Question 4

         In Kennedy's speech in Houston, Texas he seems to elaborate on the fact that yes he is a Catholic and that this fact will not affect his position in office if he is to be elected. He explains that his religion would not influence him on any decisions that would be made in office and that he is not controlled by some outside power such as the pope which would have been the worry of many anti--catholic voters. He explains the no president should be judged on how he preforms in office, but rather his commitment to the larger issues at hand that America faced in the 1960's. He also adds that if their was ever a conflict that came in as a moral dilemma to his personnel beliefs he would relieve himself from office. That he should be based on his time in office and that people should not vote on whether they support a Catholic or do not support a Catholic in office, but rather on the basis of religious freedom that our Founding fathers fought for in the establishment of America.
          As far as this kind of speech being given by a present day candidate on religion would revolve around the difference of religion being non-Christian in origin. People today would agree with his speech, but the likely hood of it being focused on Christian beliefs only would not be very likely in today's society. With the idea on equality of people and freedom of speech and religion we face today it would be understandable if we had a non-Christian religion having to give a speech in the present on the idea of being uninfluenced by aspects of their religion. Or in fact the idea of a president having no religious affiliation which would also cause need for a similar speech like the one in this video by Kennedy on guiding our country based on what is better for it as a whole. The one aspect that would be very different from Kennedy is the idea of stepping down from power if he was faced with a moral dilemma which as of late does not seem to be an option for most candidates.

Brett Ohler
11/7/2017