Just say no to using a candidate's pastor (or former pastor) in political attack ads

According to The Washington Post,  John McCain's campaign will begin to run some  ads next week that will call into question some of Barack Obama's alleged "personal associations."   The article says that "[t]he Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. appears to be off limits after McCain condemned the North Carolina Republican Party in April for an ad that linked Obama to his former pastor, saying, 'Unfortunately, all I can do is, in as visible a way as possible, disassociate myself from that kind of campaigning.' " 

I  am not going to comment on the rest of the McCain campaign's strategy, but I want to urge McCain to hold this line regarding Rev. Wright.  Of course, Obama has renounced some of Wright's views and broken with him, so one could argue against such ads for that reason.  But I think these commercials would be objectionable for broader reasons as well.  They would send the message, I think, that it is perfectly fine for a campaign to make an attack ad featuring the words and images of a member of the clergy simply because he or she serves (or formerly served) as the candidate's pastor. 

If there is a legitimate question about what that pastor has said, then ask the candidate about it.  And, if the candidate's answer relates to how he or she would govern, then make an attack ad out of that.  But the mere fact that a person serves as a candidate's pastor does not in any way make that pastor a spokesperson for the candidate, and the pastor should not be treated as such.  (I would say the same thing, by the way, if the Obama campaign ran ads featuring statements made by Governor Sarah Palin's former pastors or the pastors serving the churches Palin and McCain currently attend.) 

In sum, even if all others guilt by association tactics are deemed to be politically kosher, I believe campaigns should not view a person who simply serves (or served) as a candidate's pastor as fair game for use in attack ads.   Why?  It has to do with religion's distinctiveness, the nature of a congregation and a pastor's relationship to members of that congregation, and the spirit of religious freedom (not its letter).  I've tried to begin to unpack some of that in earlier posts.  I'll try to do so more in the future.

Comments

[KarenG]

A good bright line rule and I hope McCain sticks to it.

Here, however, Obama put Rev. Wright on his Religious Advisory campaign committee where he served until March. That's a salient fact.

[Danny]

Obama should have disassociated with Wright a long time ago. If he wasn't running for president, Obama would still be a member of the church.

I think it is relevant. I haven't heard politically charged rhetoric from a pastor before, and for Obama to have sat under his teaching for decades is significant.

[Joe]

"I haven't heard politically charged rhetoric from a pastor before"

It is far from unusual. Social issues with political contexts interconnect with religion in a myriad of ways.

For instance, concern for the disadvantaged, which surely has political overtones, is at the heart of Jesus' message. I therefore find your statement a bit dubious.

[kergee]

Preaching on Jesus' concern for the disadvantaged may have overtones. Preaching that Hilary said "Whoa!!! when she saw a black man standing in her way to the presidency is politically charged (Rev. Pfleger). I've never heard anything as politically charged as Jeremiah Wright in the churches I've attended, either. Have you?

[auradawnveirs]

When churches "enter politics," it is always to elect religious candidates who will force taxpayers to support costs of worship. Believers are too cheap to pay their ten percent tithe, so they shift it to others, including atheists like me. If I don't pay the IRS and property tax, I can be jailed. I'm paying wax companies for candles, olive oil bottlers for anointing, lace-makers for costumes, artists, for putting gold on altars, shippers of holy water, publishers of holy books, makers of the popemobile and other preacher transport, makers of baptismal fonts, etc. etc.etc. This must stop.