Blog from the Capital

In USAToday, law professor Jonathan Turley writes an op-ed making the case that if candidates are going to actively pursue voters on religious grounds, they should be prepared to answer questions about their own religious beliefs.

It might be time to put sensitivities aside and "out" those who run on piety while invoking privacy on the details of their own faithfulness.
...
The religiosity in the current campaigns represents an important choice by those candidates who chose sectarian over secular values in government.

I understand the sentiment. Nobody likes an ambitious hypocrite, right? But Turley's point misses the mark as far as I'm concerned. What's important in this area - if anything - is the way a candidate's faith might or might not be reflected in policy positions and, maybe, leadership style, not the way it's reflected in their personal life. If a candidate's ability to lead is really in question because of a series of divorces or infidelities, a drinking problem or a history of drug-use, a propensity to stretch the truth or curse up a storm, does it really matter *more* because of their religious beliefs?