If an atheist ran for president?

Judas · June 10, 2007, 11:34:40 AM

I'm sure all of us have been watching the nominees for both parties go head to head in the recent debates. More interesting than the debates themselves to me was a CNN special on faith and politics. It got me thinking, if mitt romney can cause a stir because hes mormon, and before that JFK being catholic what would be the reactions to an atheist running for office?

-Judas

joeactor · June 10, 2007, 03:05:13 PM

"Ladies and gentlemen, please welcome the godless candidate from the independent party..."

Reality sucks. People will continue to vote based on superficial qualities such as race, gender and creed for the foreseeable future.

Here's a possible solution: blind voting based only on the candidate's history and stance on issues.

Yeah, that'll happen,
JoeActor

p.s. "I voted for WHO!?!??!"

SteveS · June 10, 2007, 04:47:44 PM

I think the reaction would be --- interesting. I think it would stir up a whole lot of controversy. Too bad someone can't pull it off, though --- I think the controversy would be good. It would force a lot of issues out into the light.

Anyway, you've probably seen things like this before, but here's a gallup pole from just a few months ago.....

http://www.galluppoll.com/content/?ci=26611

Yup - atheists are at the bottom, dead last. What's worse is since over half the people would not vote for you simply on the basis of being an atheist, it would appear to be almost impossible to win an election once you "came out" as an atheist.

tacoma_kyle · June 10, 2007, 07:34:58 PM

I guess you could say about half the pop. is ok for it.

Will · June 10, 2007, 09:16:52 PM

I would be more likely to vote for them. He or she wouldn't win, but might get as much as 1m votes.

SteveS · June 12, 2007, 04:05:29 AM

The 2nd page of that gallup pole has historical answers. Back in 1958, the "no" votes against atheists were 75% !!! Only 18% would vote "yes". So, I guess progress is being made.....

Tom62 · June 12, 2007, 08:01:44 AM

I assume that he would have a 40 to 60% chance of getting shot by a religious fruitcake.

rlrose328 · August 06, 2007, 05:48:17 PM

I love that the American Public would vote for a homosexual, black, Jew and any other shade of American before an Atheist. Yup, those godless atheists who only want world peace and fair treatment for all. Sad. Sometimes, I hate living in America.

Me, I'll vote for the person I think can best do the job and represents my points of view. Knowing that I won't find anyone on the ballot who represents ALL my POVs, I will most likely take their religious convictions into account, as I did (rightly so) with Bush. He uses his beliefs much too much for my liking.

What about the Dems all hiring religious consultants and really pushing their religion this election. UGH!

MommaSquid · August 07, 2007, 06:32:08 PM

Vote for Ron Paul...he's not a Libertarian, but he's close!

Will · August 07, 2007, 08:37:25 PM

He wants to repeal the emancipation proclamation. He doesn't want universal health care. He believes in unregulated capitalism, a system in which Enron would not have been punished. He wants to abolish FEMA.

He's fun to listen to, and we'd all be better off without the Fed, but as far as a president goes, he's too much of a free-market zealot. We'd be better off with his liberal counterpart, Kucinich, or even Al Gore.

/end rant

MommaSquid · August 08, 2007, 06:28:01 PM

From what I know about Ron Paul, he never votes for legislation unless the proposed measure is expressly authorized by the Constitution.

As far as abolishing FEMA goes...would that really be so bad?

Will · August 08, 2007, 06:53:16 PM

Quote from: "MommaSquid"From what I know about Ron Paul, he never votes for legislation unless the proposed measure is expressly authorized by the Constitution.

I don't want to threadjack, so I'll keep my answers here short.

Ron Paul wants to get rid of the 17th Amendment. I'd call that pretty unconstitutional.

Quote from: "MommaSquid"As far as abolishing FEMA goes...would that really be so bad?

FEMA needs to be reorganized, but not having adequate preparedness for disasters is asking for another Katrina. FEMA was in NYC minutes after the plane struck on 9/11 with urban search and rescue teams. They were the ones working with the firefighters and police to get people out of the rubble. They also are helping to pay for cleanup and restoration. They obviously have serious issues to deal with at FEMA, but no longer having a federal response organization for disasters is irresponsible.

RP is a dreamer, which is great. His theories run into trouble in the real world, though.

MommaSquid · August 09, 2007, 06:58:01 PM

Quote from: "Willravel"RP is a dreamer, which is great. His theories run into trouble in the real world, though.

Nobody's perfect.

And now back to the topic at hand...what was that again? Oh, yeah!

If an atheist ran for president...

Whitney · August 10, 2007, 01:19:49 AM

Quote from: "MommaSquid"If an atheist ran for president...

...it would be highly possible that one of the crazier Christians would assassinate him in the name of God.

Will · August 10, 2007, 02:57:17 AM

Quote from: "laetusatheos"
Quote from: "MommaSquid"If an atheist ran for president...

...it would be highly possible that one of the crazier Christians would assassinate him in the name of God.

That would be not only a sad day for atheists, but a sad day for anyone who believe in religious freedom (especially freedom from religion).

News:

If an atheist ran for president?