Last
year in the United States, we reelected Barack Obama to the presidency. The race between the democratic Obama and
Republican Mitt Romney was just as tumultuous as any election. Both sides galvanized against each other,
sometimes stooping to mudslinging techniques and sensationalized news about the
opponent. One issue that both sides used
against each other is religion. In the
2012 election, Obama was accused (wrongly) by a lot of opposition of being a
Muslim, whereas Romney is a practicing Mormon.
The accusations against Obama stem from his parentage. Very weak associations with Islam in his
family led to viral accusations in the vein of “The Muslims have said they plan
on destroying the US from the inside out, what better way to start than at the
highest level - through the President of the United States, one of their own!!!!”. The rumors against Obama have been
rationalized as false, but the fact that they ever came up in the first place
will be remembered for a long time to come (Emery, 2013).
As for Romney, his status as a
Mormon has never been hidden. But it did
provide a way for opposition to pick on him during the campaign. Journalist Katie Glueck describes one
instance when Romney went on a talk show to discuss his platform, and found
himself defending his religion instead. “I’m
not running to talk about Mormonism,” Romney said, becoming visibly irritated
with the host for focusing on something that the presidential candidate did not
think should be important to the election (Glueck, 2012).
This is not unusual in United
States elections. The vast majority of
presidents have been Protestants. In
fact, John F. Kennedy is still the first and only US president to have been a
Catholic, and even he did not win it without a fight. Many Protestants in the country worried that
Kennedy would be too beholden to the Vatican and try to establish Catholicism
as a national religion. It required a
lot of expertly-written speeches and campaign spending to earn Kennedy a very
close win (J.F.K. Library).
The dominant culture in this
case is the Protestant population of the US, which does have a long history as
a vocal majority in the country. Martin
and Nakayama (2013) discuss the way a dominant culture, when dealing with other
nondominant cultures, will use language to establish and enforce their own
worldview. Indeed, just the thought that
a politician might pray to Allah
instead of God (both words for the same deity, according to many religious
scholars) leads people to lose their minds.
The fact that Mormonism was once viewed as a “cult” (a word with heavily
negative connotations) fueled severe criticism from Mitt Romney’s
opposition. In a cultural space as
diverse as the United States, this mindset is childish at best, and destructive
at worst. Romney put it best when he
scolded people for focusing on his religion instead of his platform; we don’t
elect religions, we elect platforms.
The language of Protestantism
nearly cost JFK his presidential race, and it has irrevocably besmirched Obama’s
name in the eyes of many. The labels
placed on other religions express worries that they may claim too much of a
politician’s attention and motives. The
very public social positions of politicians ensure that their religion will
always be considered by their constituents, even though this country has no
established religion.
References
Emery, D. (2013). Is
Barack Obama a Muslim? About.com.
Retrieved from http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/bl_barack_obama_muslim.htm
Glueck, K. (2012,
November 6). Mitt Romney Mormon video goes viral. Politico. Retrieved from http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/83310.html
Martin, J.N., &
Nakayama, T.K. (2013). Intercultural communication in contexts (6th
ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw Hill.
John F. Kennedy and
Religion. John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum. Retrieved from http://www.jfklibrary.org/JFK/JFK-in-History/JFK-and-Religion.aspx
This is a great point that gets missed a lot! People typically always have chosen sides prior to the debates. So, if, for example, they are in support of Obama, they might not notice how unnecessary it is that Romney's religion is brought up because they are in support of Obama and constantly want to see Romney in a negative or uncomfortable light.
ReplyDeleteWhile religion might seem unnecessary to be discussed in some instances, it can be the reasons behind some decisions leaders make in others. This can be cause for concern for many. While this can be misjudged at times, it can be true in other cases.
It is important to avoid negative language, like you said though!
I think it is interesting how the government tries to keep a line between church and state while the general public is so quick to attach a religion to a political figure. The fact that religion is so important for people to sway their vote is a huge part of politics. You did a great job of highlighting both the positive and negative aspects of this in your article!
ReplyDeleteGreat connection to the history of religion and presidential politics. I enjoyed reading your thoughts on the matter.
ReplyDelete