Would you vote for a Muslim/Atheist politician?

Question

With the Muslim how do you know he is not a Jihadist?
With regards to the Atheist,haven't we got bad memories of the Soviet Union,Chernobyl? And what's he going to swear oath on 'Das Kapital'?

Answer 1

not in my life time i would rather vote for Mickey mouse

Answer 2

Absolutely, if they were intelligent and stood by issues that I stand for, I most certainly would stand for either.

Article 6 of the constitution clearly states that no religious test is required to hold an office, which means anyone from any or no religious beliefs may run for and hold public office.

The oaths of office do not require then to be sworn on a bible, exactly the opposite. They require a public official to swear of affirm to uphold the constitution, particularly the presidential oath of office. Religion is only mentioned twice in the constitution, in article 6 and in the first amendment. It does not specify any form of religion, in fact is clearly defines that religion and state should be seperate so that no one religious group can ever control the government.

There are several muslims and athiests that hold public offices, even a few Hindus and Pagans hold some public offices in the United States. Religious freedom means freedom for all religions, which is exactly the way the founding fathers wanted it to be. The United States is a nation of many faiths, not a singularly Christian nation.

Answer 3

I don't think atheism has anything to do with Chernobyl. It was poor government policies that did that. religion and politics should not mix.
The church ruled for a long time in Europe, and were the cause of some of the worst atrocities known to man.
As regards voting, I would not care what religion someone was, once they were not extremist, that includes Christians, Jews, Muslims

Answer 4

If I believed they were the best candidate and they had good policies, I'd vote for them. Religion and politics should not be mixed. If I believed the Muslim could rule without trying to push his religion into everything, then I'd vote for him. Being an atheist myself, I obviously wouldn't have a problem with the candidate being an atheist. I'd basically care more about their policies and how trustworthy I thought they were than what they believe.

Answer 5

my immediate response would be athiest yes muslim no.
with the muslim thing you could look at what happened in turkey
to see how much greif a muslim with even slightly more than absolutley neutral bias would create.
however if he/she was accepting that britain was britain and that
british values and views were the predominate norm and didn't try to convert everyone into being obedient to the word of his religious/political views then it probably wouldn't be such a problem.it would be significantly easier for the atiest to remain neutral as with his views there is nothing to convert the masses to!
all things considered the athiest wins

Answer 6

I would vote for the Atheist, for he/she could do their job without religious bias, cause lets not kid ourselves, if the MP was Muslim, he/she would put that community first. I live in the North of England and my local Council is mostly Muslim, because of this the Muslim community wants for nothing. I do not condone racism, but every time someone stands up around here and complains about Muslim bias, they are classed as racists, therefore, the so called, minority can do what ever they please knowing that they are safe under the politically correct blanket. its about time we stopped letting the Muslim community use racism to get what they want, we need to take back our rigthts as English citizens. I don't care if the Muslims on here don't like what I am saying, the Muslin community where I live are the Most Racist people around, there are places in the towns where white people can't go after a certain time of night, this is racism!!!!! but you never see it hold up because we are white. why is it that the whites can be racist to the black but the same does not apply vice versa. the minorities keep themselves minorites by calling themselves minorities, why can't you just call yourselves English like everyone else. this is why multi-culturism won't work in harmony, the minorities use political correctnes to their own gain and insist on keeping themselves segregated.



EDIT; Rosa I hear what you are saying, but Christians and Atheist are not bombing innocent people. I know that not every Muslim is a terrorist, but where I live, those incharge are selfish to their religion and have no patience or understanding of others. St Mary's church in the town down the road is a listed building, they keep saying that there is not enough money to rebuild it, but the town has spent thousands on a new central Mosque, I'm affraid you have to come to terms with the 'Cause and Effect' theory. if the Muslim community wants to be respected they first have to show respect for us and our English heritage.

Answer 7

I would and I am a Christian religous fanatic. What we desperately need in the U.S. is someone who can reduce the deficit and the size of the government. I don't care at all about their religion, just their competence in controlling a monster, runaway government that is taking away our money and freedoms; this is the true American Jihad. To control that government is a skill set very few people have so I would be delighted to vote for an atheist libertarian type who supports freedom. Religous leaders tend to be too restrictive and want to bind their religion clothed in many rules about how people can go to school, get married, jobs, housing, labor, ad nauseum.

Answer 8

Nope, neither one, as they have warped thinking and would be leaning towards the Muslims and Atheist way of doing things. They can live here, but no presidents, please. What does Chernobyl have to do with anything. They just drained all the borom out of the containment and it melted down. It was a man's mistake. The equipment would not have allowed that to happen. Stupid dumb man mistake. No domes for protection, like we have here, so there you go. No, if someone cannot swear on the Bible, then go home.

Answer 9

I would vote for an Atheist politician.
But he or she would not get in because the evil has to control the world.Everything would be thrown out of whack.
You need Religious people running the government if you still want wars.
They feel that they have to prove a point that the Bible is real and its statements are real.

Answer 10

Religions are 'ideologies'... so are Naziism, Communism, Facism, etc. While there have been idelogies that have excluded religion... a COMPETING ideology... there has never been an ideology that is DEFINED by a non-belief in dieties.

The only thing that DEFINES atheism is the ABSENSE of the belief that invisible, magical sky-fairies (gods) exist.

Anyway... when was the last time you heard about millions of people being murdered in the name of 'rational thought'?

(Clue: NEVER)

Yes... I'd vote for an atheist... if I could.

Answer 11

I'd probably vote for an atheist, not a muslim.

Soviet communism had more in common with religion idiologically than you might want to think. Same mindset, just replaced the diety with head of state.