The endorsements for Senator John McCain from leaders in the religious community, once an asset to his campaign, have recently gone sour. The topic of spiritual support has become a sore subject for candidates from both political parties.

The original surge of media attention focused on Barack Obama’s Reverend Jeremiah Wright scandal but has now shifted to McCain. McCain, who was so critical of Obama, is now under attack for the endorsement received from a prominent yet controversial figure in religious America.

Last Thursday, McCain rejected the endorsement of Reverend John Hagee after statements made by the religious figure on controversial views on the Holocaust were brought to light.

“I have said I do not believe Senator Obama shares Reverend Wright’s extreme views. But let me also be clear. Reverend Hagee was not and is not my pastor or spiritual advisor, and I did not attend his church for twenty years. I have denounced statements he made immediately upon learning of them, as I do again today,” McCain said.

I find this statement hard to accept when similar events had previously occurred. In the months after already endorsing McCain, before Rev. Hagee’s controversial Jewish statements were brought to the public’s attention, he and McCain had to deal with the pastor’s reference towards the Catholic Church as “the great whore.” In response to this, McCain stood by Hagee and the endorsement stating that he does not agree with all of Hagee’s views, but that he would not stop it from accepting his support.

This statement puts McCain in an awkward position; how can he now vehemently denounce the support of an influential spiritual leader because of certain comments while he shrugged off controversial remarks from the same man just days before?

Senator Obama, when faced with the same type of predicament, decided to utilize the situation as an opportunity to take the highroad; while McCain viciously attacked Obama’s involvement with Reverend Jeremiah Wright, Obama told a Jewish audience in Boca Raton, “I don’t attribute those statements to John McCain. Nobody, nobody thinks that McCain believes that stuff. And for McCain to then suggest that, you know, every single statement that was made by somebody (else) is somehow attributable to me is just wrong.”

Why can’t McCain simply continue to say that he does not agree with the statements but he will go on accepting support?

Regardless of what an endorser said, it shows bad character to make a stand on a something and then back down a week later due to added pressure. It is clear that both candidates are looking to gain the support of evangelical Christians in America; they should be attempting to prove that they have religious integrity, not that they can gain support from leaders that have established theirs.

If the American people respond so strongly to endorsements when making their political decisions, then it is just an example of blind obedience.

The worst part about the controversy over Reverend Hagee is that his statements were completely misconstrued. “[Hagee] interpreted a Biblical verse in a way not very different from several legitimate Jewish authorities,” said Rabbi Aryeh Scheinberg of Congregation Rodfei Shalom, a modern Orthodox synagogue in San Antonio.

Hagee was attacked for saying the Holocaust was all part of God’s plan, but Rabbi Scheinberg defends his statement: “Viewing Hitler as acting completely outside of God’s plan is to suggest that God was powerless to stop the Holocaust, a position quite unacceptable to any religious Jew or Christian.”

This simple justification shows that McCain’s actions were just a form of folding under public pressure. Reverend Hagee put it the best when he said, “I am tired of these baseless attacks and fear that they have become a distraction in what should be a national debate about important issues.”

More importantly, why should our leaders even have a spiritual advisor involved in politics? I don’t want the actions of our president to be influenced by the opinion of a person who only answers to God. Isn’t that the idea of separation of church and state? The president should not have to worry about the consequences of his actions in the eyes of God, but in the eyes of the American people.