There are three elements to consider when judging the moral fitness of a person to be President of the United States
1. Social fitness: Does the person know the social conventions of society and generally lives according to them? If a person is socially awkward, he is likely to prove unfit as president.
2. Civic fitness: Does he obey the law? A person who has a history of breaking the law is hardly fit to become the chief agent of law enforcement in the country.
3. Religious fitness: I am not concerned with what his/her religion is, I am concerned with whether he actually observes the religion he ascribes to. If he is not publicly faithful to his own private commitments, how fit can he be?
Let’s try these three rules out on some recent presidents and see if they work:
President Reagan
1. Yes
2. Yes
3. Yes
He made a pretty successful president
President Johnson
1. No
2. No
3. Not sure about this one
He has two clear strikes and his presidency did not go well
President Carter
1. Maybe a little inept on this one
2. Yes
3. Yes
Does pretty well on this test, so I think he’s a morally fit man. However, moral fitness is only one element of overall fitness. Perhaps Carter lacked elsewhere
President Ford
1. Yes
2. Yes
3. Yes
He was definitely morally fit; precisely the reason who was put into the position to become president.
President Nixon
1. No. Very awkward in public.
2. No.
3. Not particularly
And we all know how that one turned out.
As we consider the current candidates, we should observe their skills and values in these areas. If we choose a president who is strong morally, he is more likely to have the ability to judge wisely when he is faced with unexpected challenges.
