Mitt can't have it both ways

Finally recognizing that America is not a perfect nation when it comes to prejudices and realizing that he has a severe handicap when it comes to the race for president, Mitt Romney on Thursday gave a major speech - being called by some the most important speech of the campaign - addressing the fact that he is, in case you didn't know, Mormon.

Romney said, "If I am fortunate to become your president, I will serve no one religion, no one group, no one cause and no one interest. A president must serve only the common cause of the people of the United States." He also added that for him to explain or justify his beliefs would go against the wishes of our founding fathers, rightly pointing out that there is no religion test for president. Finally, he said that "No religion should dictate to the state nor should the state interfere with the free practice of religion."

These are indeed noble statements. The president does not serve God, he serves the constitution. His oath is taken on a Bible, but he swears to uphold not the Bible but the Constitution. That Constitution includes the separation of church and state. And, of course, there are only three requirements to be president, and none of them have anything to do with religion.

So on the surface, Romney's statements seem to laudable. And I wholeheartedly agree that his being Mormon should not preclude him from being president.

I do, however, have a problem with hypocrites, and with this speech, Romney has shown how big of one he is.

I find it pretty disgusting that a man who says that the church should not mettle in the affairs of government is also running for president on a platform that includes being anti-abortion and anti-gay marriage, two stances that have their grounding solely in the Bible, not in U.S. law.

(Sidenote for my conservative friends. I challenge you to find me one place in the United States Constitution that would be a basis for banning gay marriage. The Bible does not count as its laws have no legal standing in the United States and thus has no bearing on U.S. law.)

Romney has also said in the past, "We need a person of faith to lead this country." Now, to me that sounds like he believes the U.S. president should belong to a religion of some sort. So why is he all of a sudden asking the American people not to judge him solely on the basis of his religion?

Mitt, why is it not okay for people to say you can't be president because of the religion you practice, but you apparently feel free to judge people who practice no religion? Or rather, it's not cool for someone to say, "He's Mormon, he can't be president," but it's completely okay to say "He's atheist, he can't be president."

The best part is, the hardest people for Romney to convince are going to be white evangelicals - aka, his base! In an AP/Yahoo poll in November, 56 percent of them said they had reservations about voting for a Mormon. This is the crucial group for Romney; white evangelicals carried Bush to the White House - twice - and gave the GOP long-held majorities in Congress from 1994-2006.

But I'm not surprised. Romney is asking for openness and tolerance from a group that has made intolerance its national platform the past 25 years.

So be careful who you reach out to Mitt. You're right - you shouldn't be judged just because you're a Mormon. But you're trying to have it both ways. You're asking people to be open to your religion when at the same time you've been running a campaign dominated by religious issues, for a party who's base wants to turn America into a Christian theocracy.

That makes you a hypocrite, and for that you should be judged.