Voting to keep God in office

The New York Times had this piece out the other day that posed the presidential election as a referendum on God.

Historical precedent and other polling information offer clues that many voters are willing to make at least certain concessions when it comes to a candidate’s religious observance when they pull the curtain behind them in the voting booth.

But could voters accept a president who believes in the Book of Mormon? What about one who believes in the Old Testament but not the New? Or one who venerates Muhammad, or Buddha?

There does seem to be at least one bottom line for many voters: belief in God.

“This is a deeply religious nation by many standards,” said Mark Rozell, a professor of public policy at George Mason University. “They want their leaders to be believers. They want them to believe in something higher, to have a moral framework as they lead the country.”

That’s the minimal standard, which the press still acknowledges. Now, they’re trying to understand it….and shape public opinion about it. One of the ways they do that is by interpreting what public opinion polls mean.

A national telephone survey released earlier this year by the Pew Research Center asked which traits, including being black, a woman, a Mormon, a Muslim, or a homosexual, would help or hurt a candidate the most. The worst trait for a candidate to possess? “Doesn’t believe in God.”

The basic standard might help explain why the Republican frontrunner in national polls, Rudolph W. Giuliani, a divorced Roman Catholic who favors abortion rights and has studiously sidestepped questions about his spiritual beliefs and church attendance, is still faring well among many evangelical Christians.

Even though little is known about his spiritual practices, Mr. Giuliani, who grew up attending Catholic schools and even considered being a priest at one point, is at least a part of a mainstream church. He has also sought to demonstrate something of a moral backbone by sticking to his stance on abortion, despite its unpopularity among the Republican base.

Let’s define “moral backbone.” And not let the New York Times define it for us.