2007-10-24 05:11:37 · 29 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
If no, why not?
2007-10-24 05:17:19 · update #1
The important things that determine how I vote are honest, intelligence, ability to delegate and have good people around him/her, the answers to certain issues, and a strong moral code. There is nothing in that list that talks about religion. Even atheist can have and often a better moral code that religious citizens especially zealots.
2007-10-24 06:53:55 · answer #1 · answered by ustoev 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Would I? Or could I? After all, neither party could nominate an avowed atheist to be its candidate for the White House at this time. Doubtless some recent presidents have been secret atheists--certainly there have been some non-churchgoers among the heroes of the evangelical Christian Right, such as Ronald Reagan...
2007-10-24 12:20:49 · answer #2 · answered by snowbaal 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Yes I would. As for a reason... to show people like Jacob W that they are wrong.
Jacob W: "Atheists do not recognize any Creator and therefore cannot rationally recognize any unalienable rights that are supposed to have come from the Creator."
But we do still believe in unalienable rights even without a Creator.
Jacob W: "Atheists also do not believe in moral absolutism."
More so than Christians. The old testament is full of rules set down by God that we no longer follow. That is the moral relativism you claim atheists have. If the bible is the word of God then God is a moral relativist.
2007-10-24 17:26:46 · answer #3 · answered by Matthew 1 · 2⤊ 1⤋
No. The nation was founded on freedom of religion and an atheist does not stand for that, nor does the atheist appreciate that.
The atheist would not even swear to uphold the Constitution because the oath requires his hand to be placed on the Bible and swear to God to uphold and protect the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic.
2007-10-24 13:37:52 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
We already had 8 years of Bill Clinton. Why would you vote for a man that has no belief system? Would you vote for a Crack head?
Be careful what you ask for Hillary is right around the corner and then you will see why we would want an Athesit in the White house.
2007-10-24 12:21:21 · answer #5 · answered by Twigits 3 · 3⤊ 3⤋
No. Atheism is not consistent with holding high office in the United States. Our system is based on the concept that the power to rule comes from the Creator and is endowed in each, individual person and we, in turn, lend that power to the government at election time. Atheists do not recognize any Creator and therefore cannot rationally recognize any unalienable rights that are supposed to have come from the Creator.
Atheists also do not believe in moral absolutism. Moral absolutism is also the basis for our system. Moral absolutism accepts the premise that God is the final arbiter of right and wrong. Atheists, again do not recognize God as the arbiter of anything. They believe man is the giver of rights and man that determines right and wrong. Therefore, they believe that our rights are not unalienable because they come from God but very much mailable. If man giveth man can taketh away.
Atheists believe in the premise of moral relativism. This means what is right is not always right and what is wrong is not always wrong. Right and wrong are relative to what ever best suits the situation at the time.
While being perfectly free to believe whatever they wish, some beliefs make a person unsuitable for a position of power. Since our entire system consists of God based principles, those who deny the existence of God cannot be bound by them.
EDIT- Matthew, I would love to explain why your answer cannot possibly be correct but you do not allow and sort of Contact.
2007-10-24 12:33:24 · answer #6 · answered by Jacob W 7 · 4⤊ 4⤋
A person's religious beliefs would not enter into my consideration of their candidacy, whether they are Mormon, Muslim, Christian, Agnostic, or Atheist. The only exception would be if that candidate's formative years were spent
attending a Medrassa.
2007-10-24 12:19:50 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Here's the dilemma as I see it.Atheists say they don't believe in God.Okay fine.I don't happen to believe in the great pumpkin.I do not spend half my time fighting with those who might, or trying to remove all references of the great pumpkin from our schools, pledge, and court houses.My point is this:if you don't believe in something, fine.But why then would you spend so much time and effort fighting against the thing that you think isn't there?My answer to the question is no.The reason being that I think most folks who claim there is no God really mean that they just don't want to follow the principals put forth by God.This is okay with me, but just be honest about it and admit that some things might just be true whether you choose to believe them or not.
2007-10-24 12:35:19 · answer #8 · answered by lori t.(works too much) 6 · 2⤊ 4⤋
Yes, cause he/she would be only candidate who could confidently say that religion would not influence his administration and ideas for legislation. As someone who is totally sickened by the Christian right, who actually considers himself to be a Buddhist cause of he extreme parts of the Christian right, I would love to see a non-Judea-Christian run for the white house.
2007-10-24 12:41:07 · answer #9 · answered by kegan_80 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋
I don't vote for candidates based on their religion, but the issues they represent.
2007-10-24 12:14:55 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 1⤋