This was recently posted in the public opinion section of my local newspaper: "While it is perfectly legal for an atheist to run for President, it is also legal—and wise—for religious believers to vote against him or her for that reason. An atheist may be a nice person, a good spouse, and a friendly neighbor, but he or she can’t be a good President. A President can’t be a moral relativist, can’t believe that morals are decided by polls or votes, can’t believe that right and wrong are individual and subjective. No, a President must root his or her decisions in eternal truths, immutable values of good and evil that aren’t created by human beings but come from beyond the human community—in other words, come from God. And a President must believe (and must be able to communicate the belief) that the United States has a mission, a calling, to be a beacon of hope, justice, and liberty to the world. We didn’t choose that mission—God gave it to us. For these reasons, even the kindest wisest atheist can’t be a good President." What does everyone think of this statement? I have my own views on the subject, but I'm interested in seeing how others interpret this. I've also posted a poll with the thread, but I would prefer some actual discussion.
Hey welcome to the forum. From my perspective as a person uninterested in the snake oil most organized religions are selling, I think most of the worst decisions ever made by political leaders have their roots in religious nonsense. Abortion for example, it is a medical procedure not a question of whether or not God has decided that a woman should bear a child. When politicians get involved and speak to what "God" wants, a simple medical decision becomes a national neurosis tearing the country apart. The worst most oppressive regimes and the conflicts in their respective regions are closely tied to either Christianity, Islam, and Judaism. We know what governments can do to their own people and their neighbors in the name of some religion and we know that the same thing can happen by governments that are tied to no religion, so why would electing an atheist make any difference?
Thanks for the welcome, looks like a nice forum, will be checking in frequently and boring you all with my lame polls and other musings.
Religion, Morality, and Politics Three mutually exclusiive words. Just depends on which two you decide to pair up.
Too much like work and perhaps not worded so well but I'll give it a quick try for anyone that cares to read. Morality and Religion. Of course there are many fine folks that attend a church of their choice on a regular basis. Good for them but what about all the scandals? Recently in my area a deacon of a HUGE Baptist church got turned out for having sex with a minor that he was supposedly guiding. He'll be facing prison as well. Seems he was taking her across state lines for sex. Why is a 54 year old married deacon taking a 17 year old girl across state lines to boink her? Yeah, morality. Morality and Politics. I really don't think I even need to elaborate. Politics and Religion. Should be kept separate but it seems more and more politicians want to shove their religious views down our throats. I ain't buying it. I don't like the thought of a theocracy. So what do we end up with when it comes election time? A bunch of politicians with varying degrees of morality pushing their religious beliefs that also have morality issues. Hmmm...maybe an Atheist President would be a great thing. Of course he'd never get anything done due to politicians, religions and "morality".
I'm hoping one of the opposite disposition will present his opinion so we can have a little discussion here. Thank you for the elaboration Clembo.
