Would you be less likely to vote for a presidential candidate if they were a self-identified atheist?
Being atheist should be a prerequisite. We need leaders who can tell reality apart from ridiculous mythology and superstitions.
I would LOVE to vote for an unabashed atheist candidate. I don't think such a profession would make me vote for a Republican, but fuck, that would be a great feeling.
Would I be less likely? Yes. Would I rule them out without hearing them out first? No. If they are non-confrontational about their atheism then I couldn't care less. That they match me on policy positions is key.
For all you atheist-haters out there:
Many atheists (like myself) grew up in religious households. When we started growing up and asking the question "why" about things in the Bible that just didn't make sense to us, we received a brush off answer or an answer that made even less sense than our original question.
Eventually we had more questions than answers, and as we grew older we saw all of these people blindly following the faith without questioning anything. The Bible became a story book, and much to the disappointment of our families, we could no longer believe.
Because of this shame and opinion society places on us, and the crazy idea that we are "devil worshippers", we hide our lack of religion.many are "closet atheists". We donate to charities, give you gifts on your birthday, experience the wonder of life and nature, and have just as much morality as you do.
I can't wait till the day that all humans are treated as equals. Wake up, join the 21st century.
I hope one day we will soon stop killing each other over who's delusional fairy tale is right or better. One day we will realize we are the dieties that rule this realm and that we have no masters.
Also, I'm agnostic you fucking religious bigots. I hail Satan because I know how much that infuriates you.
I'd be more likely actually. That way they don't have any bullshit getting in the way of critical thought.
Atheists still have a lot of bullshit getting in the way of critical thinking. But, removing religion from the equation does get rid of a huge impediment to critical thinking.
Think about how many atheist are anti-feminist, libertarian, or have other ridiculous beliefs.
Based on the overwhelming discrimination and alienation against atheist in this country, this won't happen for a hundred years. We truly live in a theocracy.
It depends. If they are extreme and will crack down on religion, then no. If they're just like "Hey, I'm an atheist, but you can do whatever" then yes.
I really don't know anymore. I used to bitch about how the fundamental atheists were as bad as the biblethumpers. But lately, it's turned. Either I've gone atheistic or the country has leaned right.
I'd honestly be more likely to vote for them.
Really depends upon where their moral guidance comes from.
The further we get away from Christian values that were at the root of building this country, the worse we will be. Self professed atheist obviously would disagree. There would then be less and less regard for God and his place in our country. Not through governance but guidance.
You don't have to believe in god to be a good person. I'm not an atheist, but I don't think most atheists are actually bad people.
God and his place is nowhere near the government. The less God we have in our views the better.
Have fun living in this new changing world motherfucker. Bigots like you don't last long in this society.
Christianity was not and is not at the root of our nation's founding. Enlightenment philosophy was.
The more we remove Christianity and religion in general from their unearned pedestals in society, the better off we will all be as a country.
As long as the individual is not anti-theist.
I'll put you down for yes.
And liberals are the close minded ones...
probably, but if they promise freedom of religion, and don't try to force Christians to not wear cross necklaces and such, then no
Because atheists are the primary perpetrators of religious oppression?
No one said that? But that secular government in Oregon did shutdown those Christian bakers. That's why Christians are afraid
Oregon has a law against discrimination against select classes of people, including sexual orientation.
Someone offering services to the public and who is benefiting from the public services provided to them, must abide the law.
The bakers illegally discriminated against people and had face the consequences. I see nothing wrong with having and enforcing anti-discrimination laws.
And if your religion tells you you need to discriminate against a certain class of people, it's your religion that should be jettisoned, not the anti-discrimination laws.
Your premise is faulty. This isn't an anti discrimination law. It is a discrimination law.
Christianity says marriage is btw a man and woman. If they don't want to provide a service to someone, go to another baker! It isn't that hard!
The free market will determine whether their business will survive. All the law does is fine Christians out of business with the club of big government.
You ignorantly and stupidity declaring it not an anti-discrimination law doesn't actually make it so. When will fucking idiots learn that they cannot simply declare something and make it true.
The bigoted bakers were tried and convicted under anti-discrimination law, the same type of laws that ban discrimination based on race, gender, religion, etc.
If the bigoted bakers want to have a bakery open to the public, they need to follow the law.
And fuck no, LGBT people are not required to find public accommodations that will deign to serve them anymore than Black Americans should have to hunt for places that will serve them, or Christians have to hunt for places to serve them.
Please, stop embarrassing yourself with idiotic pronunciations.
Id prefer it.
I understand that on this poll, people overwhelmingly voted yes, and it's also filled with "hilarious" stereotypes about atheists as jokes, but we do have a real problem when it comes to this topic in this country. Where I come from, in Georgia, many find atheists repulsive and just naturally evil. It's the same across the country from what I've seen in polls and documentaries also. People think that if somebody is an atheist, then they have no morals when in many cases, atheists have closer moral standards to Jesus than to hardcore fundamentalists (specifically of Christianity). Now again, the fact that somebody is an atheist or a Muslim or anything should not effect how you are going to vote. This should rather be based on individualism with their personal background and policies. In closing, I know that not all Christians or people in general refer to Atheists like this, but we must realize how much of a bubble we are in online.
Niemann, that's Very well stated!
I disagree nieder, I think that the religous beliefs of a political candidate are an important piece of information to know. For me, my religion shapes my life. every decision I make and every opinion I hold is shaped by my belief in God, and my beliefs about him. I know that it's not the same for everyone, but one's faith, is a major part of how they see the world. I'f I want someone to represent me, and want them to match me as closely as possible as far as what religous lens we see the world through.
Well you just proved my point in that paragraph. You just said "For me" religion is important. This doesn't mean it is for everybody. For example, someone like Keith Ellison (first person to come off of my head) who identifies as a Muslim is very secular and holds liberal beliefs. He could be motivated to help others by his god or just by his morals. We don't know, and personally, I don't care. If one's beliefs as a politician are close enough to mine and you are a genuinely decent person in my eyes, I don't think it matters what somebody identifies as.
Also, for you specifically as a Christian, would you vote for an atheist who wants to help the poor and the needy even if it's not in the name of God? Besides, your religion and holy book (the New Testament at least) are very closely aligned with the values of many atheists in this country.
I'd vote for an atheist if their other views aligned with mine better than the others who are running, but people who believe in God do have an advantage in getting my vote.
also, sorry about the horrible misspelling of your name...
According to Genesis we all come from Adam and Eve, who had 3 sons. Think about it, take all the time you need.
I didn't need to think, because i am just that much smarter than you because I know you cannot prove your statement yet you believe in it anyway. That is the very definition of stupidity. My beliefs hold more water than your fairy tale ever will, because you base your evidence on a manmade outdated stack of shit that no intelligent person would ever consider to be true since it was written by a bunch of ignorant intolerant sexist racist sadomasochistic assholes you deem to be good people. So go back to where you came from speak to your imaginary friend in the sky and tell him that I said to GO FUCK HIMSELF.
Time for a medication refill champ
Yes! What has been the effect of religious coercion? To make one half of the world fools and the other half hypocrites.
As long as he isn't vaping while wearing a fedora and revolutionizing dungeons and dragons, he's cool.
Nah. Agnostic is fine.
Every atheist is agnostic with what they know, but atheism would be more of a belief/lifestyle in which one lives without the assumption that there is a god or gods,
Anyone who brags about being an atheist would be to busy shopping at hot topic and being edgy to govern effectively.
Well there's a difference between "bragging" and being public about your religion or lack thereof.
Yes, same as the Muslim question. I'm not an atheistaphobe either lol.
Religion is usually inherited from your elder family members and just your country's culture in general, so as I see it, the religion or ideology you identify as does not determine what kind of person you are. So no, religion or lack of does not change who I will vote for
I'm curious about the 1% of atheists who said yes... 😅
I'm as curious about the 39% of Republicans that have claimed no. 🙄
I'm a agnostic and I'm a republican
You have my respect. I hope we can grow in numbers so that soon everyone will be at least half stupid or smarter.
I very strongly value religion in society and someone who outright rejects the premise of god may destroy as strong but rapidly deteriorating cultural and moral value presented with religion. If they were to enact policies that would seem to make people celebrate religion, then consider rp that a boon for me, but generally speaking, it would be a deterrent.
The values and morals of religion is really just be a good person, religion isn't necessary for that. Every atheist I've known (including myself) have no difference in morals or values.
I said no, but not out of bigotry. It is logical that if the candidate has no fear of a higher power (for lack of a better phrase), then his policies are very unlikely to mesh with my principles. To be specific, an atheist would be largely predisposed to be a socialist because it is "scientifically reasonable and efficient". But my Christian principles, coupled with historical evidence to the contrary, make it clear FREE MARKET capitalism is by far the best way of keeping more people alive and living most comfortably and in best harmony and with least poverty.
I think you misspoke. You would say yes out of bigotry, not no.
Also, I do not think the large majority of atheists believe in socialism. I think most would come to realize, including myself, although socialism seems logical, it does not apply in real life and a free market provides much better
But i could be wrong on that, maybe most atheists believe in socialism
I'm personally a capitalist supporting atheist but I can't speak for everyone.
I personally prefer social democracy as a platform. It looks like the best blend of socialism and capitalism to me. Despite calling it democratic socialism (that's different), social democracy was the platform Bernie Sanders ran on.
Bernie ran on the platform of elect me so I can buy my fourth house to solidify my working man socialist credentials.
What Bernie ran on was a whisker shy of communism.
I'd be more likely to vote for them.
More likely to keep religion out of government.
A good thing as long as he doesn't oppress religion.
"Less likely" lol. I wouldn't even consider voting for them.
And why is that? Is your life so controlled by your religion that you can't even see past it?
Very unfortunate times we live in that someone's lack of religion is an absolute turn off in a field where religion doesn't even matter.
Not even close. Atheists are the ones who are militant about their views anymore and can't tolerate those with faith. Just look at how intense you both got about a hypothetical if you don't believe me. I wouldn't be a party to allowing someone like that into the most powerful position in the world.
Give me real life actual cases of militant atheists (other than steal or whoever). Almost all of the shootings or attacks that go on are perpetrated by religious folks. That doesn't mean that I hate religious people, just that when someone makes an ignorant claim I tend to get a bit annoyed. Not militant, just annoyed.
(Stalin or whoever)*
Actually, you are someone I would consider militant. Even suggesting I am "controlled" by my faith shows your hatred of those who believe and I wouldn't help someone like you to run the country. Every atheist I have ever encountered, and I'm from Los Angeles so there have been A LOT, just can't live and let live like they say they want for themselves. All of them think they are just so much smarter and more tolerant and can't help make you know that they feel that way. If you don't like how I would vote, tough. That's your problem, not mine.
Smarter? No, atheists are not inherently smarter than anyone who holds faith in a religion. I am at least aware of that. There are, of course, atheists who do believe themselves to be better than religious folk simply because they find no evidence of a god (or gods), and I find that preposterous. Such subjects are based not in intelligence, but more in philosophy and worldview, so the proposal that you are superior to another person with the only proof being that you differ in your religious standings is ridiculous, no matter what the argument is. I can understand that, in general, you would be put off by a candidate who identifies as an atheist because of the general attitudes of atheists themselves, but may I pose a question? Would you consider voting for an atheist if they proved to you that their atheism does not negatively affect their behavior in such a way as you are concerned about? It's merely a hypothetical, you have no obligation to answer-- I'm just curious.
Thank you for understanding and accepting my point. In response to your question, I would say No for 2 reasons. First, because there really is no way to "prove" that they wouldn't act the way I am afraid of. And, if they did have some way to prove it, I simply wouldn't believe that their Supreme Court nominees, Executive Orders and other official duties would actually end up protecting Free Exercise. More specifically to the point, I will only vote for a presidential candidate that opposes abortion (ironically, I oppose it more for scientific than religious reasons, but that's a different issue). Since it is hard for me to believe that any atheist would actually be pro-life, I would not be able to vote for them. If they were atheist and pro-life, I'd have more to think about, but still can't see an atheist's views on religious protection conforming to mine allowing me to vote for them.
Alright, that's understandable. While I can think of a few exceptions, it's true that a majority of atheists have pretty liberal political standings, and so the abrasiveness of such a position on conservative voters would likely make it difficult for them to gather many loyal conservative followers. You have some pretty strong evidence to support your argument, and I completely respect that.
I don't have a hatred of religion, only of people who let it cloud their absolute judgement. Also, you clearly don't know what militant means.
Lol you clearly have far too rigid of a definition of "militant" and are 1 of the atheists I have been talking about who thinks he is so much smarter than those who he disagrees with. You won't get me to vote for an atheist and frankly now I want to vote against 1 just piss you and other atheists off. Have a good day.
I don't think I'm smarter than anyone, I just have opinions that you obviously have no respect for. I also think that people who won't vote for someone because of their religion is a bigot and doesn't have a wide enough view of the world.
You obviously didn't read my other comments as to why I wouldn't vote for them based on views they have. Typical.
Oh it's typical that I don't search for your arguments? If you were going to refute something you have to bring the evidence to the table.
Search? It's in this exact thread. It's in the replies between me and the other guy out of the 3 of us. Lol
Yeah, search, I'm not gonna look at your other replies just because, the burden of proof is on you. ROFLMAO
And I gave the proof... you are just so lazy and egotistical that if something isn't directed specifically to you, you just skip over it to get back to bashing those you hate. Got it.
It was literally 1 more comment you would need to read and you wouldn't. That's pretty ridiculous.
Lol nah, I just actually have stuff to do in my daily life that I don't care about other comments.
Lol nah you're just rude and self centered. I answered your question as to why. If you don't like answer, tough.
I'm fine with the answer (I disagree but I have respect for it) and what you think is egotism is just being annoyed at someone who doesn't want a good conversation.
Just so you know there are pro life atheists (like me)
As long as the candidate doesn't force his/her views on the people his/her religion (ANY religion) is irrelevant.
Atheists have been the most brutal of leaders. They have nothing to fear.
I don't fear god...why haven't I gone on a killing spree?
Those with great power are the ones who would. Not really every day people. (Well, mostly..)
So the only thing keeping Christians with great power from being mass murderers is a belief in god?
That doesn't make me feel very safe electing a Christian...
Not really as black and white as you're making it out to be, but whatever. I'm nervous about electing anyone with the power a president has these days. Should be minimized.
My point is this idea that morality is owned by religion is silly. I strive to be a good person every day because I just want to be. And I'm a godless infidel
Wait, what am I saying...I'm a Muslim now (see below a few posts) 😂
Yes they will sign anti religious bills!
Atheists tend to make bad and/or incredibly inhuman leaders.
Stalin, Hitler, Pol pot, Obama, etc..
Ahem. Obama is a Christian, you idiot. Can't accept that because...why?
He said he was a Christian, but his actions were those of an atheist. He wasn't really a Christian
Provide proof. Tour argument is utterly unsubstantiated and patently false.
It's been reported for years. You need to chill out bud, you're always so angry.
Obama probably was an atheist but that's not why he was a shitty president. Hitler was not an atheist. Stalin killed people because he was paranoid, not because of atheism. I don't know enough about pol pot
Imagine my surprise when Mao wasn't mentioned
Hitler and Obama were both Christian.
You don't get to decide if he "was really a Christian". That's the no true Scotsman fallacy. he says he is and therefor he is. That's literally ALL it takes to be a Christian.
So if you don't believe in god but say you're a Christian, you're a Christian?
And so, CoffeeNow, you're privy to what people believe? What other superpowers do you have?
My other super power is knowing when people misread my posts. My last post was a general hypothetical. I don't know for sure what obama believes
I'm saying if someone says they're a Christian, but doesn't believe in god, are they a Christian?
And for obama specifically, I wouldn't be surprised if he were an atheist.
I got that it was a hypothetical lol
And yes you are. That's why I said "ALL"
Look up no true Scotsman fallacy. You don't get to tell people what group they belong too or don't when that group is decided by self identifying
I'm very familiar with the NTSF but I'm not sure it applies here
If what you're saying is true, then words have no meaning. I don't believe in Allah and I think Muhammad was a goat fucker, but hey, im a Muslim. Am I a Muslim now? When all 2 billion Muslims say I'm not a Muslim, are they succumbing to the no true Scotsman fallacy?
Hitler wasn't an atheist, nor was Obama. You also can't say that they "aren't Christian" cause that's idiotic, the Christian God did way worse things then any of these people.
Not to be rude but it does apply here not sure how else to say it
So you agree I'm a Muslim because I just said I'm a Muslim?
Sure. If you meant it. But not if you don't
Yeah I mean it. I also mean Muhammad is a goat fucker and Allah doesn't exist.
Hey everyone, I'm a Muslim!
Oh no now I hate myself l. What have I done????
Now James Doohan...he were ne a true Scotsman. Sorry, lads...he just dinna have the ancestry. Angus Young...aye, THAT were a true Scotsman! *tosses caber, *disembowels, stuffs, and eats a sheep's stomach, *scratches self under dre...kilt.
⬆️ first time saying that unironically
Hitler was a Christian, as well as Obama...
Between this and the next poll. I'm disgusted. You would have no problems voting for a Muslim whoes holy book preaches hate and death to gays and raped woman. Death to those who leave Islam or lead someone to leave Islam. Idiots.
Someone's off their schizophrenia meds. Actually, that's offensive to compare schizophrenics to someone like this.
The bullshit violence in the Koran is matched by the bullshit violence in the Bible.
Both books are morally reprehensible.
Someone's religion doesn't dictate whether or not I vote for them, so no. I wouldn't have any problem voting for an atheist.
If anything probably more likely, not necessarily because of their common-sense approach to faith and religion, but because that level of rationality likely carries over into other areas as well.
Honestly no. I would rather have an agnostic than somebody who outright denies the idea and view those that do as ignorant.
Most (but not all) atheists are outright anti-any religion and despise anybody that practices a religion. That's definitely not somebody that should be in any office.
Google search the definition of atheism. It's simply the belief in no religion. Judging and persecution of others has nothing to do with being an atheist. Those that do are no different than the millions found in every other religion around the world.
That's not the case at all, a very select few of arrogant atheists despise anything to do with religion. The vast majority really don't care.
No. A President ought to represent his people, and America is still (nominally) majority Christian.
Not so nominally, Spooky, if you consider these polls:
Wiki says 75%, as of 2015, with 62% claiming to be a member of a church congregation:
Gallup says 77% in 2012:
Pew Research says 70.6%, as of 2014
An ABC poll says 83% of adults are Christians:
I'm gonna go there, cause I'm bored.
If the president should represent the majority, and since America is still majority white, does that mean the president must also be white?
Since you are'nt LegionOfTruth or Luftwaffe or Carcano, I expect the answer to be a firm 'no'.
Prince, are you talking to Spooky or me?
Yes, and I have great respect for those users you mentioned.
4JC, that's what I mean by nominally. A majority identifies as Christian, but they don't actually practice Christianity.
Oh, sorry, Spooky. Yes, I agree with that. I thought you meant nominally, percentage wise.
So you're a racist piece of shit, too? Nice to know.
Prince, please say who you are talking to.
Thanks, Prince--I try not to assume. That's why I usually try to preface each post with the person's name to whom I'm talking--as it gets a bit confusing if several people are joining in the convo.
Would not make any difference.
No, religious persuasion...or lack thereof...has no bearing whatsoever on my vote. I vote for economic policy.
Same, as long as they believe in separation of church and state, I don't care what religion they practice.
I'm an atheist, so this might be hypocritical, but I would probably be less likely.
Sincerity, perhaps? Taking only religion into account, I feel as if a faithful candidate would be more likely to prioritize certain social positions I feel very strongly about. For example, I think a religious government would be better for the security of our religious freedoms.
More to the point, it would just take a bit more convincing for me to have confidence in an atheist's commitment to certain issues, like being pro-life.
@wolf - I agree with you. Somebody that makes that strong of a statement against religion to call themselves "atheist" would worry me about those that do practice. That person would view religion as a hinderance.
Nazi's and communists come to mind. The largest atheist movements in the past 130 years.
As a non believer, I'd welcome an athiest. But it always depends on the candidate first and foremost.
How could they get any work done if they're spending their whole day worshipping Satan?
I stick to worshipping Satan on Sunday only.
I don't think religious (or sexual) preference should have any bearing in political decision-making.
Of course not, especially considering I am one.
I don't mind.