Political Insider: Attack on faith, or simply supporting diverse values?

By Agustin C. Torres/The Jersey Journal
March 16, 2013 at 6:10 AM

The Jersey City municipal election is percolating. It took a bit, but we can now look forward to that smell of napalm in the morning. It is an art to firebomb an opponent while making it look like one is on the side of the angels.

This brings us to this week's point/counterpoint. Heights council candidate Sean Connors, a 33rd District assemblyman who is on mayoral hopeful and city Councilman Steven Fulop's ticket, went on the offensive by noting that Mayor Jerramiah Healy's Ward D running mate, the Rev. Mario Gonzalez, is more Republican than a Democrat.

Connors' evidence is that Gonzalez has "extreme radical right-wing beliefs."

Those beliefs are actually those of the denomination Gonzalez's church belongs to, the Assemblies of God. Let's just say the denomination is not pleased with homosexuality -- "immoral and comes under the judgment of God," according to an Assemblies of God website. Its stands on abortion and feminism are also far from liberal.

Making someone accused of wrongdoing look like a victim -- remember the mayor's photograph on his front porch -- is a specialty of the Healy campaign team. It is now pointing a finger at Connors and Fulop, calling them anti-religious. The thinking here, and by many in the city calling themselves political observers, is that the Fulop ticket is making a mistake by attacking a man of the cloth because it will resonate with Hispanics, who are seen as a pious community. Hell, it could even upset Catholic Filipinos who are supporting Councilman Rolando Lavarro for an at-large council seat on the Fulop slate.

Gonzalez is quoted as saying: "To attack me for my religious affiliation is analogous to attacking a candidate for being an observing Muslim, an Orthodox Jew or a Roman Catholic, a church which coincidentally shares the Assemblies of God's same theological position on the matters addressed. This is frankly an ad hominem, pejorative attack on all people of faith." I was hoping for scripture.

Translation: Hey, if you worship, then you all believe the same things as my church.

Connors, who is also a police officer, said his rival can believe what he wants in his church but when he's running for an elected public office in one of the most diverse cities in the nation, people have a right to know if he plans to run local government based on his personal convictions.

Did John F. Kennedy? Then again, Kennedy made speeches and did not offer homilies.

It should be pointed out that Connors once called Fulop "un-American" but was willing to look the other way and join the councilman's slate. The councilman must have convinced him he likes baseball, apple pie and his "plush" Grove Street office.

While men of faith have contributed to the founding of this nation, the country's opinions -- or at least those in the blue states -- have somewhat changed over the centuries on the interaction between religion and government. For some, at least one truth is no longer self-evident.

Let's stop here before we get too deep into a philosophical argument. This is all about one religion in Hudson County -- politics. Normally I'd agree with those who say that attacking Gonzalez was a bad idea, but the charge affects certain groups in the community, and it could make a slight difference.

On Tuesday evening, Healy attended a town hall meeting with about 20-plus members of Hudson Pride, a nonprofit that serves the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community. Even though the mayor has trouble just letting L-G-B-T to effortlessly roll off his tongue, the mayor was warmly received and treated cordially. Yet, there was obvious concern during the question and answer session, says one Journal reporter who was at the event. Most of the questions were about the good reverend and why Healy picked him for his slate. The mayor defended him and agreed to bring the pastor back for some questioning.

As one wag said, "There are plenty of Christians who help people, even when they are convinced they're going to hell."

This whole thing also cleverly puts Healy on the defensive, after the mayor's campaign operatives have been busy trying to paint Fulop, a Democrat, as a "Republican" or another Milt Romney, a member of the 1 percent club. The mayor likes to portray himself as the only Democrat in what is a nonpartisan election. Connors' accusations are telling voters that the mayor isn't as Democratic as they think.

And will Hispanics feel outraged and come out in droves to vote? I believe this is doubtful. In Jersey City, the Hispanic vote has not made much of a citywide difference in local races. They have cast ballots for a Latino candidate or two, but not for any that would shake the political structure of the city. Any Hispanics running for mayor? Nope.

If anything, they may sit this one out. And that would be OK for the administration. A low voter turnout gives the incumbents a better chance at winning, or a runoff.

POLITICAL INSIDER

INSIDER NOTES

-- On Thursday, the Hudson County Board of Freeholders issued a permit allowing the Jersey City St. Patrick's Day Parade the previous Sunday. This is one big reason why cars were not ticketed or towed along the parade route. If you were, understand that the ticket and towing was illegal.

-- Despite what you read by commenters on some blogs, Fulop had a sizable contingent at the St. Patrick's march. Also, backers of the mayor had a tough time trying to get sidewalk parade watchers to accept "Healy for Mayor" signs.

-- We'll discuss this more after the May elections and perhaps the June primary, but right now 33rd Assemblyman Ruben Ramos is alone on a lifeboat in his bid to become mayor of Hoboken in November. The administration opposition is in total disarray, with everyone jockeying for a political position for themselves. Ramos has no tiger in the boat with him, but he does have a very quiet former Mayor Dave Roberts, who is helping to put together a fundraiser for Ruben at Amanda's at $1,000 a pop.

-- At Wednesday's Jersey City council meeting, Anna Kuczyk, a county employee who was backed by some men holding hard to read posters, demanded an apology from Ward F Councilwoman Diane Coleman for that "joke" about there being felons in Ward F. Kuczyk shouted for an apology, but seemed more interested in berating Coleman.

Coleman said she was responding with derision to a program that disallows anyone with a criminal background. She had quipped that everyone in Ward F has a criminal record, triggering Councilwoman Viola Richardson to accuse her of failing to stand up for her constituents. It made headlines.

The stressed councilwoman responded at the meeting that her comments were taken out of context by a reporter and that she doesn't have the polish of some "politicians" and as a result she misspoke. This opened the door for Richardson, who wanted to know "what politicians" she had in mind. Richardson said Coleman should apologize when she makes a mistake, like she would do.

Richardson is probably correct on how to handle the situation, but I can't remember when the councilwoman at large admitted to a mistake.

Meanwhile, Kuczyk and others said they would come to every meeting to demand an apology. Or at least until after the May city election.

-- The end of Thursday's county freeholders session became a book signing event as Freeholder Bill O'Dea signed copies of his just-released novel "Legacy of Haguesville." I hope to review it in the future.

While set in Hudson County in a fictional city that is obviously Jersey City, the novel uses characters that are based on real people and features some who are composites. Some are very obvious, but I wonder if these "characters," some of whom are still alive, can recognize themselves. I do know there seems to be a number of politicos buying the book -- out of curiosity no doubt. Is there a newspaper figure?

-- Cute. In a previous column, I noted that no Jersey City candidate dared to openly charge mayoral candidate Jeremiah "Jerry" Walker with not living in the city long enough (one year) to run for office. Neither Healy or Fulop would attack the lone black candidate and lose the black vote.

Instead, they did what they always do, had an "anonymous" source give it to a political website who would find a way to ask the question. In this case, ask City Clerk Robert Byrne about Walker's eligibility and not just everyone's. Despite receiving anonymous information, Byrne said Walker claims to have met all guidelines and it's up to someone else to bring it before a judge.

Everyone has known about the claim for a month or more, but even if it were true, the hardest thing to do is to prove it, legally. Who is to say where home is located? And the question about residency can be asked of a number of candidates -- but proving it is another matter. Don't forget, in the past we have had lawmakers that everyone knew lived outside of Hudson for years. We can't say who because some are still alive;)

http://www.nj.com/hudson/voices/index ... k_on_fa.html#incart_river

Not an attack, but a genuine question. How are campaign finances kept separate from charitable donations to a church? And if Pastor Gonzales is paid though the church, can he use his personal finances, provided by the church, in funding his campaign?

Quote:

I'll tell you what they can do. Once they've established a beach head they can use the voting block of their churches to stack the city council and school board with people who think like they do. It sounds like paranoia but it's not. I've been following politics closely since the mid 90s and I can tell you for a fact that the far right does not think like liberals and libertarians. They're like the Borg on Star Trek. Their agenda never changes and they just keep coming no matter what happens. Once they have a foothold the first order of business will be privatizing JC schools.

You keep repeating that people are attacking the man when that is not happening. It seems to me you believe any questions about his religious views and how they may affect his conduct in office are an attack. You also seem to regard voicing opposition to his religious views as an attack. If you speak for the Reverend, he needs a much thicker skin if he wants to be involved in Hudson County politics.

Everyone who has attacked this reverend, who I do not know, cannot name one thing he can do under the city code to attack gays and women as a councilperson. Please name something. Be specific! Personally, you remind me of the rhetoric of the Communist Party which talks about the evils of religion and had it outlawed for a number of years. That is scary.

Quote:

I don't like that AT ALL. Add that to the right wing anti-gay stuff and it gives me a very bad feeling about this. Who says religion has nothing to do with governing? It has EVERYTHING to do with governing when you hold extreme right wing views. Look at what the religious right has been doing for the past 30 years. Excuse me if I feel the need to question someone's intentions when I'm aware that they are heavily invested in these beliefs.

I have been attending meetings for over 40 years, no councilperson has ever used his/her office to discriminate based on their religious beliefs, even if they want to, they don't have the power. The only discrimination is see in government at the local level is their tax policy. Now I stand corrected, at the last meeting, 3/13/13, I noticed the city clerk moved the next meeting to Holy Thursdays from Wednesday. Council meetings are held on Wednesdays. When questioned he said it was moved for Passover. He said Holy Thursday is not a legal holiday that is why is was moved. Someone asked him if Passover is a legal holiday but received no answer. So the budget hearing is being held on a Christian holiday. I don't think the city clerk should choose between religions in setting the calendar. Perhaps, if the reverend wins he might object to the budget being heard on a Christian religious holiday. I strongly objected and I am not running for office. The calendar is set by the city clerk with input from the council. In 40 years I have never seen a budget hearing set on a religious holiday especially since people travel during that time. Who knows, amendments to the budget might be held on Christmas.

Quote:

Rev. Gonzalez's church's CORE MISSION is to revolutionize schools and government in JERSEY CITY. He wants to "turn the city upside down." You can't logically have the goal of transforming a particular city into an expression of your vision of Christ and claim that your religious agenda is not relevant to seeking a role in that city's government.

I don't believe religious leadership disqualifies a candidate. I do believe the voters are entitled to ask questions, especially when the leader takes positions with respect to the role of women and the rights of women and gay people that are extreme and proclaims his mission is to bring his religious vision to an entire city.

Quote:

1. Romney was a former bishop. He stopped serving in that position 17 years ago. He resigned BEFORE he first ran for political office.

2. In Mormonism, every adult male is a priest and the position of bishop is not the same as in other churches. There are 28,000 Mormon bishops. It is a part-time position.

3. Romney's religion was an issue in the campaign and you did not hear him claim that asking questions about how it would affect his public policy was "attacking his religion."

In the confines of the Faulkner Act, what can this reverend or any reverend do that would violate his oath as councilperson? Is voting on a street closing religious? Is voting on the budget religious? Is voting on the Police contract religious? Is bonding money to repair city's streets religious? I do not live in Ward D, but honestly, I would probably vote for him because he is being attacked my members of jclist for his religious beliefs. If I feel that way, can you imagine how people in Ward D feels? I am saying this even though I know and like Connors. Connors is a fine person, but I am angry that a person is being attack for his religious belief.

Quote:

Rev Colon is not on the ballot.

This is about Rev Gonzalez, who advertises his church as having a mission to change the city, and whose church subscribes to beliefs that could cause problems for the way he votes. And Rev Gonzalez seems to confuse church and state boundaries.

The Council passes the budget, which makes choices about issues raised here. The Council also passes ordinances and makes judicial appointments. I don't know that Rev Gonzalez would be unfair in how he approaches these things. But nothing he's done so far says that he would be.

What's out there already raises the question, and his defensive "I'm being persecuted for my faith" responses before he stopped saying anything doesn't reassure me.

He has the right to say anything he wants to about his faith. He has the right to not say anything about it, also he seems a bit hypocritical in making his religion and his church part of his campaign before he was confronted.

And we have the right to question whether this is good judgment, good politics, or good for Jersey City.

Schundler's ran Reverend Colon for council, he never faced these questions. Neither did he preached at council meetings; however, he and the rest of Schundler's council failed to do the one important thing - introduced and passed the budget on time. Schundler was lucky that Governor Christine Todd-Whitman did not go after his council (she did go after Democratic control municipalities, who did not passed a budget on time.)

Really H-Parker? It is extremely unusual for a religious leader to seek public office in this country.

How quickly we forget! Does anyone remember Mitt Romney , a BISHOP in the Mormon Church , who ran for PRESIDENT and was a former governor. He was also the son of two Mormons who also ran for elected office.

Quote:

Quote:

I'm not sure why this is so unclear to some people. He is not being "attacked" for his religious beliefs. Because he is a religious leader, he is being questioned about seeking the secular power to impose those beliefs on others.

His religious freedom is not at stake. His political career is. When a man who has dedicated his life to building an evangelical church suddenly seeks political authority, voters have the right to examine how the agenda of his church affects his public policy agenda. It is very unlikely that the interests of his church and his evangelical passion have nothing to do with his running for office

Voters don't pay particular attention to the religious beliefs of the average politician because the average politician is not a religious leader. I can assure you if a Catholic Bishop or a powerful Rabbi or Imam ran for political office, they would face the same questions.

It is extremely unusual for a religious leader to seek public office in this country. Most religious leaders have the sense to understand that the separation of church and state should be respected. They understand that anyone who has devoted their life to bringing other people to God and to teaching their understanding of God's will should not hold political authority in a diverse society.

The city council job is defined by the Faulkner Act which the city adopted in 1960. The running of all departments is now the function of the mayor not the council. The main job of the council is the adoption of the budget. Several years ago, Hoboken city council which also adopted the Faulkner Act was fined by the State of NJ for not adopting the budget. The state sent in an administrator to do the job. If the council just do that job well, I would be pleased because that is the main job of the city council. Only twice has social issues come before the city council- first in 1970s when the Medical Center was part of the municipal government, the council discussed whether abortion should take place. Now, the Medical Center is not a municipal agency that point is mute. Second, in 1990s, the city council voted to allow condoms in hotels. It needed an ordinance to do that. The city council does not vote on judicial matters concerning gays or women, those things are for the courts.

Quote:

But that belief becomes fair game when you start asking people to vote for you to legislate public policy.

The Reverend wants it both ways. He wants his beliefs to be private and off-limits, yet he has people from his church running his campaign, and his church has an agenda of changing the city. It's somehow un-American to ask what he means? Puh-leeeeze!

He says his campaign is is about values. His co-pastor urges people to vote for him because they are Christian. And it's an attack to question his commitment to the separation of church and state? To ask how, while holiding religious beliefs about women and gays, he could be fair in making decisions about women and gays?

The Rev's statements and his behavior don't match. Jesus had a big thing about religious hypocrites. The Rev hasn't convinced me he's being straight here (no pun intended).

The issue is not freedom of religion but rather freedom FROM religion.

It is the stated goal of this church to impose their values on everyone else.

Should we be concerned? It appears so.


http://www.usachurches.org/church/hope-center-tabernacle.htm


"We have dedicated our ministry and all our resources toward turning our city upside down and positively impacting it for Christ, something we have been doing for almost a decade. Through our 2006-07 Turning Our City Upside Down campaign we will train hundreds of other churches and ministry leaders in the greater New York City metroplex area to do the same. It is the job of the Church to challenge society and promote revolutionary change in our neighborhoods, our schools and our government."

Your name, JSleeze, fits you well. As an American citizen, I am exercising my right to speak at council meetings. People died in this country to give me that right. I personally think it is wrong to attack someone for his religious belief. Freedom of Religion is one of our cherish rights. In fact I remember John Paul 11 kissing the soil when he first visited the USA as pope. He talked about the beauty of religious freedom, something he did not have in Poland. In fact, he was ordained as a priest in secret. This candidate's views are similar to the Catholic Church, (exception woman's right to work. Many of the Vatican workers are woman, some are in executive positions), yet the world could not get enough information on the next pope! If conservative views are irrevelent, when why is the world all over Vatican City? JSleeze, have the courage to use your real name when you attack someone!

Will the new Pope support detective conners or reverend Mario?

Quote:

Two whole times! And a sign, even! Look at you!

Yvonne Balcer stands up and bitches about taxes five times a council meeting. I guess she should be the pope or something then.

Quote:

Fletch, I'm sorry to say it (I'm sure I'm not the first) but you are a jerk. I'm going to do an impression of you (if only I could do it vocally online so that you could hear the inflection points...

My name is Fletch and I've looked out for you for a realllllly long time. So long in fact that literally none of the posters, despite the fact that theyve been involved in JC politics and activism for decades, know who I am. But its not cause I've been in the closet, cause being out of the closet is [apparently] the central tenet of my campaign. I helped put together an art show. It was a lot of fun. Thats another reason to vote for me... I like fun art shows. But not as much fun as not liking taxes. Thats wayyyy more fun and it differentiates me from everyone else... I think? I dont know for a fact because I never felt the need to actually see what my opponents opinions are. Oh well. BTW, despite being SUPER active in the downtown community I am wayyyyy better than Candice Osborne and Dan Levin, you know, those people that everyone apparently knows but me? As a founder of a small direct mailing business (everyone loves junk mail and coupon packs for crap they dont need right?) with no overhead I know a lot about city budgets! Before I go, dont forget that I'm an independent - granted, the reason I'm an independent is because nobody wanted me to run with them! I wonder why? Isnt it strange that Jerry Walker is running for mayor without any representative from Ward E... Wait a second I'm from ward e!?!?!?! Anyway, vote for me! Fletch! Cause hopefully I cant screw up that bad!

Rev. Mario Gonzalez in his own words:

From NJ.com candidate under fire for alleged 'extremist' views

"I am not running on a "religious" platform. If I were, THEN AND ONLY THEN would your comments concerning ?disclosure? be on point. Otherwise, religion is a private matter unfit for public discourse in a political context.... On that note, my personal faith, as well as your own, is nobody's business."

The whole note of him being persecuted or deserving some kind of special treatment because he is a minister says a lot to me about how he would deal with controversy in office. As the head of his church he can act one way. But in the public arena when people don't have to defer to your special religious status, how will he respond. Not so well, it seems.

He got the JJ to take down one of his more bizarre comments.

And apparently all of Team Healy, from Dan to Jerry to their two Reverends, have all gone into stealth mode and decided to pretend this never happened. Too inconvenient to actually answer a question.

Quote:

Healy's handlers must have gotten to him. After getting all self-righteous, once people started asking him to say what he really believes the guy disappeared.

Quote:



Full on religious/political campaign, but with the added advantage of tax free status!

This is not an isolated incident. I was rough for a reason. And, accurate (by the way).

Quote:

I thought this was a little rough. And I'm the one saying that...

I think he knows he has a zero percent chance of winning. He's running because he thinks this can either help him win in the future or garner some attention towards some other pursuit.

It's not like he's spending a lot of money on the campaign..

Quote:

This goes out to Fletch...

I used to wonder if you were just well-meaning but clueless. But, now I am sure: you are not well-meaning, you are just clueless.

I was going to offer you some sage advice about how you have a zero percent chance of winning, so if you truly want to make a difference downtown you would make nice with the people who will actually be in a position to do things. But, you are not bright enough to take advice. So, my other advice (which I am sure you will not take) would be to get yourself back to your own little thread before you get flamed back to the stone age.

Fair enough?

This goes out to Magnus...

1) I do have a thread... but reserve the right to comment wherever I see fit and when it might be relevant. And I am on a few threads now. I have commented on Dan's thread and the "ELECTION" general thread as well. Should not matter.

2) What has Candice done, INDEPENDENTLY Outside of WORKING for Steven Fulop? Before Hurricane Sandy? I think I hear silence.

The world didn't just start in October of 2012.... when Mr. Fulop was planning his campaign back in 2011. I'd tell any potential candidate to get their "A**" out there as well to make a name for themselves.

The face of the matter is, I have been out there looking out for Ward E long before Candice.

Fletch

Quote:

No kidding. Re-read my post. I acknowledged that.

Still don't think it should be the reason people should vote for you or not vote for you. It's a mistake to suggest it. IMHO

Dear Kitten...

I made sure to say ELECTED.

Jersey City has NEVER ELECTED an openly gay person to anything.

Ray Valaquez was APPOINTED.

And I have acknowledged elsewhere that there was another gay councilman... but just not ELECTED.

Let's ELECT someone this time. Just wanted to clarify that. There is a difference. Appointment is one thing. When the PEOPLE SPEAK is another.

Fletch