Can An Atheist Be President.

[kpgclark]

I think it is interesting that those who would NEVER vote for an atheist never respond to my questions about how an atheist would make a political decision any differently than a Christian. Hmmmmm....

 

[Kendra17]

Originally posted by MinnieYC
Actually, I have...the idea of Steven Emerson's works being an unbiased source of truth makes me laugh.
On the other hand, Bernard Lewis only strengthened my beliefs regarding Islam and Christianity. He reminds us that throughout history, there have been a lot of parallels between the two religions.

Actually, I came on here to correct my reference, since Steven Emerson didn't write Closed Circle-- so, I don't see how you could have read the book in question. I meant to recommend David Pryce-Jones' Closed Circle and Steven Emerson's American Jihad. Also, why not read the Middle East Forum's website? Daniel Pipes, who began the forum actually believes only about 8% (if I remember correctly) are actually extemists. The percentage matters less since the fact is, the larger and less extreme majority has been unable to reform the extreme, capable, murderous minority.

Btw, I'm not disagreeing that one can find parallels. One can find parallels in discussing opposite concepts, as well. That parallels exist does in no way change the fact that both religions differ vastly in practice and theology.

Edited for punctuation

 

[caitycaity]

I said that it is my opinion that we need someone with RELIGIOUS values in the White House. That's my belief.

yes, but what we want to know is WHY is that your belief? why is it important to have someone in the white house with religious values, in your opinion.

and by religious values what exactly do you mean. would you vite for a wiccan? they have religious values. what about a muslim?

 

[Kendra17]

Originally posted by WillyJ
Kendra, I didn't say our country wasn't a "Christian Country" . .

John Adams said it in a treaty proposal to Tripoli. (1797)

"This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religions in it." -John Adams Letter to Thomas Jefferson, January 1817

Here are some more from Adams:

"The question before the human race is, whether the God of nature shall govern the world by his own laws, or whether priests and kings shall rule it by fictitious miracles?"
-- John Adams, letter to Thomas Jefferson, June 20, 1815

"As I understand the Christian religion, it was, and is, a revelation. But how has it happened that millions of fables, tales, legends, have been blended with both Jewish and Christian revelation that have made them the most bloody religion that ever existed?"
-- John Adams, letter to F.A. Van der Kamp, December 27, 1816

"The frightful engines of ecclesiastical councils, of diabolical malice, and Calvinistical good-nature never failed to terrify me exceedingly whenever I thought of preaching."
-- John Adams, letter to his brother-in-law, Richard Cranch, October 18, 1756, explaining why he rejected the ministry.

"I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved -- the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced!"
-- John Adams, letter to Thomas Jefferson, from George Seldes, The Great Quotations, also from James A. Haught, ed., 2000 Years of Disbelief

Remembering that one can have a very firm belief in God but not be religious per se.. I think it's fair to say Adams was at times religious and at times skeptical of religion, but definitely didn't want any religion influencing government. . .

And looking at a couple more quotes from Jefferson. . .

"I have recently been examining all the known superstitions of the world, and do not find in our particular superstition [Christianity] one redeeming feature. They are all alike, founded on fables and mythology."--Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Short, _Six_Historic_Americans_ by John E. Remsberg

"Millions of innocent men, women, and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, imprisoned, yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity [of opinion]. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half the world fools, and the other half hypocrites."--Thomas Jefferson, _Notes_on_the_State_of_Virginia_(1781-85), _

"History I believe furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which their political as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purpose."--Thomas Jefferson to Baron von Humboldt in 1813, _The_Writings_of_Thomas_Jefferson_Memorial_Edition_, edited by Lipscomb and Bergh, 14:21

And a couple more by Ben Franklin:

"I think vital religion has always suffered when orthodoxy is more regarded than virtue. The scriptures assure me that at the last day we shall not be examined on what we thought but what we did." - Benjamin Franklin letter to his father, 1738

"I cannot conceive otherwise than that He, the Infinite Father, expects or requires no worship or praise from us, but that He is even infinitely above it." - Benjamin Franklin from "Articles of Belief and Acts of Religion", Nov. 20, 1728

And what the heck; a few words from James Madison:

"What influence, in fact, have ecclesiastical establishments had on society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of the civil authority; on many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny; in no instance have they been the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wish to subvert the public liberty may have found an established clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government, instituted to secure and perpetuate it, needs them not." - James Madison, "A Memorial and Remonstrance", 1785

"Experience witnesseth that ecclesiastical establishments, instead of maintaining the purity and efficacy of religion, have had a contrary operation. During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution." - James Madison, "A Memorial and Remonstrance", 1785

. . makes it pretty obvious that the foundation of how our country will be governed as written and envisioned by the most influential men involved in creating it was not Christian- it was Deist.

And while Desim is a religion of sorts, Deists do not believe Jesus was the Son of God made Man, hence they were not Christians, hence Deist rational thought based on Greek philosophy are what formed the foundations of the ideas of democracy in America, not Christian traditions .

In fact, it's pretty obvious they didn't want any kind of religion playing a part in the US Government. . .

I do think the majority of people here in the US consider themselves Christian, but do I think we're a "Christian nation"? In some ways yes, but at least on paper we are not and never have been.

WillyJ, I'm not sure what I'm beginning to debate with you, because on most of your points, I concur. I know most of the quotations you are using here, and I don't think that disproves what I am stating.

Maybe you missed where I stated I believed an athiest could be president. I brought up Deism, in the first place, to point out that one doesn't need a belief in God to be President. Although Deism is absolutely not the same as atheism, it was an example I brought up to show that one doesn't need to believe God is there on a daily basis.

However, that said, all of the historical figures you have referenced in this post were brought up with a Judeo-Christian foundation--which certainly shaped their views. The ethics and morality they brought to the table was of a Judeo-Christian origin. Not that other influences didn't exist--they certainly did. To state otherwise (and I'm not saying you stated this!) would be false. The Founding Fathers have a shared cultural background--which is of a Judeo-Christian origin.

I don't know if you realize I'm not a Christian. However, I firmly believe that what makes America the great country it is, is the Christian foundation. That we have a multitude of people who have a different faith, or no faith, doesn't change this fact. We all enjoy the liberty in this country because we have freedom to worship as we see fit, because we have a right to pursue happiness, because we have a right to assemble, dissent, speak, etc. Some of the differing cultures, while one might want to argue that they are all of EQUAL value (of which I obviously would disagree), do not have the same values we share and would like to continue to share here.

 

[Kendra17]

posted in error

 

[Pongo69]

Originally posted by wvrevy
Wow...So, like 90% of the world's population is going to hell ? Jews...muslims...budhists....atheists....All of them doomed to eternal torment, huh ?

And some people wonder why a lot of people have a MAJOR problem with this kind of thinking in the white house ?

Where did I say that wvrevy?

Wvrevy honestly I don't give a damn if you believe you were created in a lab or grown from a tree. Your beliefs or yours just as mine are mine.

Maybe once you get that chip off your shoulder you'll see that many people could really care less what you chose to put your faith in.

YOUR problems are between you and your GOD rather you think he exist or not!!

 

[Kendra17]

Originally posted by kpgclark
I think it is interesting that those who would NEVER vote for an atheist never respond to my questions about how an atheist would make a political decision any differently than a Christian. Hmmmmm....

Hi. I'm going to try and give you the answer I believe represents the Conservative viewpoint. If any Christians disagree, please let me know--since, as I've said, I'm not a Christian.

I think those who believe an athiest would make political decisions differently than a Christian do think this with the following in mind:

When one is answering to God, they do what they believe God to want them to do. In the Christian belief--since God is forgiving and loving--this means they act with those thoughts FIRST in mind.

Conservatives--Christians and non Christians--believe there are absolute Rights and Wrongs. We believe some things are Right although the Wrong thing might feel good--even be harmless in the sense it won't hurt anybody. We don't believe that all cultures and all belief systems are inherently equal, although we believe all people--no matter what their belief system to be--to have equal intrinsic worth. Conservatives act with this in mind.

Christians believe that liberals (athiests in the POLITICAL sense) have replaced God with their own set of core beliefs. That is, if it feels good and doesn't harm anyone, it's acceptable. Conservatives, on the other hand, believe that there is a True moral code we should live by that is Right in the absolute sense. This doesn't mean that one can't discuss and debate these issues--even among themselves--but it means that there are some issues that are True among most Conservative Christians, although, of course, there are always exceptions.

An athiest might believe abortion is okay since they have decided that even though they have some personal feelings for the baby, the preference of the mother who is already alive and kicking supersedes the fetus'. A Conservative, who is following a biblical code, would believe that all life has intrinsic value and that the actual age of the baby--in utero or not--is of no matter. This is a core issue. Yes, there are a few exceptions to this, but for the most part, most conservatives agree with this viewpoint. Those that share this viewpoint may make an exception if the woman's life is at risk, since she, too, has intrinsic worth, but that what we WANT doesn't matter. . .what we believe God would want is what matters. This is not a lack of empathy on anyone's part. . .this is a moral code we live by since we believe life has intrinsic value. We believe our preferences--right or wrong--are of less weight than God's preferences.

Of course there is the whole capital punishment issue. . .here, I guess, some believe that murderers lives have intrinsic value, too. Many conservatives are obviously for capital punishment. This is a debated issue, obviously. I ,personally, am more of the eye for an eye type.

That's an example of the big issue, though. An athiest might make decisions that they've thought about, debated about, considered all the information they could find. They may feel they made the correct decision, since everyone winds up happy. A Conservative believes that our own desires are really not at issue when it comes to matters of morality, ethics, and doing the Right thing. We would do what we believe is mandated by God. . .whether we like it or not.

The criticism that is given to Conservatives for this viewpoint actually misses the point, imo. We consider every option, too . .. and, often we try to fit things that we enjoy into this code. This doesn't show rigidity in thinking, which is a criticism I've seen on these boards, this shows we've considered choices and have decided they are in agreement with or at odds with our moral code.

An athiest could absolutely make the same choices as a Christian would. However, he or she could also make different choices. The point is, it would be the athiest's choice and the athiest's value system that guides that choice. A Christian would consistently make choices that would not be at odds with Christian theology and the Judeo-Christian value system.

Edited to add: I forgot to add that an athiest might act with these thoughts in mind: "I FEEL it's the right thing" or "it FEELS right" The world "feel" is of less an issue for a Conservative. Our feelings are secondary. Of course, it's always a great thing when our personal feelings are in sync with our moral code, but our belief system would always supersede our own personal feelings. And, a President that we know shared this belief system would be of importance.

 

[wvrevy]

Originally posted by Pongo69
Where did I say that wvrevy?

Wvrevy honestly I don't give a damn if you believe you were created in a lab or grown from a tree. Your beliefs or yours just as mine are mine.

Maybe once you get that chip off your shoulder you'll see that many people could really care less what you chose to put your faith in.

YOUR problems are between you and your GOD rather you think he exist or not!!

Sorry to burst your bubble and use your own words against you but you said:

If one asked me "Do you think I'm going to hell if I don't accept The Lord Jesus Christ our Savior honestly I would answer yes!

So, in other words, you think anybody that doesn't believe EXACTLY as you believe is doomed to eternal torment in hell. That means that all the groups I listed (and every other non-Christian in the world) is going to hell, in your opinion.

Sorry, but I find that sad...and certainly not a quality or opinion I would value in a political candidate.

 

[kpgclark]

I disagree with your assessment. Firstly there are as many religious people who are affiliated with both parties. For example, President Clinton is a Christian. Maybe I misunderstood your arguments. There are many Christians who believe that abortion is OK, but I'm not religious and I don't think abortion is OK. (Let's not debate THAT issue.) I'm just using it as an example of how your religious or party affiliation doesn't define you wholly as a person. Additionally there are few people who agree with 100% of what a particular party line happens to be. For example you might be a Democrat but believe abortion is wrong or a Republican that believes in freedom to choose. There are liberal Christians and there are conservative Christians. Within the Christian religion there are a variety of interpretations of the Bible. Your statement that Christian politicians only do what is mandated by God just isn't true. Christians, for example, believe all people are sinners so by definition can not do ONLY what is mandated by God.

 

[Kendra17]

Originally posted by kpgclark
I disagree with your assessment. Firstly there are as many religious people who are affiliated with both parties. For example, President Clinton is a Christian. Maybe I misunderstood your arguments. There are many Christians who believe that abortion is OK, but I'm not religious and I don't think abortion is OK. (Let's not debate THAT issue.) I'm just using it as an example of how your religious or party affiliation doesn't define you wholly as a person. Additionally there are few people who agree with 100% of what a particular party line happens to be. For example you might be a Democrat but believe abortion is wrong or a Republican that believes in freedom to choose. There are liberal Christians and there are conservative Christians. Within the Christian religion there are a variety of interpretations of the Bible. Your statement that Christian politicians only do what is mandated by God just isn't true. Christians, for example, believe all people are sinners so by definition can not do ONLY what is mandated by God.

I'm sorry if I wasn't as clear as I could have been. Let me just add that President Clinton, who professes to be Christian, doesn't act with this in mind FIRST. One can be Christian, but that's not the same as being A Christian or at least recognizing that Judeo-Christian morality supersedes that of many others. Also, Jimmy Carter, for instance: he's A Christian. He really truly acts with his moral code in mind. The problem with this, is that his viewpoint is at odds much of the time with most Christians. I'm sure he's acting in what he believes to be a Christian way, but suffice it to say, most of the Conservatives disagree.

You are correct there are liberal Christians and Conservative Christians. That's why, in a previous post, I wrote that his religious affiliation is of less importance than his value system. That's my opinion. However, someone who would say, "I'm a Christian and I'm proud of being a Christian" and who is running on the Conservatiive platform would be sending the message to conservatives that he or she will consistently vote a certain way, and they will share certain values and try to keep our country in sync with those values.

I do think an athiest or agnostic could make a good President. But, he'd have to say to me, "I'm an athiest, but I think the Judeo-Christian morality and value system is of the utmost importance, and I respect that our country was founded with these principles in mind. I believe the Ten Commandments are the foundation of our civil law and this an important point to recognize and keep in the forefront of our minds at all time." He'd also have to run on a conservative platform. This would send a message to me PERSONALLY that he'd run this country with what he thinks God--if there were a God in the Christian sense--would want.
Really, though, I couldn't imagine anyone saying that statement. I'm just saying that would be okay with me.

Again you are right, there are always exceptions, but an athiest wouldn't be saying, "well, if it feels good and doesn't harm anyone we still won't do it because God says not to". He'd most likely say, "Okay, it feels good and doesn't harm anyone, let's do it." Electing A Christian who is also a conservative is more likely to guarantee that the President shares Christian moral values.

 

[caitycaity]

Edited to add: I forgot to add that an athiest might act with these thoughts in mind: "I FEEL it's the right thing" or "it FEELS right" The world "feel" is of less an issue for a Conservative. Our feelings are secondary. Of course, it's always a great thing when our personal feelings are in sync with our moral code, but our belief system would always supersede our own personal feelings. And, a President that we know shared this belief system would be of importance.

you act like atheists can't be conservative.

i find it pretty offensive that you think atheists don't have moral codes.

 

[Kendra17]

Originally posted by wvrevy
Sorry to burst your bubble and use your own words against you but you said:


So, in other words, you think anybody that doesn't believe EXACTLY as you believe is doomed to eternal torment in hell. That means that all the groups I listed (and every other non-Christian in the world) is going to hell, in your opinion.

Sorry, but I find that sad...and certainly not a quality or opinion I would value in a political candidate.

wvrevy, not my argument (thank goodness; I hate arguing with you!), but why would this matter to you what her personal belief system is? So what if she believes that many will go to hell or not? This is her theology, which guides her behavior. It's not as if she is bombing schol buses and hijacking planes so she'll go to heaven!

Her beliefs regarding the afterlife is of no matter in this discussion, in my opinion. What matters is how we guide our lives in the here and now--which covers some of the issues under discussion here.

 

[Maleficent13]

Originally posted by caitycaity
you act like atheists can't be conservative.

i find it pretty offensive that you think atheists don't have moral codes.

Yes, apparently we just see something we think would feel good and we go for it, morals be darned!

 

[Kendra17]

Originally posted by caitycaity
you act like atheists can't be conservative.

i find it pretty offensive that you think atheists don't have moral codes.

Nonono! I never said this. . .I said the opposite. Please reread. I personally think that our moral code is of more importance than our religious affiliation. I happen to believe that if I vote a religious Christian into office, I can pretty much trust that he or she would share my view, however, despite the fact that I am not Christian myself.

I think athiests do have a moral code. If they share the Judeo-Christian one, then fine. . .I'm happy with that. If they share the value system of a more violent murderous religion, though they say they don't believe in God, I would not be fine with that. An athiest running on a Conservative platform would be alright for me, personally. I don't think most of us have considered this, but maybe most Christian conservatives would be okay with the statement I used an example in that last post--something along the lines of "I don't believe there is a God, but I believe in how a belief in God has shaped this country. I admire the Judeo-Christian belief system and will do all I can to ensure that we remember the ten commandments are the foundation of our civil law."

The fact is, if there are a bunch of Conservative Athiests, I don't know about them. Most athiests have aligned themselves with the more liberal platform--which is obviously a problem for Conservative Christians. For instance, I am personally glad that our president finds strength in the Bible--which touts a belief system I adhere to, although I might disagree theologically.

I hope I'm being clearer. If you're an athiest, for instance, and you share the same value systems that I have, you'd most likely vote conservative, and you'd most likely fight for the same issues I do. What your personal theological beliefs are, then, are of little matter to me.

However, if you're Christian and very liberal or an athiest and very liberal . . .that would cause us to disagree on political issues.

Am I being more clear, then? I think voting for a person who is running on a Conservative platform who is also Christian just makes most conservative people more comfortable that they can trust that the President is being guided by a shared moral code.

 

[Abracadabra]

Originally posted by Kendra17
I think those who believe an athiest would make political decisions differently than a Christian do think this with the following in mind:

When one is answering to God, they do what they believe God to want them to do. In the Christian belief--since God is forgiving and loving--this means they act with those thoughts FIRST in mind.

Conservatives--Christians and non Christians--believe there are absolute Rights and Wrongs. We believe some things are Right although the Wrong thing might feel good--even be harmless in the sense it won't hurt anybody. We don't believe that all cultures and all belief systems are inherently equal, although we believe all people--no matter what their belief system to be--to have equal intrinsic worth. Conservatives act with this in mind.

Christians believe that liberals (athiests in the POLITICAL sense) have replaced God with their own set of core beliefs. That is, if it feels good and doesn't harm anyone, it's acceptable. Conservatives, on the other hand, believe that there is a True moral code we should live by that is Right in the absolute sense. This doesn't mean that one can't discuss and debate these issues--even among themselves--but it means that there are some issues that are True among most Conservative Christians, although, of course, there are always exceptions.

It seems that the first part of this is somewhat idealistic, which is not a bad thing. But it appears to present the ideal (at least based on my understanding of Christian theology) to which someone who is a Christian aspires. It doesn't represent the actual day-to-day experience of everyone who calls themself a Christian.

A president, Christian or not, is not going to be able to make decisions based on their answer of "What would God do?" If I understand Christian theology correctly, God is omniscient and infinite, while humans are not, being finite creations of God. As such we are incapable of fathoming the mind of God, understanding His purposes and plans, and since we are separate from Him, we cannot share His thoughts. (I could be wrong about this and it won't be the first time.)

When making decisions, a president or any individual for that matter, must consider more options than asking "What would God do?" While that notion is noble and admirable, since we cannot fully understand or know what God is thinking, it would be utterly presumptuous of us to assume to know what He would do in every particular situation.

My understanding of Christianity is that there are general guidelines to follow that help in making the decisions and these are documented in the Bible. However, human beings are not robots and have something called "free will" to make choices. We can choose our own paths and make our own decisions. I am not certain how anyone could be sure that the decision they made to invade Iraq or send troops to Kosovo or bomb an aspirin factory or whether to send foreign aid to the Sudan is exactly what God would do in that situation.

The best that any president can do is consult with knowledgeable, experienced advisors who can consider and present information in a way to allow an informed, intelligent decision. If the president chooses to consult with God, that is his (or her) choice. This, however, would be but one option of many open to anyone serving as president and certainly not a requirement for them to do.

I disagree with your assessment that atheists have substituted some system of core beliefs for Christian values. As others have stated, it is not essential to maintain a belief in God to be a person who has admirable values, morals and character.

 

[caitycaity]

The fact is, if there are a bunch of Conservative Athiests, I don't know about them. Most athiests have aligned themselves with the more liberal platform

i'd like to know what data you are getting this assertion from. i think there are plenty of conservatives out there who do not believe in god. my husband is one of them. the fact is, you don't have to be christian to be a conservative or republican.

 

[wvrevy]

Originally posted by Kendra17
wvrevy, not my argument (thank goodness; I hate arguing with you!), but why would this matter to you what her personal belief system is? So what if she believes that many will go to hell or not? This is her theology, which guides her behavior. It's not as if she is bombing schol buses and hijacking planes so she'll go to heaven!

Her beliefs regarding the afterlife is of no matter in this discussion, in my opinion. What matters is how we guide our lives in the here and now--which covers some of the issues under discussion here.

It matters to me because that attitude is one that I think is rampant in this country, and it's one that allows the holder of that belief to "look down upon" anyone that believes differently. It's one that, should, say, a president hold, would make it much easier to ignore the suffering brought upon other people, so long as those people were deemed "less worthy" of "God's" protection.

And it IS germane to this debate, as it represents the underlying (in my opinion) reason people would never vote for an avowed atheist for president. They view those that believe differently as less worthy than themselves, so would never support a candidate that held to such a belief.

 

[AirForceRocks]

It matters to me because that attitude is one that I think is rampant in this country, and it's one that allows the holder of that belief to "look down upon" anyone that believes differently.

But so what???? People have a right to their beliefs, right or wrong. Why is it any of your business whether or not someone else looks down on others because their belief systems are different? So long as they don't TREAT them any differently, it is no one's business but their own what they believe.

It seems ridiculous to me to say in one breath that people have the right to practice their religion and then say in the next breath that they don't have the right to believe in the very tenets of that religion.

Could you please explain to me how that works?

 

[Abracadabra]

Originally posted by caitycaity
the fact is, you don't have to be christian to be a conservative or republican.

Although, it appears that being a Christian -- or at least wearing the label -- would be helpful in gaining acceptance. But I agree... the words conservative, Christian and Republican are not synonymous nor are they attached at the "hip."

 

[Abracadabra]

Originally posted by AirForceRocks
But so what???? People have a right to their beliefs, right or wrong. Why is it any of your business whether or not someone else looks down on others because their belief systems are different? So long as they don't TREAT them any differently, it is no one's business but their own what they believe.

It seems ridiculous to me to say in one breath that people have the right to practice their religion and then say in the next breath that they don't have the right to believe in the very tenets of that religion.

Could you please explain to me how that works?

Easy... beliefs inform actions and attitudes both of which may have a direct impact on others. There are countless examples of this from discrimination in hiring (we don't hire gays because we are a Christian organization) to membership (we don't allow gays because we are a Christian group to education (we don't allow (fill in the blank) because we are a Christian school. Other areas impacted can include housing and as evidenced in this thread, politics or who should be able to run for political office.

People have the right to believe and practice whatever faith/religion they want or none at all. At the same time, they must be aware of the impact of those beliefs on their attitudes and actions toward others. If the primary tenet of one's belief system is love and forgiveness, but one denies another person employment, housing, education, or opportunities equal to others, then their beliefs are impacting their world in a negative way.