Did they really say that? Well, here's their press release. Note their condescending quote: "religious appeals to voters are simply unacceptable and un-American" Well this American says that such appeals are completely acceptable. Who appointed the ADL as arbitor of what I must consider "unacceptable"? They go on to say that we should judge the candidates based on their integrity. As far as I'm concerned, a candidate's religion (or lack thereof) is part and parcel of their integrity. Religious adherence is not an immutable charactieristic, as is ethnicity, physical size, etc. People choose their religious affiliations and their practices; those choices say volumes about who they are as people and how they'll conduct themselves in public office.
Does that make me a bigot? Well let me illustrate with an example. In the year 2000, in Maryland's 8th Congressional District, Connie Morella was opposed by Democrat Terry Lierman. Both were pro-abortion Catholics. Seeking access to the ballot as a third candidate was Brian Saunders - a pro-life Jew affiliated with the Constitution Party. I and several others worked very hard to secure him access to the ballot (via petition signatures). We succeeded in doing so. Unfortunately in Montgomery County the GOP was (still is) dominated by RINOs and Morella won the general election. A candidate's avowal of Catholicism will not automatically win my vote by a long shot.
Today's Vortex does a great job in exposing the hypocrisy of the ADL and other progressives (and the Detroit archdiocese is trying to submarine him?). Click here if you can't see embedded video.
May 20, A Question.
1 hour ago