Election: 'Resolutely religious' is wrong

Most of us are brought up to not discuss religion or politics, and mostly for good reason. These topics are historically considered impolite — except around those whom we feel most comfortable. Few people enjoy confrontation and both subjects tend to make for passionate exchanges. But I emphatically hold protected free speech and intelligent exchange more important than their absence. So at the risk of double-offending: I submit the Republican Political Party, currently courting the resolutely religious, has negatively affected our 2016 presidential race by failing to provide us a quality candidate.

Republicans used to (primarily) stand for smaller government and less regulation, which was supposed to correlate to more personal freedom. For at least the last 35 years though, a conservative morality has increasingly intruded the party ticket. The American Conservatism movement in the 1980s didn’t give us productive legislation; this subculture instead contributed to rock music album labels and our minimum mandatory sentence debacle. I don’t mind if my president looks to his God for inspiration or guidance, but I do care when an individual’s personal belief system affects our freedom or results in discrimination.

The Republican Party’s courting the religious voter resulted in Idahoans overwhelmingly endorsing Sen. Ted Cruz — a man running a Christian-Nation candidacy with a prominent “National Prayer Team” button on his website’s home page. He advertises “…restoring a culture of life, marriage and family…” and intends to open a Planned Parenthood investigation on Day One. He also doesn’t believe that a new Supreme Court justice should be appointed until a new president appoints one.

As comfortable as it seems, a Church-State nation only calms those with the same belief

system as the person they elect. Our government is elected to run a country and not advance an agenda that:

• restricts citizen-group freedoms, when such freedom only directly impacts the group. Oppression isn’t the solution to lawful behavior just because it is inconsistent with another’s own morality

• obstructs one of our three government branch’s function. Agree with our sitting president or not, it is our Senate’s duty to help fill the vacant Supreme Court justice seat.

There are many issues facing our country and we need our government teams focused on:

• differentiating real threats from baseless anxieties

• ensuring a stable economy that supports our national interests

• preventing or waging war when required

• maintaining a safe and stable infrastructure, and

• clearing unreasonable barriers to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

So let’s greet each other at worship this week, be kind and keep perspective as we remember that 99 percent of our community bows their head to the same God. Equally, that we remember that we’re electing our president this year, a person to lead our Executive Government Branch, and not a pope. Republicans and the American people should have done much better securing a competent leader capable of working with the Executive and Judicial Branches for us to endorse this fall, instead of exploiting passionate demographics for votes and using Idaho to endorse a pariah within his own political party.

•••

Dana Silva is a Coeur d’Alene resident.