Thread: Would you vote for an atheist president?

It's amazing to me how religion plays a pretty big part in government elections.

Have we ever had any non-christian in any important major government office?

What do you think would happen if Clinton or Obama or McCain suddenly came out and said they did not believe there existed a god of any sort?

Why should we even discuss a candidate's religion?

To the best of my knowledge, no admitted atheist has ever won an election to public office on the state or federal level in the U.S. I vaguely recall that there is currently one U.S. Rep who admitted to being an atheist, but he was already in office at the time.

I would assume a few are closet atheist. It would be a shame to lose a margin of intelligent talent to a ancient prejudice.

I would vote for an athiest, not because I agreed with his/her athieism, but because a persons religious beliefs, or lack of, is personal, & should have no bearing on the way they govern.

Originally Posted by davisjr1990

It's amazing to me how religion plays a pretty big part in government elections.

Have we ever had any non-christian in any important major government office?

What do you think would happen if Clinton or Obama or McCain suddenly came out and said they did not believe there existed a god of any sort?

Why should we even discuss a candidate's religion?

What is so amazing about that? Religion plays a huge part of my day, it is an important part of our heritage, and our culture.

Seeing as the issue of religion is more important to me than other minor issues, I want a president believing in God. An atheist president would in my eyes be more likely to continue the demolition of our Christian nation, and all the good traditions of our culture, and replace it with sex, filth, drugs and morals based on pure convenience and not the word of God.

I'd prefer not to vote for an athiest just as I'd prefer not to vote for someone who's guided by spirituality. Both conditions are based on the sort of blind faith that eliminates the need for critical thinking.

Originally Posted by Sparta

I'd prefer not to vote for an athiest just as I'd prefer not to vote for someone who's guided by spirituality. Both conditions are based on the sort of blind faith that eliminates the need for critical thinking.

I fail to see how including spirituality in my voting criteria abolishes my need for critical thinking. I am perfectly capable of criticizing Christian candidates, especially the liberal ones.

Originally Posted by BibleThumper

I fail to see how including spirituality in my voting criteria abolishes my need for critical thinking. I am perfectly capable of criticizing Christian candidates, especially the liberal ones.

What I mean by that is accepting something on faith alone is akin to deciding that you will believe what you want regardless of what facts may materialize in the future. If a person is capable of doing such a thing in one aspect of their life, while claiming it as the most important aspect, then I have no reason to believe that they are of sound judgement in any situation.

Originally Posted by Migi e!

I would vote for an athiest, not because I agreed with his/her athieism, but because a persons religious beliefs, or lack of, is personal, & should have no bearing on the way they govern.

I'll have to agree with you, but I firmly believe that there are a large number of politicians who kiss ass with AIPAC and all the while are secretly anti-AIPAC-ers. Sure wouldn't do to step out of the closet on that issue, unless one is a masochist, would it?

MeMyselfnI

You should discuss anything and everything about a candidate because people formulate their opinions based on a multitude of different factors. If a person chooses a candidate based off their religion, the color of their hair, or their speaking voice that is their right.
I personally don't care, but it is obvious it is important to people.