Does Faith Have any Effect on How Our Leaders Will Govern?
JESSE JACKSON, HOST: Welcome to BOTH SIDES. I'm in New York this week. The time when calls to restore morality to politics and dignity to the White House have been heard on the campaign trail, candidates have been compelled to voice their religious convictions. But these recent indications or expressions of faith have been cause for concern among those who feel there is no place for religion in public discourse. Is this display appropriate? How is it playing with the American voters? And does faith have any effect on how our leaders will govern? We're going to get two perspectives on this issue today. Joining me from Washington is Reverend Barry Lynn. He is the director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State. Also joining me is Richard Land. He is the president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention in Nashville. Welcome both of you to the program.</s>REV. BARRY LYNN, DIR., AMERICANS UNITED FOR SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE: Thank you.</s>RICHARD LAND, PRESIDENT, ETHICS AND RELIGIOUS LIBERTY COMMISSION: Thank you.</s>JACKSON: We'll begin our discussion in a moment, but first some background from John Bisney.</s>JOHN BISNEY, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): When Senator Joseph Lieberman was announced as Vice President Al Gore's running mate, he didn't just ask for help from voters.</s>SEN. JOSEPH LIEBERMAN (D-CT), VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I ask you to allow me to let the spirit move me as it does to remember the words from Chronicles, which are to give thanks to God, to give thanks to God, and declare his name and make his acts known to the people.</s>BISNEY: Unlike John F. Kennedy, the first Catholic on a national ticket, Senator Lieberman has not played his religion down but rather argued for its place in the political arena.</s>LIEBERMAN: And I feel as strongly as anything else that there must be a place for faith in America's public life.</s>BISNEY: Governor George W. Bush has talked about religion, too. At a debate last December, he was asked to name his favorite political philosopher.</s>GOV. GEORGE W. BUSH (R-TX), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Christ, because he changed my heart.</s>BISNEY: But some are calling for less emphasis on religion, most notably the Anti-Defamation League.</s>ABRAHAM FOXMAN, ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE: There is a time and a place for religion, we are a religious country, we are a religious people. It belongs in the church, in the synagogue, in the mosque. It belongs in the home, it belongs in the heart, but not stumped on the campaign trail.</s>BISNEY: Others argue the real issue is how a candidate's faith would effect his policies once in office.</s>RICHARD LESSNER, AMERICAN RENEWAL: Since we're dealing with theological issues, the devil is in the details, I suppose. And that is. will he, for example, support the restoration of voluntary prayer to the public schools? Is that an appropriate place for religion in our public life?</s>BISNEY: What impact candidates professions of faith will have on the line separating church and state may be more clearly defined after voters head to the polls in November. For BOTH SIDES, I'm John Bisney.</s>JACKSON: Rev. Lynn, is this political emphasis, now let's say, on religion, in the political campaign inappropriate? or has Senator Lieberman let -- opened the Pandora's Box?</s>LYNN: Yes I'm afraid that he has opened a Pandora's box. And I do think that no one is trying to argue that someone's religion should be hidden under a bushel basket, nobody suggests there's no place for religion in public discourse. But I think what we've seen is a kind of one-ups-manship being played by both OF the major political parties. In other words, once Governor Bush said, not only that Jesus was his favorite political philosopher, which many people had some theological differences about, I think many people view Jesus as savior, but not necessarily philosopher. Then he declared Jesus Day in Texas, on June the 10th. So he had done it. And now the Democratic Party does seem, through Joseph Lieberman, to want to be doing much the same thing. Proof texting, in other words saying: My prescription drug plan is better than the Republicans because it's more consistent with the Fifth Commandment to honor your father and mother. That's clever speechwriting, there's no doubt about it. But I think we've now reached a point where it enough is enough. We know these men's hearts, at least as much as any of us human beings can know it, we know they're spiritual people. Now let's get on with the business of telling us how we're going to fix the real problems in this country, including education, child poverty, Social Security, that's what we ought to be talking about in the next eight weeks, not quote more scripture. JACKSON; Richard, should this campaign be about religion? or public policy?</s>LAND: Well, I think it should be about public policy, but I don't think it should be devoid of the religious perspective of the candidates, if they are indeed people of faith. I was a 14-year-old Southern Baptist in 1960, and I remember when John Kennedy came to Houston. My pastor went and was one of the pastors who met with John Kennedy, there in Houston. And basically extracted from him, unfortunately and sadly and shamefully, a promise that his Catholicism would not have any impact on his performance of his office. That is a shameful and unacceptable price to extract from a candidate, and we ought to be ashamed that we did it in. I think it's -- you know it's interesting, Reverend Jackson, it took a hard-core anti-Communist to go to China, it took a Democrat to sign welfare reform, and it may take an Orthodox Jew to restore religion to its proper place in public discourse in America.</s>JACKSON: But -- are we talking about religious dogma and faith? Are we talking about a higher level of moral ethics in the public discourse?</s>LAND: Well I think...</s>JACKSON: In other words, should a Southern Baptist be proselytizing, should an Orthodox Jew be proselytizing? Or should they in fact be using the ethics of their faith to drive us to a higher level of moral discourse?</s>LAND: Well, Reverend Jackson, I think that there's a very important distinction to make, candidates for office should not be proselytizing in public policy. We should never want government sponsored religion. But my personal hero, as I know yours is, is Martin Luther King Jr. And he preached the gospel as a Baptist minister in his pulpit, but then he took his Christian faith, as pastor of a church in Montgomery, and went out and started a bus boycott, taking the gospel and applying it to mean: Equal justice under the law. Those are two very different roles and these men are not preachers, these men are not -- you know Joe Lieberman's not trying to pass a law to make everybody eat kosher.</s>JACKSON: Barry, what does Jesus Day in Texas mean to you?</s>LYNN: I think what it means is that we're going to give a special emphasis, because we think there are more Christians in Texas than any other religious groups, so we're going to give them some kind of a special promise, that is that we're declare their religious holiday to be more important than somebody else's. And I think that's the core of what I have so many problems with. When John Kennedy went to Houston he made a great speech, nothing to be ashamed of. Hears all he said, he said: "I look forward to an America where the separation of church and state is absolute. Where no Catholic prelot (ph) would tell a president, should he be a Catholic, how to act. And no Protestant clergyman would tell his congregation for whom to vote." That's a great standard, and I wish we had candidates who were willing to talk about it today. Senator...</s>JACKSON: I guess part of my concern is that Mr. Bush says his favorite philosophy is Jesus Christ, after the 140th execution in the state. Jesus said you tell the tree by the fruit it bears, not by the bark it wears. Is -- are we looking at the bark of religion or the tree of authentic religion?</s>LYNN: Well, we're certainly seeing a lot more bark, than the inner core. And of course I agree with you that ultimately it is what a man or woman does, not what he or she says, about which we should measure their commitment to morality. And I do think there is a difference, and Richard Land is talking about it, between morality and religion. There are many moral people in this country, tens of millions of people, who do not have a spiritual path that they follow, but who do in fact have moral principles. The excuse though this year seems to be, if you want to prove that you are moral, that you're not going to engage in the conduct of a President Clinton, or a Speaker Newt Gingrich, the easiest way to prove you are moral is quote the Bible. I want to see more than that. I want to see the walk and I want to understand the politics -- the policies, not so much hear more religious rhetoric. JACKSON; We're going to come right back in a moment, and talk about this distinction between the religion and faith, and its impact upon public policy.</s>JACKSON: Welcome back. We're talking about religion on the campaign trail with Reverend Barry Lynn, director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and Richard Land, president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission. Richard Land, hear this data. The recent "Newsweek" poll, 61 percent feels it is appropriate for a candidate for public office to discuss his own religion and religious beliefs during the campaign; only 33 percent feels it is inappropriate. What does this mean?</s>LAND: Well, I think it means that Americans are increasingly beginning to understand, once again, that people of diverse religious faiths live in this nation and that they have a right to bring their faith to bear on important public policy issues. They are not always going to agree. I mean, after all, you and I are both Baptists and you know that Baptists, all Baptists seldom agree on anything. But they have the right to bring their faith to bear and to say to the voters: This is who I am. Joe Lieberman said, look, at the press conference, when he was announced, he said, my religious faith is at the core of who I am. And you can't ask me to separate that from how I fulfill my public office...</s>JACKSON: Would you make this distinction between religion, in the sense of your religion, your ideology, your path to salvation, and a moral standard in an ecumenical society where you have Christians and Jews and Muslims and Buddhists, do you continuously affirm your religious dogma, which is very private? or do you affirm a higher morality for all people?</s>LAND: Well, I think that what I would want to say is that I have the right to continue to practice my faith, in worship services and in my own life and in sharing my faith with others. But when it comes to public policy, I have a responsibility to try to apply, as I understand biblical truth, to public policy. And if I can convince enough Americans that I'm right, I have the right to...</s>JACKSON: Barry Lynn, isn't that the point, that if religion drives you to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, set the captive, preach, study war no more. That's the moral taste, different than join my church, or join my religion.</s>LYNN: Absolutely, and I think one of the things that people frequently ask me here, as a member Congress says, I voted for some tax cut and then quotes a Bible passage, is that unconstitutional? No. But one would like to think that there was more understanding than simply a Bible verse, in order to justify a vote on any side of these issues. You know we are running a secular country here. These candidates are not running to be the preacher of the church. Some of the questions that George Bush and Al Gore, for example, have answered on this campaign trail are the kinds of ones I would want asked if I were on a search committee at my local church. But that's not what these folks are running for. I do think people in this country want a moral grounding in the next president and vice president. But they don't have to do that simply by promoting a specific religion.</s>JACKSON: You know, my concern is we live in our faith, on our Bible, on our Koran, we live under the law. And historically, we've seemed to make that distinction between living in our faith, which is private, and under the law. I was asked when I was running for president how does religion fit in? I said, well, religion makes me political, my politics don't make me religious. My religion obligates me to certain ethical, moral standards, it does not obligate me to proselytize and convert everybody I see in public life.</s>LYNN: Well, and indeed I like that line, and I've probably stolen it myself several times. But I also think it's important to realize that what Senator Lieberman said, and I think one of the things that was so controversial last week was, he said it's time for Americans to re-new their faith in the one awesome God and for the country to do it too. Well, we've got 250 million or so of us that are religious, we've got a faith, but the country doesn't have a faith. The country is made up of people -- individuals with 2,000 different religious traditions and, of course, the millions of people who don't have any spiritual path they follow. So we...</s>JACKSON: Why do you think...</s>LYNN: ... have got to be careful about this kind of language or we're going to turn some folks into second-class citizens in their own country. JACKSON; Why do you think Abe Foxman raises -- I mean, do you think he raised it because he does not want the character factor is because of his fear, that if it's about religion that it could in fact incite anti-Semitism. Was his issue more about the fear of anti- Semitism being incited?</s>LYNN: You know, I talked to him about other matters, I did not talk to him before that statement was issued, or our own statement was issued on the topic. I think that Mr. Foxman, in recent years, has helped to move the Anti-Defamation League into a much broader program of activity, to fight for genuine religious liberty, which includes a separation of church and state. So, it didn't surprise me that he said it. I think that it was a strong statement. It did not suggest to Senator Lieberman: Hide your religion. It just said, you know, it's time to get on with it. Sen. Lieberman, himself...</s>JACKSON: I am concerned about the overreaction. You know, when Jimmy Carter taught Sunday school he said nothing.</s>LYNN: Nothing.</s>JACKSON: When Bush said that Jesus was his favorite philosopher, he said nothing. Bush says he was converted at his father's house and Billy Graham came there to preach and pray, he said nothing. Lieberman, quoted Chronicles, he feels the need to public to react, was forced to underline an agenda there?</s>LYNN: Well I think that there really is no double standard, some people have accused folks of that. George Bush has a long history of seeking the votes from religious special-interest groups, including frankly, the Christian Coalition and other religious right groups. He's been known to pander for the votes of certain kinds of Christians for years now. When Lieberman first made his statement, he said who he was, I was on this very network for the hour afterwards. I said, look, we got cut a guy some slack, I wouldn't have done it this way, or at this time, but he was largely unknown to the public. Now he's known, we know about him, we know about the other candidates, now it's time to simply move on. And I don't understand Richard Land, for example, what you expect to learn more about these candidates' religious faith, unless we ask them to explain their interpretation of the virgin birth...</s>JACKSON: You know it's hard to stop you preachers from talking. We'll be right back in just a moment. We got to sell some secular commercials.</s>JACKSON: Richard Land, Governor Bush has endorsed the GOP platform, which supports school prayer, sexual abstinence before marriage, opposition to abortion, opposition to homosexuality. Is this a part of his religious politics?</s>LAND: Well I agree with him substantially on those issues. Although I would have some quibbles about some of the details. But, you know, Barry Lynn asked me to question: What do I want to know about these candidates and their religious faith? I guess my answer would be: Whatever they choose to tell me. They're the ones that are running for office. They're the ones that are asking for my vote. And I leave it to them to tell me how they feel that their personal faith applies to public policy issues. And if I like what they say, then I should vote for them; and if I don't, then I shouldn't. I think it's wrong to try to segregate religious speech from public policy debates. You know, Lincoln in 1860 was severely criticized for talking about slavery. And he said in Springfield, Massachusetts, my critics say I shouldn't talk about slavery in the pulpit because that's bringing politics into religion, and I shouldn't talk about slavery in politics, because that's bringing religion into politics. And so, according to my critics, there's no place where I can call this evil thing wrong, and this simple thing evil. And I'm glad he didn't listen to his critics.</s>JACKSON: But my point is here, while we are discussing religion today, there are 42 million Americans who don't have health insurance, or 1,500 Americans die a day from cancer, or coal miners die from black lung disease everyday. We can't get to these...</s>LAND: And 4,000 die from abortion.</s>JACKSON: ... issues of public policy.</s>LAND: And 4,000 die from abortion.</s>JACKSON: And 4,000 die from abortion. In the meantime, we cannot get to these issues, discussing which candidate has the most righteous line of Scripture. Is that not a divergent from the public policy debate?</s>LAND: Well I don't think we're concerned about, as a society, about who has the most righteous line of Scripture. I think that what we want to know is who these people are, and how their religious faith, if it impacts their lives, how it impacts their lives. And if they choose to tell us that, I don't think they should be criticized for doing so. Now if they start trying...</s>JACKSON: But don't we measure a tree by the fruit it bears? By its behavior? by its priorities? not just by its bark, not just by its stance?</s>LAND: Absolutely. And Reverend Jackson, I would think that it's very clear to everyone in this society, that some people like oranges and some people like apples and some people like pears. It depends on which fruit you're looking for. And that's why we have a democracy in this country. And we ask the candidates to tell us what their values are and what their priorities are. And then we make a decision, and we all abide by the results until the next election.</s>LYNN: Yes, but, you know, the problem with that, it sounds great, but I think Reverend Jackson is absolutely right that if we get so involved in the question of religion and whose got the most, or the best understanding of a particular one, we lose the opportunity to talk about what are in fact the genuine moral issues of this day. You know, unfortunately, because of some of the misdeeds of politicians on both sides of the aisle, we've come to equate morality, with the question of sexual morality. I was once asked to be on a program about the moral nature of the country, and I said: Are we going to talk about the number of children in poverty? And the producer said: You think that's a moral issue? And I said: Well, if you don't, I guess you don't want me on this program. But we're losing sight of that as we get people who appear to be running for national preacher, tell us again and again and refuse to stop, unless they're using vulgar language, as we've seen one of these candidates do this past week, they seem to be more interested in that than they do in solving the nation's critical problems. and I think that is a great risk of all of this happening.</s>JACKSON: In the end, we are a one big tent nation, under that one big tent many room for many religions, many races, many faces, many places, many languages; but one message. We'll be back in a moment with our final segment.</s>JACKSON: Reverend Lynn and Richard Land, we thank you, you been very special guests this week. This issue of religion and morality and ethics will not go way, should not go away. Now I remind people that we live in our faith, in our many faiths, they are private. We live under the law, we live under a Constitution. In the end, we should be measured, our character should be measured, by how we treat the least of these, how we defend the poor, how we deliver the needy. Should we take our message to Appalachia? the Ozarks? the Indian reservations? Does everybody matter? Does everybody count? Let us express our commitment to morality and making this a nation of inclusion, which leads to growth, and make all people feel whole and as one. Well, thank you very much for being our very special guests this week, again, Barry and Richard. And thank you again for watching us this week on another segment of BOTH SIDES. Next Sunday 5:30 p.m. Eastern. Until then, keep hope alive.