Knoxville Mayor wins Tennessee GOP primary

bill_haslamKnoxville Mayor Bill Haslam has locked up the Republican primary race for governor beating rivals Rep. Zach Wamp and Lt. Gov. Ron Ramsey.

Haslam will face Democratic nominee and businessman Mike McWherter in the November general election.

In a primary race that was laden with personal attacks and appeals to religion, it will be interesting to see the tone the rhetoric takes between the two nominees.

McWherter has made infrequent references to religion on the campaign trail, but has not made his religious beliefs a central and driving issue. Haslam, while vocal about his religious faith, was not as vocal as his opponent Zach Wamp.

With both nominees sucessful businessmen, the race will likely center on industry in Tennessee. However, since Haslam was considered the more moderate of the Republican candidates, he will have to solidify his support among the remainder of the conservative base. One can only hope that it doesn’t mean pandering to the evangelical Christians with baseless attacks.

Rep. Zach Wamp wants you to know he is Christian

0ea41a7c4ae03c80597bdff1bc387257With his latest ad, Rep. Zach Wamp wants you to remember that he is a Christian. It’s not enough that he claims to have a strong conservative record behind him, you must know his personal religious views in order to make an informed decision. For politicians, it is not enough that they believe what they believe, you must know what they believe and preferably also believe the same.

Wamp has already made it clear that he is a devout Southern Baptist and that he believes that to be elected to public office, one must believe that every word of the Bible is true. He even says that religious belief should permeate all public policy matters. Basically, he wants to legislate Christianity into the lives of every Tennessean. So much for personal choice and responsibility.

His latest ad again touts his Christian credentials with a pledge to help “restore America to its Judeo-Christian heritage and our constitution” starting right here in Tennessee. Perhaps Rep. Wamp has forgotten the First Amendment to the Constitution which states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” That our country was founded by predominantly Judeo-Christian men does not mean that their intent was to create a nation to mimic their religious beliefs. One of the core reasons for our founding was the freedom from religious oppression that many found in native England.

There were also well-known critics of religious influence in government among our Founding Fathers. Most notably, Thomas Jefferson stated in a letter to Alexander von Humboldt, “History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government.” In another letter to Horatio G. Spafford he strongly criticized religion by writing, “In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own.”

Also, the Treaty of Tripoli, signed by President John Adams on June 10, 1797 lays out what many see as the foundation of the “separation of church and state” doctrine. The wording was intended to make it clear that the government of the United States was not making diplomatic decisions based on religious belief. This has renewed importance in the face of the evangelical movement whisking candidates into office.

As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,— as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen,— and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

Wamp would do well to understand that religion and government staying out of each other’s affairs is for the protection of both institutions.

Tennessee Lt. Gov. Ron Ramsey denounces Islam as cult

3822734d220a052ded1eceed5945697cWith mere days before the primary election and with early voting underway, Lt. Gov. Ron Ramsey is making controversial remarks about Islam.

One could argue that he doesn’t have a large Muslim constituency to offend, but that should not excuse a current public official from making degrading comments of questionable validity.

Ramsey was quoted by Talking Points Memo as having said, “Now, you could even argue whether being a Muslim is actually a religion, or is it a nationality, way of life, cult whatever you want to call it.” He continued with, “I’m all about freedom of religion. I value the First Amendment as much as I value the Second Amendment as much as I value the Tenth Amendment and on and on and on. But you cross the line when they try to start bringing Sharia Law here to the state of Tennessee — to the United States. We live under our Constitution and they live under our Constitution.”

Ron Ramsey has a problem with other cultures bringing their religious tradition into our established legal system (and I agree that Sharia Law is outrageous), yet he seems to have no problem advocating the amendment of our state constitution to include banning abortion (based on his faith), banning gay couples from adopting (based on his faith), and teaching “intelligent design” in publicly funded classrooms (based on his faith). Ramsey opposes Islamic legal tradition being included in Tennessee law ONLY because it doesn’t originate from his religion. He has no qualms about legislating Christian ideals into the lives of every Tennessean regardless of their beliefs.

It would also be wise for Ramsey to not be so quick to write Islam off as a cult. Webster’s defines cult as “a system of religious beliefs and ritual” and ” great devotion to a person, idea, object, movement, or work.” He would be wise to remember that his own rigid adherence to his belief system could just as easily be called a cult by others.

If you dislike that your elected lieutenant governor is making inflammatory statements about the religious beliefs of others without critical review of his own beliefs, please contact his office.

Tennessee’s gubernatorial candidates on evolution

9e2083a00b286c38524869018c75e4e3A new website sponsored by the Tennessee Newspaper Network makes easy work of comparing the current gubernatorial candidates’ positions on various issues. Each candidate presents a different opinion on the subject which is a welcome departure from the typical party-lines talking points that tend to dominate discussion.

Sadly, the debate between evolution and intelligent design is often marred with misinformation. With that in mind, I would like to clear a few misconceptions up first thing. Evolution attempts to describe the diversity of life on our planet and determine common ancestry among related species today. Evolution is not concerned with the beginning or inception of life. That is the subject of abiogenesis. Also, evolution is a scientific theory, meaning that it can change based on the current knowledge base. Since this knowledge base continues to expand with new findings, it should come as no surprise that the theory is often refined as new discoveries are made. The theory of intelligent design is not based in science, but rather religious writings. Since the claims on which the theory rests are not verifiable by experimentation, they cannot be considered science.

With this in mind, both presumptive Democratic nominee Mike McWherter and Knoxville Mayor Bill Haslam express support of teaching children the foundations of biology in public schools. Both are quick to point out that their religious faith is compatible with their wishes that children be tought a comprehensive science curriculum. There are those in the creationism/intelligent design camp that disagree with their egalitarian handling of these seemingly incompatible viewpoints. Australian science professor David Oldroyd said in a 1993 interview with The Weekend Review, “People seem to think that Christianity and evolution do or can go together. But I suggest this is only possible for the intellectually schizophrenic. Biological theory does not require or allow any sort of divine guidance for the evolutionary process.” To the likes of Oldroyd, there can be no middle ground.

Lt. Gov. Ron Ramsey sees things a little more in black and white. “I believe intelligent design and evolution should both be taught in public schools. To choose one or the other would ignore the beliefs of large numbers of Tennesseans. Our young people are smart enough to come to their own conclusions if both sides are presented fairly.” Seems fair enough, right? Teach both sides, and let the impressionable youth which are entrusted with few other legal abilities decide best which method brought about our diversity of species. Ramsey, like many other evangelicals, fails to see the importance of keeping religion and government separate, for the good of both institutions. He would have religious ideas taught in state-funded classrooms in a heartbeat, but he would probably not be on board if the state mandated that evolution be taught alongside creationism in Sunday school classrooms.

Last, but not least, Rep. Zach Wamp says, “I believe that God created the world we live in and crafted human beings in his own image, and I also believe in the scientific evolution of other species. However, most decisions on local school curriculum are best left to local school boards, educators and parents to debate and decide. [emphasis added]” Note first that Wamp does not believe in the evolution of mankind, only other species, as that would be contrary to his literal interpretation of Genesis in which God made Adam out of soil and Eve from a vivisected rib. Also of note in Wamp’s quote is that he believes curriculum is best left to localities to decide. This thinking could result in the educations of students mere counties apart being drastically different in quality. Instead of allowing local elected officials the power to inject religion into school curricula as they see fit, why not just stick to teaching what has been tested, verified, and peer-reviewed sufficiently to make it into textbooks (Texas textbooks excluded)?