I’m watching a replay of the Democratic debate on C-SPAN. For some inexplicable reason the moderator, George Stephanopoulos, asked a question about whether the candidates believe that prayer can avert or lessen the impact of catastrophes like Hurricane Katrina. All the candidates, except Kucinich, said that they pray, that prayer is important, etc. Edwards and Biden were fairly clear that prayer cannot stop a Hurricane. But their answers aren’t very important. What’s important is the candidates get asked these no-win questions.
I don’t pray. The last time I prayed it was because my cat disappeared and I wanted him back. I was probably about eight years old. I felt like a hypocrite asking God to find my cat. I never wanted to feel like an idiot again, so I stopped asking God to do me favors. How would I answer such a question if I were running for president?
I’d probably try not to alienate people that pray. So I’d say that prayer is important to many people and that it provides comfort and strength to people that are in pain. But it can’t stop or weaken a hurricane.
The reality is that prayer can be defined in a lot of different ways. But when prayer is actually nothing more than a request to God, it is an infantile practice. But your job as a politician is not to debate theology or epistemology or even physics. Your job is to represent people and provide good governance. Teaching people about prayer doesn’t enter in to it.
So my problem is that asking the candidates such a question is a giant waste of time. It just invites them to give dishonest and pandering answers and it tells us nothing about their qualifications.
A big part of the problem in this country is that we keep setting the wrong standards for our politicians and we keep asking them the wrong questions.
