It was brought to light last week that Republican gubernatorial candidate Len Munsil and his wife Tracy conceived their eldest son out of wedlock, before their marriage.
Ironically, Len Munsil is one of the founders and former president of the Center for Arizona Policy, a conservative and "nonpartisan" nonprofit organization devoted to lobbying on social issues like abortion and gay marriage.
Noting Munsil's failure to live up to his own values 20 years ago is a petty attack against his campaign. After all, he would probably just acknowledge that he's a sinner and have that be that. But that still does not remove the very theocratic flair he could potentially bring to the governor's office.
There are many better reasons why Len Munsil is unfit to man the helm of our state, aside from his premarital relations. Besides, a slightly hypocritical politician should come as no grave shock to anyone.
A cursory visit to Munsil's Web site reveals an impressive resume, touting an ASU education, a law degree and a former editorial position for this very publication. He also has eight children with his wife of 20 years.
But beneath the rosy exterior lies a radically conservative ideologue, seeking to reshape Arizona in his image. If you caught the allusion to Genesis, the comparison is not that far off.
While he lists some of his issues as taxes and immigration (standard Republican fare), his political history is very religiously charged.
The current Protect Marriage Arizona amendment promoted by the Munsil-founded Center for Arizona Policy aims to not only reinforce the existing gay-marriage ban, but also remove benefits from unmarried heterosexual couples. (This includes, but is not limited to, health care benefits and hospital visitation rights.)
The whole point of the Center for Arizona Policy is to "change culture" by influencing public policy in an Evangelical Christian sense. You may not be Christian, and you may not convert, but regardless, Munsil will still attempt to make you live by Christian precepts by "influencing" public policy.
Faith can be a beautiful and admirable thing, when it is not being shoved down the throats of citizens via government. I personally would prefer an objective candidate running for governor, not someone vying to be elected pope.
Munsil still has a Republican primary to make it through on Sept. 12, but as one of the front-runners, he will likely square off with political centrist and Democratic incumbent Janet Napolitano.
Napolitano has an impressive record as an elected official in Arizona, formerly serving as attorney general and governor. During her tenure, she has managed to balance the budget without raising taxes, and pull the state out of a deficit and into a surplus. She is a tried public servant.
Napolitano's experience and record make her very fit to govern Arizona, whereas Munsil's socially conservative history makes him very fit to preach. Perhaps both candidates should stick to what they know best: Napolitano can stick to politics, while Munsil should stick to parenting.
The office should go to the candidate who is most likely to govern objectively and enact policies that will help the state, as opposed to a candidate who will govern to save your soul.
Rick Beitman is a political science and French senior. Your responses, be they inflammatory or otherwise, can be sent to: richard.beitman@asu.edu
