Why the Least Religious Candidate is Going to Get My Vote

In his 2006 book, "The Theocons: Secular America Under Siege," Damon Linker tells the story of the rise of the theocons, who were and are mostly Catholic or Orthodox Jewish politicians and political theorists who orchestrated the reintroduction of religion into American politics. Their goal was very plain: make America the nation Under God again.

They reacted harshly to the moral revolution of the 60s, they pray every day, and they see many things tolerated today that they consider to be moral affronts to God. Their supporters are today known collectively as "the religious right-" voters who vote mainly based on issues that offend their theology such as abortion, gay marriage, and the teaching of science in public schools.

The 2008 election is shaping up to be another feeding 2000-style frenzy for the affection of millions of strongly religious voters, who are mostly evangelical Protestants. While the Republican candidates have obviously already forfeited their intellects in favor of appeasing the American Bible-thumper (who could forget the "raise your hand if you do not believe in evolution" question from a recent GOP debate?), the Democrats are also leaping with vigor upon the religion crowd. Has John Edwards ever juxtaposed two sentences in speeches that did not include the word "God?"

But even Edwards' more religiously moderate companions are joining in. Note the ease with which Obama dismisses the religion of his family (his father is an ex-Muslim atheist and his mother is a non-practicing Southern Baptist) in favor of frequent references to his affinity for the African American Christian spiritual tradition. Behold Hillary Clinton's ability to turn damaging questions about her coping with her husband's adultery into a vote harvesting reply about how her religion helped her in her darkest hour.

I unfortunately do not find such things terribly endearing in a candidate. In fact, I find that pandering to the evangelical crowd rather turns me away.