Atheist for Pres?

[Depco164]

As I was reading through a recent TIME Magazine I saw a reader who had written in and commented about all the heat Mitt Romney was taking for his Mormon beliefs. The reader stated that the heat Romney was taking would be less than that which an atheist would take. That got me to thinking.

So my question to you all would be this:

If a candidate had the same political viewpoint that you did and he was an admitted atheist would you vote for him?

I am looking for a simple yes or no and then a brief explanation of why or why not. I don't want this to become a debate over Atheist Vs. Theist viewpoints. There are other threads for that. I am just curious if an admitted atheist would even have a chance.

My answer to the question would be this.

Yes. I do not believe the candidates religious view or beliefs should be used as the basis of their decision making process. An atheist would base their decision on something other than religious dogma because they are not swayed by the religious right or any other religious based lobby.

[zombo]

No impact. It's about the job he would do in office, not his faith (or lack there of).

[FutureTrooper28]

Would I? In a heartbeat! Assuming I agree with his/her politics, of course.

But... Gallup did a poll earlier this year, and Americans are more likely to vote for a homosexual, woman, or black person before an atheist. Not that any of them are unqualified, but knowing the extreme prejudices that some people have towards at least two of those categories, atheists don't really stand a chance in the near future. It's sad, really.

Most would rather have a president who talks to a god who tells them to invade countries. :confused:

[Bearcat357]

If a candidate had the same political viewpoint that you did and he was an admitted atheist would you vote for him?

A. Nope....not going to vote for him/her.....

B. They would never get into office as a atheist.....as liberal as some folks think this country is.....it would never happen......

[zombo]

A. Nope....not going to vote for him/her.....

B. They would never get into office as a atheist.....as liberal as some folks think this country is.....it would never happen......

Why not?

And how do you know he would be a liberal? More likely a libertarian or western republican.

[Depco164]

A. Nope....not going to vote for him/her.....

B. They would never get into office as a atheist.....as liberal as some folks think this country is.....it would never happen......

This doesn't say why you wouldn't vote for him. I would assume it is because you don't believe an atheist can do the job due to his religious view or lack there of.

[damode]

So if its impossible to be a president as an atheist or pretty much hold any part of office in the government.

The question you guys should be asking is how many people that have held office in our country have lied that they are religious and were pretty much atheists??

:)

Theres been athiests running this country, you guys just dont know it.

Im an atheist, but if i would ever be so high in a position of power, you damn well know ill be married to a good ol' country girl and go to church every sunday and agree with the church if it got me into power :)

If i think like that and im only a 22 year old scrub barely starting life, i wonder how these seasoned politicians think lol.

[retired]

Of course, their religious belief has no bearing on who I vote for.

[thenicepython]

Of course I'd vote for him/her, if I agreed with the majority of their viewpoints. Frankly, it doesnt matter to me. Now I will say if I thought they were in a cult religion *cough*scientology/mormon(see what they do to little girls, its SICK)*cough* then not a chance in hell, because I believe they are systematically brainwashed.

[LawDog99]

I would never even remotely consider voting for an atheist.

[damode]

How about if he was a minister in the church of the Flying Sphagetti Monster?

For though shall be blinded until the truth will cometh, is it not that man was created in sauce - Flying Sphagetti Monster

^^ He told me this in a dream.

[Ex Army MP]

I'd vote for a gay, black, female, athiest with ADHD.

She'd do a better job than who we have in there now.

[Columbus]

I would. Where they're going when they die doesn't affect how they're going to run the country, so why not?

[Bearcat357]

I would. Where they're going when they die doesn't affect how they're going to run the country, so why not?

What about Romney...? I am pretty sure there are a lot of folks out there that won't vote for him in the primary based on his religion.........

Hell.....look at the stink that was going on with Obama when one of the other campaign's put out he went to a Muslim school.....

Some of you honestly think an openly atheist would get elected....?

[lt1z28]

Theres been athiests running this country, you guys just dont know it.

Im an atheist, but if i would ever be so high in a position of power, you damn well know ill be married to a good ol' country girl and go to church every sunday and agree with the church if it got me into power

Nice one. You are so right about this.

Does anyone actually seriously think that the Clinton's believe in God?
And that Hillary's "faith in God" "saved" their marriage?? HAHAHAHA, LOL!!!! What marriage?? They don't even live together!
It's obvious they hate each other.They obviously stayed "married" for political reasons.
What about Obama? Heck, he "used" to be a Muslim, (and he's real quiet about his growing up years--along with the media) and now that he's running for POTUS, he's proud of his "Christian faith" --geez, how convenient to convert when running for political office (although he did this years ago, but it was for the same reason).

I loved the CNN special about religion and politics. Isn't it ironic/hypocritical that they only talked about the democrats/left-wingers who want to get religion out of everything these days--despite their claim that they "believe in God"???

As to the first question, as long as the candidate shares most of my views, they will get my vote. :cool:

[retired]

What about Romney...? I am pretty sure there are a lot of folks out there that won't vote for him in the primary based on his religion.........

Hell.....look at the stink that was going on with Obama when one of the other campaign's put out he went to a Muslim school.....

Some of you honestly think an openly atheist would get elected....?

I don't think an Atheist would get elected, but do you really think he/she would do any worse than the religious presidents we have had?:eek: :eek:

[Bearcat357]

I don't think an Atheist would get elected, but do you really think he/she would do any worse than the religious presidents we have had?:eek: :eek:

Not sure....you never know....

I would/will vote for Romney if the GOP nominates him...... Only GOPer that I won't vote for is that crazy *** Ron Paul......

[LeanG]

Yes I would...

Very religious politicians have made some very TERRIBLE decisions throughout history. I don't see how an atheist can do much worse. Heck, David Duke is/was a politician.

[zombo]

Not sure....you never know....

I would/will vote for Romney if the GOP nominates him...... Only GOPer that I won't vote for is that crazy *** Ron Paul......

You mean you won't vote for the only decent one? :D

[zombo]

Not sure....you never know....

I would/will vote for Romney if the GOP nominates him...... Only GOPer that I won't vote for is that crazy *** Ron Paul......

You mean you won't vote for the only decent one? :D

[JPR]

I forgot which founding father said it but it was said that the freedoms instituted when this nation was founded rely on a God fearing citizenry.
He believed that a free society necessitated God fearing people because maximum freedom requires maximum responsibility in one's behavior. It makes logical sense. Without belief in God it is easier to conceive and execute crime. All you have to do is formulate and execute a plan that cannot be traced by the civil authorities. On the other hand, a God fearing man is aware that even if he gets over on the civil authorities, he can not get over on God. It is logical to conclude that the fear of God drastically reduces the rate of crime, especially in a free society. We can see the evidence of this over the last 40 years as the culture has moved more away from God. Forty years ago you didn't see school shootings or students carrying guns. Now we have to have full time police officers stationed at our schools. Forty years ago you didn't have to police what your kids watched on TV or at the theater, there was no need for a ratings system. I believe the decline of God fearing people in the citizenry may be the explanation for the loss of a lot of our freedoms over the last 40 years.

I believe Abraham Lincoln once said, "If it were not for the Bible, man could not know right from wrong."

When you look at history, atheist nations have never done well or lasted long. 231 years is infancy in terms of the age of a nation. I sincerely believe we will have no personal freedoms left in the USA 231 yrs from now if we go the path of Atheism.

[Depco164]

JPR,

You did not answer the question... I assume you would not vote for an openly atheist president then.

[Bearcat357]

You mean you won't vote for the only decent one? :D

Paul....? He's nuts...... read what he says and thinks..... There are no way his ideas would get through the Congress...no matter who was in charge.....

[ignignokt373]

I assume you would not vote for an openly atheist president then.

Nope. ;)

[JPR]

JPR,

You did not answer the question... I assume you would not vote for an openly atheist president then.


That's an excellent assumption.:D :D :D The only exception would be if the other candidate convinced me that the avowed atheist was the lesser of two evils....I am a realist....I've orbited the Sun too many times not to know that life sometimes forces me to choose between a bad choice and a worse choice.:(

[Camo Cop]

In a heartbeat IF I believed he/she was a statesman.

Damn tired of hipocrites and damn tired of being on the bottom of a two story outhouse w/ the politicians on top.

Thomas Jefferson couldn't get elected today because he didn't believe that Jesus was the son of God and he didn't believe in miracles.

[Columbus]

What about Romney...? I am pretty sure there are a lot of folks out there that won't vote for him in the primary based on his religion.........

Hell.....look at the stink that was going on with Obama when one of the other campaign's put out he went to a Muslim school.....

Some of you honestly think an openly atheist would get elected....?

No, I don't think they would get elected. I'm just saying that I would vote for them. When it comes to the masses however, I don't think they could pull it off.

[bldg0031]

I forgot which founding father said it but it was said that the freedoms instituted when this nation was founded rely on a God fearing citizenry.
He believed that a free society necessitated God fearing people because maximum freedom requires maximum responsibility in one's behavior. It makes logical sense. Without belief in God it is easier to conceive and execute crime. All you have to do is formulate and execute a plan that cannot be traced by the civil authorities. On the other hand, a God fearing man is aware that even if he gets over on the civil authorities, he can not get over on God. It is logical to conclude that the fear of God drastically reduces the rate of crime, especially in a free society. We can see the evidence of this over the last 40 years as the culture has moved more away from God. Forty years ago you didn't see school shootings or students carrying guns. Now we have to have full time police officers stationed at our schools. Forty years ago you didn't have to police what your kids watched on TV or at the theater, there was no need for a ratings system. I believe the decline of God fearing people in the citizenry may be the explanation for the loss of a lot of our freedoms over the last 40 years.

I believe Abraham Lincoln once said, "If it were not for the Bible, man could not know right from wrong."

When you look at history, atheist nations have never done well or lasted long. 231 years is infancy in terms of the age of a nation. I sincerely believe we will have no personal freedoms left in the USA 231 yrs from now if we go the path of Atheism.

I sometimes can not believe the arrogance of some religious people.

Morals are not limited to people who read the bible. Right from wrong is not limited to just the people that learn from the bible.

It is nice that you quote the founding fathers to prove your point but the founding fathers didn't have everything right. Heck they thought a black man was 3/5 of a white man and that was clearly wrong.

As discussed in other threads there have been more killings in the name of GOD (whether it be a Christian god or any GOD) than for any other reason. Most atheists I know (and yes this is anecdotal evidence) are very moral people.

I would vote for an atheist if I believed in the same Politics he did. I do not care what religion any of these people claim to be.

[equinox137]

This is a rare occasion that Bldg0031 and I agree on something :eek:

[FutureTrooper28]

This is a rare occasion that Bldg0031 and I agree on something :eek:

Isn't this one of the signs of the apocalypse?

[equinox137]

Isn't this one of the signs of the apocalypse?

Watch out for the four horsemen now....:D

[Kieth M.]

As discussed in other threads there have been more killings in the name of GOD (whether it be a Christian god or any GOD) than for any other reason. Most atheists I know (and yes this is anecdotal evidence) are very moral people.

I think the total number of victims of Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot might give you a run for your money on that supposition, and they certainly weren't working for G-d.;)

[SRT936]

This is a rare occasion that Bldg0031 and I agree on something :eek:

Isn't this one of the signs of the apocalypse?

Good God almighty, it must be the apocalypse, because I agree as well. :eek:

[Kieth M.]

It is nice that you quote the founding fathers to prove your point but the founding fathers didn't have everything right. Heck they thought a black man was 3/5 of a white man and that was clearly wrong.

You know, in the 21st century, you're absolutely right - but they came up with that 3/5's stuff 232 years ago, when most blacks were kept as uneducated slaves. Native Americans (like some of my family), though born here weren't considered citizens at all. At that same time, women did not have the vote. Eventually, black men had the vote before women of any color had it. When viewed in context...what conditions of life were at the time they did/said what they did, our founding fathers (and mothers) did a pretty good job with what they had to work with. That's what constitutional amendments are for, to allow it to change, grow, and carry us through to the next challenge.

But to the original question of the thread, could/would I vote for an athiest....maybe...he/she just has to have a better plan for this country than the current crop of posers and pretenders. Just saying "I'll be different from/or I'm not GWB," does not convince me you're the one for the job. Show me how you're the right one. My vote is still up for grabs.

Whomever I vote for better fence the borders, mind the gates, keep the suicide bombers off my block, stay out of my bedroom, keep my taxes low, not tell my doctor how to treat me, and keep their grabby fingers away from my gunsafe...we'll all get along, just fine, then.

[Kieth M.]

Thomas Jefferson couldn't get elected today because he didn't believe that Jesus was the son of God and he didn't believe in miracles.

Yeah, and that Sally Hemmings thing would probably not help him too much at the polls, either, now would it?

He had affairs with, or "raped" (depending on which side of the line you view this tidbit of information) his slaves. Yes, the guy who is held up as the "seperation of church and state" champion, owned slaves. But when he talks about church & state, he gets a pass to be the voice of moral clarity.

[equinox137]

Yeah, and that Sally Hemmings thing would probably not help him too much at the polls, either, now would it?

He had affairs with, or "raped" (depending on which side of the line you view this tidbit of information) his slaves. Yes, the guy who is held up as the "seperation of church and state" champion, owned slaves. But when he talks about church & state, he gets a pass to be the voice of moral clarity.

I'll say this. The Sally Hemmings story has been known since he was President. There's been no proven DNA link that an affair or whatever occurred, so we'll never know for sure. http://www.monticello.org/plantation/hemingscontro/hemings-jefferson_contro.html

The innuendo would never help him in today's polls, BUT in a day & age when the word "is" has to be defined and when oral sex isn't really sex....that's an open question too.

[equinox137]

On a similar note, one proven affair involving the founding fathers was between Alexander Hamilton and Maria Reynolds. That was interesting BS going on.... (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/duel/peopleevents/pande10.html)

[retired]

I think the total number of victims of Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot might give you a run for your money on that supposition, and they certainly weren't working for G-d.;)

The question is, did those people kill solely because they were Atheists and for no other reason?:) :)

[Kieth M.]

The question is, did those people kill solely because they were Atheists and for no other reason?:) :)

Bldg0031's original point was that, historically, more people have been killed in "God's name." Recent history has communism/socialism taking a higher body count than God. And I forgot, because I hate to drag Hitler into any argument, but the Nazi's were about national socialism, they may have invoked God's name along with their cause, but their aim was a nationalistic socialist endeavor.

You know, God's job, in some ways, can be compared to being like a cop's job. When things are going right, nobody notices you, and maybe they'll say thank you. But when things go wrong, it's all your fault and they don't want to trust you anymore.

[bldg0031]

Good God almighty, it must be the apocalypse, because I agree as well. :eek:

I think I need to sit a week out or something ... I do not know if I can live in a world were we all agree ...

[damode]

I think the total number of victims of Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot might give you a run for your money on that supposition, and they certainly weren't working for G-d.;)

Wow this is the most used and abused lil "fact" that religious people use against Atheists.

Let me explaing something to you guys.

What Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot did and i also will include Kim Jung il (The north koreaon dude) did is make their own IRRATIONAL BELIEF.

They had to take out GOD from their system because he was in their way. They wanted to install their own irrational beliefs through themselves and through their system.

They went from the LOVE of GOD, to the LOVE of the NATION, LOVE of the CAUSE, LOVE of the LEADER.

Do you see how God would get in the way of their plot? This is why those evil leaders did what they did.

They are evil, no matter if they were christian, muslim, catholic or athiest.

~~~~~~~~~~~`

Religion is an irrational belief. Turning the State, Cause, and the Leader into GOD is also an irrational belief.

Any nation that blindly follows God, the state, the "cause" will always burn down.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Also, you can argue, so what if they were athiests? These evil men just so happened to be athiests.

Many Christians have done atrocities, same as muslims and you can go through every single religion from Jesus to Zeus.

What everyone needs to start agreeing on is that BAD people do BAD things.

BAD people will warp the bible to do bad things.

BAD people will warp the Koran to do bad things.

and yes,

even BAD people that dont believe in GOD will do BAD things.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Give me a nation built on free-thinking, democratic athiests (Sweden) that go start wars, and this argument will never be brought up again.

But every leader that was "athiest" and did their atrocities built and preyed the lands they ruled through stupid, ignorant, irrational beliefs.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Im an Athiest and i always wonder whatever happened to the common love of humanity and the world??

If you ONLY behave good because of fear of burning in hell, you sir are sick.

(That doesnt go for you Keith, thats for the "God-Fearing" people :))

[Kieth M.]

(That doesnt go for you Keith, thats for the "God-Fearing" people :))

Thanks, I think. I gave up being God-fearing over 20 years ago. I prefer to be God-loving. And I wouldn't spend one minute trying to convince an athiest that he or she is wrong, "for he who is convinced against his will, is of the same opinion, still." I prefer to let people keep their own beliefs, unless it harms another. My job is to be the best example I can, and when someone wants what I have, I'm ready to share it with them.

[equinox137]

Wow this is the most used and abused lil "fact" that religious people use against Atheists.

Let me explaing something to you guys.

What Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot did and i also will include Kim Jung il (The north korean dude) did is make their own IRRATIONAL BELIEF.

They had to take out GOD from their system because he was in their way. They wanted to install their own irrational beliefs through themselves and through their system.

They went from the LOVE of GOD, to the LOVE of the NATION, LOVE of the CAUSE, LOVE of the LEADER.

Do you see how God would get in the way of their plot? This is why those evil leaders did what they did.

They are evil, no matter if they were christian, muslim, catholic or athiest.


You just repeated what "religious people" having been saying. What's your point?


Religion is an irrational belief. Turning the State, Cause, and the Leader into GOD is also an irrational belief.

Any nation that blindly follows God, the state, the "cause" will always burn down.


Yeah, religion is totally irrational. That's because it involves faith in a power higher than oneself.

Any nation that blindly follows anything will fall, we all know that. Whether it's a theocratical dictatorship like Iran or a Stalinist dictatorship like North Korea.


Also, you can argue, so what if they were athiests? These evil men just so happened to be athiests.

Many Christians have done atrocities, same as muslims and you can go through every single religion from Jesus to Zeus.

What everyone needs to start agreeing on is that BAD people do BAD things.

BAD people will warp the bible to do bad things.

BAD people will warp the Koran to do bad things.

and yes,

even BAD people that dont believe in GOD will do BAD things.


No one's debating that. However right now, there are few world conflicts that don't involve Muslims that can't get along with their neighbors. That's the problems


Give me a nation built on free-thinking, democratic athiests (Sweden) that go start wars, and this argument will never be brought up again.


So go live in Sweden for the rest of your life if it's so much better there.


But every leader that was "athiest" and did their atrocities built and preyed the lands they ruled through stupid, ignorant, irrational beliefs.


Yeah, ok.


Im an Athiest and i always wonder whatever happened to the common love of humanity and the world??


I'm an athiest too and I'll tell you what happened. The "common love of humanity and the world" was a fantasy. It never existed. Mankind has been in a state of war since the beginning of time and will be until the end of time. That's life.


If you ONLY behave good because of fear of burning in hell, you sir are sick.

(That doesnt go for you Keith, thats for the "God-Fearing" people :))


No, then you're a hypocrite.

[equinox137]

Wow this is the most used and abused lil "fact" that religious people use against Atheists.

Let me explaing something to you guys.

What Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot did and i also will include Kim Jung il (The north korean dude) did is make their own IRRATIONAL BELIEF.

They had to take out GOD from their system because he was in their way. They wanted to install their own irrational beliefs through themselves and through their system.

They went from the LOVE of GOD, to the LOVE of the NATION, LOVE of the CAUSE, LOVE of the LEADER.

Do you see how God would get in the way of their plot? This is why those evil leaders did what they did.

They are evil, no matter if they were christian, muslim, catholic or athiest.


You just repeated what "religious people" having been saying. What's your point?


Religion is an irrational belief. Turning the State, Cause, and the Leader into GOD is also an irrational belief.

Any nation that blindly follows God, the state, the "cause" will always burn down.


Yeah, religion is totally irrational. That's because it involves faith in a power higher than oneself.

Any nation that blindly follows anything will fall, we all know that. Whether it's a theocratical dictatorship like Iran or a Stalinist dictatorship like North Korea.


Also, you can argue, so what if they were athiests? These evil men just so happened to be athiests.

Many Christians have done atrocities, same as muslims and you can go through every single religion from Jesus to Zeus.

What everyone needs to start agreeing on is that BAD people do BAD things.

BAD people will warp the bible to do bad things.

BAD people will warp the Koran to do bad things.

and yes,

even BAD people that dont believe in GOD will do BAD things.


No one's debating that. However right now, there are few world conflicts that don't involve Muslims that can't get along with their neighbors. That's the problem.


Give me a nation built on free-thinking, democratic athiests (Sweden) that go start wars, and this argument will never be brought up again.


So go live in Sweden for the rest of your life if it's so much better there.


But every leader that was "athiest" and did their atrocities built and preyed the lands they ruled through stupid, ignorant, irrational beliefs.


Yeah, ok.


Im an Athiest and i always wonder whatever happened to the common love of humanity and the world??


I'm an athiest too and I'll tell you what happened. The "common love of humanity and the world" was a fantasy. It never existed. Mankind has been in a state of war since the beginning of time and will be until the end of time. That's life.


If you ONLY behave good because of fear of burning in hell, you sir are sick.

(That doesnt go for you Keith, thats for the "God-Fearing" people :))


No, then you're a hypocrite.

[Fëanor]

Yes I would vote for an atheist.

I think they would have a much easier time separating church and state.

A candidate's religion definitely concerns me because there is currently no total separation of church and state. It's blatantly obvious that many laws and political policies are based on religious beliefs. I don't think that an atheist-led administration would have that problem.

[equinox137]

I don't care if the President worships the Spaghetti Monster. As long as he doesn't try to push his beliefs down my throat.