LITTLE ROCK — It was only a matter of time before some bigot drew a bead on Mitt Romney and decreed him unfit to be president solely on the basis of his Mormon faith.
So it went the other day, when Southern Baptist minister Robert Jeffress took the stage at a conservative confab and introduced his friend Rick Perry as “a genuine follower of Jesus Christ.” Offstage, Jeffress was less cutesy. Hetold the media that, “by theological definition, Mormonism is a cult” and that born-again Christians “should always prefer a competent Christian to a competent non-Christian like Mitt Romney.”
And yet, at least according to the Constitution, there isn’t supposed to be such a test. Article VI statesthat “no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.” Whatever happened to the conservative credo about hewing to the words of the Founding Fathers?
Romney has been dogged by the Mormon “issue” since he announced for the presidency five years ago. He has a right to feel frustrated. His faith should not be a disqualifying factor “by theological definition.” I recognize that Perry is desperate to salvage his candidacy, but it is patently unconstitutional-and, according to many mainline Christian leaders, un-Christian-to engage in religious discrimination on the stump.
The bigotry tactic may be shrewd in the short run, of course. Roughly 45 percent of all Republican primary voters are conservative evangelical Christians, and they’re probably as wary of Romney today as they were in 2008, when he drew only 11 percent of evangelicals’ vote in the crucial South Carolina primary-and failed to crack 20 percent in any Southern primary.Even outside the South, the “cult” perception is endemic; in a summer Gallup poll, 22 percent of Americans said they would never vote for a Mormon.
But I find that unfair. It’s akin to saying a Jew can’t be president simply because he is a Jew-an argument most of us would swiftly dismiss as bigotry.
Jeffress offered no evidence that any of Romney’s policy stances had been influenced or crafted by the Mormon Church; his membership in the church alone is deemed the deal-breaker. It’s no wonder Peter Wehner, a former George W. Bush adviser, wrote last weekend that Jeffress was “embarrassingly unequipped for American politics,” and it’s a sign of Perry’s politically tin ear that he’s still standing with the pastor.
Chris Christie got it right Tuesday when he endorsed Romney and rebuked Jeffress: “These kind of religious matters have nothing to do with the quality of someone’s ability to lead. You have to evaluate their record, evaluate their character, their integrity, not based upon their religious beliefs.” If only Romney’s GOP rivals would grow spines and say the same thing.
How nice it would be if someone cited the wisdom of the Founders, as reflected in Article VI. How nice if someone told the evangelical Christians it’s hypocritical to assail Mormonism, given that these same Christians frequently depict themselves as victims of bigotry. But that won’t happen, not when so many evangelicals’ votes are up for grabs. In his bid to make the Republicans a more tolerant party, Mitt Romney is on his own.
-
———◊-
———
Dick Polman is a columnist for the Philadelphia Inquirer.
Editorial, Pages 10 on 10/17/2011