Would you vote for an Atheist?

[NameTaken]

Of course I'd vote for an atheist. In fact, I'd largely prefer an atheist or agnostic in office!

 

[hotatlboi]

And a common theme to you is making no points at all rather desperate childish remarks without benefit to progressing the topic. Amazing the Mods tolerate you. But I guess the place for you is in the peanut gallery as you don't have the integrity to counter with discussion only insults. Grow up little boy.

In case you haven't noticed, you're the only one making those kinds of remarks in this thread.

 

[Demsci]

I don't think prisident got the rights to ban all religion, and free religious belief is a port of freedom.

But I would vote for an athiest

An athiest president would be bound to ban all religion and make it illegal to believe in God, and it would be accepted as a triumph for human rights.

Even though that seems totally stupid, I guarantee there's liberals out there who believe that.

 

[AsianDream]

An athiest president would be bound to ban all religion and make it illegal to believe in God, and it would be accepted as a triumph for human rights.

Even though that seems totally stupid, I guarantee there's liberals out there who believe that.

A lot of countries have a secular constitution and presdents or prime ministers who don't subscribe to any particular religion - none of these has ever tried to ban religion or make it illegal to believe in God.

Also no liberals would either accept or encourage any attempt by the state to limit religious freedom

 

[AsianDream]

Yes, I would, because I've had my fill of unctuous unbelieving politicians who grind their crotches into their gullible religious constituencies.

Sadly - enough Americans wouldn't vote for someone that was openly Athiest for this to be a reasonable thing for a US politician to admit to. Just as today it is very difficult for a politician to be openly gay.

On the other hand this may change with time - 30 years ago it would have been unthinkable for a presidential candidate to be either black or female - yet the USA now has a black president though sadly not an athiest.

 

[bankside]

It's funny - as atheist as I am when asked, I do not proselytize, although I ought to. There is a lot of ignorance out there.

One of those e-mails came around at work "how much do you know about person X" and a lot of people indicated they thought i believed in god - people who I'd known for years at work and elsewhere, who knew me well enough to be bothered to answer the chain mail. One said she could tell I did by my character that I did believe in god.

If you know unpleasant atheists, sorry to hear that. But vote for one if they know what they're doing.

Any country would be far more secure with an atheist who says he has no faith than a believer of any religion who says he has no faith - a religious person can do far more damage with "I don't believe, I know."

An atheist gets another new Testament with every research project, every scientific publication that hits the shelf. It creates a mindset of openness to challenge that serves a country and its citizens very well.

 

[AsianDream]

It's funny - as atheist as I am when asked, I do not proselytize, although I ought to. There is a lot of ignorance out there.

One of those e-mails came around at work "how much do you know about person X" and a lot of people indicated they thought i believed in god - people who I'd known for years at work and elsewhere, who knew me well enough to be bothered to answer the chain mail. One said she could tell I did by my character that I did believe in god.

If you know unpleasant atheists, sorry to hear that. But vote for one if they know what they're doing.

Any country would be far more secure with an atheist who says he has no faith than a believer of any religion who says he has no faith - a religious person can do far more damage with "I don't believe, I know."

An atheist gets another new Testament with every research project, every scientific publication that hits the shelf. It creates a mindset of openness to challenge that serves a country and its citizens very well.

Maybe the art of being a great leader is to be uncertain enough to take on board other opinions while still projecting an image of certainty to the voters?

 

[AsianDream]

Religion should never be a factor when it comes to voting for a candidate in this country.It's a ridiculous concept but yes i would i have lots of atheist friends and we are so close they are like my brothers and sistersPlus they are far more tolerant compassionate and caring than say a lot of these SO-called Christian candidates or politicians.The less said about that though the better.

Now that the USA has got it's first Black President - is the next great step to get an
Atheist one?

 

[ANDORYUU]

Why should someone's personal faith or lack of, affect if they can run/be voted for special office?

Church and state have no part being together and should be abolished.

 

[EwanSF]

It's unlikely that I would vote for someone if they weren't an atheist. Agnostic at a push.

 

[EwanSF]

Atheism is a Religion in and of itself because of its belief system, just like any other religion in the World. This is the last post I'm making in this forum.

This is the falacious, bullshit logic that allows filth like intelegent design to be taught in class rooms. Spread that about and you're telling an outright lie.

 

[Yuki Sohma]

Would you vote for an Atheist?

Yes, I fully believe in the "separation of Church and State".............

 

[bankside]

mareopacus,

If atheism is right, then it is just like any other kind of knowledge. A scientist will be happy to explain how a light bulb works, or how magnetism works. The scientist will not (and should not) mock someone just because they don't know how a light bulb works. It is the scientist's job to explain it. So to it should be with theories about god. I don't enjoy seeing atheists acting like fundamentalists either.

On the other hand, if ignorant people went around creating the religion of the light bulb, went door-to-door pushing their own theories that light bulbs are really caused by bioluminescent bacteria inside the glass, and that everyone had to worship the bioluminescent bacteria, and that schools had to teach "Intelligent Bioluminescence" theory, that their holy light bulb would dim or brighten to show its approval or disapproval of things like gay marriage or abortion... and that the holy light bulb had dimmed to show that homosexuality was an abomination...if all of that happened, then I would forgive scientists for making fun of the others, and indeed I hope they would make fun of the arrogant assumptions that the light bulb believers try to force on the rest of society even while trying to teach about the true nature of the light bulb at the same time.

 

[eddielee]

I have to give an honest answer. In a position, such as President, I would not vote for an atheist. I may consider voting for an atheist in a lower level position, if I can be assured that he/she respects the beliefs of others.

 

[bankside]

I have to give an honest answer. In a position, such as President, I would not vote for an atheist. I may consider voting for an atheist in a lower level position, if I can be assured that he/she respects the beliefs of others.

How careful are you about making sure a person of faith respects the beliefs of others before you vote for that candidate?

 

[eddielee]

How careful are you about making sure a person of faith respects the beliefs of others before you vote for that candidate?

The same thing applies to people of faith. You have to respect the rights of others to believe, or not to believe.

 

[bankside]

The same thing applies to people of faith. You have to respect the rights of others to believe, or not to believe.

...unless they're running for President, in which case you've said you don't need to respect that person's right to believe or not to believe...

 

[JSB_01]

Absolutely. I think that atheists are the most stigmatized group, perhaps even more so than gays. There is a lot of ignorance concerning atheism, just as there is a lot concerning homosexuality.

 

[AsianDream]

Absolutely. I think that atheists are the most stigmatized group, perhaps even more so than gays. There is a lot of ignorance concerning atheism, just as there is a lot concerning homosexuality.

This is one of the really strange things about the USA as seen from the rest of the world. atheists are stigmatized there – even though the country has a totally secular constitution.

Almost all us atheists would view any belief in a God, Gods or supernatural forces as being very dubious because there is no evidence at all to support these ideas – but a large proportion of the electorate in the USA do believe in these concepts.

The religious ideas of the USA electorate are relevant to the rest of the world in that the USA still has very significant military power and as a direct result of this still manages to consume 25% of the worlds resources while only being 4% of the worlds population.

There is clearly a challenge for the rest of the world to restrain the “over consumption” by the USA and part of this means understanding the undue influence of religion within that nation.

 

[_AJ_]

While I hammered away at getting my degree in General Science (with forays into not-quite-getting a geology and then a physics degree along the way), I recall very few atheists among the professors. Of the ones who were really very good professors and so stand out in my mind, there was an agnostic who spent summers and sabbaticals at JPL (standard comment: "Insufficient evidence"), a conservative but well-educated Christian (frequent comment, to fundies in his [geology] classes: "Believe what you want, but that's not in the original set of data [by which he meant the meaning of the Hebrew -- he despised "churches" who read things like the age of the earth into Hebrew words and writing that don't even have such as an item of consideration]), a self-designated "protheist" (by which he meant, "I'd love to believe in God, I really would, but I'm waiting for better evidence", a believer in Intelligent Design who got there via physics and chemistry (who in debate rebuked a Christian Creationist for welcoming him as an ally -- a display of common sense that made a major impression on me), a believer in Intelligent Tinkering (her own term) who got there via botany, and then a lot of agnostics and "apistos" types, and lastly a handful who actually called themselves atheist.

BTW, even among the atheists, a good number of my former science profs would call your division between a "scientific" and a "spiritual" creation a false dichotomy. That would be another sort of atheist I could vote for -- one open-minded enough to recognize the intellectual validity of a concept they personally did not believe in (I totally loved my astronomy prof, who didn't believe God sat around shaping Creation as it developed, but could earnestly argue the legitimacy of a view that said He did... and further proceed to argue both sides of the proposition that a Tinkerer who kept poking at the unfolding events was a better or more believable God than one who kicked it all into motion and went off for a beer [a Bavarian stout, of course]).

So the sort of atheist Crio was concerned with is exactly the type I wouldn't vote for: one who runs around saying, "There is no God -- you'd better believe it!" and working to put his believes into policy.

If you stick to that strict definition then there is probably only one athiest in the world

his name is bob and he is in the corner for being a bad boy

but there has to be some leniency in a definition though especially when it comes to people and classifying them

and based on that scale shown before if anyone said they were a 7 i would consider there opinion but would do alot of research into it more than i normally do which is probably to much already

in the times i have talked to you i think i understand your position actually alot better than most of the religious people here lol
mostly because it was a position i considered taking when i was younger and if it were not for the fact i find most people attending church to be false and scary while there it may be different lol

the reason i took up being atheist or agnostic or whatever is simply because it is possible for everything to have been created without god

does that mean it was not? nope

and i dont want to try and convince people one way or the other but i dont like ill informed people spouting crap on either side now the fact that it is mostly religious people who are ill informed and bigoted is just the way it is which is why i am normally on one side

but i am pretty sure i have posted against athiests on here for various reasons

and while i respect your opinion i am not going to stop saying what i think and honestly would you want me to

oh and i know this is really old and i dont even know if you are here anymore but anyway


OH and by the strictest definition of atheist NO i would not vote for them