Sharron Angle believes that all social programs, from welfare to public education, ought to be abolished. Not because they are unconstitutional—although she undoubtedly feels they are—but because she believes they contravene the First Commandment: I am the Lord thy God, thou shalt have no other God’s before me. As Michael Blood from the AP reported in an article on August 5, audio and transcripts from an interview Angle gave in April to TruNews Christian Radio indicate that the nominee’s opposition to “big government” is theologically motivated. (To access some of the transcript, as well as audio clips, click here for Jon Ralston’s blog at the Las Vegas Sun.)
In Angle’s own words:
“And these programs that you mentioned — that Obama has going with Reid and Pelosi pushing them forward — are all entitlement programs built to make government our God. And that’s really what’s happening in this country is a violation of the First Commandment. We have become a country entrenched in idolatry, and that idolatry is the dependency upon our government. We’re supposed to depend upon God for our protection and our provision and for our daily bread, not for our government.”
According to Blood, Angle is a deeply religious Southern Baptist who “prays daily” and firmly believes that her run for office is divinely ordained.
“In this political walk that I’m walking — and I think it is a calling that God has on my life — I have watched Him walk with me through politics and help me to see the pitfalls of the political machinery, the seduction of the party and even those outside the party, the lobbyists, all of that.”
She went on to claim in the interview that Americans are at war for their “freedom,” “culture,” and “liberty.” One would assume that chief among these liberties is freedom of religion, given Angle’s ardent belief that the separation between Church and State is unconstitutional. According to minutes from a 1995 legislative hearing, Blood indicates that Angle claims not only that the separation clause does not appear in the Constitution, but that Jefferson’s letter to the Danbury Baptists has been misinterpreted. Like many in the Tea and Constitution parties, she feels that the “wall of separation” was only intended to protect churches from the arm of the State: the Framers “didn’t mean that we couldn’t bring our values to the political forum,” she claims.
Responding to Angle’s fear that America’s “soul” is in danger, Harry Reid’s campaign stated merely that such assertions were “frightening,” and called into question the GOP nominee’s very understanding of Church/State separation.