Republican Sen. Elizabeth Dole is running a controversial ad in North Carolina this week questioning the Christian faith of her Democrat opponent Kay Hagan.
The 30-second TV spot shows clips of members of an atheist advocacy group (Godless Americans Political Action Committee) talking about their goals, such as removing "Under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance and "In God We Trust" from U.S. currency. It then questions why Hagan attended a fundraiser held at the home of a man who is an adviser to the atheist group.
The ad's voiceover says: "Godless Americans and Kay Hagan. She hid from cameras. Took Godless money. What did Hagan promise in return?" At the end, a woman whose voice sounds like Hagan's announces: "There is no God!"
Hagan volleyed with an ad accusing Dole of breaking the Bible's Ninth Commandment by bearing false witness. On Thursday, Hagan - a Presbyterian church elder and Sunday school teacher - filed a lawsuit accusing Dole of defamation and libel. In court documents, Hagan's attorneys wrote: "Each airing of the advertisement further injures (Hagan's) good name and reputation in the community."
On legal grounds, Hagan probably could prove libel (and slander, for the ad's spoken words) by providing evidence of her religious affiliation and commitment to demonstrate the statements were not accurate. She could assert that her profession of faith and church involvement indicate a belief in God (though the content of one's soul and mind are obviously more difficult to present as "Exhibit A").
However, the issue of "defamation" is a sticky one. The suit's assumption is that being depicted as a possible atheist assigns a negative image to Hagan and injures her reputation. The ad's implication is that if Hagan agreed with the goals of the atheist advocacy group or were an atheist herself, her character and judgment would be unsuitable for public office.
Exploring these positions was an angle the Associated Press article missed. The situation begs the questions: "What if Hagan were an atheist? Does that mean she shouldn't run for office? Couldn't represent her constituents? Can't be trusted to have her state and country's best interests in mind?"
The U.S. Constitution explicitly states that "no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." Yet Americans as a whole distrust atheists.
A 2006 national survey by researchers in the University of Minnesota's department of sociology found atheists to be the least accepted social group in the United States. The survey found that Americans rate atheists below Muslims, recent immigrants, homosexuals and other minority groups in "sharing their vision of American society." A 2007 Pew Research Center for the People and the Press survey found that 63 percent say they would be less inclined to support a presidential candidate who "does not believe in God," the most negative trait tested. Americans are less likely to vote for an atheist than a "Muslim" (46 percent) or a "Mormon" (30 percent), according to the survey.
What you don't see reported much in the press are what I would describe as "atheists are people too" statements (ie. atheists are American citizens like anyone else, "atheist" is regarded as a "slur," or there's nothing on the face of atheism that makes atheists unreliable or unfit for public service). Coverage of this story begged for a quote from one of the several active secular or "non-theist" groups, such as the Freedom from Religion Foundation or Council for Secular Humanism.
The omission was similar to that committed by the press, Barack Obama and John McCain presidential campaigns, and other organizations in responding (or not responding) to repeated references to Obama being Muslim. Many Muslims privately, and some Muslim organizations publicly, questioned: "And what would be wrong with him if he were?" or pointed out that these assertions about Obama, a professed Christian, are categorized as "smears" on his campaign's "Fight the Smears" Web site.
McCain, given an opportunity to address the question at a rally earlier this month, didn't clarify the issue when he now famously responded to a woman's statement about Obama being an "Arab" by saying: "No ma'am. He's a decent family man."
Republican and former Secretary of State Colin Powell, in his endorsement of Obama on Oct. 19, finally gave voice to these concerns in an address that was widely reported and consumed, when he said:
I'm also troubled by ... what members of the party say, and is permitted to be said, such things as, "Well you know that Mr. Obama is a Muslim." Well, the correct answer is, "He's not a Muslim, he's a Christian, he's always been a Christian." But the really right answer is, "What if he is? Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country?" The answer's "No, that's not America."
Coverage of the Dole-Hagan controversy, and indeed the issue of atheism in politics and in America, calls for a similar grounding voice.