2006-07-09 12:56:28 · 31 answers · asked by 自由思想家 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
shining1 said:
not if he was running against a devout christian
You would actually vote for the devout christian over the atheist even if the Atheist was both more qualified AND more moral?? Wow, is that what you are actually saying??
2006-07-09 17:08:15 · update #1
I would much prefer a national leader to be an atheist. Religion on the whole is amoral and inherently sinister, even the most apparently benign warm-and-fuzzy English churches. There's something deeply worrying about people who believe, promote and get together to share superstitious nonsense - It's a concept that seems to be the ideal breeding ground for abuse (e.g. child-molesting priests), extremism ('god hates fags' etc.), contempt for human life (islamic terrorists), ignorance (e.g. creationism) and self-destruction (mass suicides), amongst other things.
No doubt many religious people are wonderful, warm, kind human beings, but religion has an almost unlimited potential to corrupt and deprave - You can see every day in the news that there's absolutely no limit to what a person can end up doing as a result of fervently held religious convictions. I'm reminded of that saying... something along the lines of "good men will do good, and evil men will do evil, but for good men to do evil, that takes religion".
2006-07-09 13:04:37 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
No doubt about it. Religion alone does not make a person who they are, and there's nothing to say that an Atheist can't be just as good a person as someone who has found religion. There are also a lot of corrupt people out there that operate under the illusion of some sort of religion. It all boils down to who would do the most good for this country, not who (if anyone) they pray to at night.
2006-07-09 13:31:06 · answer #2 · answered by Jill J 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It depends. Will this president rule with an Iron first and outlaw all forms of religion. Morality is often judged by the individual. I find that a lot of the vocal Atheists I meet online wish to abolish religion in entirety. If this president were to leave religion alone and only focus on improving our Country then yes.
2006-07-09 13:02:58 · answer #3 · answered by plastik 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I believe that morality and religion are not the same. There are many immoral people who are very religious and very moral people who are atheists. So, of course I would vote for the atheist. Besides, I bet we've had a few closet atheists as president already.
2006-07-09 13:04:39 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely. Though I think that Ronald Reagan was a dangerous man to have in the White House, I think his son is an excellent example of what we should look for in politicians. However, Ronald Jr. has specifically stated that he could never make it as a politician simply because he is out as an atheist.
2006-07-10 07:40:58 · answer #5 · answered by wrathpuppet 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
With a strong correlation of blind followers of faith and low IQ levels, candidates are more likely to claim to be a follower of the most popular religion of the area he or she would govern (be it their true beliefs or not) in order to have a guarantee of votes from the deeply religious fraction of the voting population who vote based on religious followings.
But to answer your question...yes I would. Religion is not a good means of judging the character of a person since to falsify your religious beliefs is too easy.
2006-07-09 13:12:36 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely! I don't think a person's religious beliefs is a good indicator of how they will perform in the white house. If it is, we should never EVER vote for another Christian candidate again. They like sending us to war and dropping "test" nuclear bombs on Japan and neglecting child poverty for their own personal and crooked gain.
2006-07-09 13:08:48 · answer #7 · answered by carpediem3000 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely. If I thought he or she would do a good job, I'd vote for him or her.
As for the ignorant person who thinks you can't be moral and be an atheist at the same time - I feel sorry for you. You're obviously so closed-minded that you can't grasp that you don't need "God" to be a good person.
2006-07-09 13:03:45 · answer #8 · answered by heaven25star 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
definately. i'm an athiest and follow quite moral principals, based upon the desire to help others. religion has nothing to do with morals and is just basically incentive for people to try to act more morally. there is no link between religion and suitability as a political candidate.
2006-07-09 13:27:51 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that Presidential candidates should be REQUIRED to be atheists... the religiose aren't rational.
However, I think that the majority of politicians are atheists, anyway... they just lie about being religious, because they couldn't get elected, otherwise. After all... 80% of the electorate is religious,
2006-07-09 13:02:33 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋