How important is it to Republicans that their choice for President be a fundamentalist born-again Christian?

Question

Would an agnostic or Catholic President do just as well?

Answer 1

With Giuliani (a cross-dressing, twice-divorced, cafeteria Catholic that somewhat supports gay rights) as the tentative frontrunner, it does not seem the GOP is as willing to put its money on another fundamentalist whackjob as in years past. As the Republicans are in disarray, the party as a whole is going to be more concerned with the candidate that is most electable.

Also, AIPAC and the Bushbot neo-con fringe of the Republican Party (which still wield the most influence with the GOP) give Rudy G their stamp of approval. In their view, the "Moral" Minority fundies will just have to take the back seat for the time being.

In today's social climate, an openly agnostic or atheist person has little chance of becoming president. There is still quite a bit of animosity towards atheists by many Americans.

Answer 2

I suppose it would depend on which republican you asked. I suspect that if the GOP, going back to those thrilling days of yesteryear in the '70s hadn't hit on using the Jesus freak right as privates and corporals in their drive to get Ronald Reagan elected things would be different. Never did they suspect that the privates and corporals would land up being the colonels and generals that now staff the highest ranks of the Republican High Command. Until this Army of Virtue is defeated the Grand Old Partypoopers are stuck with these guys. So, the answer to your question is that yes, the movers and shakers of the Party of God want the most born-again Jesus Jumper they can find....be prepared for a forest of Huckabee signs. No kiddin'!

Answer 3

God, guns, abortion and gays in that order are the cornerstones a "conservative" candidate of today must posses. Personally I would prefer an agnostic as President, cut down on the foolish moral laws passed. This song was around during the Nixon presidency, it was more appropriate for the times but it says a lot.
Well, now if I were the president of this land
You know, I'd declare total war on The Pusher man
I'd cut him if he stands, and I'd shoot him if he'd run
Yes I'd kill him with my Bible and my razor and my gun

Answer 4

Not any more important than it is for the Democrats to have as their choice a commie pinko hack. Although that's all they've got, even though neither the candidates nor the mainstream newsmedia, nor the political pundits at large, will admit it.

The fringes never decide the election. The next president will be the one who most effectively appeals to the middle.

Answer 5

for me, it isnt that important at all. Its not always true that a president with "religion" is better for the country. There are plenty of ppl out there who arent fundamentalist, and are still moral people

Answer 6

I seriously doubt a agnostic or athiest president could be elected.

JFK was a Catholic, but I doubt he got alot of conservative votes.

Answer 7

Not important
Sure with the right platform.

My question can a Pro-life Democrat become their choice to run for president.

Or do they have to be in lock stop with far left all the time?

Answer 8

Did the election of Nov. 2010 coach liberals no longer something? It replaced into the biggest potential swing in American historic previous. And the tide has nonetheless no longer ebbed. individuals are cleansing out the socialists and changing them with GOP/Tea occasion applicants who're for individuals.

Answer 9

It's not at all important. Decency, honesty and the ability to deal with world leaders is what matters. If he happens to be a Christian (we're all born again) that's just gravy.

Answer 10

I consider myself Christian, however I want to vote for the man who is going to do the job the best. I also want him to have a proven record of voting in the right manner for what is in the best interests of not only me, but his past constituents as well.
The issues are key, not the man's religion.