Who cares, so long as they aren't a war-mongering nut-case.
2007-08-24 12:52:23
·
answer #1
·
answered by diaboloist99 3
·
3⤊
0⤋
If it was a straight (no pun intended) choice between a homosexual or athiest, I'd pass. This is to assume the homosexual would be a theist.
Homosexuality would only become a problem for me if the candidate claimed to be one of faith and tried to explain away Scripture to suit themself. As a eunuch for the sake of the kingdom of heaven who accepts what Scripture has to say about his inclinations, I would have a problem with that.
More important, I'd want someone who did not think the USA was God's gift to the world and that they had the right to topple any foreign government that put its own people's welfare before the right of the US to guzzle the world's resources and get rich at the expense of the poor. Viva Chavez!
2007-08-24 13:03:19
·
answer #2
·
answered by Paisley Buddy 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
LOL. it incredibly is humorous that us of a's presidents have all been Christian and their splendid court Justices have for the main area been Christian. How is it that abortion became into made criminal? How is that there is not any institutional prayer in all faculties or that homosexuality is criminalized? in spite of each and every thing it variety of feels Christian adult males could help all of those law. incorrect! we've the U.S. shape which has helped carry a lot of those modifications to the country. as a result, proving us of a isn't a Christian united states of america. it incredibly is ruled via regulations without relation to the bible exceptionally the OT. Btw, Obama is a Christian and he's amazingly professional-decision even voted against banning previous due term abortion. think of roughly that purely a splash.
2016-11-13 08:32:58
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
An Atheist, although A gay President would be okay just as long as they were qualified. Religious belief, or lack of one or a person's sexual orientation should not be a criteria. A recent Governor of New Jersey admitted to being gay after many years in office and people were generally satisfied with the way that he governed. George Bush gave us Jesus while he sold us his war in Iraq. Since his war became a failure, he doesn't mention Jesus anymore. Politicians use suedo-religious belief to serve their own agenda and sway voters. I've learned a lesson from those in politics who wave a Bible.
2007-08-24 13:06:07
·
answer #4
·
answered by liberty11235 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
I heard from a source that Hillary Clinton is NOT a homosexual!
So there!
I would rather have a homosexual president. Atheist Presidents are bound to destroy religious freedom. Along with Hillary, who has suddenly become a devout Christian.
2007-08-24 13:10:32
·
answer #5
·
answered by Christian Sinner 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I am a BIG advocate of tolerance. What we WANT is COMPETENT leaders.
So voting purely on the basis of religious or sexual orientation is just silly.
That said though, mindset matters.
I don't think doubting the existence of God affects your ability to make sensible decisions for the country.
On the other hand your stereotypical gay male is a flamboyantly artistic & emotional fellow.
His counterpart lesbian is a semi militant feminist who feels the problem with the world is that 'men' run it.
Neither generic 'gay' mindset is one you'd want at the helm.
So on a stereotypical basis, I'd prefer the Atheist.
2007-08-25 06:49:56
·
answer #6
·
answered by Phoenix Quill 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Neither of those things matter. The only thing that matters is what the president stands for, in regard to the issues. Is he or she, a president for the interests and well being of ALL the people, or a corporate and special interest elitist sell out! This country has had far to much of the latter, and I for one, am ready for the former! I will not support anyone who does not stand for the people....ALL the people! *sm*
2007-08-24 13:27:39
·
answer #7
·
answered by LadyZania 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
All 3 options would be fine with me (along many others) as long as the President knows how to guide the Country into success, and devote more time to focusing on helping to find new cures for various illness (Funding), reform of a school system (more emphasis posted on education), fight against the crime (inside the country), fighting corruption (wherever it may be found) etc. And, equal justice for all, without celebrities/ rich getting away with DUI etc.
2007-08-24 15:05:21
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
anyone but Bush
seriously, I would prefer an atheist president, and this is why: I have no problem with either one. I think, however, that an atheist president would have the extra added bonus of not being hampered by the nonsense that often encumbers clear and logical thought.
Homosexual and atheist would be an awesome combo, hertero and atheist would also be great.
2007-08-24 12:55:19
·
answer #9
·
answered by Lady Morgana 7
·
2⤊
2⤋
Good question...because the a future president will be one of these...Probably a homosexual president would be better..because read the constitution and everything this country was base on was....GOD......This country must be morally correct if we are to exist..Look at the Communist government.....They are falling apart....
2007-08-24 12:57:21
·
answer #10
·
answered by Dave B 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Skaggy, I prefer...I long for...an honest president (which GWB is not), a truthful president (which GWB is not), an intelligent president (which GWB is not), a president who isn't corrupt (which GWB is), a president who defends the US Constitution instead of whittle away at it (which GWB has), a president who upholds our democratic principles (which GWB has not), a president who isn't a bloody liar (which GWB is). His religious notions are not important to me. His sexual orientation is not important to me or to the health of our Republic. His race is not important to me, his or her gender is not important to me. Do you want to know what is important to me? This country, its people, its health, the respect of other nations, a hope for a future that isn't narrow, partisan, money-grubbing, war-mongering, in the hands of the rich and to hell with the middle-class and the poor. In short, what the Founding Fathers promised.
2007-08-24 13:00:42
·
answer #11
·
answered by Yank 5
·
0⤊
0⤋