http://digex.livejournal.com/ ([identity profile] digex.livejournal.com) wrote in [personal profile] wombat_socho 2006-11-10 02:30 am (UTC)

seriously, there is a valid discussion to be had here, if we can keep emotion in check long enough to have it, since some of this is emotional some times. when we hire someone to do a politicians job, we are hiring them to use their judgement, and other things, in our place, sort of as our proxy, or a proxy melange of all of the represented. if a candidate says to me "my faith is part of who I am, and it gives me structure, guidance, and informs me in making decisions" then I can deal with that - if a candidate says "I talk to god and I will do what god tells me to do in performing my job" then I have a problem with it - I didn't elect god to the post, I elected the candidate. there are people out there who may not feel that "the closer to god the better" when it really means that someone is taking "the word of god" and trying to apply it directly to the reality without the buffer of a human mind. in addition, there are those who do not believe in god, or perhaps believe in some god(s) structure which may be very much different from what the politician believes in - these people may feel very much not represented. maybe ascii graphics? god ======= person ====== actions seems OK god ======+person +===== actions seems questionable | | to me +------+ doug

Post a comment in response:

This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting