cur-mud-geon: anyone who hates hypocrisy and pretense and has the temerity to say so; anyone with the habit of pointing out unpleasant facts in an engaging and humorous manner
President Obama spoke to the assemblage at the National Prayer Breakfast yesterday. He spoke of his economic policies as having come from his Christian faith and cited the passage "for unto whom much is given, much shall be required" as he dicussed his effort to increase taxes on "the rich", in order to provide more for "the poor". This has caused a lot of discussion and one of the themes has been that of the cynics who wonder if this relatively new approach from the President is part of his differentiation of himself from the likely opposition candidate in the coming election, the Morman, Mitt Romney.
Another group of cynics question if the President is really a practicing member of the Christian faith or if this is simply his effort to attract another voting block for the Fall.
I do not profess to know if either of the cynical positions is valid or invalid; I'll take the President at his word that he spoke from a true Christian conviction. I am not qualified to speak to anyone having become a Christian or not since I only know about me.
What I can take away from this is that we will very likely see religion as an element in the coming race if it involves Mitt Romney which it now seems will be the case. I don't recall religion being involved in the first campaign run by President Obama but I may've forgotten that or missed it.
We have many issues that need be debated by the candidates on the basis of each issue but I am concerned if this is done with the use of religion or of the Bible to make one's position seem more or less desirable. Faith journeys are, to my mind, very much individual journeys. Given the passion that is a definite part of political campaigns, and given the passion that can be, and often is, found in debates over religious positions, I am troubled that we may be crossing into an arena that will prove problematic.