Editor’s note: A version of this blog will appear in this week’s Las Vegas CityLife.

God is on Sharron Angle’s side.

Or so she said in an interview with Ralph Reed, the influential Christian conservative activist (and, it must be said, business partner of the until-recently incarcerated Jack Abramoff). Asked by Reed if she was overwhelmed by her come-from-behind victory, Angle replied thusly: “Not really. I believe that God has been in this [her campaign] from the beginning and because of that, when he has a plan and a purpose for your life, and you fit into that, what he calls you to he’s always equipped you for,” Angle said.

Little wonder, then, that Angle believes — as she said on the June 29 edition of Face to Face with Jon Ralston — that the separation of church and state is unconstitutional.

A common question occurs with those in politics who claim divine warrant for their candidacies or policies (and you’d be surprised at how often that happens). That question is this: How do you know God is on your side? And if God be for you, surely he must be against your opponent? And since the man Angle aims to defeat — U.S. Sen. Harry Reid — is a religious man himself, does that mean his religion (the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) is wrong, and Angle’s (Southern Bapist) is right? If Reid wins despite Angle’s divine backing, what are we to make of that? That God doesn’t exist? Or that he does exist, but Angle was simply wrong about his endorsement?

I tried to ask these questions, but her spokesman, Jerry Stacy, failed to return messages.

In a nation where “In God We Trust” appears on our money, “one nation under God” in our Pledge of Allegiance and where every president of both parties typically ends speeches with “God bless America,” casual references to the deity on the campaign trail are all too common. Some politicians might actually believe them.

It’s easy to claim the divine hand of God for a truly righteous cause, such as the global struggle against Nazi oppression, although war would seem to violate his commandment to “do no murder.” It’s a bit harder to think God is behind you when your crusade is to, say, reduce marginal tax rates. A politician who claims to be doing God’s work in erasing global poverty, famine or disease is easier to take somehow than one who pounds his Bible in support of repealing regulations on offshore oil drilling.

Another very practical problem with the belief that God wants you to win is this: You cannot possibly compromise. A leader who doesn’t wear his religion on his sleeve — take Reid, for example — can approach each problem with an open mind. He may come to the table thinking a public option should be part of health-care reform, but compromise on a version of the law in order to get at least some reform.

But if you believe your agenda comes from God, compromise is impossible, and may at worst imperil your immortal soul. In other words, it can become very difficult to legislate.

This is not to say that people of faith such as Angle should not be allowed into political life. The same Constitution that prescribes strict neutrality on the part of the state toward all religions also prohibits a religious test for public office. (Nevertheless, a de facto test exists: How easily would an avowed atheist find life on the campaign trail?)

God may indeed have a plan for Angle’s life. But to claim that it’s for her to have won her primary — and presumably to defeat Reid — tells us more about how Angle thinks than about how God thinks.

Tags: Sharron Angle

You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.