Read other letters about this article

• Monday, January 21, 2008 05:34 PM

  Great Question

  Wow, play a little Devil's Advocate and watch out! Don't worry Mr. Greenwald, even a few of us non-lawyers are always up for a difficult question.

  But in terms of the propriety of their religious appeals for votes, is there really any meaningful difference between the two campaigns?

  Yes. There is a difference. I looked up "propriety" in the dictionary, and there are four definitions, I am going to assume you are using the "true nature" definition. I think there is a difference in the true nature of their religious appeals.

  As an agnostic who favors Obama for president, I have been uncomfortable with his religious statements. However, I am taking them for the statements of a pragmatic politician who really wants to be President. I think he has no choice but to make these statements, especially in South Carolina.

  Huckabee is a preacher who has made religion his fundamental reason for existence.

  Their appeals are different. However, if you had posed the question "Are the effects of these statement any different?" Well, I couldn't answer that one.

  Is it possible to criticize Huckabee for inappropriately exploiting his status in Iowa as a "Christian leader" -- as many, many people did -- while believing that Obama's hailing of himself in South Carolina as a "Committed Christian" is perfectly fine? What's the difference?

  It is very possible and has happened numerous times. I don't think what Obama is doing is "perfectly fine" as stated above, but I understand why he is doing it (I hope).

  —drsteevo Read drsteevo's other letters
  Permalink
  Flag
  Click "Submit Flag" if you feel this post is inappropriate. Explain why below if you wish.

  Cancel