from where his morals stem. Lieberman has spread his belief that religion must play a more prominent role in public life, on the campaign trail. Thus, he has been accused of attempting to violate the separation of church and state.Religion has held a helpful and constructive role in the general outlook of Presidents since Washington. In fact, Lieberman has referred to Washington's statement that there is no morality without religion. Both Jefferson and Lincoln constantly called upon G-d in their writings. Truman wrote a letter to the Pope referring to America as a “Christian nation”. Eisenhower inserted in the national anthem “under god” and the national currency “in God we trust”. What animated the thought systems of these men was the idea that a higher deity, or history, or destiny, was on their side. This idea served as a way to legitimize the often-unsavory means to acomplish vastly important ends, such as when Eisenhower overthrew the socialist, democratically elected leader of Guatemala. This act on a small scale destroyed democracy in one Central American country, but on a larger scale kept the Western Hemisphere safe for democracy. Through this habit of mind various Presidents used religion to validate secular goals. This practice, though necessary, has always been dangerous too. First of all, there is the pernicious temptation of breaking one’s own principles temporarily to establish them later on. Secondly, there is the need to maintain the separation between church and state. From Lieberman’s acceptably vague call for more religion in public life, it is not a long road to Bush’s unacceptably specific “Jesus day”. Sometimes the line between beneficial and right use of religion and destructive and wrong use of religion can get so blurred that there is no line at all. It is too soon to tell how Lieberman and his religious beliefs will effect the election, the J...
