Religion and politics: dangers of policy based on faith

by Damon Young

Like all Mormon ex-missionaries, Mitt Romney knows what is best for women.

“I respect and will protect,” he said during his 2002 campaign for Massachusetts governor, “a woman’s right to choose”.

Unsurprisingly, this rhetoric did not last. As a conservative Christian, the Republican presidential candidate will oppose women’s control over their own reproductive destiny. This is why Romney tried to veto a Massachusetts law requiring religious hospitals to provide contraception for rape victims. It is why he is now critical of Obama’s plan to force religious institutions to cover contraception in their employee insurance.

The White House initiative requires organisations like universities and hospitals to buy insurance for their workers, with contraception included alongside other health services. For the Democrat government, this is chiefly a health policy: giving women the power to avoid unwanted or unsafe pregnancy, while still enjoying consensual sex.

But for conservatives like Romney, this is a religious issue, which transgresses Christians’ profound beliefs on the sanctity of life. Romney, campaigning in Colorado, called this a “violation of conscience”. His colleague, Ohio Republican John Boehner, called Obama’s legislation an “attack by the federal government on religious freedom”.

It is a typical stoush in American politics, but the issue reveals some important religious mistakes. It also suggests some dangers of policy based on faith.
Read the rest here