  I hear people all the time saying President Bush should not be using his religious convictions to form his policies, and that he is at the beck and call of the "Religious Right. " But what I want to know is, if a person says we shouldn't be fighting because it is against a religious ethic... what is the distinction being made here? Should a President not use his religious convictions to make policy? Should a President make policy only based on a certain aspect of his religious convictions? Or does this particular President have the wrong religious convictions? And who gets to say that? If you have been a critic of the President based on his bringing his religious convictions into the mix, are you saying that shouldn't be done at all or that he has the wrong convictions?
And if you would like to see a foreign policy based only on the helping aspects of your religion's altruistic principles - are those the right convictions or shouldn't you have them in the first place? Further, are his critics saying they own the correct interpretation of what religious convictions a President should use, and he doesn't? Is that what his critics are saying? Is that what he may be saying? Anybody out there??? urlLink MORE… 
