THE AMERICAN VOTER: RELIGIOUS INTOLERANT?

We often talk of benchmarks, and precedents in American history. But, this election period will mark a defining moment in American history. In no other election have candidates represented minority sectors of the nation in quite the same fashion as this one enfolds.

Pick a minority, they are well represented....female, African American, Mormonite, Baptist, Hispanic, the list goes on and on. Obviously, the white male dominated political "club" is about to be picked up and shaken for all it is worth. However behind the times, America is slow and apprehensive to elect anyone but a white male. But times are changing (if only at a snails pace). According to the polls, three such candidates have a real chance at the top spot (once called the "most powerful man on the face of the planet"). Hillary Clinton seems to have overcome any gender bias, and in fact, is leading in the majority of polls by double digits. Barack Obama has done very well thus far in the polls, and has somewhat been able to put race into the background (if not trivialized by a mere asterisk).

However, the most challenging situation is of one Willard "Mitt" Romney, a member of the Mormon church (or "sect" if you prefer). He is intelligent, well educated, a good communicator, and even has the Kennedyish good looks which do not belay his actual chronological age of 60.

Romney and his brain trust have been loath to discuss his individual religion, preferring to sidestep the subject with platitudes of freedom of religion, and the like.

However, seeing the inevitable obstacle which WILL prevent him from any hope of achieving the nomination, he gave a Kennedy copy cat speech on religion...except he didn't discuss his religion.

What he did discuss is the ultimate question of religious pluralism, a concept I predict the mainstream American voter will not wrap their craniums around. Thus, history will show again, that in order to be elected President in this country, the whiter, the more masculine, and yes, the most mainstream of religions is an absolute prerequisite for the position.

I do not favor him, nor would I ever vote for the gentleman, however I am hoping for some indication that this country is at least crawling away from its bigoted past, not to mention its ignorant past. In this vain, as a public service, I end with a definition from Wiki of religious pluralism. Whether you believes it applies in Governors Romney's case, well that is for you to decide...

RELIGIOUS PLURALISM is a loosely defined term concerning peaceful relations between different religions, and is also used in a number of related ways:

Religious Pluralism may describe the worldview that one's religion is not the sole and exclusive source of truth, and thus recognizes that some level of truth and value exists in at least some other religions.

Religious pluralism often is used as a synonym for ecumenism. At a minimum, ecumenism is the promotion of unity, co-operation, or improved understanding between different religions, or denominations within the same religion

As a synonym for religious tolerance, which is a condition of harmonious co-existence between adherents of different religions or religious denominations.

Adherents of religious pluralism recognize that different religions make different truth claims. For example, most Christians believe that Jesus was God incarnate and that he died for the salvation of humanity while Buddhists believe that enlightenment liberates the soul from the cycle of rebirth so that it may enter into Nirvana. Christians do not claim that Christ leads to Nirvana nor are Buddhists claiming that Buddha is the son of God.