http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/3...w_emphasis_Dean_touts_his_ChristianityP.shtml Seeking a new emphasis, Dean touts his Christianity Southern campaign plans to increase religious references By Sarah Schweitzer, Globe Staff, 12/25/2003 MANCHESTER, N.H. -- Presidential contender Howard B. Dean, who has said little about religion while campaigning except to emphasize the separation of church and state, described himself in an interview with the Globe as a committed believer in Jesus Christ and said he expects to increasingly include references to Jesus and God in his speeches as he stumps in the South. Dean, 55, who practices Congregationalism but does not often attend church and whose wife and children are Jewish, explained the move as a desire to share his beliefs with audiences willing to listen. His comments came as a rival, Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut, chastised other Democrats for forgetting ''that faith was central to our founding and remains central to our national purpose.'' The move is striking for a man who has steadfastly kept his personal life out of the campaign, rarely offering biographical information, much less his religious beliefs. But in the Globe interview, Dean said that Jesus was an important influence in his life and that he would probably share with some voters the model Jesus has served for him. ''Christ was someone who sought out people who were disenfranchised, people who were left behind,'' Dean said. ''He fought against self-righteousness of people who had everything . . . He was a person who set an extraordinary example that has lasted 2000 years, which is pretty inspiring when you think about it.'' He acknowledged that he was raised in the ''Northeast'' tradition of not discussing religious beliefs in public, and said he held back in New Hampshire, where that is the practice. But in other areas, such as the South, he said, he would discuss his beliefs more openly. Some of Dean's competitors have made no secret of their religious beliefs. US Representative Richard A. Gephardt of Missouri regularly describes his son's recovery from an illness as a gift of God, while Lieberman takes pains to emphasize his inability to attend campaign events on Saturdays because of the Jewish Sabbath. On the Republican side, President Bush is outspoken about his religious journey, which he has said began in 1986, when he gave up drinking and recommitted his heart to Jesus Christ, whom he named as his favorite philosopher. Political analysts note that discussing religious beliefs could provide an important link to Southern voters. Greater numbers of Southern voters feel religion and politics need not be separate. An ABC/Washington Post poll released this week showed that 46 percent of Southerners said a president should rely on his religious beliefs in making policy decisions, compared with 40 percent nationwide and 28 percent in the East. The South is a potential problem area for Dean's campaign for the Democratic nomination, particularly as rivals like retired Army general Wesley K. Clark of Arkansas and Senator John Edwards of North Carolina invoke their Southern roots. In recent years, the South has been tough ground for any Democrat in the general election. ''If the Dean people are playing chess instead of checkers and are moving down the board and trying to figure out how to win a general election as well as how to win a nomination, they had best explain Dean to the people in terms of religiosity,'' said Stephen Hess, a senior fellow in governmental studies at the Brookings Institution. Hess added that Dean's public showing of faith could help distance him from the issue of gay marriage, expected to be a contentious subject in the 2004 political season. Dean, who backed the creation of civil unions for gays and lesbians in Vermont, has said gay marriage should be left to the realm of churches. Just how much Dean will inject religion into his campaign, Hess said, remains to be seen. He pointed to an appearance at an African-American church in Columbia, S.C., as an example of what voters might hear in the future. There, before nearly 100 parishioners, Dean said in a rhythmic tone notably different from his usual stampede through policy points, ''In this house of the Lord, we know that the power rests in God's hands and in Jesus's hands for helping us. But the power also is on this, God's earth -- Remember Jesus said, `Render unto God those things that are God's but unto Caesar those things that are Caesar's,' '' a reference to Jesus's admonition that the secular and religious remain separate. Dean continued: ''In this political season there is also other power. Not as important or as strong as the power of Jesus but it's important power in the world of politics and the world of Caesar.'' Dean's own religious background is a complex mix. His mother is Catholic, but he was raised Episcopal like his father, a warden in the Episcopal church the family attended near their weekend home in East Hampton, N.Y. Dean attended St. George's, a boarding school in Newport, R.I., where he went to church ''literally every day and twice on Sunday.'' Religion was a private matter for Dean growing up. ''My father used to tell us how much strength he got from religion, but we didn't have Bible readings. There are traditions where people do that. We didn't,'' he said. ''People in the Northeast don't talk about their religion. It's a very personal private matter, and that's the tradition I was brought up in.'' While attending Albert Einstein College of Medicine in the Bronx, he met his wife, Judith Steinberg, who is Jewish. The two were married by a judge, and neither opted to convert, Dean said, because both felt strongly about their respective religions. ''We considered becoming Unitarian as sort of a compromise that wasn't going to respect either person's tradition,'' Dean said. ''But you know, our religions mattered enough that we didn't really want to change.'' The couple's two children, Anne, a sophomore at Yale University, and Paul, a high school senior in Burlington, were given their choice of religion. Both chose Judaism. Dean himself made a decision about religion in the early 1980s, opting to leave the local Episcopal church when it sided with landowners seeking to preserve private property in lieu of a bike path in Burlington. ''Churches are institutions that are about doing the work of God on earth, and I didn't think [opposing the bike path] was very Godlike and thought it was hypocritical of me to be a member of such an institution,'' Dean said. Dean chose Congregationalism -- a denomination, he said, that suits him, because ''there is no centralized -- almost no centralized authority structure -- and I like that.'' Dean does not attend church regularly, but he said he prays daily. He is a steadfast believer in separation of church and state, he said, and opposes the placement of the Ten Commandments in a courthouse, is uncomfortable with a prayer invocation before a congressional session, though he would leave the matter to Congress, and is not bothered by the phrase ''under God'' in the Pledge of Allegiance. On the issue of a moment of silence in schools, Dean said, ''Whatever the courts say is OK with me.'' The US Supreme Court has struck down state-required moments of silence in schools. Of the president's faith-based initiative for social services, Dean said, it is ''overdone.'' ''It's not a bad thing to have churches involved in delivering social services, but I think the president has used it to reward certain churches and make it less likely for others churches to prosper,'' he said. Asked whether a presidential candidate could win without talking about religious faith, Dean said, ''Dick Nixon and Ronald Reagan never said much about religion. I think it's important, and you have to respect other people's religious beliefs and honor them, but you don't have to pander to them.'' He added, ''That's why I don't get offended when George Bush or Joe Lieberman talk about their religion . . . I have a feeling it has something to do with them as a human being, and they are entitled to talk about what makes them human.''
That's interesting: 1) He doesn't go to church 2) He is not married to someone with the same faith as him 3) His children were not raised in the same faith as him He doesn't really sound like a Christian to me. If someone is truly a christian then their faith should be so important to them that it guides practically every decision (including the selection of a mate and the guiding principles in raising children). It sounds like someone using whatever he can to get votes.
Lincoln never went to church, never joined a congregation, never raised his kids under the Christian norm, yet it is hard to point to a President who's task was more informed by the bible and the ideas of Christianity than Lincoln. I tend to like Dean's stance, but I am not much given to outward displays of religiosity and find the recent (Clinton included) need for political candidates to fit a certain mold in their public pronouncements a bit unseemly. If Dean (or anyone else) is more comfortable not discussing things, I think that's fine. As for his kids, he gave them the choice, which I think is also a good move and shows he is comfortable in his faith while recognizing there may be other paths... a position in keeping with one who would be a leader in this country rather than a leader in the church. As far as marrying someone from a different faith, I see no problem in that either. There are many marriages of the sort and if love is dependent on a certain interpretation then it is a false love that I think (and believe) my God would not support... why would he allow the creation and growth of love between two people and then not allow them to act on it?
I wasn't saying Dean's faith or beliefs are right or wrong. I'm just saying that if he's calling himself a Christian he ought to read the Bible and see what he's saying he believes in. I don't care if he's athiest, Christian or Budhist --- But if he's going to wave a flag of Christianity his life should back it up. The Bible clearly says that we should raise our children in the faith. If Dean is truly a Christian he would do that. If you are truly a Christian and truly have accepted the principles of Christianity as the guiding principles of your life --- it would be very difficult (but not impossible) to live in a marriage where both parties did not share those beliefs. If you are a wishy-washy Christian then that wouldn't be as big of an issue. I also agree that candidate should not feel the need to show outward signs of their faith. But if they choose to do that they should expect to be questioned.
Where's that "Report this post to Refman" button? I wouldn't call him a "wishy-washy Christian," but to each his Dulcinea. Which reminds me, have you read that part of the Bible about splinters and planks? I haven't but there's a good bit about it in Godspell. I think you can get it on video.
You are taking it all wrong...... If I said I'm a Budhist to get some Budhists on my side but didn't follow or even know what Budhism stood for I would be a hypocrite. I'm not judging him I'm just saying don't wave a banner that you don't understand.
I'm not taking anything wrong, Geronimo. You flat out said that a Christian who marries a Jew is a wishy-washy Christian. Our friend Refman is a Christian who's married to a Jew and I think he would take issue with your remark. So would any of my other friends in interfaith marriages. Assuming you know a man's heart is offensive. Assuming you know better than them how they should conduct their relationship with their God is passing offensive. It's hypocritical and un-Christian.
I agree with the few remarks Dean gave about Jesus. Not that I look to politicians for this. And I'm not very religious either. But I know enough of the Bible to know that Jesus promoted peace and helping one another. How does it go? "If a man strikes you, turn to him the other cheek." It doesn't go over in the modern world, I guess. We react with more of the Old Testament: "An eye for an eye."
When it comes to choosing a political candidate, I don't give a damn what their religious affiliation is. That should not be important.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/12/26/elec04.prez.dean.bin.laden/index.html The above link is an article about a comment Howard Dean made today in which he said he is witholding judgement on Osama Bin Laden until he is tried in court. Now if you read the article, you can see Dean is trying to uphold the values of due process, but you know damn well that 75% of the public is only going to hear "Dean isn't sure whether or not Osama Bin Laden is guilty." For that reason, I think it was very unwise for Dean to make these comments and it was even more unwise to later in the day turn a 180 Wesley Clark style and say that "Bin Laden has admitted he is behind many terrorist acts against the U.S. and that the death penalty was invented to deal with such men." Unlike religious preference, the above is a reason to question voting for a potential representative. All campaign long, Howard Dean has been shooting himself, and his party I might add, in the foot by publicly stating his extreme views. After today's comment, you would think that the democratic party would want to start distancing themselves from Dean who is starting to look more and more like a loose cannon for the party's presidential hopes in 2004. Even if you agree with Dean's extreme views, you have to know that you are in the minority. I can't believe the Democratic party would want to put all of their eggs in the basket of someone who so loudly and publicly caters to a minority opinion on the biggest issue facing candidates in next year's election.
How confused is Howard Dean these days? How direction-less is his campaign? It seems as though he is completely lost. It's time to find your moral compass, Howard. You are a desparate man. You reek of fear. Turning your back on your hard core of liberal supporters by proclaiming your devotion to religion is a very awkward move that simply puts your desperation on display. What are you going to do next, Howard? Say your ancestors are from Africa? Maybe that will win you some votes in the South too. Howard, you sound completely disinginuous with this latest salvo. Will your positions on the issues support this newfound love affair with Jesus? It's obviously not strong enough to get you to church on Sundays. LIFE SUPPORT
Lame, Rings. Name the "extreme" views. And include quotes, with context, from the candidate. Is a belief in due process, even for the most heinous criminals, extreme? Is the belief that we are not significantly safer since the capture of Saddam extreme? (The polls say otherwise.) Dean is a moderate, centrist Democrat, who opposed the Iraq war. A majority of Democrats also opposed the war. And, incidentally, Dean has supported the last several American military actions (including Afghanistan, Bosnia and the first Gulf War). He opposed this one for the same reasons half of the country did. Not exactly extreme. List the extreme views. You can't. I'm voting for Dean despite his centrist record and platform. I'm a liberal, but I'm voting for him anyway -- instead of a more liberal candidate like Kucinich, Sharpton, Braun, Kerry or Gephardt -- because he is the only candidate tough enough and smart enough to take the fight to Bush. I'm voting for him because he's not extreme. And because he can win.
Is that all you can counter with, Batman? Your personal insult indicates to me that you realize that the voting public will see things as I do. Don't be afraid -- attempt to dispute my analysis if you can. Set me straight, if you disagree. Otherwise, PULL THE PLUG
Jorge, if you call that an analysis there's really nothing else to discuss. Your blathering's even sillier than Kerry's or Lieberman's. And that is truly saying something. Of course, the more all you guys suggest Dean's on 'life support' (LOL. Woulda thought you'd have retired that one after using it on Bill White. Never underestimate the gall of a chumpion.) the higher his numbers go. Conventional wisdom does not apply. He's going straight to the voters. Sucks for you guys, but they like that.
Using Christianity to get votes is wrong. It really is nothing but emotional pan-handling. "God" does not take sides, it is the sides.
Whoe'er imagines prudence all his own, Or deems that he hath powers to speak and judge Such as none other hath, when they are known, They are found shallow. --Sophocles, Antigone
You mean it's not important to you. But how can you say it shouldn't be important to someone else? Shouldn't that be an individual matter?
I'm going to get attacked for this but here goes: I don't claim to know anyone's heart but it someone is a Christian than these facts should be true: 1) You believe that Jesus Christ died for your sins. The only way to heaven is through faith in him 2) People of the Jewish faith do not believe Jesus is the Messiah 3) Therefore people of the Jewish faith do not have the key to heaven 4) If you marry someone who is not a Christian you married someone that (unless something changes) you will not spend eternity with That being true one of the 3 must be true (unless I am missing something) 1) You do everything you can to lead your spouse to Christ 2) You don't believe some of the basic facets of Christianity Where is my logic flaw?
