Mitt, you are no John F. Kennedy

Mitt Romney's speech on December 7th (see CBS News story) was all about why Republican Evangelicals should support him despite his Mormon faith:

Almost 50 years ago, another candidate from Massachusetts explained that he was an American running for president, not a Catholic running for president. Like him, I am an American running for president. I do not define my candidacy by my religion.

So, Romney is comparing himself to John F. Kennedy in 1960. But JFK was answering one question only: would the Catholic church have any authority over him if he became president. And this is how he answered it:

I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute -- where no Catholic prelate would tell the president [should he be Catholic] how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote -- where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference -- and where no man is denied public office merely because his religion differs from the president who might appoint him or the people who elect him.

Whereas Romney said the exact opposite:

...in recent years, the notion of the separation of church and state has been taken by some well beyond its original meaning. They seek to remove from the public domain any acknowledgment of God. Religion is seen as merely a private affair with no place in public life. It's as if they are intent on establishing a new religion in America-the religion of secularism. They are wrong.'

In other words, the big problem with America today is the "War on Christmas": all those bad people who want to separate church from state.

So, it's even more important for Romney to answer the question that Kennedy answered: would he be influenced by his church if he became president?

I don't know if Romney can ever answer this question honestly, or whether his right-wing audience can even understand the question. Who knows? I suppose miracles do happen in God's Own Party.