nope
sorry
peace
2006-11-20 02:55:27
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
Maybe you want to look at the way you posed your question.
"even if"?
I firmly believe that a person's religion or lack thereof shouldn't be an issue in that person's candidacy. In the best of all possible worlds, no one would even KNOW if the candidate was religious or not, because our government is supposed to be secular.
And voting for someone because you think that their professed relgion means that they share your values is an iffy proposition.
Article 6, section 3 of the Constitution says:
“The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several State legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.”
This is all well and good, but does anyone here remember that JFK had to reassure the non-Catholic American public that he would put his country before his religion?
I think EVERY candidate for office in the United States should be required to do that.
In the meanwhile, this is what is so: religion plays far too large a part in our political process. No matter what the Constitution says, no matter the intent of the Founders, the religious views of candidates are played out on stages and in auditoriums all over the country.
And the electorate, all too often, vote peole into office based on religious issues.
2006-11-20 03:08:32
·
answer #2
·
answered by Praise Singer 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
i ought to. To any place of work they occurred to be operating for, absolutely, see you later as they appeared to me the most qualified for the placement. I say a comparable to a religious runner, to boot. All that concerns to me is how qualified i think they're to do the activity. Crazies like the teabaggers are for sure no longer forerunners ;) faith and politics are too heavily entwined for a rustic that supposedly has separation of church and state. Do what you want on your inner most lives, yet faith has no position in authorities. To the loopy non secular human beings that purely care if someone is going to church and is an outstanding adequate actor to play off the values they want to be certain in public, evaluate that deep down a political candidate is purely a political candidate and they are all skeevy finally.
2016-10-16 09:47:54
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
NO.
The problem with having an atheist in office is the same as putting a truck without a driver carrying precious cargo on the road. The truck is running along but can vear left or right or off a cliff or bridge. All the precious cargo would go with it.
Putting an atheist in office you are trusting this person with precious cargo (your state, your country, the people) and he has no direction (driver) and can spin out of control and ruin the cargo.
Now put God in the drivers seat and you have a good chance that things will go well.
2006-11-20 02:56:19
·
answer #4
·
answered by Nevada Pokerqueen 6
·
0⤊
3⤋
Yes I would but then I am an Atheist. I know Atheists who are very good and moral people, I know Christians who are not. In fact, some of the politicians we have had in office recently who thumped the Bible pretty hard have turned out to be less than shining examples of morality. I would rather have someone truly honest in office than someone playing the religion/God card to get what they want.
2006-11-20 02:55:50
·
answer #5
·
answered by Zen Pirate 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
If the choice was between two athiest candidates, then yes, I would vote for the lesser of the two evils.
But your question is flawed; no one is able to separate their personal/religious beliefs from political ones. If you hold strong political beliefs and don't believe that they affect your religious beliefs, I would maintain that you are not very well-grounded in your religious beliefs.
2006-11-20 02:56:50
·
answer #6
·
answered by bandit 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
Why not? If that person would advance the same political, social and economical ideas that I believe is good for the country - then great. Religion is never an issue on election - its platform.
2006-11-20 02:58:52
·
answer #7
·
answered by David 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
As a Christian I would not vote for an atheist because I would not feel comfortable with someone in office who thought there was no higher power from which to gain wisdom, strength, courage, and direction.
2006-11-20 02:58:11
·
answer #8
·
answered by missingora 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
I f they held the same political ground as me,they wouldn't be atheists.
2006-11-20 03:05:37
·
answer #9
·
answered by Derek B 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
Honestly...no. I don't think I would...or even could. Modern atheism is just so anti-Christianity...I can't think of how they and I could truly be on the same political "wave-length".
My faith is more important to me than politics.
I do support the ideas of the establishment clause of the Constitution....fully. But as for me - I want a person of faith in political office.
2006-11-20 02:55:17
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
I find it difficult to vote for someone who believes ultimate truth comes from a book written thousands of years ago by men who thought the world was flat and that disease was caused by demons.
2006-11-20 03:03:13
·
answer #11
·
answered by iknowtruthismine 7
·
2⤊
0⤋