and that is "un-American."

In the interview with Christianity Today, Huckabee was asked about New York Rep. Peter King's controversial plan to hold hearings in March on the alleged radicalization of American Muslims, and Huckabee responded by talking about concerns that Muslims wanted to "impose" the Islamic religious law code known as Sharia on Americans.

Sharia law cannot be used to trump U.S. laws, but conservatives, including Newt Gingrich -- another GOP hopeful for 2012 -- have gained traction with their base by arguing that it can, and Huckabee seemed to be joining that camp.

"We live in a country where people are free to be Muslim. They're not free, however, to impose a Muslim law as if it were civil law," Huckabee, a Baptist and former pastor, said.

On the other hand, imposing Christianity as if it were a civil law? That's completely OK.

Can I say it again?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...

Can I get an amen?